VOLUME #2  (BD-8 - BD-9)

DRAFT BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
SUBTITLE C - HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
SECTION 3002 - STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO GENERATORS
               OF HAZARDOUS WASTES
BD-8 - SECTIONS 250.20 - 250.29


SECTION 3003 - STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO TRANSPORTERS
               OF HAZARDOUS WASTE


BD-9 - SECTIONS 250.30 - 250.38

-------
BD-8



                                                   DRAFT
           RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT


           SUBTITLE C - HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
           SECTION 3002 - STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO
                GENERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
                SECTION 250.20 THROUGH 250.29
                           DRAFT


                     BACKGOUND DOCUMENT
               ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                    OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
                      December  15, 1978

-------
Headquarters/Region_



Document Number
                              -ii-

-------
     This document provides background information and support



for regulations which are designed to protect human health and



the environment pursuant to Section 3002 of the Resource Con-



servation and Recovery Act of 1976.  It is being made available



as a draft to support the proposed regulation.  As new information



is obtained, changes may be made in the regulations as well as



in this background material.



     This document was first drafted many months ago and has



been revised to reflect information received and Agency decisions



made since then.  EPA made changes in the proposed Section 3002



regulations shortly before their publication in the Federal



Register.  We have tried to ensure that all of those decisions



are reflected in this document.  If there are any inconsistencies



between the proposal  (the preamble and the regulation) and this



background document, however, the proposal is controlling.



     Portions of this Background Document were written specifically



addressing sections of drafts of the regulation which were current



at that time.  The reader is cautioned that references to section



titles or topics may have changed from draft to draft.  For ex-



ample, the section on "Containerization and Labeling" was



ultimately split into two separate sections, while sections en-



titled "Reporting" and "Recordkeeping" were ultimately combined



into one section entitled "Reporting".  Changes in the drafts of



this nature, as well as additions or deletions of sections, have



not changed the rationale or basis for establishing the proposed



version of the regulation.  Where possible, section numbers of
                            -Til-

-------
the proposed version of the 3002 regulations, Standards



Applicable to Generators of Hazardous Waste, appear in



parenthases  (250.20 - 250.29).



Comments in writing may be made to:







          Harry W. Trask, Desk Officer



          Hazardous Waste Management Division (WH-565)



          401 M Street, S.W.



          Washington, D.C.  20460
                          -iv-

-------
                      Table of Contents


I.   Introduction, p. 1

          RCRA Mandate for Standards


II.  Methodology in Developing Regulations,  p. 2

          o    Public Meetings

          o    Meetings with other Interest Groups

          o    Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR)

          o    External Review


III. Identification of Program Issues and Concerns, p.  6

          o    Manifest (250.22)

          o    Reporting and Recordkeeping (250,23)

          o    Containerization and Labeling  (250.25 &  250.26)

          o    Waste Information


IV.  Analysis of Regulation Issues with Alternatives, p. 8
     and Rationale

          o    Resource Recovery

          o    Identification of Hazardous Waste Generators

          o    Manifest System  (250.22)

          o    Reporting and Recordkeeping (250.23)

          o    Containerization and Labeling  (250.25 &  250.26)

          o    Waste Information

          o    Other Topics
                              -v-

-------
TABLES:

          Table I - Public Meetings, p. 4

          Table II - Meetings with Other Interest Groups,  p.  5

APPENDICES:

     Appendix A - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act -
                    Section 3002

     Appendix B - Summary of Comments  from Invitational
                    Workshops  (Type  II)

     Appendix C - Summary of Comments  from Meetings with
                    Potentially Affected Parties (Type III)

     Appendix D - Federal Register  (ANPR)

     Appendix E - Summary of ANPR Comments

     Appendix F - Summary of Comments  from External Reviewers

     Appendix G - Standard Production  Rate Summary (250.29)

     Appendix H - Summary of Damage  Report Study

     Appendix I - Summary of Generator Data

     Appendix J - Comparison of  Subtitle C and Subtitle D
                    Facilities

     Appendix K - Manifest Format DOT  Shipping Paper Report
                    Form (250,22)

     Appendix L - Analysis of  Utilization of  Manifest as
                    Report Versus  Summary Reports  (250.23)

     Appendix M - State Recordkeeping  Requirements  (250.22)
                               -vi-

-------
                     BACKROUND DOCUMENT
       RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT OF 1976
I.   Introduction

     A.   RCRA Mandate for Standards

     The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA) of 1976 ,

Pub.L. 94-580, is a multifaceted approach toward solving

problems associated with discarded materials.  Subtitle C of

RCRA deals specifically with hazardous waste management and

directs the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) to

promulgate regulations and guidelines to ensure  the proper

transportation,  treatment, storage, and disposal of all solid

waste  that is hazardous.  Section 3002 of RCRA requires

EPA to "promulgate regulations establishing  ...standards,

applicable to generators of hazardous waste."  These  standards

establish requirements respecting:   (1)  recordkeeping;  (2)

labeling;  C3)  containerization;  (4)  furnishing information;

(5)  a manifest  system; and  (6)  reporting.
                           -1-

-------
II.  Methodology In Developing Regulation
     Technical data have been gathered and developed to form
the basis for the regulations of Subpart B.  In addition,
comments and data from the regulated community (i.e., hazardous
waste generators, transporters, treatment, storage, and
disposal operators), States, and the public have been utilized
in the overall formulation of the regulations.  In keeping
with EPA's public participation plan and Section 7007(b) of
RCRA, which specifically states that "public participation
in the development, revision, implementation, and enforcement
of any regulation,  guideline, information, or program under
the Act shall be provided for, encouraged, and assisted by
the Administrator and the States," the Office of Solid Waste
has and will continue to encourage the affected communities
to comment prior to implementation of regulations and guidelines
with respect to RCRA and more specifically Subpart B (Standard
Applicable to Generators).
     A.  Public Meetings
     In accordance  with EPA  policy, RCRA, and the Administrative
Procedure Act, D.S.C. Section 553  (c) , ten meetings  (see
Table I) were held  with state and  local government, private
and public interest groups,  and the general public  (EPA
policy, 2p, 2827 Section  7004(b),  3 U.S.C. Section  553(c)
(1970)).
     The provisions of Section 3002  (see  Appendix A) were
discussed at the meetings.   The comments  and  data were
summarized (see Appendix B)  and used  to help  formulate  the
Subpart B regulations.
                         -2-

-------
     B.   Meetings With Other Interest Groups
     In order to ensure consideration of all viewpoints;
one-to-one meetings were held with other interested parties
(see Table II) .
     Information gathered from these meetings (see Appendix C)
provided insight into current practices employed by industry
and into areas where the environment and human health are
being compromised.
     C.   Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
     An Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking  (ANPR) was
published on May 2, 1977, inviting the submission of comments
and data on major issues confronting EPA in the development
of regulations  and guidelines.  The notice included a series
of questions  and presented two options related  to Section  3002
 (see Appendix D).  The responses  to the ANPR were reviewed
 (see Appendix E) by the Office of Solid Waste and utilized
with other comments and data  before standards for generators
of hazardous  waste were proposed.
     D.   External Review
     To  assist in  the development of  standards  for generators
of hazardous  waste, comments  were requested  from more  than 60
external reviewers.   The  sample  population represented  the
regulated industries,  Federal and State  regulatory agencies,
 and  other groups,  such as  environmental  groups.  These  comments
 have been considered  and  integrated into the regulations.
 A summarization of the comments  is presented in Appendix F.
                              -3-

-------
                      TABLE I
                  Public Meetings
February 3. 1977
February 24, 1977
March 9, 1977
March 10, 1977
April 6, 1977
April 8, 1977
April 13, 1977
April 27, 1977
May 25-26, 1977
May 26, 1977
San Francisco, California
Washington, D.C.
Cleveland, Ohio
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Hartford, Connecticut
Atlanta, Georgia
Ho us ton, Te xas
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Seattle, Washington
Denver, Colorado
                      -4-

-------
                 TABLE II



    Meetings with other interest groups





           Industry Associations



National Sold Waste Management Associations



  National Tank Truck Carriers Conference



     Liquid Water Control Association



     Association of American Railroads



     American Water Waterway Operators



   National Barrel and Drum Association





               Transporters



              Chemical Leaman



                  Matlack



              Bohager and Son



          Chancellor  & Odgen  (BKK)



          Missouri Pacific Railroad





                 Industry



               Union Carbide



             Environmental Group



            Environmental Action



              Federal Agencies



         Department  of Transportation



       Interstate Commerce Commission



              State  Governments



       California         Georgia



       Texas              Tennessee



       Illinois           West Virginia



                 Wisconin





                      -5-

-------
III. Identification of Program Issues and Concerns
     Several major issues and concerns were raised by EPA at the
meetings with various interest groups, the regulated 'coiranunities,
and government officials.  These major issues and concerns can
be categorized as follows:   (11  the Manifest System;  (2)  Report-
ing;  (3)  Containers and Labels; and  (4)  Waste Information.
     A.   Manifest System  (250.221
          1.   How detailed  should the manifest be?  What kinds
          of descriptions  and  instructions should be included?
          2.   What format should be required for the manifest?
          Should  there be  a  standard form or simply a  set
          of data requirements?
          3.   What should be  done in the event that the manifest
          is lost or a waste arrives without a proper manifest?
          4.   How should  the  manifest be circulated?  Should
          it simply move from  generator  to transporter to waste
          management facility, or  should there be more or less
          movement?
      B.   Reporting and Recordkeeping  (250.23)
          1.   How often should  reports  be filed?  Should this
          be different for generators and disposers?
          2.   How long  should records  be retained?
          3.   Should the  waste  management facility  or the
          transporter be allowed to  file reports  for small
          generators?
                               -6-

-------
     4.    What should be required in a report?  What format?
     5.    Should the manifest be used for reporting and
     recordkeeping as well as for tracking?
     6.    Should a distinction be made between inter-
     and intra-state transport?
C.   Containerization and Labeling (250.25 & 250.26)
     1.    What information is necessary on labels?
     What format should be used for labels?
     2.    Should vehicles be marked when transporting
     waste?
     3.   Should different classification systems be
     developed for labeling?
     4.   Should containers be reused?
     5.   What requirements are necessary for containers?
     6.   Should waste designated for on-site disposal
     be subjected to labeling requirements?
D.   Waste Information  (250.22, 250.23 & 250.29)
     1.   What information is necessary when handling and
     disposing of a hazardous waste?
     2.   Who should be responsible  for supplying  such
     information?
     3.   Should this information travel with the  cargo?
     4.   Should low-volume generators be  subject  to this
     requirement in view  of the high expense of  analysis?
     5.   Should a form containing waste information be
     required?
                          -7-

-------
IV.  Analysis of Regulation Issues with Alternatives and Rationale
     The Office of Solid Waste has received comments and data
presented in the meetings and on the ANPR.  These responses led
to the development of several options relevant to the regulations
to be promulgated under Section 3002.  This section enumerates
the various alternatives that were suggested and presents the
rationale for each.
A.   Resource Recovery  (250.21)
     Two objectives of  the RCRA are to protect human health
and the environment and to conserve valuable material and
energy resources.  Resource recovery is desirable for several
reasons:  it produces raw materials, while virgin materials
are becoming scarce; it can save energy, and it reduces the
volume of waste that must be disposed.
     According  to the legislative history, House Rep.-94-1491 at
2  (1976), "An increase  in reclamation and reuse practices is
a  major objective of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act."  Encouraging resource recovery is within Congressional
intent.  However, promotion of resource recovery must be
consistent with the requirements of Subtitle C of RCRA.  An
important requirement of Subtitle C is that all regulated
hazardous wastes be designated to permitted waste management
facilities.  This is especially  important since certain suggestion
for promoting resource  recovery  include exempting resource
recovery from the treatment,  storage, or  disposal facility
permit requirements.
                             -8-

-------
     Section 3002 of RCRA requires generator regulations for



six items:  recordkeeping about generation and disposition of



hazardous wastes, labeling of containers, use of appropriate



containers, furnishing of information to transporters and



disposers, use of a manifest system and submission of reports.



The manifest system and reports are intended to ensure that



all regulated hazardous waste is properly disposed of.



     Since resource recovery is addressed under other Subtitles



of RCRA, consideration under Subtitle C does not appear to be



a requirement.  If resource recovery is to be promoted through



Subtitle C, the option selected for regulation of hazardous



materials sent to resource recovery facilities must provide



enough control to assure proper disposition of these wastes—



which is  the main purpose of Subtitle C.



     In deciding whether resource recovery should be promoted



through special provisions of the Section 3002 regulations,



consideration should be given to the status of exclusions



under Subtitle C.  Resource recovery could be excluded from



the definition of treatment, storage, or disposal and therefore



be exempted from this part of the Act.  First, the definition



of resource recovery, "the recovery of material or energy



from solid waste" differs from that of disposal which is,



"the discharge, deposit, injection, spilling, leaking, or



placing of any solid waste or hazardous waste into or onto



or on any land or water so that such solid waste or hazardous



waste or  any constituent thereof may enter the environment
                            -9-

-------
or be emitted into the air or discharged into any waters,
including ground waters."  Resource recovery can be easily
distinguished from disposal.
     Storage is defined as "the containment of hazardous waste,
either on a temporary basis or for a period of years, in such
a manner as not to constitute disposal of such hazardous waste."
Resource recovery involves reuse and recycling of waste and
does not fall under  the definition of storage.
     Treatment is defined as, "any method, technique, or process,
including neutralization, designed to change the physical,
chemical, or biological character or composition of any hazardous
waste  so as  to neutralize such waste or so as to render such
waste  nonhazardous,  safer for transport, amenable for recovery,
amenable for  storage,  or reduced  in volume.  Such term includes
any activity  or processing  designed to change the physical form
or  chemical  composition of  hazardous waste so as to render it
nonhazardous."  Most resource recovery processes do not obviously
fall under  this definition.  More complicated recovery,  such as
solvent reclaiming,  might change the  physical form or chemical
composition of  the  waste and could be defined as treatment.
However, the  phrase, "amenable  for recovery"  suggests that
resource recovery should be considered a post-treatment  process
and not be  subject  to regulations covering treatment of  hazardous
wastes.  This  is  not conclusive,  and the subject is  not  discussed
in  the Act.   However,  the  legislative history,  House Rep.
No. 94-1491  at  4,  notes  that the regulation of hazardous waste
and promotion of  resource recovery are separate and conflicting
functions.  Consequently,  the promotional functions of  resource
                            -10-

-------
recovery technology, the development of markets, etc., are
placed with EPA and Department of Commerce (especially under
Subtitle E of RCRA), again suggesting that resource recovery
is not considered treatment.
     Another possible exclusion is the exception of material
sent to resource recovery from the definition of hazardous
waste.  Solid waste is defined to include "discharged materials."
If resource recovery becomes a significant part of the
hazardous waste cycle, then this defintion of waste may not
apply; the waste would become a raw material of a process.
Using a test of "economic value" could also eliminate materials
to be recovered from the waste definition.  However,  if
waste is defined as "no further use in its primary production
process" or similarly, then the material sent to resource
recovery could be  considered waste.
      If material sent to resource recovery is not considered
a waste, then it is not subject to any Subtitle C regulations.
Generators, transporters, and resource recovery facilities
would then be subject only  to DOT regulations which cover
interstate transportation of designated hazardous materials
unless the handlers of resource recovery materials come
under the regulations another way.  For example, resource
recovery facilities often produce hazardous residues.  In
this  case, the  facility might be considered a generator  and
possibly, a disposer.
                         -11-

-------
     Despite the desirability of promoting resource recovery,
the purpose of Subtitle C is ensuring proper disposition of
hazardous waste, and protecting human health and welfare;
exempting materials destined for resource recovery may not
allow this.
     Another problem is whether resource recovery facilities
should be permitted.  Any waste requiring a manifest must be
designated  to a permitted facility.  If recoverable waste
requires a  manifest, then the resource recovery facility
must be permitted unless some exclusion from the permitting
regulations can be developed.  Exclusions from the Subtitle
C  regulations may not be permissible, though modified reporting,
permitting, and manifest procedures may be.  This modified
permitting, reporting,  and manifest might be the more suitable
choice.
     Even  though  it  is  not required, Section 3002 will make
some provisions for  resource recovery.  Several possible
options were  considered.  The options presented assume that
the resource  recovery  facility is off-site.  Also, hazardous
waste  sent to resource  recovery facilities  may be  subject to
DOT'S  hazardous materials regulations,  49 CFR Sections 170-
189, if they  are  shipped  interstate and are listed in Section
127.101.   OSW is  considering four options for  the handling
of -hazardous  wastes  sent  to  resource recovery  facilities.
                           -12-

-------
OPTION I
      (a)  Under the first option, hazardous waste if sent to
resource recovery facilities is not covered by the definition
of "hazardous waste," and would not be subject to any Subtitle
C regulations, but still would be subject to DOT hazardous
material regulations, if applicable.
      PRO
          Option I would reduce the burden on generators who
      send waste to resource recovery, providing an incentive
      as intended by Congress.  Since this can be considered
      reuse  and not disposal, it does not violate the intent
      to manage the disposal all hazardous wastes.  If a
      waste  can be sent  to  an unregulated facility, the
      difference in cost between resource recovery and disposal
      should increase, providing an  additional incentive.
      CON
          Much of this  incentive  for resource recovery may
      be illusory, since many wastes will also be subject  to
      DOT  regulations  and  therefore  subject  to labeling,
      containing,  and  shipping  paper, etc.,  requirements.
      Eliminating  Subtitle C  requirements will provide  little
      incentive  for  generators  to  send  wastes to resource
      recovery facilities  in  this  case,  and  would remove all
      control over an  unknown amount of hazardous waste.
      According  to the preliminary OSW  contract  report, most
      hazardous waste  is transported less  than  fifty  miles,
      probably intrastate.  Since  DOT has  only  implemented
                           -13-

-------
     regulations  for interstate shipments,  and many States
     do not regulate at all,  this would increase the possibility
     of improper  disposal of  hazardous wastes, and foster
     the establishment of "token" resource  recovery centers
     for circumventing Subtitle C regulations.  Since Option I
     would exempt resource recovery from reporting and
     recordkeeping requirements, it would be difficult to
     establish, for survey purposes, the amount and kind of
     material sent to resource recovery.
     (b)  Alternatively, if the waste is sent to resource
recovery, the generator would be exempt from Subtitle C
regulations, but the resource recovery facility would be
issued a "special" permit.
     PRO
          This would control resource recovery facilities
     and prevent the operation of "token" facilities.  The
     ultimate disposition of the hazardous  waste would be
     controlled.
     CON
          If material sent to resource recovery is not a
     "hazardous waste" as designated by the generator, then
     the facility could not be required to have a permit.
     However, if the waste is considered hazardous, it
     might be possible to exempt the generators from some or
     all Subtitle C regulations.
                          -14-

-------
          Several  questions  concerning  Subtitle  C  exemptions
     are pending with the Office  of  General  Counsel.   One  is
     whether a class of  persons  (small  generators  - but
     perhaps also  those  sending wastes  to  resource recovery)
     can be exempt from  certain requirements of  Section  3002
     Cfor example, the manifest and  reporting requirements).
     Another question is whether  resource  recovery facilities
     can be exempted from the standards relating to disposal
     facilities.  Section 3005 does  not, however,  prohibit
     the issuance of several categories of permits for
     different types of disposal  or  treatment facilities.
          The answers to these questions will determine the
     feasibility of this option.
OPTION II
     This option does not exempt waste sent to resource
recovery from the definition of hazardous waste, but considers
it an alternative method of treatment.  Under this approach,
the generator is  exempt from the manifest and reporting
requirements, but must maintain records.  The generator must
notify EPA  annually that waste is being sent to resource
recovery.   The waste must be sent to a resource recovery
facility that will  receive  a "special" permit.  This permit
will probably be  less complex than  a regular disposal permit.
                           -15-

-------
     PRO
          This option is still less of a burden on generators
     and  consequently still within the Congressional intent
     of providing an incentive for resource recovery.   The
     permitting of resource recovery facilities should
     prevent the establishment of "token" resource recovery
     facilities and keep the quantity of hazardous waste
     sent to resource recovery under some kind of control.
     CON
          It may be permissible to exempt classes of
     persons from Section 3002 or 3005 regulations.  Since the
     manifest and reporting requirements are contained in
     the law, all generators may be required to comply with
     them.  This exemption may also violate the intent of the
     Act, which is to control the disposition of all hazardous
     wastes.  The manifest and reporting systems are designed
     to track the waste and are essential for this purpose.
OPTION III
     Generators who send hazardous waste to resource recovery
must comply with all Section  3002 regulations except that
there will be a modified reporting procedure, probably an
annual report with a simplified listing of wastes.  The
resource recovery facilities  will be  permitted, probably with
simpler reporting procedures.
                             -16-

-------
    PRO
         Option III presents no potential legal problems
    with exemptions under Section 3002 or 3005.  It still
    provides less  strigent requirements for resource
    recovery,  thus providing some incentive.  Requirements
    of  the manifest system allows tracking of waste, following
    the intent of  Congress to manage all hazardous wastes.
    Since Section  3002  states that regulations must be
    written for  the six listed  items,  it suggests that  all
    wastes must  follow  regulations for all six items.
    Option III avoids this problem, by allowing  less burden-
    some reporting.   Also, the  permitting of  resource recovery
    facilities should assure generators and  the  general
    public  that  waste is being  properly treated.
    CON
         Since the only concession to resource recovery is
    reduced  reporting,  there is less  incentive than in
    Option I  and II.  Resource recovery  facilities  are  often
    marginally profitable and  too strigent permitting,
     recordkeeping, reporting,  manifest,  etc.  requirements
     could  put a marginally profitable facility out of
     business,  and would violate Congressional intent to
     promote resource recovery.
OPTION IV
     Under this option,  generators who send waste to resource
recovery facilities would be subject to all Subtitle C
regulations.   Resource recovery facilities will be permitted.
                            -17-

-------
     PRO



          Option IV maximizes control over treatment of



     hazardous wastes.  It poses no legal questions about



     exclusion of classes of persons from Subtitle C regulations.



     Incentives for resource recovery could be developed



     under other sections of RCRA.



     CON



          Option IV provides no incentive for resource recovery



     except its potentially lesser cost compared to that of



     disposal.  However, Congress intended resource recovery



     to be promoted and this seems to violate that intent,



     especially if sufficient control over hazardous waste



     could be achieved while providing some incentive.



CONCLUSION



     Option I (a) , I(b), and III are being considered as providing



incentives for resource recovery, while still controlling



hazardous wastes.



     Option I(a) appears to meet all the requirements of the



regulation while providing incentives for resource recovery



(and industrial waste exchange).  Since the definition of



solid waste (of which hazardous waste is a subset) pertains



to discarded material, any material going to a resource



recovery facility (or for waste exchange) would not be regu-



lated.  This option has received the greatest support and was



presented in the proposed regulation.
                          -18-

-------
     Option Kb)  has the advantage of simplicity for the
generator, while providing for monitoring of the resource
recovery process.  Since the waste is subject to Subtitle C
regulations if not sent to resource recovery, actual disposal
will be regulated in compliance with the requirements of the
Act.
     Option III provides incentive for resource recovery, but
more control over hazardous waste.  This option requires the
manifest  and reporting and provides total monitoring of the
disposition of hazardous wastes.  The requirements of this
option are not considered a great burden since  some waste is
subject to DOT regulations, and  normal business procedure
requires  recordkeeping and  shipping  papers.   The greatest in-
centive is economic,  and  lower requirements  for resource
recovery  will  increase  the  difference  in cost between recovery
and disposal.
B.    identification of  Hazardous Waste Generators  (250.21  &  250.29}
      RCRA defines hazardous waste generation to mean "the
act or  process of producing hazardous  waste."  Hazardous waste
 is a sub-category of solid waste.  Solid waste  by  definition
 is not hazardous waste,  but can become hazardous waste  when its
 quantity or other characteristics cause irreversible illness or
 death,  or present substantial present or potential harm to
 human health and the environment.  The possibilities for mis-
 management of a solid waste also play an important role in
 determining whether or not it is hazardous.
                           -19-

-------
     Regulatory control over hazardous waste produced by



households and control over general municipal solid waste



based on the presence of hazardous substances is not within



the intent of Subtitle C of RCRA  (Senate Report No. 94-988



Solid Waste Utilization Act of 1976).  Consequently, household



generated hazardous waste is excluded from the requirements



of Subtitle C.



     Excluding households, the estimated number of potential



hazardous waste generators in the United States is as follows:



           (1)  farmers - 2.5 million;



           (2)  manufacturers (SIC 20-39)  - 0.3 million;



           (3)  governmental and other services - 0.4 million.



     If the intent of Congress is to be fulfilled and if EPA is



to implement RCRA so as to utilitize its resources most efficient!



in managing solid waste, generators must be properly identified.



     The following options regarding generator identification



totally exclude household waste from Section 3002 regulations.



OPTION I



     Option I defines a generator as any person whose act or



process produces hazardous waste as defined or listed under



Section 3001.  A person who meets this definition must comply



with all the regulations under Subtitle C of RCRA.



     PRO



          Option I covers every person (except the household)



     producing a hazardous waste and requires them to comply



     with Subtitle C regulations.  This leaves no loopholes



     in Section 3002 regulations and could bring an estimated



     3.2 million generators under regulation.
                             -20-

-------
     CON



          The task of enforcing Option I in an equitable manner



     would be difficult.   Enforcement problems would result not



     only from the sheer  number of potential generators, but also



     because some generators produce small quantities of



     hazardous waste or produce hazardous waste on an irregular



     basis.  Generators producing hazardous waste having the



     same characteristics as some household solid waste would be



     difficult to detect.



     Assuming that enforcement is selective, Subtitle C



regulations will be directed only against certain parties.



This could lead to legal challenges that EPA is acting



arbitrarily and inequitably in its enforcement proceedings.



     If the entire audience of hazardous waste generators is



brought into the regulatory system and must comply with Section



3002 regulations, a potentially unnecessary burden on the



treatment, storage, and disposal capacity could possibily be



imposed on Subtitle C facilities.  If generators that mix small



quantities of potentially hazardous waste with large quantities



of non-hazardous waste segregate their waste, this segregrative



process may be more injurious to human health and environment



than allowing the waste to be transported by a municipal hauler



to a Subtitle D sanitary landfill.  EPA does not have a substantial



body of damage cases created by codisposal of small quantities of



hazardous waste with municipal refuse in a properly designed



landfill.  Therefore, the disposal controls required by Subtitle C



regulations may not be necessary for small quantities.
                              -21-

-------
     The paper work impact of such a large regulated community
is estimated to be in the range of 9.2 to 18.3 million manifests
per year.  This will result in approximately 1.5 million reports
per year to EPA and the States. CAppendix L)
OPTION II
     This option provides for identification and classification
of generators by prose definition  (i.e., SIC or industrial pro-
cessl.  A generator included in the definition would be subject
to all Section 3002 regulations.
     PRO
          Option II would allow EPA to focus its resources
     on a smaller population of potential generators than
     Option I.  This would result  in better management of
     hazardous waste since EPA could better insure that all
     waste defined as hazardous would be sent to a Subtitle
     C facility.  The capacity and paper work burden on
     Subtitle C treatment, storage, and disposal facilities
      (TSDF) and EPA, as discussed  in Option I, would also be
     reduced  proportionally.
     CON
          Enforcement based  on definition by SIC would be
     difficult, since many companies have more  than one SIC.
     Identification by  industrial  process also  has  limitations
     due to variation in  industrial processes within a given
     industry and the unavailability of concise process
     definitions.
                              -22-

-------
          An inadequate definition could lead to a legal
     challenge that EPA acted arbitrarily or that the definition
     was inequitable.  Areas overlooked or not covered by the
     definitions could allow large quantities of hazardous
     waste to enter the environment at an uncontrolled rate.
OPTION III
     This option identifies generators based on hazardous waste
production rate of 100 kilograms per month.  Five States' industrial
waste surveys and industrial waste data developed in the Subtitle
C Environmental Impact Statement were analyzed to help determine
the cut-off rate for hazardous waste production.  This rate would
include a maximum amount of hazardous waste, but would
significantly reduce the audience  to be regulated.   (Appendix G)
     With this exemption level cutoff, an  exclusion  for  farmers
and retailers, and the provision for an assumption of duties
contract, the number of potential  generators  is reduced  signi-
ficantly from the  3.2 million under Option I.  The rationale for
these estimates can  be found in the Reports Impact Statement.
It was  these numbers of generators upon which the proposed  reg-
ulations were based.
          Manufacturing  (SIC 20-39}           166,000
          Retailers  (waste oil)                63,000
          Farmers  (pesticide applicators)      10,000
          Hospitals,  labs, research	16,000
                     Total                     255,000
                            -23-

-------
     For manufacturers, the 100kg exemption level puts 166,000
generators in the system (Mitre data!.  Retailers include the
62,000 waste oil generators plus 960 haulers exercising an
assumption of duties contract.  Farmers still in the system would.
be primarily the 10,000 pesticide applicators.  Hospitals account
for nearly 7000 generators; there are nearly 3000 medical
laboratories and almost 6000 research facilities.  This accounts
for the 16,000 medical facilities.
     PRO
          The Standard Production Rate (SPR) of 100 kilograms
     per month of potentially hazardous waste is based on
     industrial waste data and would apply to everyone except
     households.  The SPR would allow EPA to focus its enforce-
     ment on approximately 50 percent of the generators, who
     produce greater than 99.5 percent of the hazardous
     waste.  "Non-generators" would be required to dispose of
     their waste at a Subtitle D sanitary landfill pursuant to
     Section 4004 criteria at a rate less than 100 kilograms/
     month.  The SPR would eliminate bulk shipments (tank and
     drums) of hazardous waste from entering a Subtitle D
                          -24-

-------
     sanitary  landfill  Cwhich will have many of  the  same
     environmental  performance  features exhibited  in a
     Subtitle  C hazardous  waste landfill).  In the past,  it
     has been  the disposal of bulk shipments of  hazardous
     waste and the  lack of leachate  collection which have
     been the  cause of  most incidents of  environmental  and human
     health damage  at landfills. (Appendices G & H)
          Since the regulated  audience would be  lessened  by
     implementing an SPR,  the  capacity burden  on Subtitle C
     TSDF may  be reduced.   In addition,  the paper  work  impact
     on the regulated community and  EPA  would  also be decreased.
     CON
          The  Standard Production Rate does not  distinguish
     the degree of hazard for different wastes.   Thus/  the  SPR
     applies to any person producing any hazardous waste
     regardless of the hazard associated with that waste.
OPTION IV
     This option uses the SPR of 100 kilograms per month
and includes a "Special Chemical List" of known wastes which
due to their inherent hazard or other characteristics must
be controlled regardless of the quantity.  (Appendix G)
     PRO
          Option IV includes all the advantages covered  in
     Option III and, in addition, recognizes that some wastes
     require greater control because of heightened  public
     concern for their physical and chemical properties  or a
     documented  lack of proper management  in the  past.
                           -25-

-------
     CON
          If wastes which appear on the "Special Chemical List"
     are not unique due to their hazard, then legal challenges
     that EPA is being arbitrary and capricious could result.
          Once a list of and/or criteria for hazardous waste
     is established any attempt to develop a "Special Chemical
     List" would require a judgement as to the relative
     hazard of a material in order to establish the "cut-off."
     This judgment may be subjective and any effort
     to defend it difficult.
          Each TSDF will be permitted based on their ability
     to handle certain hazardous wastes.  As long as a facility
     is permitted, it could be construed as arbitrary or
     capricious to restrict certain wastes from a properly
     designated and permitted facility.
CONCLUSION
     Generator identification will be a difficult and critical
problem when implementing Subtitle C of RCRA.  Option III is
believed to offer the greatest control of hazardous wastes
with the least impact on the regulated community as compared
to Option It II, and IV.  In addition, Option III should fulfill
the mandate of RCRA to protect human health and environment.
Option III allows a portion of the generators to be excluded
from compliance, based on quantity limits.  This would allow
EPA to focus its resources and energy on the part of the
generating community producing the largest amounts of waste.
                          -26-

-------
Studies of past environmental damage incidents at landfills
(Appendix H) have shown that it was the very large quantities
of waste that caused damage in most documented incidents.  Small
quantities of hazardous waste appear to have no adverse effects
on the environment, particularly if they are required to be dis-
posed  of at a Subtitle D facility.  Another study by OSW
(Appendix J> indicated that regulations covering the Subtitle D
facility are in most respects as strict as those covering
the Subtitle C facility.
     Secondly, this option allows small quantities of waste to
go to Subtitle D facilities, saving landfill space in the Sub-
title C facility for the dangerous large quantities.
     Option III provides discrimination between generators and
non-generators without having to develop and refer to a  compli-
cated series of industrial SIC  definitions.  This option simply
excludes all generators who produce below  a certain  quantity
each month.  This  is much less  complicated than exclusion by
SIC definition and does not allow  excluded wastes to be  disposed
of in any amount,  as the SIC definition would.
     While  Option  III excludes  generators  from reporting,
recordkeeping, manifest, etc.,  disposal at a properly designed
facility  is still  required.  Highly  toxic  wastes would  still
be managed  properly, and as  a  result of the ratio at which  they
might be mixed with municipal  waste  their  potential  hazard
reduced.
     A  more detailed discussion of the data used  to  support
option III  is presented in Appendix  G.
                               -27-

-------
     Several other options were considered prior to proposing
this section of the regulations.  Comments were solicited on
some of these options since insufficient data were available.
Some options were based on economic impact, and on this point
the Act was silent, making any decision difficult in view of
uncertain legal ramifications.
     Raising the exemption level to a SPR of 1000 kg was considers
based on its lesser economic impact.  Proper disposal would still
be required for all wastes.  No final conclusion was made on this
option due to insufficient data on the number of generators affect
or the quantities of waste which they produced.
     Another option which was considered, would allow each state
that undertook the Federal program to set its own small generator
SPR exemption level based on specific conditions of that state's
industry.  Additional data are required before this option can
be considered viable.
     Still another option would reduce administrative and technica
requirements without removing them all together.  For example,
each generator of a small amount of hazardous waste would be
required to prepare a manifest for shipment with the waste but
he would not he would not be required to comply with the reporting
or recordkeeping requirements.  Similarly, the technical require-
ments associated with the treatment, storage, or disposal of his
waste could be reduced or waived.  Again, additional data are
needed to support consideration of this option before it can be
considered acceptable.
                           -28-

-------
     Finally, a phased implementation option was discussed.  By
phasing the degree of SPR exemption level,  a gradual implementation
could occur.  One method of achieving his transition would be to
establish the initial SPR exemption at a higher level, thus
impacting fewer industries.  After a period of time, three years
for example, the SPR allowable would be lowered to a level
which would fully meet the requirements of the Act.  This would
allow both industry and the state or Federal programs to adjust.
Insufficient data are available inorder to establish how many
steps there should be in any phased implementation of the
regulation or how much time should be allowed for each step.
Supportive data must be supplied or compiled before this option
can be considered viable.
C.   Manifest System  (250.22)
     RCRA requires the use of a manifest system to  assure
that all regulated hazardous waste is designated  for  treatment,
storage, or  disposal  at a facility permitted under  Section
3005.
     The manifest  (see Appendix K) is a  tracking  document  used
to certify  the movement of a waste.  The manifest originates
with the generator who supplies the  necessary  information,and
signs  the document.   The generator gives the manifest to the
transporter who  certifies  receipt of the shipment.  The  trans-
porter gives one copy to the generator prior  to removing the
hazardous waste  from the generator's property.  The transporter
takes  the manifest to the  receiving  personnel  at  the  TSDF. The
TSDF receiving  personnel  sign  the manifest, verifying receipt
                              -29-

-------
of the hazardous waste.  The transporter retains one of the

signed copies to verify delivery.  The TSDF retains one

copy for its own records and forwards the signed original to

the generator to vertify receipt.

     For the manifest  system to work effectively as a tracking

device, it must circulate in a closed system; to remove the

certification of any one actor  (i.e., generator, transporter,

TSDF) would open one link in the chain.  In an open system,
                                      «
information necessary  for tracking the waste would not be

available, since the parties involved in its transfer are

not actively tied  to one another via a formal document.

     So that the manifest may be consistent with common

transportation practices, provide for safe shipment and

tracking, and conform  to the Congressional definition given

it within RCRA Subtitle A, Section 1004(12), the document

has taken on the appearance of the Department of Transportation

(DOT) shipping paper (see Appendix K) .  The manifest has

a specific order of entries which includes emergency information

to assist in safe  handling and transportation.

D.   Reporting and Recordkeeping  (250.23)

     RCRA requires the establishment of recordkeeping practices

and of reporting to the Regional Administrator setting out the

quantities of hazardous waste generated and the disposition

of each waste.  The criteria used in the selection of a reporting

scheme were as follows:
                            -30-

-------
               (1)  provide necessary after-the-fact information
               for environmental management purposes;  and
               (2)  minimize the paper work burden.
     The use of the manifest as the report and the use of a
periodic, summary report (see Appendix K), formulated from data
contained in the manifest,  were considered as providing the
most detailed after-the-fact information.   Since the manifest
provides more information than would be needed for management
purposes, a periodic summary report  (see Appendix L) was con-
sidered with respect to criteria 1. It was further determined
(see Appendix L)  that a monthly summary report would decrease
the paper in commercial and Federal channels by 66.7 percent
if used  instead of the manifest as the report.  If a quarterly
summary  report were used, a decrease of paper in commercial and
Federal  channels  of 88.9 percent over the manifest being
used as  the report and 66.7 percent with respect to a monthly
summary  report would be expected.  For summary reporting
periods  greater than quarterly, effective monitoring of
hazardous waste becomes increasingly difficult with only a
5.5 percent decrease in the reduction of paper flow to
Federal  Agencies, when compared to quarterly reporting and
compared to using the manifest as the report.
     Quarterly exceptions reports would decrease the paper work
burden even more.  Under this scheme, generators would be required
to file  a report  to the Regional Administrator only when the gen-
erator did not receive the  signed original of the manifest  (or
                             -31-

-------
delivery document) within four weeks of the closing date of the
reporting quarter.  The reasoning behind this reporting method
was to provide enough information to meet the first criterion
without requiring reports on properly disposed wastes, thus reduc-
ing paper work and  satisfying the second criterion.  This was the
option chosen for the proposed regulation.
      Since  the manifest is  the generator's certification
that  the waste was  properly treated, stored, or disposed of, a 3
year  recordkeeping  requirement is placed on the manifest so that
monitoring  or tracking of hazardous waste will occur while  the
manifest is still in existence.
      The manifest verifies  the hazardous waste shipment by  track-
ing the movement of the waste from the generator,  to the
transporter, to  the TSDF.   The annual reports filed by the generat
and the TSDF are developed  from  the information on the manifest
and submitted to the Regional Administrator at the same time.
      If a transporter or a  TSDF  wish to file reports for a
generator of waste  oil he may do so but only if the generator
executes an assumption of duties contract with the transporter
or TSDF.  Otherwise, a transporter or TSDF may prepare a manifest
for a generator, but the generator must sign it.
                               -32-

-------
     For shipments of hazardous waste which move interstate,
a copy of the annual report must be sent by both the generator and
the TSDF to both the Regional Administrator with regulatory
authority over the TSDF and the Regional Administrator with
regulatory authority over the generator.
E.   Containerization and Labeling (250.25 & 250.26)
     The use of appropriate containers and labeling practices to
sufficiently confine and accurately identify hazardous waste
for shipment, storage, treatment, or disposal are mandates
of RCRA.  The options available in the selection of appropriate
containers and labeling practices become apparent when reviewing
RCRA, Subtitle C, Section 3003(b), which requires the regulations
promulgated under this subtitle to be consistent with the
Hazardous Materials Transportation Act  (88 Stat. 2156; 49 U.S.C.
1801 and following).
     In those areas where the U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT), Hazardous Materials Regulations  (49 CFR 100-189)
criteria or list are in agreement with the criteria or list
developed under the authority of RCRA, Subtitle C, Section
3001 for hazardous wastes, the DOT labels will be used to
relay acute hazards to persons handling, transporting,
treating, storing, or disposing of the waste.  In areas were
DOT is silent and EPA criteria or list identifies a waste as
hazardous, an EPA marking will be specified.
                            -33-

-------
     DOT containers will be used in all cases pertaining to
movement of wastes.  Provision are presently being made by
DOT for the use of one-way, unreconditioned containers for
disposal.  Containers used for storage of hazardous waste must
be in accordance with Section 3004 of the Act (Part 250.44-2
of the proposed regulation!.
F.   Waste Information  (250.22 & 250.23)
     RCRA mandates the  furnishing of information on the general
chemical composition of hazardous waste to persons transporting,
treating, storing, or disposing of the waste.
     Persons  handling and transporting hazardous waste need
general information as  to the chemical composition of the
waste and its acute hazard.  This information will be supplied
on the manifest.  Further information as to the hazard of
the waste will also be  displayed on the container via a DOT
label or EPA  marking.   Persons treating, storing, or disposing
of hazardous  waste may  require more specific information as to
the specific  chemical composition of the waste.  It is the
responsibility of the person operating the TSDF to acquire this
information from the generator prior to treatment, storage, or
disposal of the waste as may be appropriate to assure that the
requirements  of the permit  (issued under RCRA, Subtitle C,
Section 3005)  are met.
G.   Other Topics
     Definitions:  It was necessary in some cases to expand on  sonn
of the definitions provided in the Act.  Other words or terms also
needed to be  clarified  as the regulation developed.
                             -34-

-------
     Although very few changes occurred in the definitions,  one
term was extensively defined.  One of the first definitions  of
a generator was "any person whose act or process produces solid
waste composed in whole or in part of hazardous waste."  This
definition stayed basically unchanged with the exception of  three
exclusions for volume generated, generation from farmers, and
generation from retailers.  Within these exceptions there was
much debate.  The Standard Production Rate (SPR) exemption level
is discussed elsewhere in this background document.
     Several comments suggested that by using the word "solely"
to describe farmers' and retailers' activities that many of them
may have a small unrelated business and would not be included
in the definition.  The intent  initially was to exclude anyone
who was not exclusively involved  in the business of farming
or retailing.  This, it was  felt, would control those  "farmers"
who also ran aerial applicator  businesses or pesticide ware-
houses or co-ops.  Likewise,  there would be greater control of
retailers also involved in wholesale or formulation of chemicals
and pesticides.
     The draft was changed such that a farmer  now  needs  only
to have his  "principal business"  be  farming.   It was felt that
the number of farmers whose  principal  business was farming
would  not have a substantial aerial  application, warehouse or
co-op  business.   The  same argument,  however, was not made for
retailers.
                             -35-

-------
     Assumption of Duties Contract:  Another provision in the



regulation which would allow a transporter or a facility to



accept the duties of a generator of waste automotive oil (later



changed to waste oil in general) was made.  The addition of



this contractual agreement will significantly reduce the number



of generators required to report, without affecting the amount



of hazardous waste being treated, stored, or disposed.  It



may in fact encourage waste oil rerefining and reuse by taking



the requirement of recordkeeping and reporting off the small



generator, increasing his incentive to seek a willing hauler



or rerefiner.



     Certification:  Some comments received pointed out that



other EPA offices were using a certification of information which



was considered to be more binding than the one used in the



October llth draft.  The Justice Department had been instrumental



in helping to develop appropriate language in the suggested



example.  It was explained, however, that the language chosen



was used extensively by the transportation industry and in



developing a manifest system, every effort was made to create



the least impact possible.  Therefore, it was decided to leave



the certification wording unchanged on the manifest prepared by



the generator but use the new wording for the certification re-



quired on the quarterly exceptions and annual reports.



     A few comments were received regarding the personnel level



of responsibility that should be required to sign the manifest



and report certifications.  It was felt by some that the signatur



of any "authorized representative" of the generator could be used
                         -36-

-------
to hold the generator in violation as a result of a conviction.



Others felt that generators as a whole would be more attentive



to good hazardous waste management if they found themselves more



directly involved.  The solution to the debate was to leave the



wording unchanged since it would be unreasonable to require a



high level executive to be on the loading dock just to sign



manifests.  Although the same argument cannot be made for the



signing of the certification on reports, no justification was



made for requiring differing levels of "authorized representative"



for the signing of reports and manifests.



     Notification of Foreign Governments:  An additional change



was requested that would require generators to notify foreign



governments of shipments of hazardous waste.  Although this issue



may not be totally resolved, the additional provision was placed



on generators of shipments outside the jurisdiction of the



United States; namely, they are required to send a copy of the



manifest within one week of the shipment to the foreign agency



having jurisdiction over the designated TSDF.



     Single Manifests:  Several questions were raised regarding



the need for a single manifest for multiple shipments.  This



provision was made to simplify recordkeeping for generators and



transporters involved in moving several loads of the same



hazardous waste in any one day to the same permitted disposal



facility.
                           -37-

-------
              APPENDIX A




RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT








             SECTION 3002
               A-l

-------
           Resource Conservation and Recovery Act




                      PUBLIC LAW 94-580



                  SUBTITLE C, SECTION 3002
"Sec. 3002.  Not later than eighteen months after the  date of



the enactment of this section, and after notice and opportunity



for public hearings and after consultation with appropriate



Federal and State agencies, the Administrator shall promulgate



regulations establishing such standards, applicable to generators



of hazardous waste identified or listed under this subtitle, as



may be necessary to protect human health and the environment.



Such standards shall establish requirements respecting—



     "(1) recordkeeping practices that accurately identify



          the quantities of such hazardous waste generated,



          the constituents thereof which are significant in



          quantity or in potential harm to human health or the



          environment, and the disposition of such wastes;



     "(2) labeling practices for any containers used for the



          storage, transport, or disposal of such hazardous



          waste such as will identify accurately such  waste;



     " (3) use of appropriate containers for such hazardous



          waste;



     "(4) furnishing of information on the general chemical



          composition of such hazardous waste to persons



          transporting, treating, storing, or disposing of



          such wastes;
                            A-2

-------
(5)  use of a manifest system to assure that all such
    hazardous waste generated is designated for treat-
    ment,  storage,  or disposal in treatment, storage,
    or disposal facilities (other than facilities on the
    premises where  the waste is generated)  for which
    a permit has been issued as provided in this sub-
    title; and
(6)  submission of reports to the Administrator (or the
    State agency in any case in which such agency carries
    out an authorized permit program pursuant to this
    subtitle at such times as the Administrator  (or the
    State agency if appropriate) deems necessary, setting
    out—
    "(A) the quantities of hazardous waste identified
         or listed under this subtitle that he has
         generated during a particular time period; and
    " (B) the disposition of all hazardous waste reported
         under subparagraph  (A).
                    A-3

-------
       APPENDIX B








SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FROM




 INVITATIONAL WORKSHOPS




         (TYPE II)
      B-l

-------
        CITIES IN WHICH WORKSHOPS WERE HELD
San Francisco, California



Cleveland, Ohio



Minneapolis, Minnesota



Hartford, Connecticut



Atlanta, Georgia



Houston, Texas



Oklahoma City, Oklahoma



Seattle, Washington



Denver, Colorado
February 3, 1977



March 9, 1977



March 10, 1077



April 6, 1977



April 8, 1977



April 13, 1977



April 27, 1977



May 25-26, 1977



May 26, 1977
                       B-2

-------
                       Manifest System

     The type of information on the manifest and the degree
of detail were commented upon by those in attendance at the
meeting.  There was a widespread difference of opinion as to
what should be included in the description.  Some of the data
listed as important information was:  emergency response
procedures, generic name of waste, hazard class, quantity,
general type of waste, phone number of the generator and
transport company, physical state of the waste, chemical
composition, and the process from which the waste was derived.
Some groups complained that the chemical composition was of
little value, since most drivers would not be able to understand
it in an emergency.  Trade names were also to be avoided for
the same reasons.
     The proposed  format of the manifest drew varied responses.
Many suggested that the manifest be incorporated into the
DOT bill of lading.  This could be done with modifications  such
as allowing additional room at the bottom  of the form,  so
information could  be included  that would satisfy ICC/DOT re-
quirements.   Several in attendance recommended  that a set of
data requirements  rather than  a  format be  developed, allowing
the use of existing shipping papers.  Most groups believed  that
the use of a  separate  uniform  format  would be more  desirable and
would  facilitate  computerization of the manifest.   This uniformity
would  be  important in  interstate transport, and it  was  deemed
                           B-3

-------
necessary to make sure all states use the same manifest format
for this reason.  The State of Kansas suggested using its
manifest as the model for the proposed manifest.
     Most groups in attendance felt that the manifest was a
tracking tool and should not be used in reporting procedures.
Instead, summary reports should be issued to the agency or
authority.
     The circulation of the manifest was also the subject of
discusssion.  The majority opinion was that the manifest should
follow the  waste delivery from generator to transporter to
waste  management facility.  The waste management facility should
send a copy of  the manifest to the generator and the generator
should then report to the state.  Differences arose over
whether it  was  necessary for the  disposer to report back to the
generator.
     Questions  were raised over what to do in the event that
a manifest, for one reason or another, does not accompany a
waste  shipment.  Several groups  felt that allowances should
be made, such as allowing a second party  (transporter or
disposer) to have the option of  filling out the manifest, as
long as the generator has certified the waste shipment.  Waste
disposers had questions about using transfer points where wastes
with the same manifest number may be designated for different
destinations.   They argued that  it could be necessary  for a
manifest to originate from the transfer point in order  to
legally ship the waste material.
                        B-4

-------
      A plan for developing manifest numbers was proposed.  The



numbers could be derived by using the prefix of the company's



phone number and the area code.  A data bank would be established



with code numbers assigned to generators, transporters, and



disposers.
                            B-5

-------
            Reporting and Recordkeeping  (250.23)

     All groups represented at  the meetings felt that periodic
reporting by generators  and disposers rather than the submittal
of  manifest copies was the more practical form of regulation.
The frequency  of  reports was  a  subject of debate.  The suggested
frequency ranged  from bimonthly to annually, with most of those
in  attendance  favoring annual reporting.  Those arguing for
yearly filing  believed that any higher frequency would burden
the regulating agency with too  much paper-work, causing un-
acceptable delays.   They felt that a yearly report by both
generator and  disposer would  be reasonable and realistic.
     A second  suggestion was  that reporting frequency be based
on  volume, with those generating or disposing of large quantitie
having to file more  often.  Another suggestion involved not
requiring generators to  report, since their records are open
and can readily be inspected.   Waste management facilities shouli
be  required to report, however, perhaps monthly or quarterly.
It  was  recommended that  the periodic report by the generator
and disposer include the manifest number, quantity, and the
destination of the waste being  transported.  A set format for
reports should be developed by  EPA.
     There were a number of recommendations made concerning tha
recordkeeping  system.  The majority of those present believed
that the record should be a copy of the manifest plus any
analytical data available on the waste.  Other groups felt that:
                        B-6

-------
certain data should be required rather than a specific form
for recordkeeping.  The length of retention of records was
the subject of controversy.  It was noted that pesticide
producers were required to keep records for twenty years, though
no one suggested a retention period this long.  Several waste
disposer facilities felt that six months was long enough, but
most groups recommended retention times of from one to three
years.  Another suggestion was that retention time should
coincide with the statute of limitations.
     A recommendation was made with respect to snail generators.
It would allow the transport/waste management facility to
prepare manifests and summary reports for regular route customers
This is the same concept as preparing an income tax form for
someone else.  The report would deal only with waste picked
up and delivered to the waste facility.
     It was suggested by several groups that regulations make
a distinstion between inter- and intrastate transport.  This
is necessary because federal and state regulations apply intra-
state, while only federal rules apply interstate.  Another
recommendation proposed that the data system utilized should
identify the industrial source of the waste on the waste dis-
poser's report.  This would help check the operation with the
generator's report.
                          D-7

-------
           Containers and Lables  (250.25 & 250.26)

     A number of suggestions were made concerning the informa-
tion to be placed on the label and the format that should be
followed.  Most groups felt that DOT requirements should be
followed, with some modifications pertaining directly to
hazardous wastes.  DOT regulations require the generator's
name, the type of waste, and the chemical composition of the
waste on the label.  The manifest number and the environmental
or occupational hazards should also be required.  Others felt
that the labels should be color coded and represent the
highest level of hazard.
     Many of those in attendance at the meeting felt that
placards should follow DOT requirements, with added regulations
where necessary.  It was suggested that the word "waste" be
included somewhere on the placard..  United Nations code numbers
could also be used with DOT placards to handle the problem of
multiple hazards.  Some persons felt that additional information
should be placed on the placard, since in the event of an
accident, the manifest could be lost and the placard would be
the only source of information.  One group believed that no
additional placarding requirements were needed for hazardous
waste transport.  Another felt that a limit should be imposed
on the number of placards allowed on a vehicle.
                          B-8

-------
     Several persons suggested that labeling and placarding
system other than DOT should be used for hazardous wastes.
The National Fire Protection Association system was the most
commonly recommended alternative.  Its advantage is that it
exhibits the multiple hazard of the material as well as its
health effects.  A disadvantage is that these labels are not
recognized by all fire and emergency response personnel.
Another alternative is to develop a classification system
based on color or alphabetical designation where each letter
or color corresponds to a particular hazard or degree of hazard.
Other suggested labeling systems are the ANSI and the Material
Safety Data Sheets.
     The consensus opinion pertaining to container regulations
was to utilize DOT container requirements as long as the wastes
being stored met DOT criteria.  For those which do not, perfor-
mance standards must be developed which are adequate to insure
proper waste storage.  One group felt that container regulations
were already too stringent and should not be added to.  Several
groups also recommended that DOT container reuse standards be
modified to allow for more recycling of containers.  Another
group believed that no containers should be reused under any
conditions.
     Those participating in the meetings made it clear  that
they expected regulations to be written that would insure that
all vehicles carrying hazardous wastes would be clearly marked
as such.   Transport trucks should have  "Hazardous Waste"
                           B-9

-------
stenciled on the side to warn the public of its contents.



Placards should be placed on all waste transport vehicles,



whether it is on or off-site.



     Several groups felt that hazardous waste destined for



on-site disposal not be subject to any special labeling or



placarding requirements.
                            D-10

-------
                      Waste Information

     A number of recommendations were made as to what should
be included in the waste information category.  There was
general agreement that it include the chemical constituents
and the principal hazards.  The important constitutents of a
waste are those constituent that in any amount cause contamina-
tion of ground water.  An atidote to the waste effects could
also be included.  Several groups complained that it would be
difficult to provide the chemical constituents of a waste,
since generators often only know the trade names of the raw
materials they use and not the chemical formula.
     A second point of discussion involved who should be
responsible for maintaining this information.  The consensus
opinion was that the generator should research and supply
waste data.  This was thought to be the most economical method,
since it would be expensive for transporters to analyze each
shipment of hazardous waste from their terminal facilities.
This information should be required to be provided to trans-
porters and disposers, since in the past generators have
developed techniques to protect their own employees and then
not passed on this information.  Some groups felt that a
generator should not be required to do additional testing once
a waste has been identified as hazardous.  Information kept
on file should be able to show why the substance was classified
as hazardous.
                           B-ll

-------
     Many persons at these meetings felt the need for the
development of a classification and data retrieval system.
A list of hazardous materials could be kept on file in the
data bank and would result in less testing.  This data would
also benefit a small company that does not have the resources
to do analyzes on their own waste.
     Several individuals suggested using data safety sheets.
National Fire Protection Association and Manufacturing Chemists
Association have established standard safety sheets for
commodities.
                       B-12

-------
                        Other Contents
     The status of recyclable materials was a subject of
discussion.  Most groups felt that these materials should be
exempted from the regulations.  Less restriction would have
the effect of promoting the reuse of these wastes.
     The State of Kansas suggested that before a waste is
transported, the generator must fill out a detailed waste
disposal request.  The information is then used by both the
transporter and disposer and parts of it appear on the manifest.
     Several groups recommended that emergency response
personnel and response manuals be upgraded.  Truck drivers,
police, and fire departments should be educated in spill response
and clean-up methods.  The emergency response manuals now in
use are too difficult to be understood by first-line emergency
units and should be rewritten.
     One group wanted to know what the liability would be
of the generator who declares a waste non-hazardous based on
tests but later events prove it to be hazardous.
                       B-13

-------
                APPENDIX C
         SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FROM
MEETINGS WITH POTENTIALLY AFFECTED  PARTIES
                 (TYPE  III)
                   C-l

-------
                  Manifest System  (250.22)

     The participants at these meetings had a number of sug-
 gestions about what  sort of information should appear on the
 manifest.   For the most part, the  format should follow the
 presently  utilized DOT bill of lading.  The information on the
 bill of lading includes:  shipper's name, origin and destination
 of the material,  consignee, pick-up and delivery date, load and
 unload time,  total round trip time, tractor and trailer number,
 quantity,  and the commodity description.  Most groups believed
 that the bill of  lading could be adapted to hazardous waste
 transport  with some  modifications.  A waste description, chemical
 composition and emergency response information would be necessar
 additions.  DOT suggested that the manifest format be required  i
 under  its  regulations, but leave the development of the system
 to EPA.
     Several  companies recommended using manifest systems that
 they developed themselves.  Union Carbide has designed a manifei
 form that  is  attached to the bill of lading and is used for
 tracking the  waste.  The Association of American Railroads has
 developed  a classification system called the Standard Trans-
 portation Commodity  Code.  This is an identification system
where  each  commodity class has a code number.  Hazardous wast as
are  coded 49.  With  this system and the waybill combined, a
workable manifest system has been developed.  If some minor
additions are made specifically for hazardous wastes, the railr<|
feel it will  fulfill all EPA requirements.  The National Solid
                            C-2

-------
Waste Management Association is also drafting a model manifest,



They feel that the EPA should design a uniform manifest but



be flexible in the design to allow for individual state needs.



     Most groups were in favor of periodic reporting with



EPA enforcement by inspection of records.
                            03

-------
           Containers and Labels  (250.25 & 250.26)





     All groups agreed that the placards should be designed



to represent that an environmental hazard exists to air, water,



or land.  The placard should represent the primary hazard plus



the additional hazards of the material.  The consensus



opinion was that DOT regulations  should be the basis for placard



requirements with some additions  and modifications where



necessary.  These additions should be developed in conjunction



with DOT.  One transporter was not in favor of the proposed



"Environmentally Hazardous" placard.  He suggested using the



basic DOT placard plus a code indicating emergency response.



DOT recommended using the U.N. classification system in addition



to its regulations.



     Some persons felt that DOT container regulations were not



stringent enough to regulate hazardous wastes.  Several felt



that the DOT regulations are "impact" standards, directed



towards safety only during transport.  There was also concern



that DOT standards were not sufficient for long term storage.



Most believe that performance standards should be developed to



determine the adequacy of containers.
                              C-4

-------
                       Other Comments





    Union Carbide  has  developed a system to mark,  label,



containerize,  and handle waste materials that could serve



as a model for EPA.



    A  group of transporters were interested in knowing whether



the sludge formed when  cleaning out the tanks of the trucks



would cause them to be  classified as generators.
                          C-5

-------
   APPENDIX  D
FEDERAL REGISTER
      ANPR
        D-l

-------
                      Federal Register



                     Monday, May  2,  1977



                            Part V



                Environmental Protection Agency



                     OFFICE OF SOLID  WASTE



          Hazardous Waste Guidelines  and Regulations



             Advance Notice of Proposed  Rulemaking





               Section  3002—Standads Applicable



               to Generators of  Hazardous Waste







 Section 3002 requires  EPA to develop and implement standards



 applicable to hazardous waste generators.  These standards



 are to establish requirements for:   (1)  Recordkeeping practices



 respecting quantities  and constituents  of wastes generated;



 (2)   labeling and other requirements for containers;   (3)  identi-



 fication of chemical composition  of  wastes;   (4)  use of a mani-



 fest system to control  waste movement,  and  (5)  submission of



 reports.   The Agency is considering  two approaches to the



 manifest system which are expected also to satisfy the record-



 keeping  and reporting requirements.  The manifest form would



 be  the same for both options and  would  require substantial



 information from hazardous waste  generators regarding principal



constituents  and chemical composition,  together with the



designation of  a permitted treatment, storage or disposal site



or facility.  The options  differ  mainly with respect to the



system approach  used and  the reporting  requirements.
                            D-2

-------
Option  I would  require the hazardous waste generator to provide
the waste  transporter with a manifest for each hazardous waste
being shipped.   Under this option, hazardous waste generators,
transporters, and storage, treatment, and disposal facility
operators  would be required to retain copies of the manifest
for three  years before discarding.  In this option receivers
of the  hazardous waste as well as generators would be required
to submit  a copy of the manifest to the appropriate agency.
Receivers  of hazardous waste also would be required to return
a copy  of  the manifest to the waste generator.

Option  II  would require generators to provide transporters
with  a  manifest for each hazardous waste.  Hazardous waste
receivers  would be required to return copies of the manifest
to the  generator.  Generators, transporters, and receivers
of hazardous wastes would retain copies of the manifest for
three years.  In addition, generators would be required to
submit  quarterly reports to the Agency describing the types,
quantities, composition, and disposition of wastes generated
during  that period.
     The Agency is specifically interested in obtaining com-
ments on the two basic options presented.  Specially,
comment is solicited on the following.
     1.   Sufficiency of  each option to meet  recordkeeping and
          reporting requirements.
                             D-3

-------
     2.    Other manifest options which might satisfy the purpose
          and intent of the Act including forms and examples
          where appropriate.
     3.   Information needed on the manifest form particularly
          with regard to level of detail necessary to properly
          identify and described the waste.
     4.   Whether the same standards should be applied to
          generators of all wastes or whether different
          standards should be developed for different wastes.

With regard to the containers requirements, the Agency believes
that the U.S. Department of Transportation requirements  (49
CFR 173) and container specifications (49 CFR 178 and 179)
offer a substantial base for developing the necessary container
and labeling standards.  In addition, however, the Agency is
considering requirements that hazardous waste containers also
carry labels which indicate the chemical composition of the
contents/ the type(s) of hazard, hazard emergency procedures
and, if the container is used to transport the waste, the
manifest number.

The Agency is seeking information, comment and data relative
to such requirements including specific labeling suggestions
and the advantages and alternatives for various labeling
requirements.  Specific comments are desired on:
                          D-4

-------
1.   How to best use the DOT container, labeling, and



     placarding requirements.



2.   Identification of need and specification for other



     types of containers which may be necessary for



     contain waste classes.
                        D-5

-------
       APPENDIX E
SUMMARY OF ANPR COMMENTS
          E-l

-------
                  Manifest Section (250.22)

1.   Sufficiency of each option to meet recordkeeping and
     reporting requirements

     The consensus among those responding to this question
was that Option II was preferable to Option I because it
involved less paperwork.  The suggested reporting intervals
ranged from monthly to annually, with most groups supporting
a monthly or quarterly filing period.  There was substantial
support for Option I, however, since many felt that summary
reporting was too laborious and time-consuming.  Several
companies thought either option was viable, while a few
supported neither since it was felt that the paperwork required
for both was too large.
2.   Other manifest option which might satify the purpose
     and intent of the Act including forms and examples where
     necessary.

     A number of groups recommended that the presently utilized
DOT bill of lading be required for hazardous waste shipment
rather than developing a separate manifest form.  The transporters
were unanimous in the opinion that DOT regulations should be the
basis for any manifest system with minor modifications made
specifically for hazardous wastes.  A number of waste generators
were also in agreement.
                        E-2

-------
    Another proposed change in the manifest options involved
requiring only  the waste disposer to turn in summary reports.
Both generators and waste management facilities favored this
approach.   The  State  of Washington, Department of Ecology
stated  that "only notification of waste transport by the
generator to an authority is necessary.  Treaters and disposers
of waste must be required to report..."
    Several state  groups suggested that a certain amount of
flexibility be  allowed in the manifest to accommodate state
regulatory  systems  that are currently in use.  Several trans-
porters recommended that they not be required to report.  The
State  of Texas  Water Quality Board suggested incorporating
its "Shipping  Control of Industrial Waste in Texas" report
into the manifest proposals.
3.   Information needed on  the manifest  form particularly
     with regard to level of detail necessary to properly
     identify and describe  the waste.
     Most of the groups  responding agreed that many of  the
proposed manifests were  too detailed  for their intended pur-
pose.  There was little  agreement,  however,  on what should
or should not  appear  on the manifest.   Some, felt that the
chemical composition  should be listed,  while others argued  that
the information would be of little use to  drivers  and handlers
in the  event of a spill.   Most agreed that emergency  response
                            E-3

-------
information and an emergency phone number should be included.
There was also general agreement that a hazard classification
or a list of the hazardous materials be placed on the manifest.
     Several of those responding to this question suggested
that DOT regulations governing the description of wastes were
sufficient for the proposed manifest.  It was also recommended
that the DOT hazard classification be included.
     Several groups believed that the proposed manifests were
not detailed enough in their descriptions and hazard warnings.

The Velsicol Chemical Corporation recommended that the mani-
fest include the  chemical  components by percentage, hazardous
properties, flash point, pH, physical state, specific gravity,
and the DOT classification.  The Texas Water Quality Board
suggested  using a system with a detailed description coded
according  to the  system  developed in Texas.  The State of
Washington recommended using its system, and the Association
of American Railroads felt the railroad system was adequate.
4.   Whether the  same standards should be applied to generators
     of all waste or whether different standards should  be
     developed for different wastes.
     About half of those responding  to this question believed
that the same  standards  should apply to  all generators of
waste  and  to all  forms of hazardous  waste.  An  equal number
                            E-4

-------
of groups suggested that  standards  should vary with the degree



of hazard.  More dangerous  substances should be subjected to



standards of greater  stringency.   Several groups expressed



the opinion that less stringent regulations should be enforced



upon small generators.  The Alabama Power Co. felt that wastes



should be exempt from regulation if they are not the result



of some manufacturing process.
                            E-5

-------
      Container and Labeling Section (250.25 & 250.26)

1.   How to best use DOT container, labeling, and placarding
     requirement^.

     The consensus opinion was that the DOT requirements are
sufficient to cover hazardous waste handling methods and do not
need to be supplemented.  Most groups felt that wastes should
be treated like other hazardous materials and would thus fall
under DOT regulations.
     A second kind of response suggested that DOT regulations
should be used as the basis for handling regulations, but that
modifications and supplements may be necessary and should be
developed in conjunction with DOT.  Several groups suggested
using additional labeling systems  such as the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency if the need was warranted.  Most of those responding
with this opinion agreed that any modifications and additions be
coordinated with DOT requirements.  They also stressed that
changes be made only if the changes are not  covered by DOT
regulations.
2.   Identification of need and specification for other types
     of containers which may be necessary for certain waste
     classes.

     An opinion expressed by many groups was that the DOT
requirements for containers are sufficient to cover most

-------
situations involving hazardous wastes.  If any further require-



pnents are necessary,  the DOT special permits procedure could



be used.



    A smaller number of groups believed that the DOT require-



ments need to be  supplemented when dealing with hazardous



wastes that  do not meet DOT criteria.  All stressed that these



additions should  be made in conjunction with DOT.



    Several responses involved the Other Regulated Material-



Waste  (ORM-W) system.  Many felt that a classification system



should be developed based on this since it includes provisions



for environmental and health effects.
                             E-7

-------
                       Other Comments

     A matter of concern to several companies was the status
of recyclable wastes.  One company felt that recyclables
should not be considered wastes.  A governmental group believed
such materials must be regulated under the manifest and
reporting systems or else many could become "lost" and unac-
counted for.
     A number of groups had opinions on problems peculiar to
their situation.  The American Petroleum Institute suggested
that facilities with less than a 2,000 gallon waste oil storage
tank capacity not be considered generators.  The Cad Nickel
Plating Co. felt that regulations on the electroplating industry
are unnecessary in California because state regulations are
enforced.
     State Agencies had a number of individual concerns.  Some
of these were:  the exemption of households from waste  regula-
tions, the licensing of generators, the addition of carcinogens
to the DOT hazardous materials list, special reporting  practices
for infrequent and periodic shippers, and  a new definition of
waste to include all materials no longer useful.
     Waste generators made a number of comments not pertaining
directly to the questions asked in the Federal Register.
Celanese suggested that generators be required to file  with
an authority a one-time detailed description of a particular
                             E-8

-------
waste.  This information should not have to be on every mani-



fest.  The Ford Motor  Co.  believed that generators should



furnish waste  information to the receiver through contracts.



The National Association of Metal Finishers recommended that



the public be  educated to the fact that disposal sites are



safe and need  not be a detriment to a community.  Rollins



Environmental  Services felt the agency should assign identi-



fication numbers  for waste streams.  The Tennessee Eastman Co,



suggested that in instances where a waste is generated, trans-



ported, and disposed of by the same company, that the waste



not be subject to the manifest system even if limited travel



is required on public roads.
                           E-9

-------
       APPENDIX F
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS  FROM
   EXTERNAL REVIEWERS
            F-l

-------
     To assist in the development of standards for generators
of hazardous waste, comments were required from external
reviewers representing the regulated industries, Federal and
State regulatory agencies and other groups, such as environmental
groups.  These comments have been considered and integrated into
the regulations.
         Manifest  - Section 250.23  (11/30/77 Draft)
     The external  reviewers made a number of recommendations
about the manifest system.  Several recommendations concerned
coordination with  existing State and DOT regulations.  These
reviewers felt that felxibility in  the manifest sytem was
important so that  it could be incorporated into present State
and DOT systems*   A second recommendation was that a copy of
the manifest be  sent to the regulatory authority by both the
generator and TSDF to better insure the proper disposition of
the hazardous waste and allow more  immediate action if discrepancie
occurred.
     A number of reviewers commented on the problems caused by
transfer stations; they suggested that the regulations be
changed in order to accommodate these operations.  Transfer
stations may alter waste received,  extract certain components,
and then send the  remainder on to other facilities.  There would
be difficulty in trying to keep a manifest with these wastes.
The regulation solves this by requiring a new manifest if the
chemical or physical properties of  the waste are altered.
                          F-2

-------
    DOT regulations will be used whenever possible, for
example, the  labeling  and container standards will use DOT
standards.  The  need for flexibility in the manifest will be
met requiring certain  information on the manifest rather
than developing  a  specific form.   A manifest may remain with
a waste so  long  as the waste has  the same chemical and physical
properties.   If  these  properties  are changed by storage or
treatment before the waste reaches its final destination, the
waste would require a  new manifest form.
    Transportation transfer points also could cause confusion
in the manifest  process.  It would be difficult to keep a
manifest with a  shipment that was transported to a number of
sites before  final disposition.  Rather than requiring a
manifest to remain with a waste,  it was recommended that the
generator give one copy of the manifest to the transporter and
send two copies  to the facility of final disposition; the
facility would then return one copy to the generator.  Mechanisms
should also be provided for exceptions that do not fit the manifest
system such as pipeline transfers.  One reviewers suggested
that the manifest  indicate the type of treatment the waste
shipment should  undergo.
    Some comments were directed at the structure or wording
of the actual regulations.  Several reviewers felt that
paragraphs  250.24 (a)  and  (b) should be written more clearly.
Another pointed  out that the instructions in the regulations did
not match  the example manifest in  some instances.  The emergency
                          F-3

-------
response phone number caused some confusion.  Some were
unsure whether twenty-four hour vigilance was necessary.  One
reviewer was confused about the meaning of "special handling
instruction."  A number of persons recommended that the
paragraphs in the manifest section which dealt with the trans-
port and TSDF be deleted and added to sections dealing with
these operations specifically.  One reviewer was concerned with
the proper identification procedures when a waste shipment con-
tains more than one waste.  Concern was also voiced that sub-
part A does not distinguish between "Shipping Description" and
"Hazard Class."
          Reporting- Section 250.25 (9/14/77 Draft)
     A large number of reviewers were concerned with the
designation of the authority which should receive the gener-
ator's report.  Most felt that provisions should be made in the
regulations for a State agency to receive the report if the
program has been authorized by EPA.  Presently, the Regional
Administrator is the only one officially designated to receive
the report.  Reviewers also felt that a report should not be
sent both to the State and Region.  These comments were incorporate
into the regulation.
     Section 250.25(b)(6) caused confusion.  Several reviewers
believed that the reporting requirements for on-site generators
needed to be clarified.  The term "temporary pre-transportation
storage" needs defining and a reason stated for the exception
                           P-4

-------
given in this paragraph  (6).  Also,  the paragraph referring to
TSDF requirements should be  deleted  from this section and
placed in a more appropriate section.
    A number of reviewers proposed  changes in the reporting
frequency.  One groups believed that annual reports would be
more suitable, citing greater expense and more paper work with
quarterly reporting.  Several reviewers recommended a monthly
report.  They felt  this would enable the authorized agency to
keep more current data,  respond faster to possible problems,
and match-up reports  with  greater ease while placing little
additional burden on  the generator.   The regulations adopted
quarterly reports to  keep  waste data current without becoming
burdensome.
    A question was raised concerning the amount of time allowed
after the closing date  to send in the required quarterly reports.
Several  reviewers suggested that a time limit of 30 to 45 days
was necessary  to  compile an accurate report.  This would allow
timo for transactions late in the reporting period to be
accounted for.   Other recommendations  included placing the
general  chemical composition on the report and requiring
industries  to retain a copy of their report  in case the
authorized authority should misplace it.
          Generators Section 250.22(9/14/77  Draft)
     There was widespread disagreement among the reviewers  over
the generator classifications  issue.   Several groups  recommended
that the classification be  abolished entirely, thus  requiring
                              F-5

-------
all hazardous waste generators to be subject to the regulations.
They felt that a generation rate was an inadequate demarcation,
since it established no levels for toxicity or concentration.
     A number of reviewers favored an exemption for generator
classification and proposed several different methods for cate-
gorizing generators.  One group suggested using the system
developed by the State of Texas, which divides industries into
very hazardous and less hazardous waste classes.  The companies
who are in  the less hazardous class and employ less than fifty
persons would be excused from compliance.  Another recommended
method was  to base the generator definition on "total toxicity."
This would  represent a combination of toxicity and quantity and
would eliminate the problem of highly concentrated toxins
escaping regulation.  In addition, comprehensive lists could be
developed that would exempt wastes which are below quantity and
concentration criteria developed in Section 3001.
     Several groups favored establishing a threshold quantity
as the definition of generator.  One reviewer suggested that
each waste  stream be evaluated rather than combining all wastes
generated at a plant.  Another recommended approach was to exempt
small quantities or "batches" of waste and not exempt the
generating  facility itself.
     Comments were also directed at the portions of the
regulations that deal with generator classification.  Section
250.22 (Generators! was severely criticized for encouraging
                          F-6

-------
the improper disposal of hazardous  wastes.   Many suggested that
this clause be omitted  in  future  regulations.   Criticism was
also voiced concerning  Appendix B,  particularly the third
paragraph.  These guidelines  need to be developed that take
into account which generators are likely to follow them.  These
comments led to  the  redefinition  of "generator" and the elim-
ination of Appendix  B.   (This whole Section, originally 250.22,
was later incorporated  into Section 250.20.)
        Definitions Section 250.21 (9/14/77 Draft)
    The definition  of  "on-site"  drew a great deal of comment
from the outside reviewers, who believe that waste generated
and treated at a facility  crossed by public rights-of-way
should be considered "on-site" disposal.  This would allow the
facility to comply with fewer of  the regulations of Subpart B.
The Union Carbide plant in Charleston, West Virginia was used as
an example.  The facilities are located on both sides of the
Kennawha River,  and  under  present regulations a waste shipment
transported across the  river would have to be manifested, reported,
etc.  It was  suggested  that the definition of non-site" has been
redefined not to exempt premises  crossed by a public right-of-way.
    Several  groups  recommended redefining household refuse to
include farm,  commercial,  and retail businesses.   Some also
felt  that gasoline  stations with a waste oil capacity of less
than  2,000 gallons  should also be excluded.  The definition of
                              F-7

-------
general chemical composition drew varied comment.  The definition
needed greater clarification of the amount of detail required
for constituents.  The majority felt that the less testing
required, the better.  Some of these comments were incorporated,
Chemical composition was changed to chemical and physical
properties.
Containers and Labels - Sections 250.27, 250.28  (9/14/77 Draft)
     Most reviewers commenting on this subject believed that
the DOT regulations for containers were sufficient and that new
standards could be developed jointly by EPA and DOT if needed.
One group criticized DOT standards for containers on the
grounds that they were designed to safeguard materials only
during transport and not for long periods of storage.  Another
reviewer felt container regulations under DOT were too confusing
and should be substituted.  Several person recommended that
container specifications be required for the railroads also.
EPA agrees that the DOT regulations are generally suitable, will
adopt DOT standards, and will recommend container standards only
as necessary.
     The labeling requirements under Subpart B received much
criticism.  A number of reviewers suggested that the EPA label
be used only when the DOT label was not applicable, instead of
allowing either one to be used.  One group felt that if the
DOT poison label were used, there might be confusion as to
whether the hazard was specific to DOT criteria or simply a
                             F-8

-------
general environmental hazard.   They suggested using ANSI as
well as DOT labels.  Another reviewer pointed out that using
an EPA label and/or  a DOT label may violate DOT transportation
regulations.   Several persons remarked that DOT labels were
designed primarily for  transportation purposes and may not be
sufficient for disposal or long-term storage.  All reviewers
agreed that DOT and  EPA label regulations should be consistent
and that any new  labels be developed in coordination.  The
regulation adopt  DOT labeling requirements 40 CFR 100-189.
                       Other Comments
    There were a number of comments concerning the status of
resource recovery.   Several reviewers believed that the de-
finition of waste as "discarded materials" exempts those
substances destined  for resource recovery from Subtitle C
regulations.   Other  groups opposed this view, stating that in
order to have  control  over all hazardous waste materials, those
designated for resource recovery should also be regulated.  One
reviewer suggested  exempting particular phases of resource
recovery, such as fuel recovery, from compliance with regulations.
    The recordkeeping section caused a good deal of confusion.
Some reviewers suggested rewriting the recordkeeping regulations
for greater  precision and clarity.
                       Other Reviewers
    The  small generator issue drew  varied responses from the
reviewers.   Most opposed basing the  definition on a quantity
limit.   They felt that the problem may not be the major dis-
                          F-9

-------
charges but the smaller companies, which may discharge toxic
waste without treatment.  One group suggested exempting certain
less toxic classes of waste.  Regulation would have to include
genetically active wastes, however.  Other reviewers recommended
basing the definition on volume and type of waste or on a
combination of toxicity, concentration, and quantity.  One
reviewer  suggested a quantity limit which excluded the lower
10% of all generators.
     A number of comments were directed at the small generator
guidelines presently in the regulations.  It was proposed that
small generators sending waste to a permitted facility should
not have  to report or keep records.  Several groups also suggested
deleting  section 250.22(b) in the 9/14/77 draft  (pertaining to
small generator exclusion guidelines) because it discouraged
proper disposal of waste.  Another reviewer felt that Appendix B
in the 9/14/77 draft might place  small generators in a legally
questionable position and also should be deleted.  A suggestion
was made  to establish penalities  for failure of small generators
to triple rinse containers.
     Several recommended changes were proposed with respect to
the manifest system.  One reviewer believed that a uniform
manifest  should be developed and  should be required to be
utilized  by all States.  This would eliminate confusion during
interstate shipment.  Another person felt that the manifest
was unduly burdensome to smaller  companies.  He pointed out
that many generators sign their wastes over to collectors  "at
the door" and  should not have to  bear  responsibility  for errors

                            F-10

-------
made by  the  transporter or TSDF.   It was also recommended that
the transporter  fill  out his  portion of the manifest before
giving the generator  his copy.   This would insure tighter control
over the system.
    Several reviewers  made comments pertaining to the reporting
system.  One group  suggested  dividing generators into two
groups,  large generators and  moderate-size generators.  Large
generators would consist of the largest 10%, which create 80-
90% of all hazardous  wastes.   Those in the large generator
category would be required to report quarterly.  Generators in
the moderate size category would report yearly.  This method
would reduce paperwork,  significantly and still cover the vast
majority of  waste.  As  an example, EPA air emission regulations
divide point sources  into large and small classes and have
different requirements  for each.   Another reviewers suggested that
the report be semi-annual rather than quarterly.  A recommendation
was also made to require generators, transporters, and TSDF's to
report to the Region  with authority over their operations.
    One reviewer made  a number of suggestions to improve the
labeling requirements.   This  group felt that the National
Fire Protection  Association labeling system should be substituted
for the DOT  system.   It was pointed out that DOT only reports
the most severe  hazard  while  the NFPA identifies health, flam-
nability, and reactivity hazards through diagrams.  The reviewers
believed it  to be a much more complete system.
                            F-n

-------
           APPENDIX  G




STANDARD PRODUCTION  RATE SUMMARY




             (250.29)
               G-l

-------
     The use of a Standard Production Rate (SPR)  to define
generators was necessitated by several circumstances.  Congress
has mandated the EPA to develop methods and allocate resources
to protect the environment from contamination by hazardous wastes.
EPA faces the task of using available funds to protect the
environment to the greatest extent possible.
     It becomes clear that the real danger to the environment
is not posed by the many small generators of hazardous waste,
but by those few who produce large volumes.  The large amount
of time and money necessary to regulate small generators is
questionable, in terms of the additional protection of the
environment that would result.
     The problem is to find a production rate cut-off which
would exclude the small generators whose waste has an insignificant
effect on the environment, while concentrating on the large
producers who have proven so destructive in the past.  It is
a matter of balancing the cost of enforcement versus protection
against damage to the environment, trying  to minimize the former
and maximize the latter.
     In order to determine an appropriate  SPR, it was necessary
to gather data demonstrating the characteristics of  the generator
population.  Data from the Environmental Impact Statement and  data
collected from five state hazardous waste  surveys were utilized
in the analysis.  Methods of this analysis are detailed in
Appendix I.  The analysis indicated that there was  a range
of production rates that excluded the most significant number
                               G-2

-------
of generators compared  to  the  possible damage to the environment
that could result.  The range  was from 75 Ibs./month to 300 Ibs./
month.
    The Office of Enforcement and OSW further restricted the
range of the SPR.  Both felt that the SPR must be much less
than one drum  (450 Ibs.) .   The reasoning was that enforcement
of the SPR would be easier if  determination of generator status
could be made simply  by noting whether a drum of waste was on
the loading dock.
    It was decided that a one-half drum quantity (220 Ibs.)
would satisfy both OE and OSW  criteria.  This also worked out
to 100 kgs. in the metric system.  It was decided to test
this value for cost reduction  (percent of generators excluded)
and possible environmental damage (amount of waste excluded).
According to the EIS  data, 40%-60% of the generators would be
excluded from regulation while only .3-.4% of the hazardous
waste escapes control.   In the five state data, 11.3% of the
generators were excluded while .0005% of the waste was excluded.
These figures  satisfy our desire to reduce costs significantly
yet maintain control  of the hazardous waste.
    There is  still  the question of whether the unregulated
disposal of these  small amounts of hazardous waste could cause
damage  to the  environment.  The exempted waste would be required
to be disposed  in  a  Subtitle D sanitary landfill.  It was decided
to do a study  of past incidents of environmental damage at
sanitary landfills to see what factors contributed to the con-
tamination.  This  analysis is detailed in Appendix H.
                          G-3

-------
     It was found that two factors were primarily responsible

for past damage incidents.  The first involves the quantity of

hazardous waste which was dumped at the site.  There were few

incidents in which the quantity was documented where less

than 1,000 Ibs. of hazardous waste were involved.  Most damages

were caused by quantities in the thousands of pounds.  These

are well above the anticipated 220 Ibs./month limit to be pro-

posed by Section 3002.
     «
     The second important factor was related to the construction

of the landfill.  At the time these damage incidents took place,

no regulations were in effect regarding construction and safety

considerations for landfills.  Environmental damage occurred

because obvious errors in location, construction, and operation

took place.  Subtitle D of RCRA is currently writing regulations

for sanitary landfills.  All hazardous wastes excluded by the

SPR will have to be disposed of at a Subtitle D landfill (or go

to a Subtitle C facility. 1  In the present draft, Subtitle D reg-

ulations require damage control methods that would have prevented

or reduced the impact of every case of environmental damage in

the incidents outlined in Appendix H.  The specific damage

control methods are expanded on in Appendix J.

     It was stated in the previous paragraph that Subtitle D

regulations would have prevented all of the damage incidents

investigated or reduced the impact.  It was questioned whether

a facility not designed specifically for hazardous wastes

should be allowed to handle them, even in small amounts.  A
                              G-4

-------
comparison of  a Subtitle D landfill and a Subtitle C facility,
which is designed  specifically to accommodate hazardous wastes
was made.  The study  revealed that in every important facet
of location, construction, and operation, the Subtitle D
standard was as strict as the corresponding Subtitle C require-
ments  (Appendix J).
    From the  previous discussion, it is clear that there is
reason  to institute  the SPR, in terms of reduction of cost
and effort  spent  in  enforcing the regulations.  It has also
been shown  that protection of the environment is not compromised
by exempting  smaller  generators.  Thus the Standard Production
Rate of 220  Ibs./month  (100 kg.) is a reasonable and viable
proposal.
                            G-5

-------
          APPENDIX H
SUMMARY OF DAMAGE REPORT STUDY
            H-l

-------
     A study was done of hazardous waste disposal incidents
in several states (Mass., N.Y., N.H., Conn., R.I., Penn., Md.,
Va., N.C., S.C., Ga., Fla., Tenn., Ala., Miss., Kentucky and
W. Va.).  The purpose was to find out what bearing these
incidents had with respect to the proposed method of defining
a generator using the Standard Production Rate (SPR).
     If the SPR definition is used, a quantity of hazardous
waste will be released from regulatory control.  Some of the
waste may be taken to a Subtitle C facility (specifically for
hazardous wastes) .  The remainder of the waste will be required
to be disposed of at Subtitle D facilities  (sanitary landfills) .
     A concern of many persons is that the Subtitle D facility
may not be adequately constructed to accept even these limited
quantities of hazardous waste.  Sanitary landfills have, in
past incidents, caused damage to the environment because hazar-
dous wastes were indiscriminately dumped into them.  This paper
will show that past incidents of environmental contamination
and damage at sanitary landfills would have been prevented had
the presently worded Section 3002 and Subtitle D landfill re-
ulations been in effect.
     There are two aspects of these incident reports which we
are particularly interested in.  The first  is the quantity of
hazardous waste which was involved in each  incident.  Section
3002 regulations will limit the use of a Subtitle D site
(sanitary landfill)  to those generators that generate and dis-
pose of less than 100 kg/month.  The second important factor
concerns the method by which the environmental contamination

-------
or damage took place  (i.e.:   leachate  entering groundwater,
explosion, production of  toxic  gases,  etc.).   Subtitle D
regulations have specific requirements to control such problems.
    According to the incident  reports surveyed,  the quantity
of waste involved in every incident in which quantity was docu-
mented greatly exceeded  the 100 kg/month limit that would be
imposed by Section 3002  regulations.  This includes open
dumping incidents as well as accidents occurring at sanitary
landfills.  The smallest documented amount which was involved
in an incident was several drums (1000 Ibs.)  of a flammable waste
which exploded at a  landfill in New Jersey.  It is evident from
these reports that limiting the quantities of hazardous waste
that enter a sanitary landfill  would greatly reduce contamination
and damage incidents.
    It is also clear from reviewing the damage reports that the
mechanism of environmental damage,  with respect to the landfill,
is generally limited to  five pathways:  groundwater contamination,
leachate  infiltration,  surface water runoff, explosions and fires,
and the production of  toxic gases.   All of these possible dangers
are dealt with  in the Subtitle D disposal facilities criteria.
    Subtitle D requires that contamination of ground water be
controlled by several methods.   These include:  a hydrogeologi-
cally  sound  location,  an impermeable liner, a proper distance
between the water  table and landfill bottom, and a monitoring
system.   Surface water contamination is  limited by diverting and/
or collecting runoff waters.  Damage by  leachate infiltration will
be controlled by  leachate collection methods.  Toxic gases, ex-
                           H-3

-------
plosive gases, and fires will be minimized by periodically

covering active sites with dirt.  A more detailed analysis

of Subtitle D landfill regulations is found in Appendix J

of the background document.

     V7e have shown that in all the incident reports surveyed,

environmental damage and contamination would have been eliminated

if the Section 3002 and Subtitle D regulations had been in force.

It can further be concluded that because of the safeguards pro-

vided by these regulations, it would be safe to dispose of limit-.

ed quantities of hazardous waste at Subtitle D facilities.

     1.    a.   Northeast Bronx, N.Y.
           b.   private landfill
           c.   An organic solvent was dumped at
               a landfill, causing bad odors to
               emanate from the area,

     2.    a.   Granby, N.Y.
           b.   land disposal
           c.   55 gals, drums of liquid sludges were
               stockpiled at a site.  Subsequent leak-
               age from the drums caused contamination
               of nearby streams.

     3.    a.   New York City
           b.   private dump
           c.   Sludge containing chromium and zinc was
               disposed in a swampy area, resulting in
               contamination of the groundwater.

     4.    a.   Mamaroneck Village, N.Y.
           b.   surface dumping
           c.   An exterminating truck filled with a low-
               concentrate solution of the pesticide
               Aldrite dumped 50 gals of the liquid into
               a storm sewer.  This resulted in contamina*-
               tion of a nearby creek.

     5.    a.   Islip, N.Y.
           b.   Sanitary landfill
           c.   Industrial wastes containing bicarbonate,
               HCT, CI, Fe, Mn were deposited in a sani-
               tary landfill, causing contamination of
               groundwater.
                              H-4

-------
 6.    a.   Middleport, N.Y.
      b.   land disposal
      c.   Land disposal of  pesticides on
           company property  caused contamina-
           tion of groundwater and surface water.

 7.    a.   New York City
      b.   surface dump
      c.   A small refiner dumped wastes containing CuSo4
           and NiSo4 at the  back of its property.
           This resulted in  pollution of groundwater.

 8.    a.   West Valley, N.Y.
      b.   Radioactive waste burial facility
      c.   Radioactive wastes were buried in
           capped trenches which allowed water
           to infiltrate to  form leachate.  This
           leachate seeped into the soil causing
           contamination of  ground water.

 9.    a.   Babylon, N.Y.
      b.   landfill
      c.   The Babylon town  landfill has 2.3 million
           cubic yards of garbage deposited on 25
           acres of land. Since the bottom of the
           landfill is below the water table, leachate
           has entered the aquifer, causing trace
           amounts of arsenic, copper, lead sine,  to
           occur.

10.    a.   Foundry Cove, N.Y. - Cold Springs
      b.   land dump
      c.   A plant making nickel - cadmium batteries
           dumped alkaline wastes at the edge of a
           marsh that drained into the Hudson River.
           Contamination of  the Hudson resulted.

11.    a.   Olean, N.Y.
      b.   surface dumping
      c.   A fertilizer company spilled and dumped
           numerous accumulations of nitrogenous
           wastes.  These wastes were washed into
           the Allegheny River, causing major fish
           kills.  Groundwater contamination was
           also noted.

12.    a.   Rensselaer, N.Y.
      b.   industrial spills
      c.   Waste oil from an underground tank seeped
           into the ground water and was subsequently
           transported by streams into the Hudson  River.
                            H-5

-------
13.   a.   Bergen, N.J.
      b.   surface dumping
      c.   An abandoned manufacturing plant used
           a nearby site for surface dumping of
           mercury wastes.

14.   a.   Cape May, N.J.
      b.   Landfill
      c.   Oil and petrochemicals spilled at a
           landfill site caused contamination of
           a nearby creek and lake.  This involved
           30 truckloads of waste, about 150,000
           Ibs.

15.   a.   Newark, N.J.
      b.   landfill,
      c.   Oils and chemicals dumped at a landfill
           caused contamination of coastal waters.
           This involved about 500,000 gals.

16.   a.   Mantua, N.J.
      b.   landfill
      c.   Leachates from industrial waste deposited
           at a landfill caused contamination of
           groundwater and a creek.

17.   a.   Atlantic City, N.J.
      b.   landfill
      c.   The city landfill caused high concentrations
           of Fe and Pb.

18.   a.   South Jersey
      b.   landfill
      c.   Chemical wastes deposited in a company-
           owned landfill resulted in the contamina-
           tion of nearby drinking wells.

19.   a.   Jamesburg, N.J.
      b.   landfill
      c.   Leachate from wastes disposed in a landfill
           caused contamination of ground water and
           public wells.

20.   a.   Deepwater, N.J.
      b.   surface disposal
      c.   Leachate from waste sludge accumulated over
           50 yrs. has resulted in contamination over
           a 40 acre area.

21.   a.   Pine Beach, N.J.
      b.   landfill
      c.   15,000 drums of hazardous waste was deposited
           in a small landfill in the early 60fs.  Ten
           years later, leakage from the site caused
           public concern.

                          H-6

-------
22.    a.    Lebanon,  Pa.
      b.    landfill
      c.    Untreated leachate from refuse has caused
           damage to ground water

23.    a.    Middletown, tt.J.
      b.    landfill
      c.    60,000 gals of liquid chemical wastes were
           spilled at the landfill and contaminated
           nearby streams.

24.    a.    Baltimore, Md.
      b.    landfill
      c.    2,000 gals of liquid sodium sulphide disposed
           of in a landfill caused the release of noxious
           gases.
   %
25.   a.    Allegheny Co, Pa.
      b.    land disposal
      c.   400 tons of a pesticide waste were disposed
           on a site  in the town of Hamilton.  A bull-
           dozer operator became sick and  leakage to
           groundwater has occurred.

26.   a.   Maxataway, Pa.
      b.   land disposal-Quarry
      c.   55-gal. drums of paint  solvents were disposed
           of in a quarry.  Contamination  of several private
           wells occurred.

27.   a.   East Cocolico,  Pa.
      b.   landfill                                  ...
      c.   55 gallon drums containing  nickel and beryllium
           wastes  caused  damage  to nearby  wells and springs.

28.   a.   Sandy Lake,  Pa.
      b.   land  dumping-fill
      c.   30,000  gallons of alkaline  wastes were  dumped
           in a  3  acre area of a swamp.   A large fish
           kill  occurred in a nearby river.

 29.    a.   Springfield,  Pa.
       b.   landfill                          ,    ..  ,
       c    Tank-car quantities of waste were deposited
           at a landfill, resulting in an explosion and
            fires that burned out of control for several
           days.

 30.   a.    Ambler Twp., Pa.

       "    ^mflS'cubic yards of asbestos .were deposited
            in several open piles, resulting in contamina-
            tion II nearby land areas and  degradation of
            a creek.
                  H-7
c

-------
 31.   a.   Rivera Beach
      b.   landfill
      c.   3,000 gals of sodium sulfide was deposited
           at a landfill resulting in the formation
           of toxic gases and the disabling of a truck
           driver and five other man.

32.   a.   Monroeville, Pa.
      b.   landfill
      c.   50,000 gals per day of leachate from the land-
           fill contaminated groundwater and a nearby
           creek.

33.   a.   Kiskiminetas, Pa.
      b.   dump pile
      c.   463 tons of acid per day were leached from
           mine tailings.  Contamination of the Kiski-
           minetas River occurred.

34.   a.   Robinson, Pa.
      b.   land dump
      c.   17 tons of sulphuric acid is leached daily
           from a pile of waste coal debris.  This
           leachate contaminates nearby streams and rivers

35.   a.   North Cordurus, Pa.
      b.   landfill
      c.   Compaction of 1300 Ibs of lye waste caused
           personal injury to persons at the landfill.

36.   a.   Solon, Me.
      b.    Dump
      c.   Twenty cases of pesticide disposed at the dump
           have a potential for contaminating groundwater.

37.   a.   Bowdin, N.C.
      b.   improper disposal
      c.   8 jugs of pesticide caused a major fish kill
           in the river along which  they were deposited.

38.   a.   Toone, Tenn.
      b.   land disposal
      c.   Steel drums of  toxic wastes were buried in
           lined trenches.  Leaks in the drums have
           allowed waste to escape to the subsurface
           environment.

39.   a.   Dover, N.J.
      b.   land storage
      c.   Drums of various petrochemicals stored on
           a farm leaked and caused  damage to an aquifer
           and creek.  This involved 6,000 drums.
                         H-8

-------
40.    a.    Pennsville,  N.j.
      b.    lagoons and landfills
      c.    Disposal of metal wastes in an unlined
           landfill caused contamination of the
           groundwater in the area.

41.    a.    Bridgewater, N.J.
      b.    subsurface disposal
      c.    Subsurface disposal of volatile organic
           wastes caused pollution in a stream and
           seewpage into basements.

42.    a.    Atlantic Co., N.J.
      b.    landfill
      c.    Lead wastes deposited at a landfill resulted
           in the leaching of chemicals into the ground-
           water .

43.    a.    Middlesex, N.J.
      b.    landfill
      c.    Fires and explosions from known sources
           caused a fatality at this landfill.  The
           source of the explosion was several drums
           of hazardous waste.

44.    a.    California
      b.    industrial waste disposal
      c.    Poisonous fumes from alkyl lead wastes caused
           illness to workers in the disposal plant.

45.    a.    Oregon
      b.    disposal company - improper dumping
      c.    A disposal company improperly disposed of
           hazardous waste by dropping several drums
           off at a local dump.  The drums were later
           unearthed by a flood and began contaminating
           the groundwater and emitting toxic gases.

46.    a.    Perham, Minnesota
      b.    burial of wastes
      c.    Arsenic wastes buried 30 yrs. ago contaminated
           drinking water and caused several persons to
           be hospitalized.

47.    a.    Los Angeles, Cal.
      b.    sanitary landfill
      c.    cyanide and acid wastes were mixed together
           forming toxic hydrogen cyanide gas.  This
           involved 2,000 gals of cyanide waste.

48.    a.
      b.    excavation
      c.    Mixture of aluminum sulfate with sulfide wastes
           resulted in the production of H2S gas and the
           death, of one person.

                           H-9

-------
49.   a.   Dundalk, Md.
      b.   sanitary landfill
      c.   Mixture of sulfides and organic materials
           caused the production of H^S gas and re-
           sulted in the hospitalization of several
           persons.  This involved a 2,000 gal-load.

50.   a.   Southern California
      b.   land disposal site
      c.   Unloading of waste acid into a bottomless,
           open tank resulted in the production of
           NO2 and the evacuation of nearby areas.

51.   a.   Contra Costa, Calif.
      b.   dump
      c.   Drums of solvents reacted with mineral
           acids which were released by leaky containers.
           Since no cover was applied that day, a
           chemical fire resulted that dispersed
           beryllium into the air.

52.   a.   Riverside Co., Calif.
      b.   dump
      c.   Several drums of waste were improperly
           deposited at a dump.  Later, during a flood
           the drums were unearthered, ruptured, and
           washed  downstream.  HC1 gas was released.

53.   a.   California
      b.   disposal  site
      c.   Dichromate  salts were dumped in a pit with
           pesticides.  The dichromate oxidized the
           pesticides  and caused fires to ignite.

 54.   a.   De Quincy,  Louisiana
      b.   disposal  site
      c.   A company is storing hazardous wastes  at an
           unsuitable site.   Leakage from the  site is
           causing damage  to  nearby vegetation and
           potential damage to ground water.

 55.    a.   Pience Co., Wash - 1971
       b.   open dump
       c   Hazardous pesticide chemicals  were  deposited
            in an open dump.   The material was  subsequently
            transported elsewhere.

 56.    a.    Steven Co., Wash.
       b.    land dumping
       c    Radioactive wastes from an old uranium mine
            were dumped land exposed on the ground, subject
            to wind and water erosion.
                         H-10

-------
57.    a.    Kitsap Co.,  Wash.
      b.    dump
      c.    A high explosive was washed out of shells
           by the Navy and resulting wash was sent
           to a dump.  Hazardous concentrations were
           found in the groundwaters.

58.    a.    Great Britain
      b.    land disposal
      c.    A company bought a tract of land to store
           wastes, sludges, and containers on.  Drainage
           from the site affected nearby streams and
           ponds, killing livestalk.

59.    a.    Great Britain
      b.    dump
      c.    Run-off from an industrial waste, dump
           contaminated drinking water for a community.

60.    a.    Colorado - 1954
      b.    industrial waste pit
      c.    An industrial waste pit caused contamination
           of groundwater, affecting plants in the area.

61.    a.    Connecticut
      b.    land dumping
      c.    Public school wells were contaminated due  to
           surface dumping of industrial wastes.

62.    a.    Conn.
      b.    land disposal
      c.    Byproducts from manufacturing of antibiotics
           were disposed of in an old sand pit and
           contaminated the groundwater.

63.    a.    Conn.
      b.    land dumping
      c.    Waste solvents were dumped by a company onto
           neighboring industrial land, polluting the
           ground water.

64.    a.    Delaware
      b.    landfill
      c.    Leachate from city landfill contaminated
           groundwater and aquifer with high metal
           compounds.

65.    a.    Delaware
      b.    dump                                   .
      c.    Leachate from abandoned municipal and indust-
           rial dump has affected groundwater and drinking
           water.
                         H-ll

-------
66.   a.   New Jersey
      b.   land disposal
      c.   Stored sludge is leaking organic chemicals
           into the local aquifer recharge area.

67.   a.   New York
      b.   land disposal
      c.   Chromium was leached from plating waste
           deposited on the land surface

68.   a.   New York
      b.   land dump
      c.   Leachate from film - manufacturing wastes
           dumped into a peat swamp have affected the
           groundwater.

69.   a.   New York
      b.   sanitary landfill
      c.   Leachate from liquid and solid waste has
           degraded ground water in the shallowest
           aquifer underneath.

70.   a.   Pennsylvania
      b.   industrial dump
      c.   Heavy metals were leached from a slag
           pile and infiltrated to the water table.

71.   a.   Saco, Me.
      b.   open dump
      c.   Large quantities of sludge from a treatment
           plant were deposited in an open dump.  The
           groundwater  supply nearby was contaminated
           by  leachate  from the waste and resulted  in
           high levels  of Fe and Mn.

72.   a.   Solon, Me.
      b.   landfill
      c.   20  cases of  a pesticide were dumped at a
           landfill, resulting in contamination of
           surrounding  soil and a nearby aquifer.

73.   a.   Ashland, N.H.
      b.   landfill
      c.   Several barrels of dyes deposited  in a land-
           fill began  to  leak and  caused contamination
           of  a nearby aquifer.

 74.   a.   Hudson, N.H.
      b.   surficial dumping
      c.   Surface dumping of  industrail wastes  in  drums
           caused the  contamination  of  wells  used for
           drinking  water.
                          H-12

-------
75.    a.    Coventry,  R.I.
      b.    surface dump
      c.    Open dumping of toxic and explosive
           wastes at a pig farm resulted in an
           explosion and possible damage to the
           water table.

76.    a.    Southern,  R.I.
      b.    dump
      c.    An unspecified leachate from a dump
           contaminated a portion of an aquifer
           near some public wells.

77.    a.    Ledyard, Conn.
      b.    land disposal
      c.    Buried drums containing styrene con-
           taminated six private wells.

78.    a.    Durham, Conn.
      b.    surface disposal
      c.    Two small manufacturing companies
           deposited solvent wastes in a surface
           dump, resulting in public wells being
           contaminated.

79.    a.    Wolcott, Conn.
      b.    surface dumping
      c.    A tool company dumped oils and organic
           solvents in the backyard of the business
           establishment.   Private wells and wells
           of adjacent businesses were contaminated,

80.    a.    Milford, Conn.
      b.    landfill
      c.    Flyash was deposited in a landfill,
           causing contamination of groundwater.

81.    a.    Windsor, Conn.
      b.    landfill
      c.    55 gallon drums of chromic acid dumped
           in a landfill caused contamination of
           nearby streams.

82.    a.    Olean Co.
      b.    surface dumping
      c.    Chromium leached from plating wastes
           discarded on the surface resulted in
           high levels of Cr in nearby wells.
                        H-13

-------
       APPENDIX I
SUMMARY OF GENERATOR DATA
            1-1

-------
Ideal Case
   1-2

-------
    Study of hazardous waste data  from  a  number  of  sources



reveals that a graph of number of generators  versus  the  rate



at which they produce in  Ibs./month has  a  convex  shape.   This



shape can be approximated by two  straight  lines;  one occupies



the lower intervals and has a  large slope; the second line is



in the larger intervals and has a much smaller slope (fig. 1) .



    These shapes indicate that for small  generation rates,  we



have large numbers of generators.   For larger generation rates,



fewer generators are found.  At a certain  rate, a noticeable



break occurs.  To the  left of  this rate, a large number of



generators are excluded  for  each  additional increment of rate.



To the right, fewer generators are excluded per added in-



crement.  In choosing  a  Standard  Production Rate, it is desirable



to exclude the most  significant number of generators per added



increment of rate.  Using this criterion,  the SPR should be



chosen at the rate where the break in the lines occurs.
                            1-3

-------


so

-------
SUMMARY  OF EIS DATA
        1-5

-------
     It was necessary to convert the raw EIS data into genera-

tor and hazardous waste statistics.  This was done by first

choosing six rate intervals:  100,  200, 400, 800, 1200, 1600.

These intervals are in Ibs./month.   For each SIC value, the

calculated generation factor (table 1)  was divided into the

rate interval being studied.  This value revealed the number of

employees that a company at this rate interval would employ.  By

looking at table 2, it was possible to determine how many

companies employed this number of persons and produced at this

SIC.  This was done for each SIC category for each rate interval.

The total number of companies that fell into each rate interval,

for all SICs, was divided by the total number of generators

surveyed and multiplied by 100 to obtain a percentage.  This was

plotted versus rate interval on a graph (fig. 2) .  The hazardous

waste curve was determined by multiplying the number of generators

falling into each rate interval by the value of the particular

interval.  This was plotted on the same graph.  An example using

an interval of 100 and an SIC of 20 is shown below.

     SIC = 20                           Rate Interval =100

     0.544          *    0.1467         *=    3.7
     (rate interval      (generation factor  (No. of employees
     of 100 in metric    from table 1)        employed by gens.
     tons per year}                          producing at this
                                             interval.)

     About four employees are employed by generators producing

at 100 Ibs./month.  Looking at table 2 for this SIC, it can

by seen that 8,492 companies employ this number of persons and

thus produce at 100 Ibs./month.  This procedure is continued
                           1-6

-------
for all the other SIC categories  surveyed.   The total number

of generators is added and this represents  the total number

of generators/ in all SIC categories,  that  produce at 100 Ibs./

month.

    To obtain the hazardous  waste value at 100 Ibs./month,

the total number of generators for all SIC  categories is multi-

plied by 100  Ibs(.544 metric  tons).  This is then surveyed and

multiplied by 100"to obtain a percent value.


     126,012   X    .544  metric tons/yr.(100 Ibs./mo.)=68,550 m. tons
(Total number of                                             /YR
gens, in SIC  20-39
producing 100
Ibs./mo nth)

68,550 m. tons/yr.  *43.4 X 106 metric tons/yr          = 1.58 X 10
                   (Total amount of waste                    _3
                    surveyed)                          2 x 10

                    2  x 10~3  x 100 =  .2%

     .2% of  the  hazardous waste  is produced by generators  who

produce at  a rate of 100 Ibs./month.

     The graph of the generator  and hazardous  waste data from

the EIS can be seen in figure 2.   The hazardous waste data is

multiplied by a factor lo"1.  It can  be seen  that the generator

curve has  a large slope in the early  rate  intervals and  then

rapidly flattens out between 100 and  400.   The data continues  to

flatten after 400, becoming  very nearly flat  in the intervals

from 600-800.

     The generator curve  in  fig  2 is  a realistic approximation

of the ideal case.  The EIS  data does not  have a definite break

point as in  the  ideal  case.   Since it is raw data,  such a pro-

 nounced break would not be expected.   However, a range of values
                              1-7

-------
                      s TA.CTC:IS roa THE CALCLATIOS OF ssrcjiisa orxrrrrtss
     CT EAZAXDCCS VASTS SiSZSAlTJ 3t »c.-J?AC^.r3LIS3 tSDCST2!iS 2^313 OK DGLQYIE-
Srarcard  laduscrial Classifiesilia
                                              Calcularad
                                          teserscion Jzcz

20  Food aad  kisdred products
               value
               value
         Low  value

       rf!7f -1*11  preeuaea
         ?*<*an -value
         Low
23  Apparel aad other textile products
0.1467
0.3704
0.0237
                                              Q.A635
                                              1.2130
                                              0.0366


                                              0.1133
              value
      •*3ac:elle Sorc=w«*e Laboratories,  1377
       r,*zies=*cic sear, a* =ae rang*.
                                                                      0.10S3
                                                                      0.0993
                    (SIC 22 i 33
                       -O.i613)
24
23
25
27
23
29
30
31
32
Zsaaer aad •wood products
2fieaa value
High value
Low value
FuraieurB aad Fixtures
Seaa value
High value
Low -value
Taper and allied products
Haan value
ff!gh value
Low value
Printing ac4 publish lag
Seaa value
gagh value.
Low value
**^en value
g
-------
Sczr.dard tadussria
                lassif icasian
                                              Calculated
                                          Ger.aracisn Tacca:
35  Jiachinsry, exeepc  «lec::lcs.l
         Meaa value
         Hisa value
         Lav -value

36  Zl*c-cric -g^  electronic eculpcaac
                                         0.2331*
                                                               Comparison
33 ?rls



3i eabr



ary seeai iaaus cries
Mean value
High value
Lou valu«
_cace
-------
                                   • IKK I) lu ml mm on OK HANUPAtriuuim) PIHMS itv BTAHI>/VKI>  HIMUNTHIAI. ci.AUiimoAi um - \<>n*

Stitii.f.irJ tudtifttrlal L'lAoul Hunt ion
20 Kiiud mid kindred |iruiluutn
22 Tom llu mill product a
21 A|i|iiirnl uiid otluT lull. Ill* pkuduct*
24 l.uinlior mid wnnd product A
71 t'ur ul turn 4i|u| ll»lmj;il
26 l'.»|>nr .iiid ul Hod product u
27 l'» hit liift mwl |iiililluliln||
2fl Clii'mlfiiln mid it 11 It'd |>riidiictii
29 Pel rnliiuw iiud mull (iroducla
10 Ritltlirr jnd «hn:. jilmit led product*
11 l.uniin'r mid Jorttlinr |iriuliitln
12 KluiMi, i:luy .mil ||lnuii product*
1.1 I'rlMMi'y »n;l/il liulunirluti
14 K.tlirli-iti i-.l mi-lnl pruditrtN
IS Myii lilnury, im>:i-|il duel rlcdl
i(l KliM-irlu jind uUtctriiiiic oqul|imcnt
17 Truitu|iiiiliil Inn i'<|ii ||>moilt
!)tl- IIIHI niMitntu A«ul ru lilt ml |>rmliicta
39 Mine. HiinufiiiiiurliiK liulimtri**
TrtTAI,
I'KIICIvNT (IF TtrlAl.
NUHUKH OK MANUWrfUHINC PIBMS 	 	 .

1,492
1,085
1,462
17, fh

a 14
• ii.iflfi
3,749
591
1.522
791
,113
,250
,105
1 ,74|
,516
,989
,178
.54*
112,900
16.0
5-9
3,543
714
3,040
3,362
1 ,444
540
6,890
1,612
442
1,265
3
-------
!

-------
can be estimated over which this break point could occur.



Looking at fig. 2, the possible range of values is from abou>



75 to 300.  Depending on how the two lines are drawn, any



value between these two limits could be a possible break poi;;t.



The rate cut-off could thus fall anywhere in this range.



     Placing the rate cut-off either to the right or left of



this range would cause a deviation from the optimum break point,



If the cut-off were moved to the left, a large number of genera-



tors that could have been excluded with only minimal increase



in the SPR will remain in the system.  If the rate cut-off were



moved to the right of this range, few additional generators



would be excluded from the system for each added unit of rate



excluded.  Any realistic rate cut-off must lie somewhere in



this range.
                            1-12

-------
                   DATA FROM E.I.S
RATE
| IN
LBS/KOK

L 100

L 200
i
L 400

L 800

L 1200

L 1600















PERCENT
COM?.

40

50

58

61

70

73











!



PERCENT *
E.W. GOI:TG
TO SUB. D

0.2

0.4

0.9

1.9

3.3

4.6








1


i



PERCENT *
E.W. GCII-iG
TC SUB. C

99.5

99.6

99.1

98.1

96.7

95.4

1
1
\
5

"'







i
i

* Due to refinements in data as background information



  improved, these percentages changed slightly.
                  1-13

-------
Summary of Genera-tor Data From Five States
                      1-14

-------
    Generator data was obtained from five  states;  Illinois,



Maryland,  New Jersey, Tennessee, and Texas.  The  amount  of



waste produced by each generator and the identification  number



(or SIC)  were derived from the data in the  surveys.



    Hazardous waste quantities have been converted into units



of Ibs/month using the conversions at the back  of this section.



A number of arbitrary rate generation cut-off values were



constructed.  Cut-off values were:  25, 50,  100,  200, 350,  500,



750, 1250, 1500.  In each state, the number of  generators pro-



ducing in each rate category was calculated and divided  by  the



total number of generators polled in that state's survey.  The



amount of hazardous waste produced by the generators in  each  rate



category was likewise calculated and divided by the total amount



of waste found in the paricular state survey.   All of these



values (both generator and hazardous waste)  were  multiplied by



100 to obtain a percentage.  These percentages  enabled us to



know what portion of the generators and hazardous waste  fell  into



each rate generation category, in each state.



    A composite graph with cumulative data from  all five states



was developed.  The number of generators in each  rate interval



from each state was added together and and  divided by the total



number of generators surveyed in all five states.  The hazardous



waste produced in each rate interval was added  together  from  all



of the states and divided by the total amount of  hazardous



waste surveyed in all five states.  A graph was constructed



using this data.  The graph represents generator  and hazardous



waste percentages on the y-axis.  The rate  in Ibs/month  is  on the
                             1-15

-------
x-axis.  A best possible curve fit was constructed for each sec



of points, using a French curve.



     The generator curve has a characteristic convex shape wh^ ch



can be related to the ideal case  (fig. 3).  The generator curve



from this data, like the EIS data, appears to have a range over



which the break point can occur.  As in the EIS analysis, the



range is approximately from 75 to 300 Ibs/month.  The SPR should



be chosen somewhere in this area in order to excluded the most



significant number of generators compared to the amount of waste



released from the manifest, reporting, and recordkeeping



requirements.
                             1-16

-------
1

-------
              APPENDIX J
COMPARISON OF  SUBTITLE C AND SUBTITLE D
               FACILITIES
                  J-l

-------
                           COMPARISON OF SUBTITLE C AND D LANDFILLS
  I.   GROUNDWATER
      A. General
         Standard
                                Subtitle D Landfill
                          1.  Aquifers for human
                             consumption not ad-
                             versely affected

                          2,  Aquifers not for
                             human consumption
                             maintained at levels
                             set by state
                                                             Subtitle C  Landfill
                                      Facilities must not
                                   degrade aquifers beneath.
                                   Degrade means not contami-
                                   nate water to the point
                                   where additional treatment
                                   is necessary in order to
                                   drink it.
V
N>
D.  Methods for
   Insuring G.W,
   Quality
1.  Artificial liners
2.  Collect leachate
3.  Use natural hydrogeologic
   and soil conditions
4.  Monitor ground water
5,  Develop a contingency plan
   in case of contamination.
1.  Monitor ground water
   a. grid system of
      vacuum lysimetors
   b. background wells
   c. monitoring wells
   d, sampling analyses

2.  Collection of leachate,
   Prevention of infiltration
   a. natural soil liner
      (1.) 10 ft. thick
      (2.) impermeable
   b. leachate collection
      (1.) bottom liner
      (2.) collection sump
      (3.) periodic removal
3,  Contingency Plan
   ri.  Surface Water

-------
       A.  General Standard
Subtitelo P Landfill	  •

     1. Point source discharges
        conform with NPDES per-
        mits

     2. Non-point sources must
        be minimized
SubtltXe C. LandfXll.

 1. Point sources
    discharge must
    conform with NPDES

 2. Non-point sources
    must be minimized
       D.  Methods for Control
10
        No  specified methods
 1. Runoff from active
    portions must be
    collected and con-
    fined to a point
    discharge.

 2. Diversionary structures
    must be built

 3. Runoff collected from
    active area v/ill be
    treated as a waste
  III, Coyer
       Material
     A. Reason for regulation
     B. Methods
     For control of disease
     and fire
 To minimize  fire,  infil.tr
 tion, odors, vectors, and
 provide an acceptable
 appearance
     Cover must be periodically
     applied
 1. Daily cover applied to
    active area - 6 ins.
 2, If cell not to be used
    for extended length of
    time - 12 ins. of eartl

-------
                         Comparison of Subtitle C  and D  Landfills  (Con't)

                              Subtitle D Landfill                Subtitle  C Landfill
IV. Operation of Facility
     Operation requirements
     in regulations
     None
1. No mixing of incompatible
   wastes
2. Position of each hazardous
   waste must be noted.
V. Air Quality
   A. General Standard
1. Air emissions controlled to
   comply with all applicable
   laws.
2. Open burning prohibited
3. Explosive gases must not
   accumulate
4. Toxic gas must not move off-
   site.
   Emissions shall not exceed
   N.P.S.A,A,Q.S. standards
   and not significantly
   deteriorate air. quality
   hazardous air contaminants
   shall not exceed OS11A levels.
   D. Methods
Mo specified methods
1, Monitoring for emissions
   once a year
2, gas venting installed where
   problems occur.
VI, Other Topics
   A, Closure
No closure requirements
        Requirements
   ^ ^     r—^'-T •     ~—
4. •  v 4.fJai'tfJ.i . ai* yuci^ ai* - ^ > ti
2,  Closure  and long-term caro
   plans must be developed
3,  final oovor          ~>.

-------
  B.  Contingency  Plans
Subtitle D Landfill


Only a general requirement
to develop a plan
Subtitle C Landfill


     Requirements
1. Procedures to notify public,
   emergency response
2. Designate responsible
   persons
3. List of equipment to combat
   spill
4. Filed with Regional Admin.
  C.  Location
Ul
  D.  Containers
Landfills must not be located
in or near:
  1. environmentally sensitive
     areas
  2. flood plains
  3, permafrost areas
  4. critical habitats
  5. Recharge zone of aquifer
     used for drinking water
  6. Near public well, spring,
     etc.

     If certain conditions are
met, it is possible to use above
areas,
Landfills must not be located
in or near;
  1. fault zones  (active)
  2, floodplains  (100 yr.)
  3. Wet lands
  4. permafrost areas
  5. critical habitat
  6, Must be away from public
     wella, springs.

     Under some conditions,
  above sites may be utilized.
No container requirements
     General requirements per-
taining fr.o leakage, opening,
spills, and disposal of used
containers,

-------
                 APPENDIX K








               MANIFEST FORMAT




         ICC STRAIGHT BILL OF LADING




DOT SHIPPING PAPER  (STRAIGHT BILL OF LADING)




                 REPORT FORM
                   K-l

-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANIFEST j
I I
I


                                                   IDENTIFICATION
vTt;Vv'>;-:^g£
JENBRA.TOR
ft*MS»ORTER
»OF JTREATMENT. 3TOR-
GC Olt DISPOSAL FACILITY]
tJO. CODE



NAME



ADDRESS

«»

o^ YE awtoi
»•.-• R.SCEIV

||fg

                                                 WASTE INFORMATION
SMIRKING DE3C»W*»T1OM





'
NAXAMO CUASS

"




QUANTITY
-





fComplcf* AppUc«^» Cola^
. UNIT
-~





COKTAINKMT
_
' •




                                               CMeRGENCY INFORMATION
 IHMgDIATE RESPONSC INFOAMATIOM
 Sf»CClAI.- HAMOUNC IMSTKUCTIONS
JCOMMKMTS
                                                   CERTIFICATION
 This is to certify that tho a&ovo-namecf materials are property classified, described, packaged, marked ax, / labeled,
 zodaro in proper conditioa lor transportation according to the applicable regulations of the Department of Trans-
 portation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
                             CKNENATOR SIGNATURE
                                                                                              DATE
This is to certify acceptance of the hazardous waste shipment.
                            TRANSPORTER SIGNATURE
                                                                                              DATE
 This is to certify acceptance of the hazardous waste for treatment, storage, or disposst.
                                TSOF SIGNATURE
                                                      K-2

-------
        -UNIFORM  STRAIGHT  BILL  OF LADING
                                                                Shipp*r*a N
             ORIGINAL—NOT NEGOTIAB1E—
                                                                            ! (SCAC
JECEIVSD, subject to th» clavMaeat-ara and toii£s la effect on th* dat* of th» LSJU* of thvt Bi
                                  City,
                     .County,
        •*     J
    iiir nn T*i» IIMU TII mil rtiiiimi'im tl '• iniiiiii"j »j int. 11 In ncti cwr.»*' ef »U or loj1 of v»'w4 yn
                                                                          r««iri &>«>-« a n-
•£»
                      County,.
*&
. Vehic!» or Car Initial.


tor
^*t M fc * ^^7>^* ?*tfr<»fr^

Kind of Facias*, D*«ariptiaa of Axtfd»%
Special Maria, aad Esc»p*ioa»'
• .
!••.._
* J
^'

* "'
f
" ' •
• B
•
. . . . I
:•

Ss . - -

*•

Mfeere th» rat» b dependent on value. shtpp*r3 at
^Adarrd valu» of tha property.
 bit! «f lxS"J »lnU>tai« •}^«»t: »
•» required to state sp*cifie»Uy Li wndn^
CLO-D. c^ivs^] Shi?f*r-
Subjvcr to Section 7 of coi
^ears, if thi» shipment t» t»
jn*« vr
out iscounar on ti» cotwij;
tb»^con»snor shall aija &»
Tha carnit shall a** m»!e»
lofsry of thr» shipocnt -sarjth-
pagrzamt of Crwrjhk and att ot
laarfoi char^sa. . .J _
.», _ .

17 c3targa» ar» t» bv prep
7*»— »«»y«j-a>
Chars-* advanced:

                             — Ship?**	
                                   	C;:/.	

-------
                                       CONTRACT TERMS AND  CONDITIONS
                            •   -r ,,-j. ^ ji^
                                                                         itMJ j]n7| lj, fuWi M il
                                                                                                  V- f -- J t—tii*ir»f t
                                                                                                                *
         f» No CMW* e» pMiy in pn . i  7m of *U
s-of CaO. ii« puiW Mmy. th» authority of Uw. or eh* M* or drbull of th» i&pp* or a*flM>. or f» lutoni ^rinWijft, T>» ewiiw « luaifilv sinU t»  afc»» r*uk» of lh« MTT»*| of l>s» fnp^tf ml rf.riiji.iJan or »» CM port of npwt (iC inSMidid for upart> h*» U«« dul* »»1 «>• •><*•<* »rai  at»» p*e«m«
»rf xl ;*iainiti>»vaT LuaL* o««u>vrr «f CMpnpw^ tvliMTMtjr mloM U >»««•• it. ba« b— <• BiJ*U. £mnp* ia Ci**otn-»»i"W»i>t th»cam«r or
                                                    c*cs**. is> asoM* or
                                                        or miitili«i» Tin iTiiii.»« ihitl tinlil itii nrriin hii—'— ' -
                                                nf 1*11 tinnniQ rumrfh/ltih iiiafml Tutu IIQT p1ir« >ii'n* •*•- 1 —  ''- • '•  --- rr-ritninn
                                                                                               ii.tIiMt»'^^
                                                                                                 k^
   ^	A  1^	. .	«- '	%_ _  "•   f~ __ _"""_• A " ^^«1 ~	~«^. • '  "• '_»	' *• -—^ •_ I*-' --	  ~^~ •. fc- -  -«•--' - --^	•           **	•*— - _ ^ ^	_^_	. V»	». _
                                                                                                                              * - _1 ^^. " .' -.
                                                                                                                              jir>Jt-""*»'i.* i
                                                                                                             ;• -. -"•-•"'" ~±zr::£^£££'~
                                                                                                             ABM* *r nmir». M«4V^U^MAN
                               iTnii»iJllj. l»i l.iiln p'nj. h tH
      •••««•* il ahoU Ut (•
!*»•!• «rp«M»i>l«i PKOVinSD,T1atg
                                                                     »»»«^»«rth»i»»i>»l«f 0>»pia»»ty «rll» failure «•
«4 th»
of nei wv.
                               »*V *•!«. MH! oth«r
                                                                                          «am»y brxiiNmtiW by U»«.

                                                                                          m of Cr^fS
                                                     »«p«iw and of cari*i for »nd m«auiainx thr property, if pra7«r CM* of v»»n»

         10 Pint-Mi/ tfnt>n«J to or t*V*n from A itoliMfl. »Jurf. I*«a1n( or oth*r D!M* «t N-NWh fhw» u no rrjuUrly •j>awrt«d fc»»i?ie »<««. »S»»5t ^
               fro«» «»fx »»>^c4— ar wv-MU or until lo»dwl into CM*. »«)ue!w or »«~»U »«!. «K«al ia c»-» of c*rr:n'> iwrUjntc*. — fcn» p-c«i»nf &OK» c '
               u, j,, ar olS« ptic«s >>ulS b* »C VMtir'* rs'« until th« can *r* »it»cS«l u> «nj tl-^r t.Srj  trr d.uchwi from !dcan»fa<« =-^ Criia or u: - !
                                                                                                                               .  cJi ry >"
                   -..^s^. .^.>c-: >.l or
                                                               tunwu, ««;.. or for .,-» jnlcl-. ar».ir
                                                                of t>» tr:»!** u» «r
-------
                              STRAIGHT BILL OF LADING

                                      ORIGINAL—NOT NEGOTIABLE
                                                                         Shipper No._



                                                                          Carrier No..



                                                                               Oat*.
        HM
I CM pv4»CFM 17Z.10I)


                                                                                         RATE
                                                                                              tforC
                     MEETS REaUlHEM04TOF 49 CFR 17Z201
                                                                        TIE &T3STZBTPRET

                                                                        ISSTCATlONTARt
                                                    SHf
                                                    =Fcdpy
                       MEW HM-112 CSTHRCATtON
                                                 COD
                     /
r*cr*o a
cnnecTQ «
                                                                                 CMAMGO:   1
                                                                                    FREIGHT CHAAGE3
                                                                                 ^-.^r-     a
                            . Jo..rt-»J*e»»~«»»»»—n»
I*"—
    YOUR NAME IMPRINTED HEBE
                                                 OAT?
      NX» iacmi =•
                                     K-5

-------
                             HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATOR REPORT
                                         IDENTIFICATION
                                                               CXNKMATOn IOKMTIW1CATIOW
                                                           CLOSING DATE
                                       WASTE INFORMATION
  TMATMCMT. aTOKAOB OK
3>9»O»Ak FACILITY I.O. COOK
MAMFCST OO<
            «MT NWMMM
                                                                                         or
COMMENTS
                                         CERTIFICATION
   I have personally exanined and am familiar with the information submitted in
   ificaticn/ and I hereby certify nrjA»T- penalty of law that this inC'jtT'H'*"'0" is trJfi.r
   accurate/ and conplete.   I am aware that there are significant penalties for
                              g the possibility of fine and imprisonment.1*
                                                                            OATC
                                        K-6

-------
              APPENDIX L
ANALYSIS OF UTILIZATION OP THE MANIFEST
   AS REPORT VERSUS SUMMARY REPORTS
                  L-l

-------
     The OSW "notification System Supportive Services"  study con-

tract No. 68-01-4631 Published December 21,  1977,  listed

approximately .38 million generators of hazardous  waste.  The

study "Characterization of Potential Permittees under Section

3005 of the Resource Conservation and Reocvery Act"  Contract "lo.

08-01-4456 published June 8, 1977 estimated .45 million generators

of hazardous waste.  Assume  (1) the average of the two estimates

to be the number of hazardous waste generators regulated under

Subtitle C Section 3002.

      C38 +  .45) X 1Q6    =     .42 X 106
             2

and  (2) that these generators are uniformly distributed among the

States.  Jay Snow of the Texas Water Quality Board has indicated

that  in the month of May 1977 approximately 2500 tickets (manifests)

were  issued by 600 to 1200 industrial generators


Assuming then 3 manifest per generator per month as an average,

if the manifest were used as the report, then;

      .42 X 106 generators X  3 manifest =
                            generator month

    1.26 X 10  manifest/month

     EPA would receive 1.26 million manifests per month or
      126,000 manifests per Region per month if no States
     assumed the hazardous waste program.

On the other hand assuming one monthly summary report per generator

or one quarterly summary report per generator, then

     1 report X     .42 X 10  generator =
     generator

      .42 X 10  report/month  or quarter
                             L-2

-------
fhus, EPA would be receiving 420,000 monthly or  quarterly

summary reports or 42,000 monthly or quarterly report  per

Region assuming no States assume the hazardous waste program.


Paper flow impact on a typical EPA Regional Office when  comparing

aanifest reporting to monthly, summary  reports;

    126,000 Manifest - 42,000 reports       X
              126,000

    100 = 66.7% decrease in paper flow impact when using  a

                monthly, summary report instead of the  manifest

                as the report.


Paper flow impact on a typical EPA Office Regional when  comparing

•anifest reporting to quarterly, summary reports:

    126,000 manifest              X     3 month   = 378,000 manifest
         monthquarter             quarter

then,

    378,000 manifest - 42,000 reports
                   378,000

    X 100 = 88.9% decrease in paper flow impact when  using a

                  quarterly, summary report instead of  the

                  manifest as the report.


Paper flow impact on a typical EPA Office Regional when  comparing

jonthly, summary reports quarterly, summary reports^

    42,000 reports                X     3 months =  126,000 reports
         montnquarter              quarter
                              L-3

-------
then,

     126,OOP reports - 42fOOO reports
               126,000

     X 100 = 66.7% decrease  in paper flow impact when using

                   a quarterly,  summary report, instead  of a

                   monthly,  summary report.
                            L-4

-------
           APPENDIX M
STATE RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS
                 M-l

-------
      - '   v
   State Recordkeeping Requirements
           (Perlo
               '
                                                U  a
 State

.-^Alabama
 Alaska
 Arizona
 Arkansas
 California
 Colorado
 Connecticut
 District of Columbia
 Delaware
 Florida
 Georgia
 Hawaii
 Idaho
 Illinois
 Iowa
 Kansas
 Kentucky
 Louisana
 Maine
 •Maryland
^Massachusetts
Agency Requirement
Public Utility Coimn.
Public Service Conua.
     *6
    **6
      2
      3
      3
      2
      2
    N.A.
    N.A.
      1
      3
      2
      5
    N.A.
    **2
   **10
      1
      5
    N.A.
      3
    N.A.
      3
Otlier Agency
cruireraent •$
      N.A.
      *10 Health!
      N.A.
       1 Eealth
                            M-2

-------
                         Agency Requirement:
                         Public Utility £omro.
                                 Service Comm.
Hichigan

Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
Hew Hampshire
Hew Jersey
Hew Mexico
Hew York
Horth Carolina
iorth Dakota
 Oklahoma
 Oregon
 Bennsylvania
 Khode Island
 South Carolina
 South Dakota
 Tennessee
 Texas
 Utah
 fenrtont
 "Virginia
 Washington
N.A.

   3
   3
N.A.
   3
   3
   3
N.A.
N.A.
   3
   3
   3
N.A.
   3
N.A.
***2
   3
   1
   2
   2
 N.A.
   2
 N.A.
 N.A.
 N.A.
   3
OtherAgency Re-
quirements
2 Dept.  of Naturai
Resource
      N.A.
      N.A.
       *5 DEP
      N.A.
                                                         N.A.
         3  Health De?
      U.A.
      N.A.
      N.A.
         c

-------
State                    Agency Requirement       Other
                         Public Utility Corom.     guireroents
                          Public Service Coimn.

Wi scons in                       6

Wyoming                       N.A.                     N.A.
                 *State Regulations Pending

                   **Statute of Limitation

                  ***Records held for Audit

-------
BD-9
          RESOURCE  CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
          SUBTITLE  C  - HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT

          SECTION 3003 - STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO
               TRANSPORTERS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

                SECTION 250.30 THROUGH 250.38
                            DRAFT
                     BACKGROUND DOCUMENT
               ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                    OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
                      December  15, 1978

-------
Headquarters/Region_



Document Number
                               -11-

-------
    This document provides background information  and  support



for regulations which are designed to protect human health  and



the environment pursuant to Section  3003  of  the Resource Con-



servation and Recovery Act of  1976.  It  is being made available



as a draft to support the proposed regulation.  As  new  information



is obtained, changes may be made  in  the  regulations as  well as



in this background material.



    This document was first  drafted many months ago and has



been revised to reflect  information  received and Agency decisions



made sirfjb then.   EPA made changes in the proposed  Section  3003



regulations shortly before  their  publication in  the Federal



Register.  We have tried  to  ensure that  all  of  those decisions



are reflected in  this document.   If  there are any  inconsistencies



between  the proposal  (the preamble and  the regulation)  and this



background document, however,  the proposal is controlling.



    Portions of  this Background  Document were written specifically



addressing  sections  of  drafts of  the regulation which were current



at that  time.   The reader is cautioned that references to section



titles or  topics  may have changed from draft to draft.   Changes



in the drafts,  as well  as additions or deletions of sections, have



not changed the rationale or basis for establishing the proposed



version  of  the  regulation.   Where possible,  section numbers of



the proposed version of the 3003 regulations, Standards Applicable



to Transporters of Hazardous Waste, appear  in parentheses  (250.30




- 250.38) .
                               -111-

-------
Comments in writing may be made to:
               Harry W. Trask, Desk Officer



               Hazardous Waste Management Division (WH-565)



               401 M Street, S.W.



               Washington, D.C.   20460
                            -iv-

-------
                     Background Document


                      Table of Contents
I.   Introduction ...................     /

II.  Methology Utilized in Developing Standards ....    7

     A.   Meeting with interest group
     B.   Advance  notice of proposed rulemaking
     C.   External review

III.  Regulatory Development Options   ..........  /"/

IV.  Identification of Program Issues/Concerns  .....  / ^

     A.   Transporters
     B.   Hazardous waste generators
     C.   Public interest groups
     D.   State and local governments
V.    Analysis of Standards
     A.    Scope of regulations
     B.    Recordkeeping
     C.    Acceptance and transport of hazardous  waste
     D.    Compliance with the manifest
     E.    Loading and storage of  hazardous /^^er/^/f (
     F.    Emergency/spill regulations
     G.    Identification of  vehicles
     H.    Placarding of transport vehicles
     I.    Insurance requirements
     J.    Permitting of hazardous waste  transporters
     K.    Identification Code

-------
List of Tables, Attachments, Appendixes
               Tables
                                            Paqe
Table I
Table II
Table in
Table IV
Table V
Table VI
Table VII
Table VIII
    Public Participation Meetings,,  :?. /o
    Parties Contacted Outside of Public Meetings^
    Regulatory Authority of DOT/EPA, p* /S
    Standards Required Under DOT/EPA, p. /b
    State Recordkeeping Requirements,^. 2.?
    State Insurance Requirements, p. 7*/
    States Requiring Permits/Licenses, />. 8S
    State Application Requirements and Revocation
    Authority, f. fj
Attachment I

Attachment II

Attachment III
Attachment IV
Attachment V
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
XIV
XV
XVI
XVII
XVIII
Attachments

Status of Federal Hazardous Material
Regulations^
Status of Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations,
DOT Letter,
Bill of Lading,
Handling of Shipping Document by Motor
Carriage (DOT)./
Preparation of Waybills,
Computerized Waybill,
DOT L<*4ding and Storage Placement Chart,
Incidents from Mixing Incompatible Wastey
DOT Incident Report Form
DOT Incident Summaries
DOT Incident Summaries
DOT Incident Summaries
DOT Incident Summaries
DOT Letter
DOT Placards
ICC Certificate of Insurance
Texas Letter Concerning Permits for Waste
Transporters
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
    Appendixes

    Summary of Type II Meetings
    Summary of_Mav 2, 1977, ANPR Comments
    Jc'Ay/-  M?Tl',"fc. Of fco/Sc.  '^Vtyv'o?
    External Feview Comments/Actions
                          — VI _

-------
I.  Introduction



    The Resource  Conservation and Recovery Act (Pub.  L. 94-580),



signed  into  law on October 21, 1976,  directs the Administrator



of  the  Environmental  Protection Agency,  under Subtitle C of



the Act, to  promulgate regulations within 18 months of enact-



ment to ensure the proper controls on generation,  transportation,



treatment, storage, and/or disposal of all wastes defined as



hazardous.   Section 3003 of the Act (RCRA) requires EPA to



develop standards  applicable to transporters of hazardous



waste as may be necessary to protect human health and the



environment.



    The standards developed shall include but need not be



limited to;   (1)   recordkeeping concerning the hazardous



waste transported, its source and delivery points; (2)



transportation of  such wastes only if properly labeled;  (3)



compliance with the manifest system developed under Section



3002; and  (4)  transportation of all hazardous wastes only to



the waste management  facility which the shipper designates



on the  manifest to be a facility holding a permit issued in



accordance with Section 3005 of the Act.



    In addition  to these minimum requirements, paragraph



(b) states  "that  in the event that any hazardous waste



identified  or listed  is subject to the Hazardous Materials

-------
Transportation Act  (Pub.L. 93-633),  the  standards established



by the Administrator shall be consistent with  the DOT regulatic as.



Also, the Administrator  is authorized  to make  recommendations



to the Secretary of Transportation respecting  regulation of



hazardous wastes under the Hazardous Materials Transportation



Act  (HMTA).



     Current federal authority  for the control of transporta-



tion of  hazardous materials  is  shared  by the Department of



Transportation  (DOT) and the Interstate  Commerce Commission



 (ICC).



      ICC



      The ICC has jurisdiction over hazardous materials  (as



defined  by DOT) transportation  in  two  areas:   1)  the authori-



 zation of new services interstate  and  limitations thereon,



and  2) the investigation of  tariff filings  affecting hazardous



materials.  The  regulated transport companies are classified



 either as common or contract carriers.  A common carrier



offers service  to the general public.  Interstate common



 carriers must hold  a certificate  issued  by  the ICC, which



 limits service  to a specific geographic  area and, in many



 cases to specific commodities.  A contract  carrier  is a



 company  that engages in  for-hire  transportation of  property



 under individual contracts or agreements with  one or a



 limited  number  of shipments. The ICC  does  not regulate



 transport of agricultural goods,  private carriers  (a company



 not primarily engaged  in the transportation business that

-------
hauls  its  own property in its own vehicles),  local cartage
carriers,  and intra-state carriers.
    In addition to regulating the interstate transportation
of hazardous materials,  the transportation of waste products
for reuse  and recycling is currently,  as of May 13, 1976,
covered under ICC authority (HC-85).   In 1971, the Commission
ruled  that waste materials which are recycled "assume all of the
characteristics of property."  Interstate transporters of
waste  must acquire a special certificate of public convenience
and necessity.  In acquiring this certificate, the transporter
must file  the following with the ICC:   1)  name and address
of company; 2)  carrier's agent; 3)  evidence of carrier's
insurance  coverage; 4) copy of carrier tariff; 5)  statement
signifying that all appropriate state regulatory agencies
have been  notified, 6) a statement describing the pollution
control program from which the wastes were generated; 7)
statement  of operational feasibility;  and 8)  a statement
demonstrating the applicant's fitness to perform the involved
service.
     The ICC, as stated, does not regulate intrastate transportation;
however, its regulations do have an impact on the State
Public Service Commissions or Utility Commissions that regulate
(license/permit) transportation.  The State  of Texas recently
(January 28,  1977) ruled that a person who performs  solid
waste disposal services is regulated by  the  State of Texas  as a

-------
"motor carrier", principally because the ICC ruled that waste
may be considered property. (See Permitting of Hazardous Waste
Transporters, Section V.)
     DOT
     The DOT regulates the interstate as well as the intrastate
transportation  of hazardous materials under its Hazardous
Materials Regulations  (49 CFR  100-189).  The regulations
address all  modes of transportation  (air, rail, highway,
waterway, and pipeline).  DOT  has established requirements
for  shipping papers, containers, marking/labeling/ placarding
of containers and vehicles, handling of materials, and
 incident  reporting.
      According  to a  recent  interpretation by  the Office of
 Hazardous Materials  Operations (DOT), any material,  including
 waste,  which meets  the DOT  criteria  for  a hazardous  material
 must be handled accordingly.
      The Office of  Hazardous  Materials  newsletter  of April/May
 1977 states:  "There have been numerous  inquiries  to the
 Office of Hazardous Materials Operations regarding the
 applicability of the Department's Hazardous Materials Regulations
 to the transportation of waste materials.   These regulations are
 structured to apply to any materials that may pose an undue
 hazard in transportation and, as such,  do not differentiate
 between waste and other than waste materials.  If, after
 processing, a material meets  the definition of a hazardous
 material, then that material  must be classed and shipped in

-------
accordance with the requirements prescribed for the hazard



associated with the material.   Many materials,  including those



considered waste materials,  may have more than one hazard and



certain other materials may lose their hazardous characteristics



due to  processing.   A mixture of materials, both waste and



other than waste,  must be properly evaluated to determine



its characteristics since after processing, a mixture may be-



come more or less hazardous than it was prior to processing.



     The Department's Hazardous Materials Regulations may



apply to any material regardless of its end use and the fact



that a material is considered a waste material does not



relieve application of these regulations."



     In addition to the Hazardous Materials Regulations, trans-



porters of  hazardous materials must also comply with DOT



safety regulations for Motor Carriers,  (49 CFR 390-397);



Transport by Rail, Federal Railroad Administration Emergency



Order No. 5; and transport by water, U.S. Coast Guard Shipping



Regulations  (46 CFR).  Currently, Motor Carrier Safety  Regulations



apply to interstate transport.  Under HMTA, the regulations



can be extended to also cover intrastate transport.  Safety



regulations for carriage by air, rail,  and water  apply  regard-



less of inter or intrastate shipment.



     Several States have adopted the hazardous material regulations



and the motor carrier  safety regulations in toto  or  in  part,  or

-------
have similar regulations (Attachment I & II).  Twenty-seven



States have adopted in toto or have similar regulations for



hazardous materials transportation.  An additional 12 States



have adopted in part the hazardous material regulations



leaving 11 States currently with no regulations for hazardous



materials transportation.  Fourteen States have adopted all parts



of the Motor Carrier safety regulation.  Of the remaining 37



political subdivisions, 35 either have similar rules, have



adopted the regulations in part for all or some sections, or



have adopted in toto for some sections the Federal Motor



Carrier Safety Regulations, leaving only two States currently



with no regulations for intrastate transportation  (Louisiana



and Montana).

-------
II.  Methodology Utilized in Developing Standards





    As  required under Section 3003(b)  of RCKA, the standards



set  forth under Section 3003 for transporters of hazardous



wastes  shall be consistent with those standards developed



under the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (PUB. L. . 93-



633).   In order to be consistent, both substantively and



procedurally, the standards for hazardous waste transport



are  modeled after the hazardous material regulations (49 CFR



100-189) .



    In addition to using the DOT's Hazardous Materials Regulations,



the  EPA has solicited comments/data/opinions/suggestions from



the  regulated community (i.e., hazardous waste generators,



transporters, treatment, storage, and disposal facility



operators), States, and the public on the major issues



confronting EPA as part of the regulation development process.



This has been done prior to the development of these regulations.



Section 7004(b) of the Act specifically states that "public



participation in the development, regulation, guidelines,



information, or program under the Act shall be provided for,



encouraged/ and assisted by the Administrator and the States."



Therefore, to fulfill the requirement of the Act and develop



a public participation plan, the Office of Solid Waste has



encouraged the regulated community to comment prior to



proposing regulations on the major issues of the Act, including



those dealing with Section 3003  (Standards Applicable to



Hazardous Waste Transporters).

-------
     In addition to early public participation, EFA undertook
a study which examines and characterizes the Hazardous Waste
Transport Industry.  The study, a first of its kind, identifies
the various segments of this industry:  transportation by
the generator, transportation by the waste management facility,
and transportation by independent carriers.  The data collected
from the study was used in the development of these standards
and also for input to EPA's recommendations to DOT.   In
addition an economic analysis of the proposed regulation was
           2
undertaken.
     EPA also has an internal working group process which
met periodically to discuss and resolve the major issues
confronting EPA.  The working group formed for Section 3003
is made up of representatives from the various offices in
EPA and representatives from the Department of Transportation
Office of Hazardous Materials Operations.  All issues and
proposals are reviewed by the Agency  (Steering Committee and
Administrator) prior to publication of the draft regulations
in the Federal Register as a "Notice  of Proposed Rulemaking."
     At this point, the public  has another opportunity to
provide comments/input by way  of written  responses  and
public hearings which will be  scheduled during the  public
 1.    Arthur D.  Little:   "A characterization of  the  Hazardous
 Waste Transport Industry," Contract No.  68-01-4381,  1977
 2.    Arthur D.  Little:   "The Economic  Impact of the Hazardous
 Waste Transportation Regulations",  Contract No. 68-01-4381,
 1977.

-------
comment period.   EPA will then re-evaluate the regulations



in view of the comments received and forward the revised



final product to the Steering Committee for their final



approval.   The Administrator will review the final regulation



for his approval.  The regulations will then be published in



the Federal Register as the "Final Rulemaking" after considering



all points of view.





     A.   Meetings with Interest Groups



     A series of 15 meetings were held with generators,



transporters, waste management facilities, State and local



government, and public interest groups to discuss the devel-



opment of Section 3003 standards.  Approximately 1,000



people attended the meetings which were held throughout the



country (Table I).  At ten of the meetings  (Type II) the



requirements of the Act and various options for the regulations



were discussed.  (For summary of meetings see Appendix A.)



Three meetings  (Type I) were held with the public to review



the current direction of all the draft RCRA Standards.  In



addition a joint public meeting was held with the DOT  in



Chicago (10/26/77).  Transcripts of these four meetings are



available  for review at the Office of Solid Waste, Washington,




D.C. 20460.

-------
                          Table I
                Public Participation Meetings
February 3, 1977
February 24, 1977
March 9, 1977
March 10, 1977
April 6, 1977
April 8, 1977
April 13, 1977
April 27, 1977
May  11,  1977
May  25-26,  1977
May  26,  1977
Type II (Informal meetings)

        San Francisco,  California
        Washington, D.C.
        Cleveland, Ohio
        Minneapolis, Minnesota
        Hartford, Connecticut
        Atlanta, Georgia
        Houston, Texas
        Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
        King of Prussia, Pennsylvania
        Seattle, Washington
        Denver, Colorado
          Type  I
 October 11-12,  1977
 October 13-14,  1977
 October 17-18,  1977
        Washington, D.C,
        St. Louis, MO.
        Scottsdale, AZ.
                 Joint EPA/DOT Public Meeting
 October 26,  1977         Chicago,  ILL.
      In addition to public meetings, meetings have been held
 with various interested parties (Table  II).

-------
                         Table  II
        Par-ties  Contacted Outside of Public Meetings

Industry Trade Associations
     National Solid Waste Management Association
     National Tank Truck Carriers  Conference
     Liquid Waste Control Association
     Association of American Railroads
     American Waterway Operators
Transporters
     Chemical Lehman
     Matlack
     Bohager and Son
     Chancellor & Odgen (BKK)
     Missouri Pacific Railroad
 Generators
     Union  Carbide
 Environmental. Group
     Environmental  Action
 Federal Agencies
     Department of  Transportation
      Interstate Commerce Commission
 State Governments
      California
      Texas
      Illinois
                                )\

-------
                          Table II
        Parties Contacted Outside of Public Meetings

Industry Trade Associations
     National Solid Waste Management Association
     National Tank Truck Carriers Conference
     Liquid Waste Control Association
     Association of American Railroads
     American Waterway Operators
Transporters
     Chemical Lehman
     Matlack
     Bohager and Son
     Chancellor & Odgen  (BKK)
     Missouri Pacific Railroad
Generators
     Union Carbide
Envir'brn"
-------
    B.   Advance Notice  of  Proposed  Rulemaking  (ANPR)

    As part  of EPA's  public participation plan,  an Advance
Notice of Proposed  Rulemaking (ANPR)  was published in the
Federal Register on May 2,  1977,  and  a Joint Notice of Public
Meeting was published  (with DOT)  on September 29, 1977, inviting
comments/data/information on the major issues confronting EPA
in the regulation  development process.  These notices included
a series  of question related to Section 3003.  The questions
raised are  similar to the issues discussed during the earlier
public meetings (Appendices B and C).

     C.    External Review

     In addition to the  advance notices  (ANPR),  the  second draft
Of the regulations were  sent to over sixty outside  reviewers
soliciting comments.  See Appendix D for  major comments  received
and actions  taken.
     Comments from  the public meetings,  transport study,  the
ANPR  , external review, plus any  additional information received
were reviewed and  considered by  the  Office of Solid VTaste before
proposing  standards for  transporters of hazardous waste  trans-
 portation.

-------
III. Regulatory Development Options



     A.  Authority for the regulation of hazardous waste



transportation is contained in both the Hazardous Materials



Transportation Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery



Act  (Table III).  RCRA and HMTA, except for the reporting require-



ment,  share authority, either mandatory or discretionary



 (Table IV).  The areas of RCRA mandatory requirements in which



DOT  has discretion to develop regulations are intra-state control,



definition and criteria for hazardous wastes, recordkeeping,



and  notification.  DOT, on the other hand, has mandatory



requirements for (they are discretionary under RCRA) placarding,



marking, handling (operational), and incident reporting.



HMTA does not grant DOT the authority in a number of important



areas.  There are hazardous wastes which do not come under the



definition of hazardous materials (e.g., carcinogens).  DOT cannot



develop standards concerning:   1) bulk shipments of materials by



barge, and 2) spill clean up requirements.



     B.  There are three options for the development of



transporter standards under RCRA.  Under the first option,



EPA would develop standards for the transporter which would



address only recordkeeping, compliance with the manifest,



acceptance of only properly labeled wastes, and delivery of



all  the waste to the designated permitted facility.  These



standards will afford only a minimum amount of protection to



the environment and human health.  Although the standards



may guarantee delivery, they would not guarantee safety in



transport for hazardous waste, and they may not adequately



address the operational problems encountered by the transporter.

-------
                           Table III
  Regulatory Authority of the Department of Transportation
    and  the  Environmental Protection Agency Concerning
                       Hazardous Waste
DOT Authority HMTA (49 USC 1801,    RCRA Authority (42 USC 6901,)
                   P.L. 93-633)                     P.L.  94-580

Safety,  Health,  Property           Human Health,  Environment
Transportation of Haz. Material    Hazardous Waste Management

     Packaging                     Containers

     Repackaging

     Handling

     Labeling                      Labeling

     Marking

     Placarding

     Routing (shipping paper)      -Routing (manifest)

Manufacture, Fabrication, Marking
Maintenance, Reconditioning, Repairing
Testing of Package

Designation of haz. material       Definition of Hazardous Waste
Recordkeeping                      Recordkeeping
Recordkeeping                      Recordkeeping

Registration                       Notification

Imminent Hazard                    Imminent Hazard

                                   Reporting

                                   Furnishing of Information

                                   Compliance with Manifest

                                   Transport of Properly Labeled
                                   Waste

-------
                   Table IV
    Standards Required/Discretionary Under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the
    Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
                       Coverage
                         RCRA
                          M
                          M
                          M
                          M
Standard
Interstate
Intrastate
Definition of Haz. Waste
Recordkeep ing

Labeling
Placarding
Harking
Packaging
Furnish Info.  (Proper Desc.)
Manifest  (Shipping Document)
Reporting
Handling
Incident Reporting
Notification/Registration        M/D
Spill  Reporting                  D
*Motor Carrier Safety Regs.      D
M « Mandatory
D = Discretionary
N.A. = No Authority
* Separate  Authoritv (Transportation  of
                      Pub. L. 86-710 ,18
EMTA
M
D - State Pre-emption
D - DOT Newsletter 4-5/
D - Standards only for
Container Certification;
M
D
D
M
M
M
M
D
D
M
M
M
M
M
M
N.A.
M
M on
                                      M only for limited
                                      occurences.
                                      D/D Std. not developed
                                      M Accident/Incident
                                      reporting
                                      M
                                  Explosives Act,
                                 USC 831-835)

-------
    The  second option for the regulations development would



be to  expand  the scope of the regulations under Section 3003



which  states  "such standards shall include but need not be



Limited to..."   to cover standards for safety in operation



and transportation of hazardous waste.  Expanding the coverage



to include safety in operation and transportation would



require EPA to adopt existing Federal regulations for the



transportation of hazardous materials interstate and apply



them to hazardous waste transportation inter and intrastate.



     The  final option for regulations development is for EPA



to develop standards for transporters of hazardous wastes



and request that DOT incorporate all or reference EPA's standards



in its regulations.  DOT would then modify or develop new



regulations for the transportation of hazardous wastes to



control inter as well as intrastate  movements.  EPA would



then adopt the new regulations.  Various Offices would



become involved under this option.  The principal one would



be the Office of Hazardous Materials Operations with other



contacts  with the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety, Federal



Rail Administration/ U.S. Coast Guard, and the Federal Office



6f Pipeline Safety.



    After reviewing these options, EPA believes that for



the most  effective development of hazardous waste transport



regulations,  the DOT's expertise, knowledge, and organizations



should be utilized to help develop the regulations.  EPA



will develop regulations as required under Section 3003 and



work with DOT to have additions/modifications to their regulations



»ade.  "Since there is no guarantee that DOT can respond to all
                              n

-------
of EPA's needs regarding especially bulk shipments by barge and



spill cleanup, EPA proposed the necessary standards as outlined



in Option II.



     Since October of 1977, EPA and DOT have cooperated and



coordinated each agency's efforts in the development of hazardous



waste transportation regulations.  In December 1977, DOT stated



that every effort would be made to either reference or incorporate



all standards that EPA deems necessary for hazardous waste trans-



portation (Attachment III).  EPA, therefore is planning to adopt



those standards developed by DOT which meet the needs of EPA and



promulgate those standards that cannot be developed by DOT.

-------
IV.  Identification of Program Issues/Concerns



    Several major concerns were expressed by transporters,



generators, waste management  facilities, public interest



groups, and State and local governments during the public



meetings and in response  to the Advance  Notice of Proposed



Rulemaking,  Some of these are as  follows:



    A.   Transporters;



         1.  A major concern expressed by transporters of



    hazardous materials  and  industrial wastes is that



    EPA's regulations for hazardous waste transport be



    consistent or equivalent to the DOT Hazardous Materials



    Regulations.  The regulated community cannot cope with



    different sets of standards for the same  (chemically)



    substance.  EPA should do everything possible to have



    DOT develop standards for hazardous waste transport.



    Transporters expressed no objection to having EPA



    reference DOT standards, thus giving both EPA and



    DOT enforcement power.



         2.  A recommendation of  the  transporters was that



    EPA should permit or license  haulers.  Transporters



    feel that if it is EPA's intent to have responsible



    carriers haul hazardous  waste, the only way to achieve



    this would be to issue licenses/permits.  By issuing



    hazardous waste hauler permits, the transporters believe



    EPA could prevent the transport of hazardous waste by a



    hauler who does not  have the  proper equipment or understand



    the regulations.  In addition, EPA can establish a data

-------
    base  that can be  used  by EPA and  generators to identify
    transporters.
          3.   The development of  spill regulations was  another
    concern  of the  transporters.   Section  311 of the Federal
    Water Pollution Control Act  (Pub. L. 92-500) gives the EPA
    Administrator authority to develop regulations for control
    of spills of hazardous substances.  When the regulations  are
    promulgated by  EPA,  every effort  should be made to have
    only  one authority cover the spill of  hazardous substances
    and/or wastes.  The preferred,authority by the transportation
    community was Section  311 of FWPCA.
          4.   The problem of waste compatability was discussed.
    The transporters  feel  that the generator must furnish
    them  with a description-of the-wastes  so that wastes  are  not,*
                                                                 *
    mixed by the transporter so  as to cause a chemical reaction,
    explosion, etc...
    B.   Waste Generators, Waste Management Facility Operators

    The only major  concern expressed  by these groups was
that any regulations developed for transportation of haz-
ardous waste should  be consistent with the  DOT Hazardous
Materials Regulations.  Developing separate standards from
those  promulgated under DOT would not  only  cause confusion
within the shipping/transport industry but  would also in-
hibit the movement of hazardous waste.

-------
    C.  Public  Interest  Groups





    The major concern  of the  public  interest  groups  is  that



the vehicles transporting hazardous wastes  be  identified



so that in the event  of an emergency  or spill,  emergency



response personnel  and  the public at  large  will be aware that



the material spilled  is a hazardous waste and,  therefore,  presents



a hazard to huinan health  and the environment.   In order



to achieve this,  all  vehicles  transporting  hazardous  waste



should be identified  by a placard or  proper marking.





    D.  State and  Local  Governments





    State and local  governments shared the same concerns of the



public interest  groups, hazardous waste generators, waste



aanagement facilities,  and transporters of  hazardous  wastes.

-------
V.   Analysis of Standards



     The Office of Solid Waste has reviewed the public input/



comments/information that was received from the public meeting -



and the Advance  Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR).  These



responses include several suggested alternatives relevant to



the standards to be promulgated under Section 3003.  This section



enumerates the various alternatives/options that were suggested



and which were selected.



     Many of the wastes which are identified under Section



3C01 of RCRA also will meet the DOT criteria for a hazardous



material.  Since DOT has authority for those wastes meeting their



criteria, EPA has no alternative except to require that the



hazardous waste be transported in compliance with the DOT



Hazardous Materials Regulations, developed under title 49 and



46 CFR that would apply to transporters of hazardous wastes both



inter and intrastate.



     %.   Scope of Regulations



     RCRA grants EPA authority to regulate the transportation



of hazardous waste intra and interstate.  Intrastate transport



control would only apply in those States which are not



granted interim or full authorization under Section 3006.  Most



commentors  (shippers, transporters, waste management facilities,



State governments and public interest groups) agreed that EPA



should develop regulations that are consistent with the DOT



Hazardous Materials Regulations for hazardous wastes.  Being



consistent will enable the regulated community to easily comply
                               Z2.

-------
and understand  the  standards  developed  by EFA.   The DOT



regulations  apply to  persons  transporting hazardous materials



in commerce.  DOT has interpreted "in commerce"  to mean any



transportation  on a public highway.   Using this  interpretation,



the regulations do  not apply  to "on  premises"  transportation



of hazardous materials.   Also,  no manifest is  required for



"on premises" transportation  as stated  under Section 3002.



Since DOT  regulations do not  apply,  and the manifest will



not be  applicable to  "on premises" transport,  EPA should



exclude "on  premises" transportation of hazardous waste.



    Excluding  "on  premises"  transportation from the regu-



lations does not compromise either protection of human health



or protection to the  environment. The  generator must properly



label and  contain the waste and treat/store/dispose of the



waste at a facility permitted under  Section 3005.  In the event



of an accident  or spill, the  generator  is also required to



have a  spill contingency plan as well as a record describing the



wastes. Including  the transportation on-premises within the



regulations  would only create an unnecessary burden on the



regulated  community without affording any additional protection



to human health or  the environment.



    Under Section  3002 Standards Applicable to Generators of



Hazardous  Waste, a  generator is defined as any person whose act



or process produced a hazardous waste and who generates or disposes



of greater than 100 kg per month of  hazardous waste.  Therefore,

-------
if a generator ships less than 100 kg per month, no manifest



would be required.  EPA is concerned that small quantities of



hazardous wastes may be consolidated by transporters.  A trans-



porter could pick-up wastes from non-generators (since the



quantity is less than 100 kg) and consolidate a shipment that,



if offered from one generator, would be subject to the regulations.



EPA believes that if the waste is a DOT hazardous material, regard-



less of quantity, the generator (shipper) would be subject to



the DOT regulations.  The transporter would then also be subject



to the DOT regulations.  Since the shipper is knowledgeable of the



waste, the transporter should not be made responsible to properly



describe, package,  label, etc...the hazardous wastes.  In addition



to the DOT regulations, the transporter will be required to



delivery the consolidated shipment to a permitted facility that




can properly handle the waste.
                               a-V

-------
     B.    Recordkeeping



     As  required by RCRA,  records must be kept concerning the



hazardous waste transported,  their sources, and delivery points.



The purpose of recordkeeping by the transporter of hazardous



waste is to document the delivery of all the hazardous waste to



the designated permitted facility or the transfer of the waste



to another transporter, identify the generator of the hazardous



waste, and also describe the hazardous waste.  The record would



serve as a means of documenting delivery or transfer of the



hazardous waste and it would also provide a source of information



needed to characterize the hazardous waste transport industry



concerning types of hazardous wastes hauled and their destination



points either inter or intra state.



     Common and contract carriers as required by the Interstate



Commerce Commission for interstate transport and the State Public



Utility/Service Commissions (PUC/PSC) for intrastate transport



require  that a record be kept in the form of a bill of lading,



waybill, invoice, etc.  These documents contain the following



information:

-------
the shipper's name,  address, etc., the transporter's name,



etc., the consignee,  the quantity of the material, and



description of the material.  In addition the consignee may



also be required to indicate receipt (Attachment IV) of the



shipment.



     In the May 2, 1977, ANPR the question was posed as to



what kinds of records should be kept.  This question was also



discussed at the Type II meetings.  All parties agreed that



a copy of the manifest or the information on the manifest



be kept as the record.



     Since these types of records are currently being kept



by transporters, EPA has developed the recordkeeping standards



so as not to create additional unnecessary paper handling



and  storing.  The intent is to require that a record be kept,



which would contain information on the source and delivery points



of each  shipment of the waste, date of pick-up and delivery,



quantity of waste transported, and description of the waste.



The  record, therefore, could be a copy of the manifest or if



the  document contains the information on the manifest the bill



of lading, waybill, etc., thus requiring in most cases the



retention of records already being kept.



     The length of retention of records was also discussed



at the public meetings  and  addressed in the Kay 2,  1977, ANPR.



Suggestions which were  made include:  1)  the retention of the



records  should  coincide with  the  Statute of Limitations, or  2)



coincide with Federal/State requirements which vary from one

-------
to three years.   The majority of comments supported the



adoption of  a  three  year retention period,  which is similar to



the current  ICC  requirement.



     State requirements for retention of shipping documents



for intrastate transport vary widely.  State PUC/PSC re-



quirements were  reviewed.  When the State had no recordkeeping



requirement,  the State Health Department or Department of



Natural Resources regulations were reviewed (Table V).  Sixteen



State PUC's/PSC's require the period of retention of records



to be three  years.  In those States with no PUC/PSC requirements,



two State  Health Departments require retention of records by



waste haulers for a  period of three years.  In addition nine



State  (PUC/PSC)  Dept. of Health) require retention of records



for a period of five years or longer.  Therefore, a total



of twenty-seven States require retention of records for at



least three  years.  Of the remaining twenty-four States, ten



have no recordkeeping requirements either by the PUC/PSC or



Health Department; four have a one year retention requirement;



and ten states require that records be kept for two years.



     The Interstate Commerce Commission  (ICC) which has



jurisdiction over interstate transportation of hazardous



materials (as defined by DOT) and 66% of the States with



PUC/PSC or other Agency recordkeeping requirements,  require



transporters to retain  shipping  records  for at least a  three



year period.  In order  to be consistent  with existing  ICC

-------
requirements and the majority of existing State requirements
for recordkeeping, a three year retention period has been
selected.  By using existing requirements, many transporters
are today currently in compliance with the proposed record-
keeping  requirements.

-------
    ••~ :
   State  Recordkeeping Reouireraents
State

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
District of Columbia
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Agency Requirement
Public Utility  Comm.
Public Service  Comm.
     *6
    **6
      2
      3
      3
      2
      2
    N.A,
    N.A.
      1
      3
      2
      5
    N.A.
    **2
    **10
      1
      5
    N.A.
      3
    N.A.
       3
Other Agency Re-
ouireraents
     N.A.
     *10 Health Dep
        3 IEPA
      N.A.
       1 Health Dept

-------
State


Michigan


Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia
V  (continued)
Agency Requirement
Public Utility Comm.
Public Service Comm.
     N.A.
  3

  3

N.A.

  3

  3

  3

N.A.

N.A.

  3

  3

  3

N.A.

  3

N.A.
  3

  1

  2

  2

N.A.

  2

N.A.

N.A.

N.A.

  3

  5
                    Other Agency  Re,
                    quxrements "*

                    2 Dept. of Naturai
                    Resource
                              N.A.
                              N.A.

                               *5 DEP
                              N.A.
                              N.A.
                                3 Health M
                              N.A.

                              N.A.

                              N.A.

-------
                    Table V (continued)

State                     Agency Requirement       Other Agency Re-
	                     Public Utility Comm.     quirements
                          Public Service Coinm.

Wisconsin                       6

Wyoming                       N.A.                     N.A.
                 *State Regulations Pending

                   **Statute of Limitation

                  ***Records held  for Audit

-------
C.   Acceptance and Transport of Hazardous Wastes
     The existing hazardous materials regulations require that
a transporter cannot accept for transport or transport hazardous
materials unless they are prepared for transportation in
accordance with 49 CFR, Part 171, 172 and 173, which require
that the hazardous materials be properly described, packaged,
and labeled.  The regulations require the transporter not only
to assure that the materials received from the shipper comply
with the regulatory requirements but also to assure that those
shipments received from or transferred to connecting transporters
are in  compliance as well. Therefore, according to DOT, a
transporter  cannot accept for transport or transport hazardous
wastes  which meet the DOT criteria for a hazardous material
unless  the  shipment is offered with a shipping paper signed
by the  shipper, properly labeled, and packaged.
     In the development of the hazardous waste transportation
regulations, similar acceptance and transportation requirements
were discussed.  Several comments were received during the
development of  the regulations concerning  the acceptance of
hazardous waste by the transporter prior to  transport.   "The
regulation. ..does not adequately provide for the  acceptance
by the  transporter of small  quantities of  hazardous waste
such as partially filled pesticide containers and bags,
etc. , which are not properly labeled and in  poor  condition.
We believe  the  actual transportation of  such waste to  a  site
should  be performed only in  sound containers.  However,

-------
for these small quantities  of  wastes,  acceptance by the



transporter  should be  permitted,  followed by repackaging..."



    The EPA regulations regarding acceptance of a hazardous



waste  shipment are modeled  after  existing DOT regulations.



According to DOT, a  transporter prior to transporting a



hazardous material may repackage, label, etc...the shipment.



Therefore hazardous  waste transporters prior to transport may



as a  service to  the  generator properly describe and manifest the



wastes,  and  properly package,  label and mark the package.

-------
D.   Compliance With The Manifest
     The manifest system developed under Section 3002 assures
that all the hazardous waste that is generated and transported
off-premises is designated for treatment, storage, or disposal,  to
a permitted hazardous waste management facility.  The manifest
document is designed also to furnish information to persons
transporting and handling hazardous waste concerning the
characteristic of the hazardous waste, emergency response
information, and certification by the generator that the waste
has been properly described, labeled, and packaged.  The
regulations developed under Section 3003 concerning compliance
with  the manifest are to assure that all of the hazardous waste
picked up  from  the  generator is delivered to  the designated
facility and also in the event of an emergency  in transit,
that  information concerning emergency response  is with  the
transport  vehicle.
      Under existing ICC and DOT requirements, the shipment
of hazardous materials  interstate must be accompanied by a
shipping paper.  The ICC requires that either a "Straight
Bill  of Lading"  (Attachment IV) be prepared or  a  form contain-
ing the following information be prepared  (49 CFR 1051.1):
names of the consignor  and consignee; the points  of  origin
and destination;  the number of packages, description of the
articles;  and weight, volume, or measurement  of the  property
received.   The  DOT  also has  shipping  document requirements
specifically  for  the transportation  of hazardous materials
 (49 CFR 172).   The  basic  difference  between  the ICC  and DOT

-------
regulations is that DOT requires that  the  hazard be  identified
and that the shipper certify that  the  package  is in  proper
order for transportation. In many  instances  the Bill of Lading,
which is required by the ICC is modified to  meet the requirements
of the DOT.
    Shipping documents are initiated  by the shipper (generator)
of the hazardous material.  The  shipper either prepares a
shipping order  (which meets the  DOT requirements)  and/or
contacts the transporter, who  then prepares  the  Bill of Lading
(motor), Waybill  (rail), or Dangerous  Cargo  Manifest (vessel,
barge).   If a  shipping order  is not prepared, the transporter
will produce his  own shipping  document and acquire shipper
certification on  it.  The transporter's shipping document is
the primary document accompanying  the  hazardous materials
shipment.
    Procedural differences  exist  among the modes for the
handling of shipping documents.   Specifically, differences
exist  between motor and rail carriage of hazardous materials.
The shipping documents  for motor carriage are initiated by
the shipper via a shipping  order,  and the transporter
prepares a Bill of Lading,  etc.. which is used during transport.
Currently DOT  requires  that the shipping document remain  at  all
times  with the transport vehicle.   Standards  for the actual  place-
ment  and handling of  the shipping paper have  been developed
(Attachment VI) .   Upon delivery of the  shipment to  the  consignee
or transfer between transporters, the Bill  of Lading must be

-------
signed or another document must be issued signifying delivery



or transfer and receipt of the shipment.  The ICC requires



that when collecting transportation charges, the transporter



must issue a freight or expense bill covering each shipment.



The following information is required on the freight or



expense bill:  names of the consignor and consignee/ the



date of shipment, the points of origin and destination, the



number of packages, description of the articles, weight,



volume or measurement of the property transported, the



exact rate or rates assessed, the total charges to be collected,



etc., the route of movement indicating each carrier participating



in the transportation service, and the transfer point or



points through which the shipment moved.  (DOT shipping papers



do not need certification of receipt.)



     Shipping documents for rail carriage are initiated in a



similar manner  (Attachment VI); however, the handling of the



shipping papers are different from those procedures used



currently by motor carriers.  The railroad has developed and



is developing for all rail carriers a computerized system



for handling the movement of rail cars and shipping documents.



The shipping document prepared by the shipper is translated



into a computerized waybill which is attached to a train



consist  (Attachment VIII).  DOT's Hazardous Materials Regulations



allow for the computerization by the railroad of its shipping



papers, and accordingly have adjusted their regulations,



"No member of the train crew of a train transporting the

-------
hazardous material is required  to have  a  shippers certificate



on the shipping paper in his  possession if  the original



shipping paper containing the certificate is  in the originating



carrier's possession."  Upon  delivery of  the  shipment to the



consignee, the transporter  prepares  a delivery receipt



indicating when the shipment  was delivered.  The shipper in



addition to acquiring a delivery receipt  also sends the Bill



of Lading "overhead" via the  mail  for certification of



receipt.



    In developing the standards for compliance with the



manifest, EPA has taken into  consideration existing industry



practices for the handling  of shipping  papers.  Two elements



must be addressed in the standards:  (1)  certification of transfer,



receipt, and delivery; and  (2)  information for emergency



response with the shipment.  Requiring  that the original



manifest remain with each shipment of hazardous waste may



disrupt current shipping paper  handling procedures by the



railroad and barge and also prevent the computerization of



all shipping documents by the other modes.   (For discussion of



barge transport see ADL Study,  Oct.  1977.)   Important elements



of the manifest include the shipper's certification and



transporter's signature prior to transport, information



remaining with the shipment during transport, and certification



of receipt by the permitted facility.  The above can be



achieved either by requiring  that  the original manifest

-------
remain with, the shipment of hazardous waste or the information



contained on the manifest accompany the shipment in the form



of any shipping documents.  To certify delivery the manifest



must be signed by the designated facility.  In the event that



the information is with the shipment, a certification on a



shipping document rather than the original manifest would



indicate delivery.  In either case the transporter would



have documents certifying pickup, transfer, and delivery of the



hazardous waste.  If the manifest or shipping document cannot be



immediately signed upon delivery, provisions need to be made



concerning acquiring a signature.  Various suggestions were mace



concerning the time period for compliance for signatures from



one to thirty days.  When developing the time period, holiday



weekends delays and delays for weather need to be considered.



Most holidays last no longer than three days and recent winter



storms have kept business closed for up to a week.



     EPA's standards for compliance with the manifest shall



be based upon DOT'S requirements for handling shipping



papers and current industry practices for handling of the



shipping document.  By employing existing procedures, the



regulations would simplify compliance with the regulations



as well as protect human health and the environment.  Regardless



of the handling procedures used, the information needed for



emergency response will remain with the transport vehicle and a



certification of transfer and delivery would be assured.

-------
    If certification of  receipt cannot be made upon delivery the



circumstances  describing  why the manifest or shipping paper



could not be signed  should be indicated.  The time period for



acquiring signature  will  be five working days.  This will allow



delays due  to  holiday weekends,  facility delays and other delays



in final acceptance  of the waste shipment by the facility.

-------
          E. Loading and Storage of Hazardous Aig-/gA/«ls (jQ oTj
     The DOT regulations for hazardous materials address



general handling and loading requirements for each mode:  49



CFR 174 Subpart C (Carriage by Rail) ;  175 Subpart B (Carriage



by Aircraft) ; 176 Subpart C through O)  (Carriage by Vessel) ; and



177 Subpart C (Carriage by Public Highway) .  According to DOT if



a hazardous waste meets the criteria of a hazardous material,



the above regulations must be complied with.'



     In addition to the above standards, shippers of hazardous



materials are prohibited from:  1)  "offering of packages of haz-



ardous materials in the same packaging, freight container,  or



overpack with other hazardous materials, the mixture of contents



of which would be liable to cause a dangerous evolution of  heat



or gas or produce corrosive materials  (173. 21 (a));  2) offering



for transportation of any package or  container of any liquid,



solid, or gaseous material which under  conditions incident  to



transportation may polymerize or decompose  so as to cause  a



dangerous evolution of heat or gas; and  3)  offering for trans-



portation of any package or container of any material which will



cause a dangerous evolution of heat or  gas."  As a result  of



these regulations, DOT has placed the burden of incompatible



materials on the shipper.



     For each mode there are  several  general requirements



concerning  the  loading and unloading  of hazardous materials



from the transport vehicle.   The  following  requirements concern



the loading and unloading of  hazardous  materials from motor




vehicles:

-------
1.   Any tank, barrel, drum, or cylinder v/hich is not



    designed to be permanently attached to the motor



    vehicle and contains any flammable liquid, compressed



    gas, corrosive material, or poison must be reasonably



    secured from movement within the vehicle during trans-



    portation.



2.   No hazardous material may be put on or transported "



    via any pole trailer.



3.   No person may smoke near any vehicle while loading



    or unloading any explosive, flammable liquid, flammable



    solid, oxidizing material, or flammable compressed gas.



    Extreme care should be  taken during the loading or



    unloading of these materials, and all fire and flame



    should be kept away.



4.   The carrier must not use any tools likely to damage



    the closure or otherwise adversely affect the integrety



    of any package.



5.   Packages containing explosives, flammable liquids,



    flammable solids, oxidizing materials, corrosive mater-



    ials, compressed gases, or poisonous liquids or gases



    must be braced to prevent motion relative to the



    vehicle during transportation.  Containers having



    valves or other  fittings must be loaded so as to min-



    imize the liklihood of  damage to them in transit.



6.  Reasonable care  should  be taken to avoid any dangerous



    rise  in  the temperature of the lading in transit.  No

-------
    one should tamper with any hazardous materials con-
    tainer or its contents between the points of orgin , net
    destination, nor may there be any discharge of the e on-
    tents of any container other than a cargo tank prior
    to the removal of that container from the trailer.
7.  It is absolutely prohibited to leave a cargo tank
    unattended during loading or unloading of a hazardous
    material.
8.  Flammable solids, oxidizers, and corrosive liquids,
                                                   /
    when transported on a motor vehicle with other lading
    must be loaded so as to provide ready access to those
    materials for shifting or removal.
9.  Use of cargo heaters with hazardous materials is
    carefully regulated:   (a) when transporting explosives
    any cargo heater must be rendered inoperative by
    draining or removing the heater fuel tank or dis-
    connecting the power source for the heater, and
    (b) when transporting  labeled flammable liquids or
    flammable compressed gas, a combustion cargo heater
    may only be used if it is a flameless, catalytic
    heater, which is not ignited in the vehicle and
    which has a surface temperature that cannot exceed
    130° F.  (54° C.) either by thermostatic controls  or
    other controls when the outside or ambient temperatu ~e
    is 60° F.  (15  C.) or  less.  The manufacturer of  sueA

-------
     a catlytic heater must certify and mark the heater



     indicating that it "Meets DOT requirements for cata-



     lytic heaters used with flammable liquid and gas."



     Such a heater must also be marked "Do not load into



     or use in cargo compartments containing flammable



     liquid or gas if flame is visible on catalyst or



     in heater."



10-   An automatic, cargo-space-heating, temperature



     control device may be used when transporting labeled -



     flammable liquid or gas only if (a) there is an



     electrical apparatis in the cargo compartment; (b)



     there is no connection or return of air from the cargo



     compartment to the combustion apparatus; and (c) the



     heating system will not elevate the temperature of



     any part of the lading above 130° F. £54° C.).  If



     these restrictions cannot be met, the heating device



     must be rendered inoperative through emptying or



     removing the fuel tank.   {Each LPG fuel tank for



     automatic temperature control equipment must have its



     discharge valve closed and fuel feed line disconnected



     in lieu of actual emptying or removal of the tank.)



11.  So-called ton tanks meeting DOT specifications 106A



     or 110A, authorized to carry certain hazardous mater-



     ials by highway, must be  securely chocked or clamped



     to prevent any shifting.  Equipment suitable for



     handling such tanks must  be provided at any point



     of loading or unloading.

-------
     12.   Specification 56  or 57 portable tanks may not be
          stacked on top of one another,  ncr nay other
          freight be stacked on them during transportation.
     13.   No motor carrier  may load any article bearing a
          poison label into any vehicle with material marked
          as, or known to be, foodstuff,  feed,  or any edible
          material intended for human or animal consumption.
     In addition to general requirements for loading and un-
loading of hazardous materials specific requirements regarding
the loading and unloading of articles under headings for
each hazard classification are included (Part 176, 177).
Also for each mode the DOT has produced loading and storage
charts.   For example Section' 177.848 of Title 49 is a tabular
chart of the loading and storage requirements,  pairing each
classification with potential loads of other classes  (Attachment
VIII).  The loading and storage chart may be summarized as
follows:
     1.   Labeled flammable liquids and flammable compressed
          gases must not be loaded or stored with Class A
          poisons.
     2.   Labeled flammable solids, oxidizers,  or organic
          peroxides must not be loaded or stored with  labeled
          corrosive liquids or Class A poisons.
     2.   Labeled corrosive liquids must not be loaded or
          stored with labeled flammable solids, oxidizers,
          organic peroxides, or Class A poisons, cyanides,
          or cyanide mixtures.

-------
   4.  Nitric acid, when  loaded in the same motor vehicle



       with other acids or  other corrosive liquids in



       carboys must be separated from the other carboys



       as prescribed  in the notes to the loading and




       storage chart.



   NOTE:  Shippers  loading  truckload shipments of corrosive



   liquids and flammable  solids or oxidizing materials



   packages and  who have  obtained prior approval from DOT



   may load such materials  together when it is known that



   the mixture of contents  would not cause a dangerous




   evolution  of  heat.



   The storage requirements are principally developed  for



the storage of  containers  on transport vehicles.   Since



wastes are also transported in bulk, there is the  potential



that they  will  be  mixed during the collection phase of trans-



portation. The existing DOT regulations  do  not  address  the



nixing of  wastes by the transporters.   Though the  regulations



apply to hazardous waste which meet  the criteria for  a hazardous



aaterial,  the storage and loading  requirements may not apply



to mixing.  The rational for currently not addressing the  subject



by DOT for transporters is that  hazardous materials are  not  mixed.



Product integrity is of importance and, therefore, during



transportation the hazardous materials are not  mixed.  The



contamination of  the material  is avoided.  However, in a spill



situation the potential exists for unintentional mixing.

-------
         The following information is taken from a report done

for EPA concerning the Management of Incompatible Wastes.*

Though the study concentrates on waste management at treatment,

storage or disposal facilities, similar procedures are used

for storage and mixing during transportation.


Statement

     Persons involved in the storage, handling, treatment, and

disposal of hazardous wastes shall not create a situation

whereby potentially incompatible wastes can come in contact
                                                        /
with one another and result in:  1) heat generation,  2) pressure

generation,  3) fire,  4) explosion or violent reaction,  5) for-

mation of substances which are shock sensitive, friction sensitive,

or otherwise have the potential of reacting violently,  6) dis-

persal of toxic dusts and mists due to an  explosion or violent

reaction,   7)  formation of toxic fumes, gases, or other toxic

chemicals,  8) volatilization of flammable or toxic chemicals

due  to heat generation, and  9) solubilization of toxic sub-

stances.  All  storage and disposal areas shall be demarcated and

labeled  such that the incompatible characteristics of the waste

are  clearly displayed.

Rationale

     The wastes  accepted at hazardous waste  treatment,  storage,

and  disposal  facilities  are usually  very hazardous by themselves.
      * Recommend General Options for the management of  Incompatible
 Hazardous Wastes at.Hazardous Waste treatment Storage  and
 Disposal Facilities,  Grant fR-80469201.

-------
However, if a waste were  to  come in contact with another



waste which is incompatible  with it,  the consequences often



create much more hazardous situations than the reactants



themselves.  Furthermore, wastes can contact other incompatible



materials during handling (transport)  at a facility resulting



in the same consequences.  The lack of accurate information



about the wastes,  and  the often indiscriminate handling of



the wastes contribute  to  the high risk of contact of potentially



incompatible substances at hazardous waste treatment, storage,



and disposal facilities.  The chemical reactions which result



from such contact  can  cause  secondary consequences such as



injury,  intoxication,  or  death of workers, members of the



public,  wildlife,  and  domestic animals.  They can also cause



property and equipment damage,  and contamination of air, water



and land.



    Many incidents have  already occured  (Attachment IX).  The



incidents occured  during  normal handling operations and were the



results  of lack of accurate  information about the waste,



indiscriminate disposal practices, and indiscriminate combination



during other handling  operations.  They have shown that the



above mentioned reactions or primary consequences are those



that are most  significant in the consideration of potentially



incompatible hazardous wastes.  In many instances, these



consequences have  been documented as a chain of events.  An



example  is where a violent hydrolysis reaction resulted in



hear and pressure  which  caused dispersal of highly corrosive



materials and  considerable property damage.

-------
     It is evident fc-3fm these cases that sensible precautions are''
extremely necessary in the handling of hazardous wastes to prevent
      incidents from occurring. ' Such precautions must be directed
toward preventing contact of potentially incompatible wastes and
contact of waste with other incompatible materials.  It is
imperative that these precautions are stated and clearly under-
stood by all involved in the management of hazardous wastes be-
.cause of the extreme hazards involved and the swiftness with the
consequences of contacting incompatible materials can occur.
Handling of Bulk Hazardous Wastes
Statement
     In the handling and disposal of hazardous wastes, potentially
incompatible hazardous wastes  in bulk shall be handled in-
dividually to avoid contact with each other except in the
mixing of one waste with another under controlled conditions
for  the purpose of treatment.
Rationale
     A hazardous waste in bulk must not be deposited into an
area which is already used for the  containment of another in-
compatible chemical constituent since the two wastes may react.
to create a more hazardous condition than that presented by  tie
components in each waste.  Depositing of an acid waste into  a
landfill  containing a  cyanide  waste resulted in  the evolution
of hydrogen cyanide, an  extremely  toxic gas.  Such an  accident
could have been averted  if  the handler had  ascertained the  nature
of waste in  the landfill before depositing  the  acid waste.   M

-------
other such accidents have been reported  in  the  literature  in-



volving heat, fire, and explosions  resulting  from mixtures of




alcohols with metal hydrides and mixtures of  concentrated  acids



with organic solvents.




    All handlers of incompatible wastes must have explicit



information on the composition of both the  waste  being disposed




and the waste in the disposal site.  Furthermore,  they must be



aware of any potential incompatibility of chemical constituents



in the wastes so that chemical reactions between  the chemical



species will not have any detrimental effects on  the public




health, wildlife, environment, property, or equipment.



    Under Section 3004, guidelines for  hazardous waste manage-




nent facilities are being developed to prevent  mixing of incom-



patible waste and handling procedures for storage of incompatible



waste in drums.




Alternatives Chosen



    Rather than EPA developing  at  this  time  new  loading and




storage requirements and since the  DOT has  developed loading and



storage requirements that are applicable to hazardous waste trans-



porters and shippers, EPA will incorporate  the  DOT regulations



under 250.34 of the regulations.  Since  generators/shippers are



familiar with the hazardous waste,  it is their  responsibility



to determine whether or not a waste should  be offered for




transport and whether or not the container  and  the existing



vaste in the container are appropriate  for  the  offered hazardous



waste.  In addition, since Section  3004  is  developing incompatibility




guidelines, these guidelines will be made  available to transporters.

-------
F.   Emergency/Spill Regulations

     Emergency Situations

     In the event of a spill of hazardous waste or a hazardous

material which then becomes a waste, special handling proce-

dures should be instituted.  There is a concern that because

of the transport requirements, in the event of a spill which

requires immediate removal of a waste, the waste could not

be transported or that the transporter would be in violation

of the standards.  EPA needs to consider the emergency

situation and allow for immediate response and ease of move-

ment of the waste.  Requiring compliance with the regulations

may result in unnecessary delay in the removal of hazardous

waste spills.  The transporter requirements once the emergency

is secured would then be in effect.  In the event that an

on-the-scene coordinator (EPA, State police, etc.) determines

that the materials presents an immediate safety hazard, the

waste could be allowed to be transported outside of the

regulations to allow for immediate removal of the waste.  The

coordinator would have the responsibility to designate the

waste management facility.

DOT Incident Reporting*

"The regulations of the Department of Transportation  (49 CFR

171.15, 171.16} require all carriers, including private and

contract carriers, to file reports of any accident or incident

involving the spillage or unintentional release of any hazardous

material from its packaging."


*This discussion taken from Chapter 17 Hazardous Materials
Accident & Incident Reporting, Red Book on Transportation of
Hazardous Materials,  Lawrence Bierlein 1977.

-------
 the incident reporting  system,  as it is commonly called,  was



 developed in response to  a  recommendation made by the National



 Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)  to the Secretary of Trans-



 portation in 1969.   The NTSB felt that an incident reporting



 system was necessary because of an increase in traffic, demand



 for hazardous materials,  and the need for intermodal coordina-



 tion.  The system was designed to provide a unified data



 system based on  uniform definitions of terms and utilizes a



 common reporting form  submitted by transporters.



      Beginning in 1971, the reporting system was instituted.



 The system covers two  primary areas.  The first is a require-



 ment  that all carriers  make immediate reports to DOT by tele-



 phone when incidents of a specified severity occur."  The second



 part  of  the  system is  a routine reporting requirement governing



! the submission of written reports in a uniform format in those in-



 stances  when an  immediate report is required and also in any



 case  where there has been an unintentional release of hazard-



 ous materials  from a package.  The detailed written  report must



 be filed within  15 days of the date of discovery.  If the



 information  at that time is incomplete,  the carrier  should  file




 within 15  days  and complete it later.

-------
     The reports on file with DOT are public information, as



are the accumulated totals and other compilation prepared by



the DOT staff from these reports.  Any person may obtain a copv



of any report, and no information is considered confidential.



A detailed written incident report is required for every unin-



tentional spillage or release of a product.  There is no



quantity threshold that would preclude reporting small amounts



of unintentional spills; although, no report is needed for



normal occurrences such as spills from hoses during normal



disconnections.  As DOT said in adopting the system:  "The



(Hazardous Materials Regulations) Board does not feel it is



in a position at this time to determine whether there are in-



significant unintentional releases of hazardous materials that



do not warrant the filing of a written report.  While it may



be true that under the amendment the Board will receive re-



ports of unintentional releases of hazardous materials that



may prove to be insignificant, the Board does not have any



criteria at this time on which it could draw a line between



those releases that should be reported and those that should



not.  As experience is gained under this incident report



program, the program will be subject to containuing review.  If



it is found that the present criteria is (sic) putting an unduo



burden on carriers and that the Board is receiving unusable or



irrevevant incident reports, the Board will not hestitate to



review the reporting requirements and to take future rule-



making action".

-------
    Although the matter of reporting  every  incident, no

matter how small, has been the  subject of  frequent  critical

comment, there has been no indication  from DOT  that a rule

change is contemplated that would  set  a specific  quantity

threshold for the reporting requirements.  Given  DOT's  comments

during the adoption of these  requirements, however, the door

has been left open for those  who would care  to  suggest  some

limitations.

    The specific requirements  are as  follows:

    Immediate Telephonic Hazardous

    Materials Incident Reports

     (a)  At the earliest practicable  moment,  each  carrier
    who transports hazardous materials shall  give  notice  in
    accordance with paragraph  (b), below, after  each  incident
    that occurs during the course of  transportation (including
    loading and unloading and  temporary storage) in which
    as a direct result of hazardous materials-

     CD  A person is killed;

     (2)  A person receives  injuries requiring his  admission
    to a hospital;

     (3)  Estimated carrier  or  other property  damage exceeds
     $50,000;

     (4)  Fire, breakage,  spillage, or suspected  radioactive
     contamination occurs  involving a  shipment of radioactive
    material.


     NOTE:  In these  instances, the radioactive materials  package
     or materials  should  be  segregated as far  as  practicable  from
     personnel contact.   If  radiological advice or assistance is
     needed, the U.S. Energy Research  and Development search  and
     Development Administration should also be notified at the
     offices listed below.   In case of obvious leakage or  if  it
     appears likely that  the inside container  may have been
     damaged,  care should be taken to  avoid inhalation, ingestion,
     or  contact with  the  radioactive material.  Any loose
     radioactive material should be left in a segregated area and
     held  pending  disposal instructions from qualified persons.

                               1T3

-------
Note 2:   Details involving the handling of radioactive
materials in the event of an accident can be found in
Bureau of Explosives Pamphlets 1 and 2.

(5)  Fire, breakage/ spillage, or suspected contamina-
tion occurs involving shipment of etiologic agents; or

(6)  A situation exists of such a nature that, in the
judgment of the carrier, it should be reported by
Immediate Telephonic Report, even though it does not
meet the criteria listed in this paragraph.  For example,
a continuing danger to life exists at the scene of the
incident.

(b)  Each notice required by paragraph  (a), above
shall be given to DOT by telephone at Area Code  (202)
426-1830.  Notice involving etiologic agents may be
given to the Director, Center for Disease Control, U.S.
Public Health Service, Atlanta, Georgia, at Area Code
(404) 633-5313. instead of giving notice to DOT.  Each
immediate telephone notification must include the
following information:

(1)  The name of the person calling.

(2)  The name and address of the carrier on whose
behalf the call is being made.

(3)  A telephone number where the caller can be  reached.

(4)  The date, time, and location of  the incident.

(5)  The extent of  injuries,  if there are any.

(6)  The classification, name, and quantity of hazardous
materials involved, if  this  information is available  at
the  time of  the call.

 (7)  The type of incident and the nature of the  involve-
ment of hazardous materials  in the incident,  and whether
a  continuing danger to  life  exists at the  scene  of  the
incident.

-------
    (c)  Each carrier making an immediate telephone report
    of an incident must also make a detailed written report
    as described below.

    Detailed Hazardous Materials

    Incident Reports

    (a)  Each carrier who transports hazardous materials
    shall report in writing/ in duplicate, on DOT Form F
    5800.1, illustrated below, to DOT within 15 days of the
    date of discovery, each incident that occurs during the
    course of transportation  (including loading, unloading,
    or temporary storage) in which, as a direct result of
    the hazardous materials, any of the circumstances
    warranting an immediate telephone report have occurred
    or there has been any unintentional release of hazardous
    materials from a package  (including a tank).

    (b)  Each carrier making such a detailed written report
    shall send it to the Director, Office of Hazardous
    Materials Operations, Materials Transportation Bureau,
    Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C. 20590.

    The DOT incident report is divided into several sections,

each given an alphabetical designation.  Within  each section

are items describing the details for that section  (Attachment XI) .

    The data collected from the incident reports are used

to determine whether greater emphasis should be  directed to

shipper and carrier compliance with existing requirements, or to

the need for change in containers, hazardous classifications,

or in handling requirements.  The Secretary of DOT responded to

this recommendation with agreement "as to the  importance of

accident and incident data  in  evaluating the effectiveness of

existing regulations and in developing new hazardous materials

regulations."

    At this time, the detailed  information  for  the reports  is

computerized, and it is possible to retrieve complied  informa-

-------
tion according to each of the major subject categories on
form DOT F 5800.1.  Incident data can be retrieved from the
full system by carrier name, shipper name, container speci-
fication, incident location, material classification, pro-
duct shipping name, etc.
     With recently acquired direct jurisdiction over the
makers and reconditioners of packaging for hazardous materials,
DOT may be expected to rely on the incident reporting system
in its evaluation of the integrity of specification packaging
generally, and the products of certain manufacturers particularly.
     Data summaries from DOT indicate that since 1971 approxi-
mately 44,000 written reports have been received.  A majority
of 36,500 (83%) of the incident reports were  submitted by for-hire
      (common & contract) motor carriers.  Data summaries are
also available on container failures, commodaties  involved in
incidents, etc.   (Attachments XII, XIII,  XII)
     DOT recently conducted an in-house study for  1976.  The
number of written reports received for each commodity by shipping
name were tabulated.  Because DOT has a classification N.O.S.
 (not  otherwise  specified),  it is impossible to determine
whether  or not  hazardous waste are involved.  However, DOT
does  identify by  shipping name commodities which may be
hazardous wastes.   In 1975  only two  incident  reports were
received:  one  for  "acid  sludge" and one  for  "Bottles, having
previously contained a  hazardous material and not  cleaned."

-------
SPA Spill Notification
    Current authority over the spills of oil and hazardous
substances rests with EPA Section 311 of FWPCA and the U.S.
Coast Guard.  Control and removal actions are required for
spills "into or upon the navigable waters of the United
States/ adjoining shorelines, or into or upon the waters of
the contigous zones."  The waters of the U.S., according to
the U.S. Coast Guard include all streams, creeks, lakes, and
ponds.  . .  Storm drains and similar artificially created
systems whose discharges are not processed  through  treatment
plants are  'waters of the U.S.1  .  .  ."  The "waters  of  the U.S.
also include seasonally dry watercourses.   U.S.  waters  should
not be  construed as every puddle or  depression  containing  or
capable of  containing water."
    The Coast Guard has developed a toll-free  number that is
ased to report a spill of oil  and  hazardous substances.   Once
notified, the U.S. Coast Guard contacts the appropriate spill
agency.  Hazardous wastes may  partially fall under the reporting
requirements of Section  311  once promulgated.   Reporting to the
U.S. Coast  Guard to  the  EPA  Regional Spills Office would be
required  for those wastes  covered.
     It is  estimated that  approximately eight million metric
tons/year  (wet  basis)  of hazardous waste is transported within
the United  States.*   In  order to estimate  the potential number
     *Potential for Capacity Creation, Foster D. Snell, August 1976,

-------
of hazardous waste incidents that may occur during transport,

the hazardous waste transported will be compared to the total

estimated hazardous materials movement.  In 1976, it is esti-

mated by DOT that 5,000 million tons of hazardous materials

were transported resulting in approximately 12,000 incident

reports.  DOT estimates that only 10% of the incidents are

reported; therefore, the total number of incidents may be

estimated at 120,000.  Given the ratio of hazardous waste

transported to hazardous materials transported of 562:1, and

120,000  incidents, it would be expected approximately 213

incidents would occur involving hazardous waste.

          5,000 million tons X 0.9 = 4,500 million metric tons

          4,500 million metric tons     562

              8 million metric tons  =   1

This estimate of potential incidents may be low, however,

hazardous waste transported represents only .17 percent of

hazardous materials transported.  In an EPA report** it is

estimated that 57% of the spills occur in transit.

     Various alternatives are available for the development  of

spill/emergency reporting for hazardous wastes.  EPA could

develop  its own notification and reporting system for hazardous

waste.   This, however, ignores existing procedures and available

systems  for notification and reporting of spills/emergencies.
      **Documentation and analysis of Historical Data on Hazar lous
Material  Spills,  Contract No.  68-03-0317, April 1976.

-------
    During the development of these  regulations,  the  opinion
was expressed by outside reviewers and working  group members
that existing systems should be used, if  at  all possible.
Since the basis for the regulations rest  with existing DOT
requirements, the use of the DOT  incident report to report
hazardous waste spills was supported  by all.  EPA has  proposed
to DOT that minor modifications be made/allowed to the incident
report to cover and identify hazardous wastes and also determine
the disposition of the spill.  Since  DOT  currently receives  the
report, EPA is proposing, with approval of DOT, to have all
hazardous waste incident reports  mailed directly to DOT.  Upon
receipt, DOT would forward a copy to  EPA.
    Early in the development of  the  regulations, it was felt
that a 24-hour toll free number should be utilized. Since
such a number already existed under  joint sponsorship, the
proposal was made that the existing U.S.  Coast  Guard system
be utilized.  The Coast Guard has agreed  to  EPA use of the
toll-free number.  (Attachment XV ) .
Alternative Chosen
    Under DOT requirements, the  spill of any hazardous material
is a reportable incident  (49 CFR  171.15  & 171.16).  Accordingly,
any waste which is spilled and meets  the  DOT criteria  must  be
reported.  For those wastes  not meeting  the  DOT criteria, it
was felt at the public meetings and  during external review
that those incidents should  be  reported  using the same procedures.

-------
The purpose of the reports is to determine what caused the



spill and also to evaluate the adequacy of existing containers



handling procedures, etc. for the transportation of the waste.



Use of existing DOT regulations, as stated in the other areas



of regulations development, simplifies compliance with the



regulations.



     A notification system is also needed for hazardous waste



spills.  Since the U.S. Coast Guard has agreed to the use of



their number, EPA is proposing the use of the existing 24-hour



spill notification phone lines.  It is anticipated that approxi-



mately 120 notifications should be received concerning in-transit



spills.



Spill Clean-up



     Various comments were received from both within EPA and



from outside agencies concerning who is responsible for spills



of hazardous wastes.  According to the structure of the Act, EPA



believes that responsibility for the waste (as long as the regula-



tions are complied with) is transferred from the generator to the



transporter, to the final destination.



     The transporter, once receiving the shipment of hazardous



waste, is responsible for the transportation and delivery of the



waste to the facility designated on the manifest.  If a spill



occurs, the transporter is still responsible for the proper THE n-



agement of the spilled waste.



     Under Section 3002, a generator is defined as any person



whose act or process produced a hazardous waste.  If the transporter

-------
spills a waste,  the  composition of the waste may change.  If
that is the  case,  the transporter would become a generator,
and again, be  responsible for the proper management of the
waste.
    Upon notification of the spill,  either an EPA official or
other Federal, State or Local official representing various
agencies  (Fire,  Police, Environmental)  would become involved in
mitigation of  the  spill.   Emergency actions may be directed by
these officials  to prevent endangerment to human health or the
environment.
Regulation Developed
    Since the transporter is responsible for the delivery of
the hazardous  waste  shipment to a permitted facility, this respon-
sibility would be  maintained if a spill occurs.  EPA could be
silent concerning  this regulation since the transporter is re-
sponsible for  delivery or may become a generator.  However,  EPA
believes that  responsibility should be clearly stated and there-
fore, has made the transporter responsible for clean up of a
hazardous waste  spill.

-------
G.   Identification of Vehicles



     The Interstate Commerce Commission requires every for-



hire motor carrier (common or contract) operating under



authority granted by ICC to identify themselves as such.  "There



shall be displayed on both sides of each vehicle operated under



its own power, either alone or in combination...the name, or



trade name, of the motor carrier under whose authority the vehicle,



or vehicles is or are being operated, and the certificate permit,



or docket number assigned to such operating authority by the



Interstate Commerce Commission."  The purpose for the identi-



fication is to identify the transporter as being regulated by



the ICC and DOT.  Many State PUC's/PSC's have similar identifi-



cation requirements for common and contract motor carriers.  Of



those 49 States that have PUC/PSC requirements, the majority,



39, require identification of motor vheicles.  In addition to



ICC requirements, 49 CFR 397 requires  that any private carrier



operating a motor vehicle under its own power, which must be



placarded for the hazardous materials  it is carrying, must also



mark the following information on that vehicle:  The name or



trade name of the private carrier operating the vehicle, and the



city or community in which the private carrier maintains its



principal office or in which the vehicle is customarily based.



These markings must be on both sides of the truck, readily legible



from 50 feet while the truck is stationary.



     Identification of the transporters hauling hazardous wastes



was supported by the majority of persons attending the Type  II

-------
public meetings and the external reviewers  of  the  draft regula-




tions.  As pointed out in the  transport  study,  the majority of



hazardous waste is being transported  by  motor  vehicle.   The



majority of problems concerning illegal  disposal has been the



result of illegal disposal by  motor carriers.



    In developing the identification (marking)  requirements



for transporters of hazardous  wastes, the model differences



were taken into account.  The  rail, air, and barge carriers are



easily identifiable and are  restricted,  due to the nature of



the mode, as to their areas  of services  and use of communication




lines  (track, rivers, air).  The motor carrier, on the other



hand,  is quite mobile.  If there is a road, path or passable



route, a motor carrier could take  it.  Concern was expressed



that many motor carriers of  hazardous waste, "gypsies", often



use unmarked vehicles so that  they cannot be identified when



picking up, transporting, or disposing of hazardous wastes.



    Federal, State, and local government representatives



are concerned that all  transporters  handling hazardous waste



be identified.  Under existing ICC and State PUC/PSC regulations,




the private carriers are not regulated.   In order for all



motor  carriers to be identified,  the  standards should apply to




private, contract, and  common  carriers.




Alternative Chosen



     Since carriers by  air,  rail,  and barge are readily



identifiable and  restricted as to  their routes, EPA  sees no



need  to  require identification of  the vehicles for hazardous



waste transport.  Transporters  of hazardous waste  by  motor

-------
vehicle, as urged by the public, will be required to be identi-



fied.  For the identification, existing ICC requirements will bf,:



incorporated into the regulations.  Since the I.D. number



assigned by EPA under 3010 and these Standards is an existing



ICC, PUC, or IRS number, the majority of motor carriers will be



identifiable by name and also number.  EPA plans to issue a lis™



of transporters who have notified EPA giving name, I.D. number,



etc. .  .  Since EOT uses the 1,000 Ib. limit for marking, EPA,



for  those waste not covered has used similar weight limits.



According to existing data the majority of transporters both



inter and intrastate currently are complying with the proposed



standards.  By referencing EPA's list  of Transporters, EPA



enforcement personnel and State and local governments can



identify transporters of hazardous wastes.  The identification



of the  transporter also informs the public and emergency response



personnel as to the firm transporting the hazardous waste and



the  location of the home base of the vehicle.  In the event



of an emergency, the terminal can be contacted to determine



what is in the load.

-------
H.  Placarding of Transport Vehicles



    As required by the DOT, a  transporter cannot move a transport




vehicle containing hazardous materials  unless it is placarded in



accordance with 49 CFR 172 Subpart F  -  Placarding.  DOT has




recently developed new placards to identify the hazards present



daring transportation  (Attachment XVI).   The DOT placard is a



rectangular, color-coded  sign with a  hazard warning word written



on it and attached to  the four  sides  of a transport vehicle.  The



following hazards and  types  of  hazardous material are identified



by the placards:  EXPLOSIVE, FLAMMABLE,  NON-FLAMMABLE GAS, OXYGEN,



FLAMMABLE GAS, CHLORINE,  POISON GAS,  COMBUSTIBLE FLAMMABLE SOLID,



FLAMMABLE SOLID  (do not wet),  OXIDIZER,  ORGANIC PEROXIDE, POISON,




RADIOACTIVE, and CORROSIVE.



    Transport vehicles  containing any quantity of explosives,




poison gases, flammable  solids  (do not wet), radioactive, and




corrosive materials must be placarded.  Thansport vehicles



containing  less  than  1,000 pounds of the  following need not be



placarded:   flammables,  non-flammable gases, chlorine,  poisons,




oxygen,  flammable  gases,  combustibles, flammable  solids,  oxidi-




zers,  organic peroxide,  and corrosives.



     The warning word on the placard keys emergency  response



personnel  to the hazard of a spilled material  and thus  elicits



certain  responses.   DOT has published an  emergency action guide

-------
to help emergency service personnel during the first 30 minutes



of an accident.  The guide identifies both the chemical and the



hazard associated with that chemical  (i.e., ammonia, corrosive)



     Under existing DOT regulations, any hazardous wastes which



meet the DOT criteria of a hazardous material must be placarded



in accordance with the DOT placarding requirements.  DOT regula-



tions currently apply to interstate transportation; however, a



majority of the States have adopted the DOT Hazardous Materials



Regulations.  According to DOT, 39 States require DOT placards on



transport vehicles.



     The placarding of transport vehicles was discussed at the



Type II meetings and in the ANPR.  DOT, under their current



criteria, cover many hazardous wastes; however, those wastes



which are bioaccumulative, above DOT toxicity levels, may cause



genetic change, or are carcinogens do not require placards.  The



majority of the respondents to the ANPR believe that the DOT



placarding requirements are sufficient for hazardous wastes.  How-



ever, many stated that additional placarding is necessary to



cover those wastes which are not addressed under the DOT Hazardous



Material Regulations.  The respondents favored the DOT developing



the placard, if deemed essential by DOT.



     At the Type II meetings various alternatives were suggested



for placarding of transport vehicles.  Many attendees suggested



use of DOT placards as a base and in addition develop placards



similar to the labels designed by the National Fire Protection

-------
similar to the labels designed by  the National Fire Protection



Association  (NFPA), Manufacturing  Chemists Association (MCA),  or



HIOSH.



    The NFPA system identifies  the hazard of the chemical



material in  terms  of three  principal categories:   Health,



flammability, and  reactivity  (instability).  The  order of



severity is  rated  numerically by fire divisions ranging from



four, indicating a severe hazard to zero,  indicating no special



hazard.



    The information on  the label  is presented by a spatial



system of diagrams with  health  always being on the left,  flamma-



bility at the tope, and  reactivity on the right.   Supplementing



the spatial  arrangement, color  backgrounds and numbers are used



for the three categories:   blue for health, red for flammability,



and yellow for reactivity.  The fourth space is used to indicate



unusual reactivity with  water or may be used to indicate other



additional information to fire  and other emergency response



personnel and stresses that "the hazard should be assigned on



the basis of the greater hazard that could exist under fire



or other emergency conditions."   Therefore, the NFPA system may



not impart a valid health hazard in the absence of fire.



    Identification of the  various hazards of a waste would be



helpful to emergency response personnel, as well as to those



individuals  handling the waste.   The NFPA system would require



additional testing and analysis of the waste beyond that required



by Sections  3001 and 3002 because wastes may vary from batch to




batch.

-------
     The labels and precautionary information system of MCA



recommends the use of precautionary labels bearing such infor-



mation as the product name, signal words designating the degree



of hazard (i.e., danger, warning, or caution); affirmative



statement of hazards; precautionary measures covering actions to



be followed or avoided; instructions in case of contact or



exposure; antidotes and notes to physicians; and instructions for



container handling and storage.  The MCA system is rather infor-



mative requiring a lot of information on a label and therefore,



would not be appropriate for a placard.  For wastes, MCA labels



may present a problem in developing the information for each



waste stream or mixtures fo wastes.  The system does not allow



for a numerical hazard rating.



     "NIOSH's proposed system has drawn upon the most effective



features of each system."  Basically, NIOSH proposes a label



with the following information:  alert symbol of health hazard,



flammability hazard, and reactivity hazard along with a rating



for each (similar to NFPA) .  The label includes the trade name



of the product, statements on the nature of the hazard (DOT),



action statements, and first aid statements (MCA).  When



applicable specific cleanup and disposal statements shall be



included.



     Each of the systems discussed, NFPA, MCA, and NIOSH in order,



relay increasing amounts of information to emergency response



personnel and handlers of the material.  With too much informa-



tion portrayed on the placard, the effectiveness of quick re-



sponse is lost.





                               45

-------
    Other recommendations to EPA concerning placarding  of



vehicles for those wastes not covered by DOT were to  develop



placards for each class of waste  (i.e., bio accumulative,



carcinogen, mutagen, etc. .  . .) or  to  develop one placard  in



addition to the DOT placard  or  separate from DOT which would



indicate that the shipment contains  a  hazardous waste.  By



identifying the shipment, emergency  response personnel would  be



alerted to a potential  threat to  human health and the environment,



and the manifest  should be consulted.   Terminology suggested by



participants at the Type  II  meetings for the placard  included:



•Hazardous Waste,"  "Environmental Hazard," "Environmental



Contaminant,"  "Controlled Material," "Controlled Waste," "Waste,"



or "Dangerous."   The  terms  "Environmental Hazard," "Environmental



Contaminant,"  "Hazardous  Waste,"  and Dangerous" were  rejected by



the majority of  reviewers because the description  of  the hazardous



waste as  compared to  the actual hazard present during transporta-



 tion was  not consistent.   Therefore, the  terminology  of "controlled



 material," "controlled waste," or "waste" was supported.



     Another approach  for the  development of  placards for  those



 wastes not currently covered by DOT is  to recommend  to  DOT a



 unification of their  regulations.  DOT  at  this time does  not see



 the need for either DOT or  EPA to develop a placard  for hazardous



 wastes.  Since a placard has certain  connotations for emergency



 response personnel, there is concern  that if in the  event of a



 hazardous waste  spill  which presents  a chronic hazard, there is



 the possibility  that a full emergency response action would be



 taken  and, as studied  by DOT,  a  potential exists  for an accident




 incurred by the  emergency  response personnel.

-------
Alternative Chosen



     EPA has received several comments that pacards should onl-.



be used when the transportation of a material (waste)  presents



a hazard during transportation.  DOT has the responsibility fo



determining which materials present a transporation hazard and



whether or not a placard should be used to identify the hazard



of the shipment.  It was recommended that EPA not develop a



placard independently of DOT.  EPA, therefore, has recommended



to DOT that hazardous waste which currently do not require



placarding of the transport vehicle be placarded.  DOT will



determine whether or not a new placard should be developed.



Current DOT thinking is that hazardous wastes which present a



chronic hazard need not be placarded since the information on



the manifest will supply sufficient information for emergency



response in the event of a spill.

-------
I.   Insurance Requirement

    Section 3003 of RCRA mandates  that standards  applicable
to transporters be developed  to  protect human health and the
environment.  In order to fully  coir.ply with this mandate,
the question has been raised  as  to  whether there is a need
to establish minimum insurance coverage requirements for
hazardous waste transporters  to  cover the costs of spill
cleanup and the resulting environmental damage.
    Comments to this question were invited in the May 2, 1977,
ANPR.  Various State agencies believe that minimum insurance
should be required.  However, concern was expressed that small
transport companies could be  driven out of business because of
the high cost of insurance.
    There was also general agreement among waste generators
that insurance should be required.   However, the level of coverage
suggested varied.  Several  suggestions were received:  transporters
should be insured  to  cover  the cost of spill cleanup; minimum
insurance requirements  should be established plus a $5,000,000
umbrella policy  to cover all accidential spills of hazardous
wastes; insurance  should be required but made  available through
the public  rather  than the private sector; and the current ICC
insurance requirements are sufficient.
    There  was  also  a consensus of opinion among waste
disposers that minimum insurance requirements  are  needed.
Either  the  Federal government should  provide  the necessary

-------
insurance coverage or if the insurance industry is willing



to insure transport of hazardous wastes, the private insurance




industry.



     Transport companies commenting, however, did not support



RCRA requiring minimum or additional insurance.  Some felt



that no insurance regulations were needed other than to



cover unique hazards or extensions of the Price-Anderson



Act.  Interstate common carriers believe that insurance



presently carried by most transporters was adequate and that



additional insurance would be expensive and hard to find.



Interstate Commerce Commission





     Interstate transportation of hazardous materials  (waste)



is regulated by the Interstate Commerce Commission  (ICC).



Motor carriers are required by the  ICC  to obtain a certificate



of insurance before receiving authority to operate  (Attachment



XVII).  The minimum insurance requirements which are set  forth



in 49 C.F.R. 1043.2 include $100,000  for bodily injury or death



of one person; $300,000 for bodily  injury or death of more



than one person  (limited to $100,000  per person); and $50,000




for property damage.



State Regulations





     Insurance for the  intrastate transportation of hazardous



materials  (wastes) is required by the various  State Public



Utility  Commissions  (PUC).  Of the  49 regulatory commissions

-------
which certificate motor  carriers,  only New Hampshire, Maryland,



and New Jersey do not  set minimum liability insurance requirements



Thirty States require  a  certificate of insurance or demonstration



of financial responsibility prior to issuing a license or



permit.



    Among the other States, the minimum amounts vary widely



(Table VI) .  The minimum insurance for bodily injury or



death to one person ranges from $10,000 to $100,000  (although



California requires $200,000 for petroleum carriers); from



$10,000 to $300,000 for  bodily injury or death to more than



one person  ($600,000  in  California for petroleum carriers);



and from  $1,000  to  $100,000 for property damage.  Although



some States have set  their minimum insurance requirements



quite  low, this  is  not always relevant because carriers  in.



those  States hold far more insurance than is required.






*Availability





     Insurance coverage for hazardous material spills  for



fixed facilities and transportation stock varies widely.



The trucking  industry is  the only  transportation mode  which



 is required to carry minimum insurance  levels.  Although the



 ICC requires  minimum insurance  coverage,  coverage  within the



 industry varies.  It is estimated  that  there  are  16,000



 (common,  contract)  truck  lines.  Of these,  about  100 lines



 carry large "umbrella"  insurance policies which range between



 $1,000,000 and $5,000,000.  Another 1,000 truck lines

-------
                                        Maximum for EocUly
Property Damage     Financial P-egi
Alabama
Maska
Ari2ona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Lstrict of Columbia
•si'
alaware
Florida
Georgia
Hav;aii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
lov.'a
Kansas
Kentucky
or deatl
10.000
100,000
25,000
25,000
100,000
*** 200,000
25,000
100,000
N.A.
N.A.
100,000
25,000
25,000
100,000
20,000
100,000
25,000
25,000
*10,000
i one person Irrjtiry
300,000
300,000
100,000
50,000
300,000
600,000
100,000
300,000
N.A.
N.A.
300,000
100,000
100,000
300,000
40,000
300,000
50,000
50,000
*20, 000-30, 000
50,000
10,000
10,000
5,000
50,000
100,000
10,000
50,000
N.A.
N.A.
50,000
10,000
10,000
50,000
5,000
50,000
10,000
5,000
5,000-**25,000
or InfiuremciG rcouircx
for Perr.rJ t/1 .1 cor. re* 	
X
X



X
X

X


X
X
X
X
y

toy

-------
louieana

Maine

Maryland

Me -.r sachusetts

Micliigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

^'.ssouri
Nebraska

Itevada

New Ilonpshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

K«w York

North Carolina
 *    Varies by weight of vehicle
 **   I'cr flanwable/  explosive/ oil, etc.
 "•''*   Petroleum Carrj.ers
UOClJLJtV ' Mnovury
— — • 	 : — w p?.gqs
10,000
20,000
N.A.
N.A.
100,000
100,000
100,000
50,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
N.A.
N.A.
10,000
25,000
50,000
fimrtHfrfMl^ acoar c
-------
                                                               for Eodily
Prc-r.-.rt.y
                                           Ljt
torth Dakota
)hio
)klahcma
)regon
'ennsylvania
ttioclQ Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
."ennescea
?exas
itah u-f-* k
'ermont
'irginia
Washington
?est Virginia
Ji socnsin
?yatiincj
     Varies by weight of vehicle
 '*   FOJ.  tlaixniable, explosive,  oil,  etc,
  **  Ptitxoleum Carriers
re ""Heath ones person
100,000
100,000
10,000
10,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
N.A.
25,000
25,000
100,000
N.A.
100,000
25,000
10,000
ir>,ooo
25,000
Injury
250,000
300,000
25,000
20,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
N.A.1
100,000
100,000'
300,000
N.A.
300,000
100,000
20,000
30,000
100,000
CL* Jn.'iUJ.vr^c re
lor rorndt/ljce
25,000 X
100,000
5,000 X
10,000 X
10,000
10,000
10,000 X
5,000
10,000 X
10,000
50,000
N.A.
50,000 X
10,000 X
5,000 X
10,000
5,OUO X

-------
carry property damage insurance  between $100,000 and $500,000,
and are assumed to carry  correspondingly large coverage for
personal liability.  The  remaining 15,000 truck lines carry
the minimum insurance levels as  required by the ICC.
    The insurance coverage for  the trucking industry for
hazardous material spills as presently constituted will
cover mitigation expenses to prevent further property damage.
However, environmental  mitigation expenses may not be recog-
nized by these insurers as necessary and valid expenditures
to mitigate damages.
    There are no Federal requirements for minimum insurance
coverage for  the railroad industry -for hazardous material
spills.  Generally,  railroad lines are self insured and,
therefore, cover their  own damage claims.  Some lines, however,
to carry special insurance policies to cover catastrophic
accidents and fires.   Insurance levels for this type of
situation may be for $25,000,000 total coverage, with a $1,000,000
to $2,000,000 deductible  clause written into the policy.
accident liability  for  the railroad industry is thus covered
either  by the railroad  line directly  or through a  large
catastrophe policy  with a substantial deductible clause
tritten in.   However,  as  presently constituted, it  is not
likely  that a large catastrophe policy would cover  environmental
"litigation expense.
*EPA memorandum Johnathan Amson to Hugh Thompson 8/19/75

                            77

-------
     Insurance coverage for vessel transportation of hazardous



materials appears to be different from that for the railroad



or trucking industries.  Present insurance policies for



vessels transporting hazardous materials are indemnity policies,



whereby the insurance underwriter indemnifies the vessel owner



or operator for all costs the owner or operator must pay to



cover all liabilities.  Current vessel insurance coverage for



most policies is for all liabilities encountered, regardless of



whether the substance causing the problem was designated a



hazardous substance.  Thus, existing insurance for vessels trans-



porting hazardous materials includes all accidents resulting in



pollution incidents and the resulting mitigation expenditures.



Cost of Spills





     The cleanup costs of hazardous materials far exceeds the



value of the chemical spilled.  The following examples illustrate



the high cost of cleanup incurred on spills of polychlorinated



byphenyls  (PCB's) during the last four years.   (PCB's when



destinated  for disposal will be considered a hazardous waste,)



     March  1973     1,400 gallons spilled; $1.7 million



                    cleanup cost



     November 1974  250 gallons spilled; $175,000 cleanup cost



     December 1974  1,400 gallons spilled; $500,000 cleanup cost



     January 1975   150 gallons spilled; $7,166 cleanup cost



     February 1976  25 gallons spilled;  $20,000 cleanup cost and



                    lab work

-------
    The  cost of  spill cleanup varies from incident to incident.
Due to the  paucity of data concerning cost of cleanup, it is
impossible  at this time to determine minimum rates of insurance
coverage  for property damage.
Section 311 FWPCA
    Under  Section 311 of FWPCA,  a revolving fund has been
established to defer the cleanup cost of oil and hazardous
substance spills  (once designated) .  The fund, known as  the
Revolving or Pollution Fund, is administered by the Commandant
of the U.S. Coast Guard and is available to EPA.  This fund  is
used
     (1)   to clean up "mystery spills," ones for which the
         perpeptrator cannot be identified;
     (2)   to clean up spills from vessels where the limits of
         liability as defined by the FWPCA have been passes;  and
     (3)   to finance cleanup where  the  on-scene coordinator
         has determined  that the spiller is not capable of
         cleaning up a spill even  though identified.   In these
         latter cases, the  spiller is  required to  reimburse the
         fund.  Often, these cases result  in  litigation for
         final settlement.
EPA
     EPA is  currently examining  the cost of dealing with
environmental emergencies.   An  analysis is  being  conducted which
will include all media  and substances  for which EPA has some
related  statutory  authority and which  have  the potential to

                             It

-------
cause an environmental diaster or emergency.  The primary



objective will be to determine the appropriate and most



cost-effective approach EPA should support concerning environ-



mental diasters/emergencies.  The study will consist of media



analysis of  (1)  the potential, type, and estimated frequency



of environmental diasters; (2)  the feasibility of conducting



cleanup operations; (3)  the level of contingency resources



necessary to provide technical assistance and monitoring



activities necessary to define the problem and to determine



what corrective actions should be taken; and (4)  the level



of contingency resources necessary to cover the costs of



actual cleanup operations.  In addition to the media analysis,



development of insurance requirements or a_ revolving fund



which would be reimbursed by industries that have the potential



to cause or do cause an environmental disaster is being reviewed



The need for legislative and regulatory revisions necessary



to establish such a fund will also be assessed.



     Various issues that will require consideration during



the course of  the analysis are listed:  contingency funds,



environmental  disaster/emergency, media/substance, contingency



fund reimbursement to  include a taxing mechanism, and the



assignment of  direct liability, fines, bonds, or insurance.




Alternative  Chosen





     The Agency  is considering at the current time developing



mechanisms to  cover the cost of spill cleanup.  Until a

-------
final decision is made, no action will  be taken concerning



insurance coverage for transporters  of  hazardous wastes.   EPA



also believes that since  the  States  as  well as the ICC require



minimum insurance coverage,  the property liability being carried



by transporters may be sufficient to cover the cost of spill



cleanup.  A study by  the  Office of Solid Waste to examine



financial responsibility  which will include the availability



and costs of insurance for  transporters of hazardous wastes is



being conducted.

-------
j.  Permitting of Hazardous Waste Transporters

     A major concern expressed by the States, public interest
groups, waste management representatives, and transporters is
that a permitting system for transporters of hazardous wastes
should be developed by EPA.  A permitting system for hazardous
waste transporters would serve two purposes:  the firs.t woule;
be  to identify and collect data on hazardous waste transporters;
the second, which is the major reason for the development of a
permitting  system, would be the ability of  the permitting agency
to  revoke the permit,  thus preventing a transporter from hand-
ling hazardous wastes.
     Federal  and State transportation agencies currently require
that transporters of hazardous materials  (wastes) acquire a
permit/license before  engaging in transportation.  The Inter-
state Commerce Commission  (ICC)  requires  transporters of
hazardous materials  to obtain operating authority through the
standard ICC  application procedures.  The ICC  is far more
stringent  in  its requirements for these  transporters than
regular freight  transporters.  The transporter must demonstrate
a high  degree of responsibility  and strict  compliance with  all
safety  regulations.  The transporter's past record is carefully
scrutinized for  violations.   In  addition, the  carrier must
provide special  training for  personnel who  will  come in
contact with  the hazardous materials as  to  proper handling

-------
techniques and applicable safety regulations.  The  transporters



equipment must be shown fit to carry dangerous materials,  and



in accordance with marking and packing requirements.   A five



year limitation is placed on operating authority granted



transporters of certain of the transporters  continued fitness  and



safety compliance.



    Traditionally, the power of  the  ICC to  regulate  "property"



was interpreted to exclude waste  products, but  in recent years



environmental concerns have led  to a  re-evaluation of this



interpretation.  Under Ex Parte  M.C.  85, wastes  to be reused



or recycled are deemed to have  economic  value and are subject



to regulation.  The Commission  further indicated in the Long



Island Nuclear Service Corporation Common Carrier Application



(110 MCC  393) that radioactive  and toxic wastes are subject to



regulation regardless of value  because of the inherent danger



involved  in the unmanaged  transport of such materials.  In the



Tri-State Motor Transit Company case (125 MCC 343) , the need for



reliable  and  responsive transport services for hazardous wastes



was recognized when  the ICC  issued limited term  (5 years)



certificates  to  two  carriers  of radioactive wastes after  these



carriers  demonstrated  fitness to carry  such materials.  Two



additional  carriers  were  denied authority due to a lack of



experience  and  trained personnel  in the  transportation of




radioactive substances.

-------
     The above cases set the precedent for ICC regulation of



all carriers of hazardous wastes and also has influenced State



coverage (Attachment XVIII).  It is the ICCTs current policy



to bring such carriers under regulation through their standard.



procedures, while at the same time giving special consideration



to the sensitive nature of the goods carried.



     The ICC regulations pertain to interstate common and



contract carriers while State agencies control transportation



intrastate.  The State Public Utility Commission is the



primary agency responsible for the permitting/licensing of



transporters.  Table VII summaries those States that have



license/permit requirements.  The first column indicates whether



or not the  State requires transporters to file for authority



to transport DOT hazardous materials  (waste).  Of the 50



States, 49  require  a certificate of authority to operate.  In



addition to requirements for hazardous material transporters,



waste transporters  also require permits/license.  Of the 49



State PUC's that require certificates of authority for hazardous



materials,  38 also  regulate waste transporters.  Column two



indicates whether another agency within the State requires a



permit/license for  hazardous waste transporters.  The permit/



license is  issued by various agencies within each of the Sta tes:



Health Department of Natural Resources, State EPA, Departmert



of Environmental Quality, or Water Pollution Control Board.. .



Of the 51 political subdivisions, 30

-------
     roc
Operating Authority
Permits/Iicensing required
by other Agency
     Joint
HJC/Other Agency
Poquirod ?vequi Tenants for
Hazardous Waste L^^^ys. Waste
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
District of Coluiribia
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii

Materials
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N.A.
No
Yes
Yes
Yes


Yes
N.A.
haz, mat.
waste
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
N.A.
.
N.A.
£es (for
Ereatment}
N.A.

Pending Health Dept.
_
Pending Health Dept.
No
Yes ' Health Dept.
No
Yes ' liquid waste Dept.
Env. Protection
Pending Committee on TransportaT-
tion
No
No
Yes Dept. of Natural Re-<
sources
N.A.

X
-
X
-
X
-
X
'
-
-
X



-------
                  6fe. ISZZ7
         ST^TEJ'EgMIT/LICENSE REQUIRKKENTS
     PUC
Operating Authori.ty
rorrn.its/licenoing required
I>y odier Agc-ncy	
     Joint
FUC/Other Agency

* •> <*
Hazardous Waste

Stnto Mc-iteriaJH
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
•O
Louisana

Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts

Michi gan
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
1
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Scnie
Yes

Yes
No
Yes

NO'
i •
No
Yes
Yes
Pending
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
Pending
Yes

Yes

Requirements for
Hazardous Waste


Illinois EPA
liquid waste Board of
Health
Dept. of Env. Quality
Dept. of Health and
Environment
Dept. of Natural Re-
sources
Health & Human Resources
Adm.
-
Dept. of Health
Division of Water
Pollution Control
Dept. of Natural Re-
sources
-
X
X
X
X
X

X
-
X

X
X

-------
     HJC
Cperati-ng Autliority
Permits/licensing recruirecl
by p bher Agency
     Joint
KJC/Ofcher Agency


State
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missuori
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
>J
J New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina

RCv'iuirf

fe^Iai!
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Mes
No
Yes
\
Yes
Yes

»v_*

• Wr^*T" G.
Yes
Yes
reuse/re-
cycle
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N.A.
No
Yes




Pending
Yes
Pending
Yes
No
No
NO
Yes
Pending
Yes
No




Pollution Control
Agency
Board of Health
—
Dept. of Health and
Environment
-
••
Dept. of Environmental
Protection
Environment Improvement
Agency
Dept. of Environmental
Control


Requirements for

Hazardous Waste
X
X
X
X
-

X
X
X



-------
         STATE PERMir/LICENSE
     HJC
Operating Authority
                 required
l)y pij;or^ Agency	
     Joint
rue/Other Agency
          ;s for
Hasagfloua Waote I^J^^pyS. W?ste
State Material's
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

South Carolina
5Q
*
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes


Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
\
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
5fes-unles3
clunped
fes-except
iebris/
garbage
N.A.
Yes
Yes
N.A.
No
Pending OEPA
Yes Dept. of Health
No
No
Yes liquid waste Dept. of
Health
i
Yes Board of Health


No
Yes Dept, of Health
Yes Water Quality Board
No
_
X
X
-
-

X


X
-
X
X


-------
                             POC
                        Operating Authority
                             itequiracl
                                     Kar.to
                         rernd.1,s/lic.'enaing required
                         by other Aggncy	
                                                           Joint
                                                      FUC/Other Agency
                                                      Itequirerrents  for
                                                                              VJante
Vermont


Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin


Wyoming
Yes


Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes


Yes
    Yes
Yes-to treat
roent
    Yes
    Yes

Yes-except
disposal

    Yes
Pending   Env. Conservation
          Agency

  No-

  No

  Yes     Health Dept,

  Yes   i  Dept. of Natural Re-
          sources
                                                                X
X
X

-------
     existing or pending permit requirements.  In 29 States



which have existing or pending hazardous waste transport



permits/license requirements, the PUC's of each of the



States also regulate the transportation of hazardous materials



(waste).  Of the 29 States with other agency requirements,



24 State PUC's also regulate waste transportation.



     It appears that in many instances there may be duplicat-.on



of effort in some of these states.  As stated, one of the



purposes of requiring permits/licenses of transporters of



hazardous wastes is to identify and collect data on the



transporter.  In filing for permit/license to the State PUC,



certain information is required of the transporter  (Table VIII).



     Each State requires that the name and address of the



transport company be included on the application for a permit



or certificate.  Some States also require the names and addresses



of the principal officers of the firm.  The majority of State



PDC's require the transporter to submit either a financial



statement or show evidence that it was "fit, willing, and



able" to perform the tasks specified in the application.  Some



States required both a financial and fitness statement.  About 50*



of the State regulations specified that a minimum amount of



insurance was necessary before a transporter could obtain a



permit.  Some States, however, do not require insurance for -he



permit but require a certificate of insurance before the trans-



porter began service.  Some state PUC's require a description

-------
                                                                               KEY
STATE ^A _ j

Alabama

Alaska

Arkansas
Arizona ***

California***

Colorado*

Connecticut
^District of Columbia
Delaware
Florida
Georgia***
Hawaii***
Idaho

X

X

X






X
NA

X


X
* Requirements Not Specified
n c D B F_J



X








X
NA

X


X


X

X

X






X
NA

X


X
X

X

X






X
NA




X

1 1
X

X

X






X

-------
                              FUG
STATE
i
Illinois

Indiana

Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky

Louisana*

Maine
-O
J* Maryland***


Massachusetts

Michigan***


Minnesota*


Mississippi*
Missouri

* Requirements Not £oecifie
A

X

X

X
X
X

X

X




X




IX
t
!
X
X

*j
B



X

X
X
X








i








1
u
^•MMM
C
:


X

X
X




X













X

.-' "'*-•
D





X
X


















X


E
	 1


X

X
X


















X


JL



X


X





















G






X

I



1




1

i
i
1



X


M

X

X

X

X





X


X








X


JL



X

X






















J

X

X

X
X
X





X










X
X


K,
"
X

X

X
X
X

X



X


X

X


X


X
X




A.


B.

C.

D.


TT
•w •
F.


Ci.

.,
ij ^

T
-• *

: 0.
K.

"••--- - - •
                                                                                 KEY


                                                                          Name,  Address  of  Business
                                                                          Office

                                                                          iiame,  Address  of  Pr.incdp^
                                                                          Officers

                                                                          Financial responsibility
                                                                          StateiuenL

                                                                          Description of Equipment
                                                                          and Facilities

                                                                          Services to be Performed

                                                                          Typo of Transport

                                                                          Schedule of Rates

                                                                          Requires Public Hearing

                                                                          Necessity of Service

                                                                          Rovokation Authority/

                                                                          Finalities Assessed
                           .  .

**   iJtato way have revokaticn authority but not: specific mention of complaints pathway-(K not
     Tl \ 11 T* if TJ fl I
     marked)
***  Data Not Available

-------
                                                                                         KEY
IM
STATE

 Montana*

 NebrasJca*

 Nevada

 New Hoi

 New Jersey

 New Mexico

 New York

 North Ca

 North Da

 Ohi.o ***

 Oklahoma

 Oregon
A
1


Ik


shire

ey

CO

rolina
kota


L
X

X

X
X

X

X

X
X


X
1
X

rania*

X
1
D C D E P






X

X

X

X



X



t





X


X


X
X
X


X










X

X
X


X
x jx
1














X


X


X












X

X





X




G H.I J K






X



X

x

, 1

X




	 1









X
X
x
X


X
/
X














X




X







X

X




X

X
X


X
X




X

X

X
X

X

X
X
X
X

X

X

X

A. Namo, Address of Busine
Office

B. Name, Address of Princi
Of f i.cers
C. Financial responsibilit
Statement

D. Description of Equipmen
and Facilities
E. Services to be Per forme*
F. Type of Transport
G. Schedule of Rates

U. Requires Public Hearing
I. Necessity of Service
J. Revokation Authority/

K» Penalities Assessed

   **
      State may  have rcvokation authority but not specific mention of  complaints  pathway-(K not
      marked)
 ***   Data Not Available

-------
                               PUC
                                  7* 6k.  ~WT
 STATE
  RlTOde
  South
  Sout±
  Tennessee
  Texas
  Utah***
  Vermont*
>-o
  Virginia
  Washington
  West Virg
  Wisconsin
  Wycmijig
A ,B 0 D E F
dand*
/ .
iroli-na
ikota***
ie


it
i
jon
:ginia
in





X

X

X
X

X
X
X
X
X


X

•>«»•• •«••••


X











X




X






X









X






X




X

t









X




X
1
1


X

X




X

X


X


G H.I J K


X





1





X



X


X



X
X
X


X

«• *•«•••>•» •— +*—**•


X





X

X



X

1


X

X
X


X
X
V
X





— "— -1
X

X
X


X

X
X
X
x
1
1


.
           KEY

'A,   Name, Address of Business
     Office
 B.   Name, Address of Principa
     Officers
 C.   Financial responsibility
     Statement
 D.   Description of Equipment
     and Facilities
 T3.   Services to be Performed
 F.   Type of Transport
 fi.   Schedule of Rates
 H.    Requires Public Hearing
 I.   Necessity of Service
 J.   Revokation Authority/
 K.   Penalities Assessed
 x	
      4*1. \£ WW.'*.WI-W*'W*9 tVWL- W£ST2K» J. *. .A-C^U
 **   State may have revokation authority but  not specific itention of complaints pathway-(K not
      nuirked)
 ***  Da«-.a Not Available

-------
I' Identification Code






   Section 3010(a)  requires all who transport a hazardous



waste, no later than  ninety days after promulgation or revision




of the regulations under  Section 3001, to file with the Adminis-



trator or an autorized  State, a notification stating  the general



description of the activity and identification of the hazardous




wastes handled.   This ninety day notification period  is a  one-



time notification and does not require notification by transpor-



ters beginning operations in hazardous waste after that time




period.



   Section 3003, as urged by the participants at the public




meetings, should  require  that any person who transports a  hazard-




ous waste notify  the  State or EPA.



   There are a  variety  of purposes  for notifying the appro-




priate agency.  The  agency will be able to  determine  all  new



transporters entering the business.   Through the  notification



and subsequent contact  by the appropriate agency,  the transpor-




ter would become  aware  of the transport regulations  and of the




generator regulations.   Also, the agency would  then  have  a



sailing  list  to  sand information  concerning the regulations.



The notification  could  also  be  used  to  register.the  transporter.



Begistration would only  signify  that the  transporter is  aware of




the regulations,  not an  endorsement  by  EPA.



    At  the  Type  II meetings all  parties  have  called for  a permit




system for  transporters.   Under Federal  law,  (there are no pro-



visions  to  permit the transporter),  a transporter must notify the




appropriate  agency before he transports  the wastes.   Since there

-------
is concern for permitting transporters, the notification syste-
coulc be used as a means to register transporters.  The regist: a-
tion would not be considered a permit nor a stamp of approval;
only that the transporter is aware of the RCPA regulations.  F ?.
could issue a publication or newsletter listing all registered
transporters.

Alternative Choosen
     EPA believes that the -one time notification by transporters
would not be sufficient  to determine who is transporting a hazard-
ous waste.  By requiring notification and subsequent registration,
EPA would be able to  identify transporters of hzizardous waste-.
The subsequent issuing of an Identification Code number by EF?
would be used by the  transporter  to  identify himself as a hazard-
ous waste hauler and  also that he has  furnished  information  to
EPA.
      In those States  in  which the hauler of a waste requires a
permit  or  is licensed by the State or  ICC,  that  license or
registration number jwould be used for  EPA purposes.

      Requiring  furnishing of  information by the  transporter  e^ter
 the 90  day initial notification  period,  allows  for  constant  v. :date
 of nailing lists,  provides  a  current list of  transporters  foi
 technical assistance, establishes a data base  for contact  wir.:
 the transport industry and  also  allows sufficient time for t: ans-
 porters (generators)  to determine whether or  not hazardous w: ste
 is being transported.  In addition,  transporters would be  re;-illy

-------
identifiable by permit number  in  case actions by EPA or States



[against the transporter's permit  need to be made.

-------

STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
LOUISIANA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN-
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
Attachment I
SECT i ON NUMiicKi)
171
1
0
3
3
3
3
0
0
3
3
1
1
-3
(P
0 0
0
2 o
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
" 3
172
2
0
3
3
3
. 3
2
0
3
3
1 .
1
= 3
0
0
0
?
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
3
173 [ 177
2
0
• 3
! 3
i
; 3
3
-2
0
3
3
^
1
1
3
0
0
0
7
3
3
0
Q
0
0
3
0
3
2
2
-3
-3
~"T7r
0
— — — — .
5
3
-3 ! 3
•
Z
2
3
'^•m™ l .—
2
~l 0
-3
-3
3
3
-1 1
'1
-3
1

0 0
0
0
0
^3
^
0
^3
-1
0
-- 3
0
"""" 3
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
^
i 	 -ir
_____>
1 - Has Similar Rule
2 - AdootKeJ in  Parr
3 - Adopted in Toto
                                  f) — Hae
                                             DM 7 a

-------
IftTE
OTTANA
-gBRASKA
-PADA
-m HAMPSHIRE
-BIT JERSEY
-II? MEXICO
~m YORK
-DRTH CAROLINA
-BRTH DAKOTA
-OHIO
JBAHOMA
JBGOM
JBWSYLVANIA
JDDE ISLAND
.SOOTH CAROLINA
.SMITH DAKOTA
.OWES SEE -
.HAS
.UAH
..URMONT
JtRGINIA
JSIIINGTON
ttST VIRGINIA
HSCONSIN
IgOMING
SECTION NUMBERS
171 172 175
0
0
3
-1
1
3
1
3
n
0
0
a
3
3
0
3
3
2
3
0
1
3
0
3
3
3
0
3
1
1
3
1
3
0
c
0
0
0
3
3
0
3 r.
3
*
3
3
0
1
3
0
3
3
3
0
3
1~
1
3
1
3
0
0
0
0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
3
0
3
3
177
-3
0
"3
-1
"l
'3
-1
'3
0
0
'1
-3
'3
'3
3
-3
'3
-3
'3
0
-1
-3
0
' 3
- 3
173
0
0
3
1
1
3
1 .
3
0
0
1
0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
3
0
3
•j
«5f Explanation  .
' — JIas Sixil&r Xule
^* Adopted an Part *
3 - Adopted in  Toto
0 - Has Ho Rule

-------
STAT\ (tf   FEDERAL MOTOR .CARRIER SAFETY REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY STATES

STATE
ALABAMA
ALASKA '
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
'FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII -"
IDAHO
ILLINOIS-
INDIANA
IOWA
LOUISIANA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY "
MAINE
' MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
' MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
: SECTION NUMBERS
351
, 2
3 /
/ .
3'
f 3
- 1
3
0
.1
1 -
3
2
2
3
0
3
*1
0 '
' 3
• 2
. 0
2 *
0
0
3.
-— *
3
592
• -2- <__..
3
3
3
1
3
0
1
1
3
3
2
.3
0
3
0
0
3
3
1
2
0
1 -
3"
3 .
595
2
3
3
3
1
3
1
1
2'
3
3
2
3
2
3
1
0
3
3
1
2
0
2
3
'3 '
594 595
2
1
3
•3
1
3
1 "
1
1
3
1
2 •
3
1
1 '
0
0
3
3
1
2
1
1
3
3
2
2
3
3
2
3
0
0
1 "
2
3
2
3
0
3
1
0
3
1
2
0
1
1
3
3
j 9 0 39,
2
3
3
3
1 •
3
0
0
0
3
3
2
3'--'
1
3
0
0
3
3
1
2
0
0
3
3
2
"\
3 !
3
3
?
0
1
0
3
3
2
3
0
s
1
- C
3
-
-
^
i
,'
-
-
   Key Explanation
   1 - Has Similar Rule
   2 - Adooted In Part
3 - Adopted in Toto
                                 — Kac tin Oii7

-------
'••{- Has Siailar Rule
 ~ Adopted in Part
3 — Adopted in  To to
0 - Has Wo  .Rule
~-
fcffE
ffSSOURI
UTTANA
• 0RASKA
ilWDA
0 HAMPSHIRE
0 JERSEY
'0 MEXICO
P YORK
*
»RTH CAROLINA
!1»RTH DAKOTA
;«0
JKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
* % • * *
ffiODE ISLAND
SODTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
SNNESSEE
HXAS
8IAH
&RMONT
URGINIA
WASHINGTON
KST VIRGINIA
RSCONSIN ' '
DOMING
SECTION NUMBERS
391 392 593
3
«*
0
I/.
/"
2
1
0
3
0
3
2
1
0
3
3 o
• ' 3
3
3
3
' 3
* »
3
1
0
0
3
. l" .
.3
3
* *"** - •*
' 0
1
' 3
1
0
3
3"
3
2
0
-1
V
3
3
3 ~
3
3
3
3
1
0
0 -
3 '
1
^
3
0
1
3
1
3
3
3
3
2
2
1
3
3
3
3-
3
3
3
3
1
2
2 '
3
1
••-} ,
:>
394
3
0
0
3
1-
1
3
3
3
0
0
1
0
1
3
3
3
1
3
3
1
0
2
0
1
3
, 	
595
3
0
1
2
0
0
3
1
3
3
2
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
2
2
0
3
596
•*
0
1
'3
1
*
3
3
3
3
0
0
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
3
0
3
- t£-
397
3
0
1
3
1
0
3
1
*•»
0
0
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
1
0
3
1
3

-------
   \ «>1J'JVj',,

    /I /%            DEPARTMENT OF  TnANSPORTATfON-

   j JVJ?             -MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU
        V^            .      .  V/ASKIKGTC.N. D.C. iOSPO



                              December 23,  1977
 Mr. John P. L2hran, Director
                                                    !
           Waste l-'anagerent Division  (WH-565)       UJ
 Office of Solid Waste
 U.S. Eriv.ixonir.sntal Protection Agency
 401 M.. Street, S.W.         .
 Vashiiigton, D.C. 20460
ASf-^r
                                                                        11
      Mr

 In Decerriber of 1975, the "Departn>3nt of Transportation published
 •an advance notice of proposed nHs-oakiny in the Federal Fegister
 concerning environanental :anc5 health effects iraterials (DocJ:et M-l-145)
 Recently, in October, our off ices held a joint public rnseting concern
 the development of regulations for the transportation of hazardous ..a.
 7\s you know, both the public n-eating and r.-?ritten conrr-nt-j received in
 response to our joint notice of public meeting and supplc-ivanta! acv-^;-.-
 notice of proposed n0.aitikirig overwhelmingly urge the Depai-fcnei-it of
 Transportation to tal3-r
 un,-;cr Section 3001, Identification ar.:l Listing of I-!a-i5rc.ov.s"v7as:-^?
 Section 3002, Standards Applicable to Gsni-rators of Hazardous Waste;
 cuid Section 3003, Standards Applicable to Transporters of Hazardous
 VSiste, 'itappsors that tha Hazardous I-^terials Itogulations can ba
 rrodified to accornrxJate irost of the needs of the Resource Ccnssrvatior
 and Recoveri' Act, Subtitle C (Hazardous Waste Harag-cosant)  relative
 to hazardous \>aste transportation.

 The Dcpartaant is considering the development of a ncvv class of iratcri
 v^--ich -will include those hazardous v.astes not curron civ regulated bv
 DOT (.^ucli as wastes that are bioaccv^.rjlative,.  toxic above current CO."
 sfcan-JIitrds,  or that iray cause genetic change).  fe also expect to ir.cl.:
 in our regulations references -bo EPA standards, -particularIv to deal
 v/ith those cases v.ftere EPA standards apply to materials  now' regulate"!
 by DDT but which are not identified in"DOT regulations as  wastes.   As
 you toto:.;,  the ixrj1 Hazardous Materials Weqnlations do not row distircp.:.!
               an
 In order for D031 to develop comprehensive reg-olations for hazardous
 waste transportation,  it is necessary that I receive frcn vo;ar off jV--
     l- drafts of tha Section 3001 and 3002 stenchrds prior to prooo -•'"•

-------
changes to-the DOT regulations.  To date, I have received pralijr.irurv
drafts of thase standards  in addition to receiving a -final draft en -the
Section 3003 standards.

After a. review of the draft Section 3003 standards, -it appears that
the Hazardous 1-jaterials Regulations can be irodified to reflect rn^st,
if not all, of your proposed .star.d£xrds. . The Dapartrnsntwill rr^ke
every attempt possible to  develop or incorporate all Section 3003
standards necessary for the transportation of hazardous wastes,

It is nry understanding that EPA is planning to propose the Section
3003 standards soretirr^ in January, ]977, with the  intention of jointly
proposing the DOT stsndarcls v;cen they are ready.  It is likely that
v,-e v/jjrl not be prepared to publish a notice before  the end of
Januarv, but v?e v;ill -be. prepared to publish in adequate tiirs to  ;
allow final rules to be promulgated -before April2Lp, 1978.  Consequently,
we believe that an earlier unilateral EPA proposal, appearing befcra 3
joint DOT-EPA proposal, or before EPA has published proposed Section
3001 and 3002 sfcandax'ds-, will only contribute to public confusion. . VJa
would orefer to rely eMClv.sJ.vely on. jojjitly proposed regulatiOits for
waste transpDrtsrc, v;hich \vould easily  facilitate necessary cross-rriferer,
between proposed DOT ar.d H?A regulatory te>:ts.   _

Ho-vevor  if EP-\ rletenrinos to proceed v/ith proposed Section 3003   -
standards  in January,  I v.ould ask that  the prearnble to ti^t prcposal
-(1) reference DOT's intention to publish,  (2) indicate that a  3orr_
DOT-EPA prcrossl v/ill be fortl'.ccxtiiiicj, and (3).nake clear that  alljDr
part of the" EPA propose 1 will be y/ithdrawn upon -tha publication or.
IX3T standards.

I look forward to a coritin^ticn of our past and current cooperation
to provide a siirple, unified set of regulations for shippers and  ...
 transoorters of hazardous v.sstes.
                                          Sincerely,
                                          Alan I. Roberts
                                          Director
                                          Office of Hazardous
                                          I-^terials Operations

-------
                                              RULES
|Be Printed on White Paper)

              UNIFORM  STRAIGHT  BILL  OF  LADING

                   ORIGINAL—NOT NEGOTIABLE—Domestic
__„           	,	„	Carrier.  	
                                                                                    Shipper's N'o, ,
                                                                                                    (SCAC)
 RECEIVED, subject to th« clauiacarlora and tariffs la enact on th» date of tha issu* of this Bill of Lading.
. • ..  -	:	         .      Data	
                                              City,
                                                                         County,
                                .Stxt*
           . in *ep*nM pod onUr. uc*p< u aaud ico«u»o and tonaitJcwi of co«it»fiu of p*c!uiA luOutown) nvirkML cauiimd, *a4 d«>tin*4 » jtaevn beta*.
                               Utrau|bout dxi> control at m*«ali| a.ir p«ne« or carpor»tia« in yni wroion o/ !i»ii«p«rtjr undx- thcaonlnct) »p*««
                                      niUmi, *it»r tin*, hi{Av*y .T?UU or nu'-c*. or wtthta th« urritory at la hifhwiy opnvoon*, aihirnM ta>
          aB Ux rout* u Hid dMuulwb ': i irruu-iUjr ipwri. u to *Kh uniiro;  ^«-rK> V= b> p»rferra«J hrnun »U the ta»vlit»r«
                                t fT -r-i-fi'in-t	*" '"---:	' -v:->- —»•—^T-J	..-^
                              County,
                                                                                                Zip.
aj.
*•( Carrier.
                                             , Vehicl* or Car Initial.
                                                                                      .N
                      port, b, . «rrW, by «U». tk. U-
                                                      lh« bill oT Udiof *»» >u« «h« it
          .
          th« rat* is dependent on value, shippers ar» required to state specifically sn wntiug
           valut o/ tha property.

        or d»clar*d valu* of &• prop*rty i* hereby 3p*cL5c»Ily statad by the »hipp«r
  Subject to Section 7 of condi-
tions, if this shipment is to bo
delivered to th« consjn»« vrjth-
out recourse- on tha consignor,
th* consignor shall sign th* fol-
lowing statemsnt;
  *n» carrier shall not roafc» <3a-
Giiwy of this shipnaent vrithaut
payment of freight and all othtr
lawful charges.
                                                                                    If charges ajc« t» ba prepaid
                                                                                  write  or  stirr.p her*  *To b«
                                                                                  Received 5		•.
                                                                                  t» upply in prepaymant of th«
                                                                                  cliarsas.on  th» property  ds-
                                                                                  scribed he
                                                                                  Per_
                                                                                         Agent or Cashier
                                                                                   Charge* advanced:

                                                                                   S_	
                                                    P«r
  **t*ddres» of Shipper. Street,
                                                           City,
                                                                                            .Sut«
          C. O. D. Section to b« Printed in Red,

-------
 	RULES	


                                               CONTRACT TERMS  AND  CONDITIONS


        Sec. I. (a) The earner or party U prussuian of any of the property herein described shall b. liable as at common law for any !o- thereof or i.m.te ^re-a
  hareieiafter provided.

               f» N» carrier o» p*rty in pismiiiii of aU or any ot th. property h*r*in dascribed shall be lib!* for any leas thereof or esnwse tSere'o or del,,, e "
  Act of Cod, the, public enemy, th* authority of law. er th* act or default of the jhipper or o«ner. or for narjrsl .hnnkais. The esrnerV UaSwUty shil! be that of »-. .-,
  only, tar loaa. dan***, or delay caused by fire occurrinj after th* npiration of th* free time (U any) ai!o»ed by tariffs lawfully on file t juch fnre time to be re.-np^i*c
  provided) after notica of IB* arrival of th* property »« destination w at th* port of «port (if uijended far Mport) has been duly lent or pen. jnd after placemen t of ,
  far delivery at destination, or uride* of c!*uv*ry of th* property to th* party entitled to receive it. ia* been mad*. Eicept a cu* of neejijence of the carrier or p»rt-J ir,
  (and the burden to prove freedom from such Qee.lif.ence shall be on th* carrier or party in poswaioa). th* carrier or party in poaaasaion shall ixx be Hjbl* .'or JCM.
  delay cecurrn*. wteU th* property ia stopped ana held a transit upon  tt» raquast at the shipper, owner, or party entitled to make  such r-quo^ or .-we'tine, .'lom
  *ic» ia the proparty. or for country danaf* to cotton, or from riot* or strikes. Except ia ease of carriers neiiijenc*, ao carrier or party in po»ers»ion  of ill or any/of :
  herein Jpemtmi snail b* liable fcr delay caused by hijhway obsuuctioa, faulty or uapaaaable hithw.y. or lack of cap*citjr of any tu'inway. b«,e or .'rrnr. and ti
  prove tfMdain from such n*fU(*ace shall b* oo  th* carrier or party in pnaewina,
                (e) lae»a»ef quanntuM th» ptoiMity nay b» d^har^ at i^ ««d «a»ii»« o/ o»aai« inia quatmntiBo dfpet » tlarwhyrT. »• r»quir«d by
  or aulharitink or for th» eanur'9 dapxch at acamt awnaVh poini in curwr't judpnani. and w any such cs» earri»r's r»ponaibilU» ih^il cia?» »hrn property u i»
  or propwty may b* ntumd by carriw at own*/* apMta* to ahipouif poiat. eunint fwijht ball) xaya, Qaarantin* npoua of »Nai»s«r t-jtu.-» or k.nd upon or >
  prapMty akall b> bom* by th* owian of dw prapMty or b* a tint thmoa. Th» carmr ihail not b» UabU tot io» or danu;* ocea»on«i by (ami jiuon or i;i^,<,c;
  Beta r»|uin4 or doa* by quaranein* nfuUtion* or authontin mm Ihoujh th* aun* may ha»» b»m oon« by cirrirr's 13cm, if rnta. or tmpiavm. nor for de-.«-i t
  daoafaoraaykia4oearri*r, ita afiata, or o3c*r^ u b> quarantow lam or rrftilaUoiu, Ik* abippw *h»il hoU ih» earrirra hjrmJM« from »nv rjprnw ift,r mj» J.TCV.-
  tlvrjr may b.  rvquimi to pay. by  rnuea of th» mtrodoction of tha propatty ommi by thtt contact inu» any pUea afitfiM th. suarandiw U-» or rriuUiun. in „-
        &M. 2. (a) No earriar ia bound to rranapart uid preparry by i«y particular JchxJuU, train, «*rod* or -raael. or in tjnw for any particular matkat or ot>t«r»-W.-  ;Ka« «it!i
       mplr d»ony carrtw or nutr b*twt«B th> (xxnt o( ibipnwnt »r   Ow point
  of cimuauon. la all caa*a not prohibiud by law. wh*r* a lovtv valu* than actual rahit ha* OMI rrpm«it*d ia writinf by th« shipper or hu brrn tfmd upan .   Tttinj u
  th* rel««««d valu* of th* pnparty aa dMarmiiwd by th* daawAeatioi. or tariff! upon "hich th* rat* ia baMd, audl lower  iaxo»*r*J. »b*th«r ar no* aud> leaa or damaax occurs from iwgtiiaiM*.                                                          •        -
               (b) Aa a> condition precedent to recovery, claim* must b* filed ia writing with th* rrceivinf or detiverinf carrier, or carrier Iseuinf thia Stil
  * dam***, injury or delay occurred, or carrier in ponam'nn of the property when the loss, damtf *. injury or delay occumd. within nu>e
  of cha property lor, inth»cae*of export traffic. withtA nut* months alter delivery *t port of export) or. in caj* of £sUur* to msie delivery, thin »iiSm t*'.nt rvonrhi ii-^f    »s*un»bie
  time for delivery haa *lap*ad: and mica shall b* instituted against any  carrier only within two yean and on* d«y from the dsy when notice in wrinni i» jiv m b ,   -< carter
  to th* claimant  that th* carrier haa disallowed th* claim er any part or parts thereof specified  ia th* notic*. Where claim* are not Sled or >U>LS are not  :rucituc«L   'nrvoo is
  accordance* with the foreroui| provisions, no carrier hereander shall be liable, and web cUu&a will not b* paid.

               (el Any carrier or party EaU* on account of tc*a of or dama|*toany ef said property shsll have the full benefit of any insurance that miy ru>r bnn effected,
  upon or on account of said property, so far aa tai* shall aot avoid th* policiea or contracts of insurance: PROVIDED, That i be earner reimburse ih» claimant l-jr  - . prvoiiua
                                                                                                          •cnary cooperaf> and b*li»( it owner'j cost.
  over whoaa raw* cotton or cottoa liatenia to be traraaoriad r^ceiwdar shall hsv* th* privtl*fe. at ita ewa cost e :j brcarupu'.  a* uierein
  proeideaJ, after notice of the arrival of th* property at destination or altheport of iiport (if intended firetpont has been duly sent nr riveo. and 3/;er pjxr^-.trx ^<   •  property
  for deUery at daouuiSo* ha* beea nade. Of property not recewai. at tin* tender of delivery of th* property to th* party entitled :o rcri.e  it hu been .-!•_.._'„.   -, 'i, kept
  ia veaael. vehicV, ear, depot, warehouse or place of baaineas of th* carrier, subject to t>» UiiJ charse for xorat* and u earners resporuibiiity ss wsrehouserasn^ c..  . or at tbt
  optio*) of Iho carrier, jnay be renevej to and stored in a pubbc ar UcenaW  warehous* at  th* point of delivery or other available point, « if r-.o i^n -.I^OMM i-.   -,».Uale«t
  poia^of de4iv»r» or at other svaiUble point, then in othersvsilabl*iior.je/jciljrr. el tieooetof the owner and there held without liat«.'i-.> on tHe part c,Crn» ci:-.     .• jtijtci
  to • Cea for all freitht tnd other tawAil ciurgM, indudiat * nawnabl* chart* for storare. In th* event const'ine* cannot b* found ac *dd,-e*t  &\-f, tar deriv»r»    tn in tlu!
  event, notice of th* placing of each foods ifl warehouse shall b* rnailid tathaaddreasfivta  for deiirery and mailed ta any other addmt ti»*n on the bill of ladir<( 'of   .uScnion.
  showins the <.areh0ua. ia which such property haa be« plac< subject to the  c«ovisio« cJ thb parspsph.                       ='

               (t) Wbm oonpensiLshl* property which has been tntaf^^ to <^ta>*^ btrr^~'a  ntt^ fy °x>»fn~ or lit* ?*nj entitled !o rm^v it -j .-.  , tetxltr of
                                     	      to receive or dsim it wittet  U days after aabc* of arrival shall have>b*en d«iy »e«t or r-ve«, OM ci n , r  may »tfl
                                                         >*»auy be daatfaatadl by the carrier:                                                   .


  Buy be, and that it will b* aubj*tt ta, «b o^W (h* t*mv> of th. bill  of Udatj i/ dapositioa be not srrsnred for. and shaU ha». pubfuhej not.c. ^tMnlrTr ,  «y.  the- ruea* rf th* party t« whom cnrtsipssd. or. if .topped oraV aotay. &, MTO rf a* auty u be notified, and the time and  place of -wl,. once .  v ,k !„ two
  jntcasMn «***A w a Bvetpapw of t*n.rsl*a«lsuoB at the place of sale ar  aearast pUc* where such newspaper is puUahed. ?ROV IDED. That 3O  (isy» shsll >.... .l.piei
  betat* pubVcatiofi of nocic. of s*U after said nolic* that (h* piopwty »« rrfusvJ e» r.«aii» anelJWned-a. maDed. sent or p»en.

     ...       (c) WhervrjwiahabUpeopwtywhidlhaa beta tnueoRed h«r»und«tod»tinatioB is refosejby cormrne.orp.rty entitle toreceiv, ,t, «My c^^.
  entuM to new* it *h*a fail to receive rt pmmptly, th* earlier may. m it* deration, to  prevent detrriorstian or further deterioration. M)i  the vine ,„ the b»«  '.
  y^ °L?^e **T ^?V1?*^ 1?Ut **""• ***** *"»«t»*"»'on •» «b* conaijnur or owner lh« refusal of the property or the failure to r«etve it and rK)u«.t fc:
  »f th, property, such ootificaooii shall b*  p«on. ia such maiuwr at th. auras, of due dui|e*ce requires, befor* the propertyj, »ld.
                                                                                                              •*>»>
 fa.  fc^i    k.  -1  '7T'~1Tot"0™P^rf'w"^twr«»P«J*^l^pm-l^|bnotpoe>»bU.*»srveitha^                                        ;
 » aimdre ttve njht of th* camw at 1U opOon to Mil th* property under juch QrcunsUoces and in auch manner as may be authoriwd by l»w.

 anrf ,**      <•) Th* PforW* ot any sale mad* under thii sectm, sh.ll b* sppOed by th* cairWr to th. payment of freijht, oVmurrafe. «o«,e. .nd any other !.  "u. .—,--
 •«« th* nperM of ««K*. ad»«taem«t, ail*, ml otjur Mcvwry .rpem. snd of eari«t for .nd msiatainin* the property, u* proper care of »me r^^-a ^»o,i   pen»e. a«d
                * b*.ance it shall be paid to th* owner of the property sold hemnder.

                  Property destined to or taken from a ststion. wharf, landuif or other place at which there a no rerularly appointed fre^St  sjent, sJi.Jl b« entL-<  .• at risk of
                  ded from can, whiciea or vessete or uatfl loaded into cats, vehicles or vneeU. and. escept in e»- of camera nejiij^nce. -sen recei.ed from o- iru-  -rd !o jurt
                         or other ptacea. shall b* at owner's »k until th* cars ar* attached to and after they are detached from iocomoti.e or :rstn or ^-.:! kw-  d '-e:o sod
                     •e~rw, ar if property u tnnaportad i« motor vehicle trailen or semi-trailen, unlS such trailers or semt-trsilm sre »t£ach*d to tnd if-^r Ctey   •* •4it*cht&
      P*-e» untta. Where a carrier is directed to unload or defiw property trsnaported by motor raajcle at a particular location -here coosi rn*. or n>r^rn«'» .ie-ve u   - rv(uUti)
      ea.th.n.»»/UT0nu>«iiI,t.0,dtHTrry. jhall be that of the owner.

              -S'o carriee hemnder will carry or be liabU in any »ay for any decumenu, specie, or far any articles of * and a stipulated value of Ihe articles u* eadoryd hmon.

 '•'and uvull Er*7 P*rt!'' *jM~"»n.r» the c»rrW .,^^1  ,n i~.^-^«.m.«.u_J «.. —-I, ,««l,  «»d *»ch |ood* raay  bewuenouedat ownersroa and e>pen.«or 2wr-   •    '   '      --.:-.

-------
                                STRAIGHT  BILL OF LADING
                                            ORIGINAL— NOT NEGOTIABLE
                                                                                                     Shipper No.


                                                                                                      Carrier No.
                                                      iiH-*"^ S* C-wt
                                                                                                              Cats-


: Tip Co<:»
,•»•«















•n™^-™-"^""
HM















FROM:
Street
Or.gm

DESCoiPTTON ANO C'uASSiFiCATION
(Proper Sniooir-r; Naff-aa.-*: Class cef -S9CFR 172. to I >
















*l(l»l| " ""'"^ '** *^"^° *

j4 T r«ns9on«f o"
TOTAL QUANTITY
(Wetgni. Volume.
Gallons. e!C.)















Ven-cl*
VVEiGHf
(SuOecl !o



-




X
-





COD Amt-.S
St,!>f«CI 1O S^cito** I* o' tP« Co**e"**O1(**. '* t-Ni* sAipm««t r-* to b* fi
;fvf ^-ynsi^-v^--* ^-HrVlnjt raCOu'l 4 Q-* '1^* C W^S-ftrt-O*. 'i*** CO*")*4TO' S-^
****n*S to
AH I^n tj*4
iy*ri«n* of
's-s"»"'"-'Co"'^>0"

RATE i
I
,
i
i




i
i
i


!
i



- i
C.O.O. r£5- -
PflSFAiO O
COLLECT O s
CHARGcS: S
FREIGHT C^A?
,__ __. 	 !.>,., 3ow rt* ^jjrl nrnr^t-tv ev-f ail or an* oration o/ said rout* 'o o*«tin»:i:3

                                                        33
  route iosa«i jtsimaiion. I: •» mu:'-i<:y
                                              co-trsct) a
                                             V"'* '•<> e*i..
                                             -- carr;e> o'
nr< '                                              ,  ^
,-:y !iiT.» :nt*fesf»d in ail or any s^*o ji-fcos^v, .."at -j**ry S«-T<« 'o ^
ftai* M suCiflCT O 3*i t-ie ti*Jl c' laCi"5 twms arxl CO<-.CI;KX>* m in

 SfliOw* "«*^Oy c»n:f •*.» *fi»t f^» *3 famiiiac wi(h a*i HNS D-O of '

                I fo-f ^'T
                                                               CASRIcfl

-------
                                            Attachment V






                      49  CFR 177.815
    (e)   Shipping  paper accessibility - accident or inspection




A driver  of a  motor vehicle containing hazardous material*  and



each carrier using  such a vehicle^ shall ensure that the shipping



paper required by this  section is readily available to, and




recognizable by,  authorities in the event of accident or inspection,



Specifically,  the drivar and the carrier shall-—



    (1)   Clearly distinguish the shipping paper, if it is



    carried with other shipping papers or other papers of



    any  kind,  by either distinctively tabbing it or by-



    having it appear first; and






    (2)   Store the shipping paper as follows:



         (1)    When the driver is at the vehicle's controls,



         the  shipping  paper must be:  (A)  Within his immediate



         reach while he is restrained by the lap belt; and (B)



         either readily visible to a person entering the



         driver's  compartment or in a holder which is mounted




         to the inside of the door on the driver's side of the




         vehicle.



         (ii)   When the driver is not at the vehicle's controls,



         the  shipping paper shall be:   (A)  In a holder which



         is mounted to the inside cf the door on the driver's



         side of the vehicle; cr  (B)  on the driver's seat in




         the  vehicle.

-------
                                                              OF           i
                         HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (Attachment  i/I) ^O^.
                  PURPOSE
KJNOF SHIPPING PAPERS FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS !S GOVERNED
UjS MATERIALS REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT Or
fflATION, TITLE -9. CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, PARTS 170 -133.
gjLATICNS ARE REPRINTED iN RM. GRAIIANO'S TARIFF PUBLiSH'NG
IATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

£WiTH VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE O.C.T. REGULATIONS, ALL     172 4 - Explanation of sicns and abbreviations.
:OR«SHIPPING PAPERS" PREPARED BY RAILROAD PERSONNEL, MUST^g  Usj of Hazardous Materials
g» INFORMATION IN AN UNABBREVIATED FORM.                173.427 Shipping papers (radioaova material}
    I OF THE D.O.T. REGULATIONS SPELLING OUT THE SPECIFIC  174.510 Shipping papers
     }£ AS FOLLOWS:                                      174.511 Certificate
                                                        174.573 Sntermediata shippers and carriers
                                                        174.583 Examination of shipping order and pacs
                                                        174.534 Waybills, switching orcJe^ of cihar biilin
                     ©
            DANGEROUS
ORIGINAL FREIGHT WAY3ttL
CAM ivn^» *-* *^»*** | »•«
T, r*~^" ™J^*1" *™ ^ *"" }
0.
c.

^uu« *

T»^«
uM«r«

^»(T T"~^*i^
1.U.5/ I**-* •«.

r^ '-•*»•»
O^TI o» s»**^i


l^T

- | ~


          STOF
          THIS
          CAR
             TO   ~-
                                                F7CM  MVMHJI
                                                         . X«MC e» v**rr-cn
                                      I   SWC
                          @
                  DOT SPECIAL PS^iri KO. ^63
                                                Oi ji I UX SM4t «noM»«« ur.
             1 T/C  ??.C?XN3,  rUVMXJ-5I.£
                                         CAS
                                        180,600
                "DOT 112A MJS7 3£ AA:-'D
                  WITH ??A E.G. >;o. 5-

-------
                       PLACARD OR LABEL NOTATION

     SHIPPERS ARE REQUIRED TO PLACE SPECIFIC LABELS ON PACKAGES
     OFFERED FOR TRANSPORTATION, AND PARTIES WHO LOAD RAIL CARS ARE
     REG'JIRED TO APPLY PROPER PLACARDS. THE SHIPPING PAPER MUST SHOW
     THE COLOR OR KIND OF LABEL NOTATIONS FOR LESS THAN CARLOAD
     SHIPMENTS. OR PLACARD NOTATIONS FOR CARLOAD SHIPMENTS OF
     EXPLOSIVES AND OTHER DANGEROUS ARTICLES. (SECTION 174.584)

                         COMMODITY CODE NUMBER

(7)   USE THE 49 SERIES STANDARD TRANSPORTATION COMMODITY CODE (STCC)
     NUMBER THAT MATCHES THE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND
     CLASSIFICATION ON THE WAYBILL UNLESS OTHERWISE INSTRUCTED 3Y YOUR
     supsaioRa

                            SPECIAL. PERMIT

®   WHEN A SHIPMENT IS MOVING UNDER A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
     (DOT) SPECIAL PERMIT. THE SPECIAL PERMIT (DOT) NUMBER MUST 3E SHOWN
     ON THE SHIPPING PAPER AFTER THE COMMODITY. THIS ALSO APPLIES TO DOT
     EXEMPTIONS.

                         RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS

(9)   FOR SHIPMENTS OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, THE WAYBILL MUST
     ADDITIONALLY CONTAJN ALL THE INFORMATION PROVIDED PURSUANT TO
     PARAGRAPH (5) OF SECTION 173.427{a).

                        F.R.A. EMERGENCY ORDERS

     ON THE LOWER PORTION OF THE COMMODITY DESCRIPTION SECTION OF THE
     WAYBILL, A NOTATION MUST BE MADE FOR ANY APPROPRIATE F.R.A.
     EMERGENCY ORDERS. THIS REFERENCE INDICATES SPECIAL
     TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS NOT PUBLISHED IN THE DOT
     REGULATIONS.
                               7T-2

-------
                               SHIPPING NAMS  '

0   THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE DESCRIPTIONS FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ARE THE
     SHIPPING NAMES LISTED IN ALFHABETiCAL ORDER IN SECTION 172.5 Or THE  '
     TARIFF. YOU WILL NOTICE IN SECTION 172.5 THAT SHIPPING NAMES ARE
     DESCRIBED IN BOTH ROMAN TYPE AND iTALJCS. ONLY THE ROMAN TYPE
     DESCRIPTIONS MAY BE USED AS A SHIPPING NAME.

                                CERTIFICATE

     EACH SHIPPER OFFERING A HAZARDOUS MATERIAL FOR TRANSPORTATION
     MUST SHOW ON THE SHIPPING PAPER A SIGNED CERTIFICATE AS SPELLED
     OUT IN SECTION 173.43C(a). A CARRIER CANNOT ACCEPT SUCH SHIPMENT
     UNLESS IT HAS SEEN SO CERTIFIED A3 REC'JiRED IN SECTiCN  174.511.

                               CLASSIFICATION

(3)   THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE SHIPPING NAME IS LISTED TO THE RIGHT Or
     EACH ARTICLE IN SECTION 172.5, UNDER THE COLUMN "CLASSED AS". THE
     "CLASSED A3" COLUMN WILL GIVE YOU THE ABBREVIATION OF THE
     APPROPRIATE CLASSIFICATION. NOW LOOK AT SECTION 172.4 OF THE TARIFF
     FOR THe DESCRIPTION TO BE USED A3 THE CLASSIFICATION.

                           PLACARD ENDORSEMENT

(5)   THIS IS THE NAME OF THE PLACARD APPLIED TO THE CAR. THE NAME OF THE
     PLACARD MUST APPEAR ON THE SHIPPING PAPERS IN LETTERS NOT LESS
     THAN V» INCHES HIGH, AND MUST BE LOCATED NEAR THE SPACE PROVIDED
     FOR THE CAR NUMBER. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, THE PLACARD ENDORSEMENT
     WILL BE APFUEO USING A RUBBER STAMP. WHEN A RUBBER STAMP IS NOT
     AVAILABLE, THE ENDORSEMENT CAN BE HANDWRITTEN, BUT MUSI BS Ai
     'LEAST Vs INCHES HIGH AND LOCATED NEAR THE CAR NUMBER. (SECTION
     174.584)

                              TOTAL QUANTITY

     QUANTITY MUST 3£ !ND!CA"D SY WEIGHT, VOLUME. GALLONS, POUNDS,
     QUARTS. OR OTHERWISE INDICATED. (SECTION 174.510)
                                      -3

-------
                                             APPUCA3LS REGULATIONS
RMoacMmattriaaa			-RAM
      tcfanm. or a •>••«*«*• awrcwwi*, m* &• vo»n.
  (SJ F» *v« «* r^o»* <«*•«**, *• sis*** o-e-
               ' IX* <"B«ut i* X X
    « 7>» ow* 01 »» •wonuac** * 3» radwaCf.* maawH. and a
                        ---r - •* -- " — •...-—^m
    («| Tni rrnr 1 ~i TTTT — "r   • ..... •—-—
    fM T>» cvp» o» 'ja»
       -
    {v>  FaraA9*%n.»o..ctw«fn.«ur«..i
        iuM CS.OB fH jn-pfiM. T* ME
r-iiani 'ir-i-tt—i -rf "—**—"a	1—^»-••-"••*•"*'•'-»'-«^»
J.B««eM.V*«VMMLl M «^ ^
nor avuoert nif nuxma IKMKII IWMCI » T<* nquwoni
        tt 172Sai«avMt9«)a«*»> ^
         xat «vgrv«*mw-in 'rvr o> "auMl Aoe<*<
  (b) WK«Min>
o pwtgnBiw (« »« (» g«
                               *-r nn-qio
$ 1 Wi ol «"•
          grand •««••>.
                                                              dasa A poaen gaa
                                                              For «>MnM. oa«» C .
                                                              For naovr-aDi* iQb^la ..
                                                              PO* CDrf*O(«W«d
                                                              tv-ntm oi^«r ?«i tytt can
                                                              For ox^rM»«d r.prt.mrwn.jo.1 Q*MS in ar*
                                                              Fir!
                                                              •jnt
                                                                 fjarnmaOM potOrtOc* tqudlt C±J>«« A, m
                                                                         fquca 9 sc«33.
                                                              For
                                                              »r«a-r or Tjooaer»« i.ic i
                                                              far
                                                              For or* earm.
                                                              For xnorr !an» :ui :r>> '«>
 F**5aVll   J   ttV** ^C
 nocaoean   j  *i Nqr- *t
 to IC*DV   i -^xp*mi en :
 »n»f c*   b-^~«5 r***.-
Twx^d*  kc.,3c«3-p^
 on :r*    1    ic» 7*
 O*^    *  Car -Ximtx-
 PlaonT

                                                                                                   "P>w« Oa* J
                                                                                                    PucanT
                                                    Oaxwdai
                                                       8  .......
                                                                 No*««i%&cvt. ??15*40fc

-------
                                3*  -  MISSOURI-FRCIF7*"
OflNGERGUS
                      *
         8LCOMINGTCN
                                 TX
                                                     33415  FREEFORT
                                                     9343' FREEPORT
                                                      •   701  S RVENUE  D
                                               DOW CHSMICRL U S  R
•PONT DE NEMOURS &  CO
8MO:  V-3322
                                                R/
                                                                        31  533S42--1.49:::
                                    65832
                                                                WEIGHT
    CRLL 713-238-2112  IN  EMERGENCY
                   4984128

CHLORINE
IBM FLflMMflSLE  GRS
LIQUID LFOO
HLONS SHELL  CRPfiOITV
*»"DflNGEROL!S PLRORRD "*"*
8N RHOTON
                  TOTRLS
                    TRRIr"
RS
                                   178,
                                               § 174.24 Shippii^g papsra, (a) £xcspf as "provided
                                             grapJi (c) o? this section, no- person may accept fcx trars^;,.
                                             raii any hazardous ma.'sfia) whicn is subject to ifiia sutcrac
                                             he has rcrceivecl a sfiipping psp-y preca/ec! in tr^a mar.nef ^
                                             Subpart C of Part 172 oJ 7jii3 subchsptef. In acWiUon. u^c-
                                             paper stTjji inciixda a cerSHcats, if required by § 1 72^C4 c!
                                             charier. Howev&r. no me«>bet* of tf:a rrain crt*^ ci a !;-a)n !rr.
                                             the hazardous material is required to havj- a shipper's cartiHca
                                             snipping paper in fits possession if the original sMppirg p^
                                             ing (he ceriificais is in tha onginaiirg CEinefs pcssessioo.
                                                                                        sc
-------
  '257 82/23/77 U9398 01313913 . ON N0992 BV TCS
CLflSSIFJCRTION: CORROSIVE MRTERlfiL
COMMODITY NUMBER  IS 4928253

SLUDGE RCID
FIRE RESPONSE:
  EXTINGUISH FIRE USING flGENT SUITflBLE FOR TYPE OF SURROUNDING  FI <£;
    OIRTERIRL ITSELF DOES NOT BURN OR BURNS WITH DIFFICUTLV. >._

NOT ON FIRE:
  BUILD DIKES TO CONTflIN FLOW
  KEEP MRTERIRL OUT OF STREflMS flND SEWERS.

PERSONNEL PROTECTION:
  DO NOT HflNDLE BROKEN PflCKRGES WITHOUT PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT.
.  RVOID BREflTHING VRPORS.
  WEflR PROTECTIVE GLOVES flND SftFETV GLOSSES.
  WEflR SELF-CONTRINED BREflTHING EQUIPMENT.
  MflSH flWflV flNY MflTERIfiL WHICH MflV HflVE COHTflCTED BODY UITH  LflRGF
    flMOUNTS OF WRTER OR SOflP FIND WflTER.

-------
                  ^               .                                   .
              .-;. Subvert C—Locdlng a«d Sjoraga Chart o? Haxerfoua Motarfaia

Ipwit «aii si tsS's
                                            Tm -

-------
              tab's  s^o-wa  ?b»
haiardcio mat.-r'.alj  trMch cunt
not b« to^ia«i or 3tor»i UvsOy.
               aa !aUnect!oa o?
               TTsrt'.caS CO!LCOBJ
 bertxonta]
tot B» Jcaaai or
tor   »nmpl»: Dstanstas  laws
<3as4 Av vitii  or  without ratHo*
acUT* coo2^ocaota g  boduxitaNl
column  cnii*  not bi loaded cr


b rartlc*) odnmn.
:icQ*a Mga^mnunitioa, or ortrirlgo,
Prtsen tat aaa«i or SQsIl seen,
 empty cir&ldj* b»o—blaci pow>
 ijx   Issllm.  eapSr  carirldg*
                             cr
?arran«lao  r
                 tracer  faze* or
2SS|

S-§13
*£Sf
B"»aS
SSal
•5-3-: 5
IK!
=114
—— a a
oas<=
SSoS
fill
                                                         a », 
r priming o
tniu-Qury.tu
, bad uyp
briuiot/fral
                                                                      "2-4
                                                           "'
        |I
        *a
                                                     ¥
                                                     ••
                                                     o>
                                                     3
                                                        ::-3 e^a"3 o—
                                                                     S'-l'a i
                                                                      3 -A
                                                                        -
                                                                      i
                                                                      •£•3 =
                                                                      So-**
                                                                         ~
-|?L
a a-21,2;
322 ["a
l"Stl2a
SJ25-
XJ-. --*!  *»
lislf
°Pj=~
** S,2<-* w
O «—| ^ O

§ff|5~'
..j rt =»;   ~
liSH
                                   3i2}l3

                                   !?rM-
                                   5°|-a^3
                                   rt **" 51 ra^
                                   Isa
                                                                                    Sit
                                                                                          s.  -  =;
                   = r;
                   3S:
                                                                                                    -
                                                              • i  S
                                                                                                                •> S3
                                                                                                                — ^
                                                                                                                                         II
                                                                                                                             3  -
                                                                                                                                ; Jo
                           3  S  3 S
                                          {•3
                                                                                                                             I —
E  s
?  a
                                                                                                             a  -ofti --
                                                                                                                         ^ '  »i

                                                                                 i S
                                                                      ^dz  8|3
                                                                                                                       9 i JO
                                                                                                                                   =) I
                                                                                                                                   0" !
                                                           -;£. 3
                                                                                                                                           :»

tSi», conji'JlaUjn or d-tooslln?
I3CTH. c;*i> C .
'.Tn'fna. d«tacaat Iu3» >. f'U* ilihttrti fitw ienll*f».
•; ^57 «r»-clnr lsoll*a. plect.-ff
n^illv*. imunuweoiL* fu» or \x
etttf cent
'^•-"^rtx eomnuw.. ..
.TTHX* i>»HOH^ocr.'« iaTicti» .
•saabir liquid? or "aaim.ib^e
• ^f, 5TanimAhl*> Unuid or 8301-
»o-« j3« lab«L___-. ..__.__ 	
. - aa^lii solliL- of f>i:diiin« at-
' 'ji« FbramabI* jotid, oxl!»
.=J ."-•. ,,r.,JU 	 - ,
« .;» zwet or ilquldj in tsok far
'• -.':" cyiiaCers. pmj>ctltw nr
•-:?- -_• 'v— m»r*Tl«l«.__ 	 •_„..
• !i:3»i •? opior el«rtHe blsatlnic
^ f
J
. 8
»
It-
n
\i
13
14
'i»
iO»J

._

X
s
X
s
V
X
^F
>qu

s .

X
X
•X
*
X
X
^F
»n:;t

.X
V
X
X
X
X
X
'x
«x
d DOC 8I«
_^


•X
-X
-X
-X
•X
X
'X
-<1!"

•• -.. •
• "•• ••."-•'.
\
X
• x " -
X
, 'x
•-;'x -:
»x



' -•-
X
X

X
X
X
»x




X
X
X
X
X
X
'X







>x

3






-
•X

X









X




....







	


-


-
z
	








:





-'



_..
-

1



.-


	







	 ,

X




— 1
....




x*-
**""






.
-T

	
,
I



	

*x
-

X



— ^ --—
x
F
— :—
.. .v.
•






— " ••
..;
, -

'

.*""*
— •••
                                                                                                                                          .^J^:.-{
 MO.
   . Ji  ;=;
    !o. ^aaceaC to flaon-ibl* st
    "" - "C^riali, nra:r.uai:icri tor ennnan «i:h or without project!:?*, or pr
        ;'«. c:ceol ihs: shippers ioiuling truciUwl shipiients oi own
        j naa!d  soiicJs or otidzin^  rmceriaij  psciMis and  who haw
         i-v app«>r.-U from th« D-pat;c!ent aay tosrt sue.-/ mivu.-iiU tojfcthef
        • T»wr. that th«i obuurt o( contents would not causa a jgJ3 e:ak«l'M or w;:li

                           a, »nd tbortuci rrjljj [n joV.c
          iVjj;.:   s
                                                                        .  », bv c, d. a. f. and ;.


                                                                        "  With etpiojiv?!, C;.iiS A.
         . f jrp!.«l»r>.
                                                                            N'OTJH: N':wcnc!rl
                                                                          «ft?r corrrsivs Ij-i-UL
                                                                          by S HcS pii>Jx . ^103 *•'.».
                                                                                               ioa ^»j 0*
                                                                                               !:.~3 c.
                               . toor for:h» IJrptrSz
                               Govfinra^R: nj^y o=»
                         ccl-jrr.iuc.d,3,3,10.1 i.it.:^ ;^ami u
                               NOTE S: 3
                           :- 2.   ;
                                                                                                          r=n !n qc.v.r;i::i3 u.i:

-------
                           e Histories
Violen t Reaction_,_J?res "ur e Generation  in  Tank T^-uck
     In Richmond,  California, a hazardous  waste hauler  mixed,  in




his 30-barrel tank truck, a liquid waste containing butyl




acitata in xylene  with an etching waste containing  sulfuric




acid,  nitric acid, and hydrofluoric  acid.   A hydrolysis reaction




took place.   Pressure was generated  in  the tank and the safety




relief valve was blown off while the truck was  traveling through




a residential area.   A private residence was sprayed with, the




hazardous mixture.  No one was injured, but considerable ''clear-uo



and repainting of  the house were required.




Heat Generation and Explosion f^oagon.taminated Drums
     An employee transferred two  five-gallon cans  of waste vinyl




cyanide and water from a still to a  supposedly empty waste drum.




As the  employee rolled the drum to a storage area  across  the read,




it exploded.   An employee was sprayed by  the waste material.  He




believed that he saw a flash at the  time  of  the explosion.  The




drum was thrown approximately 48  feet, wrapping around  a  steel




guard post.   The employee received thermal and possible chemical




burns to both feet.  The waste drums contained still bo t touts




from the stripping of. i: vinylation mixture.   The exothermic




'reaction,  causing the drum to rupture, was probably a combination




•Of cyanoethylation and polymerization.




'Fpnaation of Toxic Gas _and Explc^i.o_n__i_n__Wa_ste j^ank .



:     Sulfide waste was added to soluble oil  waste  in a  tanker and




Subsecuer.tly added to other oily  wastes in a tank.   Later, treat-




lent of the oil with acid to break the emulsified  oil resulted in

-------
the evolution of  hydrogen sulfide.  Two operators v;ere briefly
affected,  and there was  an exposive in the tank.
Fire, Dispersal of Toxic Dusts from Leaky Containers
     At  a  dump in Contra Costa County, California,  a large nu~u
of drums containing solvents were deposited in a  landfill.   Ir.
the immediate area were  leaky containers of concentrated riiner
acids and  several bags containing beryHiiurn wastes  in dust fcrr.
The operators failed to  cover the waste at the end  of the cay.
The acids  reacted with the solvents during the night, ignited
them, and  started a large chemical fire.   There was possible
dispersion of berylliura  dust into the environment.   Inhalation,
ingestion,  or contact with beryllium dust by personnel could
have led to serious health consequences.
Violent  Eruption  in Waste Drum
     At  an engineering work, hot chromic acid waste was ir.ac.v-.:.
ently added to a  drum containing methylene chloride waste fro-
degreasing operations.   There was a violent eruption resulting
in chemicals  being sprayed locally in the workshop.   >;c one wj.:,
harmed.
                            131-2-

-------
                                                    '      -


                                                                                                                                                              ,         , .



                                                                                                ,'-""  *'-'•«'.--., .-7 -                   •   ^f-i,.—*•-_"•>•            - ,  , *"?*.>^,"i'V"

                                                                                         • T^^^—^••'^'^"IM^'" •'' '- •-~<»"^^'^---J^"»g"--^x--^.^^>:-J vT*J.£-\"-.:^,V.:
'rS
        -


-------
                                      PREFACS

 In 1971 a nationwide interrnodal system for the reporting of hazardous,  aatari.
 incidents was established to provide the Department of Transportation  with  cl
 factual data necessary to comply with the Hazardous Materials Transportat_Lca
 Control Act of 1970.  Analysis of the reports is expected to reveal proble.a ;
 and say result in changes in the regulations where necessary to aliavlats a*v.
 threat to public safety.

      The regulations requiring reporting of hazardous materials, incidents- art
 contained in the Cade of Federal Regulations, vizi.
      Title 49, Parts 100 to 199 (Governing  the transport of hazardous  siatsr
        fay highway and rail)'
       171.15 lasnediate notice of certain hazardous materials incidents
       171.16 Detailed hazardous materials incident reports
      Title 14, Part 103 (Governing the  transport of hazardous materials  by :-
       103.23 Reporting certain dangerous article incidents
      Title 45, Parts 1 to 65 (Covering  the  transport of hazardous uiatarials
        vater)

       2.20-65 Imaediata notice of certain hazardous materials incidents
       2.20-70 Detailed hazardous materials  incident reports
      This system is two-fold in that an immediate telephone notice is requ?.
 under certain conditions and a detailed written report is required whenever
 is any unintentional release of a  hazardous material during trar.sporcation
 temporary storage related to transportation.
      Any time- there is aa unintentional release of hazardous materials,  the c.
 must submit a report on Form F 5800.1 within 15 days frcjn the date of the inc
 While carriers are required to report, any interested party may report.   In 01
 include all pertinent information, cither reporting parties are encouraged to .
 utilize this form.                                  .                     .

      The success of this program depends greatly on the quality of th~ info--   ; c-
 submitted on the report.  Generally, most of this required information ±3 av    .-.nle
 at the time of the incident,  bat since leaking and damaged containers are de_   : vsd
 and spills are cleaned up,  some investigation is often necessary in order to ,
 all of the facts.  Much of this information is also required by carrier-  for
 purposes:  insurance records, damage claims,  etc.  In view of this., carriers .
 find it to their advantage to incorporate reporting requirements into nt^d-••-
 company procedures, thereby making the needed details for the reaort 310re rl>
 available and enabling the  company to'more easily comply with the reporting ;
 tions.

      This guide is intended to assist carriers in. completing the recort form '
 providing examples of the information needed.  However many of 25,000 reports
 received in the past 4 1/2 years are incomplete,  particularly as tc container
 information.   Additional information relating to containers,  container aarkir..
 labels,  definitions,  etc. is available at no  cost from the address shown  belc

      A  liaitad supply of the report form is available upon request in writ'ia
 the Office of Hazardous  Materials Operations.  Larger quantities- may be obta-7-
 rrora  several  industry sources who have reproduced the fora for this'pursos-,  .
may reproduce the fora yourself.  (A blank report fora is  provided on the  las-
pages of  this guide for  this purpose).   Two caste a of the  report must be  subr.  .ted
 to the  Department.  Typewritten reports are preferred.
tain
                                      *****
     Incident reports 'should now be addressed to;  U. S. Deoa-tCTen*-  of -"—-ns —
    ',nfte;;la.ls Tra"sPortation Bureau, Office of Hazardous Materials Operatic-
     30), Masnington, 0. C.  20590. When Form DGT F 5300.1 is revised at a 1,
date, this change will be included.
                                       ~"2~                       Rev.  Sept.

-------
 'ill in all  blanks.  Use N/A when not  applicable.
 :ontainer,"  "No label applied," "No  symbols," "No
                                                       If  there are none, "state ""No marking" "on
                                                     serial r.uabers," etc. as tha casa m&y b«

 ration «:                          •                          .       ".'..:'' -;—.--

    If items  1.1  through 1.5  do not  apply,  insert at 6 your operational area:  Manufacturer,
 irehouse, etc.  For  iteins A2  and A3,  if the actual data and location are not. known, give t^a
_ ite and location  of  discovery.   Do not include terms such, as "on trailer 3:76" or "bet-^aen
 lew York and Philadelphia".

                         HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT REPORT

 INSTRUCTIONS: Submit thio report i.-i duplicate to the Secretary. Hazardous Materials
 Transportation, Washington, D.C. ""-"" '•	•  ------         • -  - -'
 item under Section H, "Remarks'
 nay be obtained from the Secretary,                _ _._=	
 may be reproduced and used, if on the sain* size and kind oTpaper.
                                                                                            SMSPK-J^M
                                                                          Board, Department of
INCIDENT ^' 5Q
rt - dJf - Yoa')
lit 3.0 a.m.
FRE1GHT
FORWARDER S
3. LOCATiOM OP
Exit 3 en I-
d
OTHER
ff(/e.i(i/yj
INCIDENT
•495 near
Alexandria, Va.
action B


    Item B4 should indicate  the complete company name.  Do  not use abbreviations    I>" "'he
.ecort is submitted by scneona  other than the carrier involved  in tha incident, please ind--
:ate_your connection wj.th the incident such  as "J'S J Chemicals—Consignee"  and identify the
:amer.   I ten  B5  should be the main office  addrass of the company, not  tha  teraiina-l pre-
        ri l^C^r^f^T'*^    Tf~rarn Tit c-Vi^^i-*1!^ ,-^-,^,-e.^-ft,. A.L>m i..._. _ _C 	LJ_^   .   ^-  -T-.   •    . .  .    *
jaring tha report.   Item 55 should spacify the  typa of vehicle" or facility in which,  the'unin-
                            ?:   tank car, van  trailer, trailer  on flat car  (Tore), storage
:entional release  took placd1:
tarehouse,  etc.
 KSPORTIN_C CA3HI53, COMPANY OR iNDi

 *•
   FUL!- MAMS

   ABC  Trucking Company, Inc.
 6. TYPE Or VEHICLE OR FACILITY

    :ractor _-  Vaa Trailer^
                                                                              Zip Codi.)
                                                    Post: Avenue
                                   «.(S^     I  Faverceville,Norch Carolina  23301
                                      _              _                        _
                                           X-3

-------
     I tarns C7  and CS should include tha complete
     by itself,  identify the shipper Of
                                                            .
Item C9 jhoula clearly identify the _ ..._.   _
fication  is-not very meaningful.  An exaaple of
the shipper on an import shipment.         	
                                                          cl
                                                                 nusibers witih^mt  sn-^
                                                                    ba the broker c:
  SHIPMENT
  7. NAME AND ADDRESS OP SM1PPSR
                                   «
     XYZ  Chemical Company
     1101 South Peachsree Street
     Atlanta, Ga.  30303
                                                8. NAME AMD ADDRESS Of CQNS'GMi

                                                  J & J Chemicals
                                                  1506 Wayne Street
                                                  Alexandria, Va.  22301
   9. SHIPPING PAPER IDENTIFICATION HO.

      Shipper's  B/L:   INC 12345


      Carrier's  Pro:   9876
                                                10. SHIPPING PAP!

                                                _?   CARRIES
                                                   !72.5)
^ ^Sraic Acid

17. TRACE M
Kor.e
Section P:

      In iteai F13
Puncture" nay have
ar.v mark in it era  19.
                   check all spaces which aay have contributed to the packace *^; lir:
                   e been caused by "Other Conditions" such as a traffic collision.
   NATURE Or PACXACiNG FAILURE
      f li DROPPED IN HANDLING
      (4) WATER DAMAGE
      17) EXTERNAL HEAT
      (10)
          DEFECTIVE FITTINGS,
          VALVES. OR CLOSURES
      ( 13)  BOTTOM FAILURE
      MSI CHIME FAILURE
                                    (2J EXTERNAL'
                                              PROM OTHER LIOUiD
                                   18) INTERNAL PRESSURE
Ml) LOOSE FITTINGS. VALVES CR
   CLOSURES
                                       9OOY OR SOE FAILURE
                                    (17) OTHER CONDITIONS f:u»n«i/x.>
                                     TV a
                                         x-y
                                                                   (3» D A?* ACS BY OTHET<
                                                                  I (6! FRE£"
                                                                      CORROSIOH OR
,,2, FAILURE O ~ INNE
    RECEPTACL.cS
                                                                   ! 15) WEL.O FAILURE
                                                                !?. I?AC£
                                                                             COT U5£

-------
    G:
f»Coluar.s 1,.  2,  i=d  3 zmy  I,A «.>*  cc ccnyay ^  variety  o2 ir-f oraAti^rs,  You  may raoorfc sgta.Us
Bcre«  di£:Jari.at  "--/-.as o- ccr.'.ii.-v.MTs -'i: ..:;.-,  ••••hi.--',; ha-arc'cv.s •-atoriaXa esea^sd, or tlsie* cs^LaLv-—
;ae type* and si,^.--
;8B*-. =.iTvar /•.3,nu;;.o;,-,:rii-:3,  In  t_ha eyar.nla b-t'.cw,. CclvMns' 1, and 3.
i been us-id ts sapar-itg ihs  •;5-:i?m.-3 '_;  iruiar  i,~.d outar ccncjiir.ers.  _.- colo/uns 1,  Z'r and  2'
iflBt ad&quata, i separate  s :-.<.: 'it r.^y ';„•;?  a.:;--,cr.&d to :"va r-;rx:.r;:,  or vc\s jiay  ufiilisa tha> sp^-crt
the  "                                                            "          "                       ~
      tiojval  e.-iar-.?l3s f=r  G"0 ar3  "C^ri-fly-- a^^Fi^erbo -s v-2 Box"  a/.i :cr  G2I, >ha cs;x.c:icy
I tank trailar or  ta.iX car,   C-2^ an-J. G'.;3--lr,  tCie ;~xj--\pli b«Ic •••.«,  the reco.ft clearly i^dic.-jtaa
t hazJLirisuj r~iHari,i*a e-JscA^ed frc-.-: 1 cx".:n ar.d  3. lir.es  ov. t of 72  iine4 d.5--i^3 x:\  tha ship.-.ient-
A th« iar.er a«5 cut-u-T ccrxtainsra ax-i or  3 dif fsrer.t  capacity cr  ucisenclat-.Jr&, taa jreeoct
Kid clearly stata.   Tor e-xfiiipla:   2 glass botslag out  of 4 glass bottJas In a cactrcirL were :  -
k«n.  li ti;ara v*r* 1C such  --artio.-.a in  the ship.-rsant, th..in ti?.a  re-v'-s.ct should sca£a that
irdoua
                                                                                   and  fr-.,a 1 c.-art:cr>_
                                                     ,_
tof 10 carrc::j.  Thai'ti shauli. ,V-«.  -ic doabi th.iw the  40  i:ottlaj wars tiie  ir;:ia*f
Outer coriiaj-rijara ia c-r^a sh.s.p.-trfin.
.  la G24 show all of tha  r-.-it xir.r;.; ralac-s-A to  tha contiinsr .   "123" is  not the  couplets
Jting for a  fiieshoi-d ^c-x.   Is  shc^Xd  ha "1^3,0", or "1:350",  et~.   IS tiie contair^  bt
 tK3T specif ica^ior,  T.arkii--v*  entar "K0;i:r;a in  -he spacs.  no MC7 laava G24 bianX.
w  C25- - Tha hasardo-i
       "
                                                                            ,-i:.!rx:-rigs:  in sc.v.o-

  In G2S  antar tha  n-:;->i of ihes  .tc-talrijr i.'.anvif r.^t'i-sr .   "esp in Rir.d  that seine :naii^£j:Ctv.r scss
                    ticna,  sroo.ls a::d  ccr!i>is.iL-:.on3  of. Isciera a;:d
  For G27  rh» sarial r.-jnb^r o*  .=. Gvl
-------
Section H:

     In addition to tha information requested following "Remarks" on tha fora,  this section
should be used to include any information which  the reporter feels is pertirse.it.  For  i^uvia:   .•>,.
if there  was a spill o£ a flaanaable liquid and the driver was huraed, and you did riot  ir.dlc   :J-
"fire" ia F17 (Other Conditions), then Section H should clearly explaia that thar«. vas a 11
involving tha flaasaable cargo, the origin of  tha fire, etc.  In instances of contatrir^.-ior. ,-
a vehicle or freight, the method of decontamination and disposition of the contasiraited sire.'.,  nc
should be explained.                      •                                                     •
   H  REMARKS. Descnb* easantial facta of incident including but not limited to delects, damage, pjjbiblc cause, ato*-
      action Uken at the time discovered, aad action taken to prevent futur» incidents.  I,-.cl'ade any reco.-nrnenc?.tioi>3 t-i-:
      packaging, handling, or transportation of hazardous materials.  Photographs and diagrs.Tii should b» suhmit;ed '.^he--
      necessary for clarification.


             Our  vehicle  was involved in a minor traffic  accident which  caused  >h-
             load to shift aad  puncture one  of the drums.   The  leaking drutn, was-
             removed by the consignee to. their disposal area and buried.  The
             vehicle was  taken  to our Alexandria terminal  and cleaned  (washed down
             and  steamed).  A Highway Patrolman on the  scene had some  of the
             spilled liquid splash  on his hand.  He was taken to a local hospital
             where he was treated and released.
31. MAME Of PERSON PREPARING WEPOHT (T/p» or print) .
Ira Jeopard
33. TELEPHONE MO. (Includ* Ar*» Cod*}'
(202) 143-0510
32. SIGN A TunE ft .
^LtJ ' JL^^^^^L^^
J4. DATE REPORT PB^/AHeD *
March 15, 1972
    NOTE:   This report cancels the report formerly required by Section 177.814.  It  DOSS M; '
    REPLACE other required reports such as the accident report MCS-50 required fcv  the Fede- .1
    Highway Adninistration.  Thia aaterial nay he reproduced without special permission £ -  t
    this office.

-------
                                    _'V,5N,L9F TRAMSPGR7ATIGN
                         HAZARDOUS MAlHRiALS INCIDENT REPORT
                                                                              Form Aporavad PM2 Nal 04-5.51!
    DAIS   2r~] HIGHWAY 3f   IRAR.   A| - iwAT~R   Si
           '-.-^             I -- 1    ^*     L., __ j  T ^ ' *- • *   J !_
                                                           R!GKT
 ITS AND TiM£ Or I.MCIOEN r i',
       CARRIER, COMPANY
                                                    3, LOCATiOrt Or iNCIOEMT
                                                    3.  ADOSSjiL ('.Vusriixr, Sfi-e«f, City, Ssale- and Zip Cao'ej
 fPE OP V£K,C-,£ OR PAC;i.!TY
IAM£ AMD AOO«£S5 OP
           S3 IO£NT;?ICATIG:4 HO.
                                                    3. MAMS AND ADDRESS OF CONSIGN EE
                                                                         isssjEQ s
                                                            CARRIER

                                                            OTHER
                                                            (Idsntily)
PHs. IMJUR;=S. LOSS AND
        DUE TO HAZA^CC'JS MAT5T~!AL.3 'NVCL.V?
       F\SwN5 i,^> w Hil O       j 12, NLiM3£K P 'C ,:;:5C ^5 ,*>

                           J.-
                                                                       | 13.  E.5T1MATSO AMOUNT OF [.OSS AN
                                                                      -i     PROPERTY DAMAGE INCUJOI.^G COS
                                                                       j     O-F OECON-T AVIIMATiOW f.-Tocnd o« J«
                                                                       I     dollars)
STIMATED TOTAL OUA.ITITY OF HAT Abacus
   IS. CLASSIFICATION
         (Src. 172.4)
                                       IS. SHI
                                            (Si-.;
           1 ?. TRADE MA.«S

JRE OF PACSACiNO rAILU.^2
        applicable i CORROSION OR RUST
   ,12)  FAILURE OF
        RECEPTACLES
J6J CHIME
                                   (17) CTMEH CONDITIONS ,'"-i''-i--f''>
   (?s>  WELD

;?. iPACJ: FOR DOT 'JSS QHL'f
IT F 5SOO. 2 (10-70)

-------
    1 TYPE OF PACKAGING INCLUDING INNER
  20 j RECEPTACLES (Steal draa-.i, *nod*« box.
                   ITEM
                 OR WEIGHT PES UNIT
  22
  23
   ZS
               Or
                         G£S FROM WHtCH
      NUMBER OF PACKAGES OF SAME TYPE
      IS SHIPMENT
      OOT SPECIFICATION NUM3ESCSJ ON  .
      PACKAGES (IIP, J7E, 3AA, »lc.. ar nant)
SHOW ALL OTH£a DOT PACKAGING.
MARKINGS (Part ITS)
     ! NAME. SYMBOL. OR REGISTRATION MUM-
   ~° i 9E« OF PACKAGING MANUFACTURES
  27
SHOW SERIAL. SOM8EH Or C
CASGO TASKS, TANK CARS,
TA^4KS
   23  TYPE OOT LABELIS! APPLIED
      IP RECONDITIONED
        OR
BEOUALIFISD, SHOW
                              REGISTRATION
                              NO. OH SYMBOL
                               DATE OF  LAST
                               TEST OF INSPEC-
                               TION
     | I f SHI PMENT IS UNDER OO' OS USC3
  30 [SPECIAL PERMIT. ENTER PERNMT NO.
                                                         el
                                                                                     = 2
H  REMARKS-  Describe essential facts of incident including bat not limited to defec:s, danigs. prcb ;^
   action taken at the time discovered, and action taken to prevent future incidents.  Include any rec-_•-..
   packaging, handling, or Transportation of hazardous materials.  Photographs and diagrams should be
   tjscessary fo? clarifica.tiaru
31. NAME OF  PERSON PREPARING REPORT (Typa or print)
33. TELEPHONE NO. (Include Ar*f Cade)
                                                       32.  SIGNATURE
                                                             34.  DATE REPORT
                                          Reverse of Forra DOT F 5300 1  (10-'-'

-------
                              DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                                MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU
                                      WASHINGTON. O.C. 2QiSO
                            HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT REPORTS

                          REPORTING CARRIERS AND REPORTS SUBMITTED

          The following tables list by mode of transport the- number &f reporting
          carriers and the number of HHI reports submitted by each  mode. ..  -   .
MODE

Hwy Carriers (For-hire).
Hwy Carriers (Private)..
Wateir Carri e* s .........

TOTAL 	

1971
3
233
54
28
•10
328
1972
11
323
53
35
8
435
teporti n<
1973
15
353
73
35
7
483
g Carrie
1974
32
380
82
40
17
551
rs
1975
31
392
116
44
23
606
1975*
40
600
200
50
40
930
Total* P
50
700
250
75
50-
1,125**
P ercer
of Tot
4
• 62
22
* • 7
"•••^-4
— * ..'r^*^
Se»- Nc
*Estimated

**--Total rt.mber of different reporting earners during the 5 year period - NOT the.
    •additioV-of numbers for each year.  (For example - Carrier XYZ submitted reports
     in EACH year but as the "total" reporting carriers, XY7. is only one reoortino
     carrier - not  six..)

NOTE - About 10 freight forwarders and 14  other reporters (such as stevedoring firms..
       Port Authorities, Police, etc.) submitted about 100 HHI reports during this
       6.year period.
Hooe

hWy. Carriers (For-Hire)
Hwy. Carriers (Private).


Total 	

1971
5
1,633
258
346
13
2,255
1972
32
3,613
352
337
10
4,344
Reports
1973
48
5,092
450
412
12
6,014
Subnn tl
1974 I
155
7,254
361
617
26
8,413
:ed
1975
152
8,988
903
675
32
10,750
1976
150*
?,900*
950*
1 ,COO*
50*
11,898
Total*
550-
36500
3300
3400
150
44,000
Percen
of Tot
"t-i
83 . -
71
7 1.
1.
See No

-------
   §32lOOOjMAZARDOUS'MATERIALS iNCIUENI HtPUKU.KhOhiVtU ^KU1,•y/l
    AiLUtte CAUSES Ai FOLLOWS!                 '               ''
     ,p,l. 'I..:" .-.;• •".   •  •••
,,, Actual figure! used for first 4 1/2 years and estimated  figures used for list 6 months of 1975)
      ••'•        '                           '	'  •""     	
!\..f, . i •
t. |HAtiHU x.
(If OAMAOtt OY OTHER FREIGHT
III PREEZINO
It) CORROSION OR RUST
(IJU MlLDRE OC INNER
RECtRTACLE*
(It) WELD FAILURE
Ho failure shown
   ABOVE CONTAINER FAILURE CAUSES LISTED BY RANKING!

   Other Conditions?!	 8500 HMI reports
   External puncture	....,.•... 6800  "
   Damage by other freight?5*?:.... 4900  "
   Dropped in handling	.,,,,. 4000  "
   Loose fittings, valves.closfflj-f. 3800
   Defective "   :    "     M ***  2400
   Bottom  failure	  1700
   Body or side failure.,.*	  1050
   failure of Inner receptacles..  1000
Meld failure	   550  WI reports
Internal pressure	   550
Corrosion or rust	   500
Chime failure	   400
No failure shown	   200
External heat...	   130
Water damage.,......*..,.........,...  110
Damage front other liquid	   100
Freeing	   100
   * - Reporting carriers often check "other conditions" and insert
       "traffic accident", "derailment", "fire" , etc, which they
       may or may not explain In the "Remarks" section'of tho report.
                                 36,790 failures  causes
                               reported since many IMI
                                reports cited more than
                               one cause.
   ** - Analysis of the incident reports which show "damage by other freight" generally reveals improper
        blocking, bracing or stowage. "Imprpper loading" is often shown in "other conditions".
                                                               1               *       i
   *** - Many Incident reports cite both "loose f1tt1ngs» Valves or closures" and "defective fittings,
        valvos or closures", apparently Indicating that tha reporter In unable to determine if the
        fitting, valve or closure was merely "loose" or was In fact "defective".

-------
                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ^~-:

                        MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU
                              -           '
                              WASHINGION. o.c
                                                               .*. l.»_l
   COMMODITIES NAMED- .MOST OFTEN IN HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT REPORTS^
Title 49, CFR 172.5 contains approximately .1,100- line entr 1 es"(entrfeV-_.
having one or more shipping names in Roman type and showing reference to
Part 173 for packing).   Approximately 425 of those 1,100 line entries^-,.*
were utilized in the 32,000 Hazardous Materials Incident Reports received
from January 1, 1971 through December 31, 1975.  However, 21 of  the 425
commodities accounted for about 77 percent (24,633) of the 32,000 reports
Paint related compounds were combined with paint, and electrolyte fluid..
was combined with batteries, to make the following list of the top 21
comnoditles reported most often.
      Section 172.5 Commodity

1.  Paint and paint related compounds
2.  Gasoline
3.  Batteries and electrolyte fluid
4.  Compounds, cleaning, liquid (Cor.)

5.  Sulfuric acid
6.  Cement, liquid, n.o.s.
7.  Flammable liquids, n.o.s.
8.  Hydrochloric acid
  •- - ~. y-'; .•;.•."     '  •-*'&'
>3.  -Corrosive liquids,, n.o.s. -..
KJ.:  Insecticides,- liquid (Poison  B)
iu  L.p.G-                     ;•'.
12.  Poisonous liquids, n.o.s.  (Poison  B)
13.
|4.
15.
16.

T7.
18.
19.
».
H.
                                                    Number of     Approx. %
                                                     Reports  '   of all 32,000
                                                   (1971-1975)   reports rec'd
    Alcohol, n.a.s. -
    Acids +~ liquids, it.o.s.
    Caustic soda liquid

    Nitric acid
    Resin solution
    Anhydrous ammonia         ,,  /„ .     B\
    Compounds, tree or weed  kill  (Poison B]
    Compounds, cleaning,  liquid (FL)

                                   TOTAL

           TOTAL of  all  reports received
6,590
4,243
3,593
.2,194

1,081
   903
   844
   825

   714
  .422
   395
   364

  -."-355"
  "337
   316
   304

   265
   240
   222
   215
   211

24,633

3'2,000-
                                                                    20 1/2
                                                                    13 IfZ
                                                                    IT
                                                                   •" -^ --.; "-
                                                                   'TV£"'•>•"
                                                                     2..T/Z
                                                                    r"*»*^™r '" ' - "
                                                                    ^i/i
                                                                    ^ V4.

  03/4
  0'3/4
  0 3/4

 77 '%

100 I
 Ms list is merely a tabulation and does  not imply  that ranking of risk or
 fczard to the public.  For example, most of the  paint spills were less  than
                    .
 *llon amounts and most of the  battery  acid  spills were  less  than one
 Sounts, but many of the gasoline  spills  were of  100 gallons  or more.  Quantity
 teased is onl/one of the  factors  to  be considered in  any evaluation.  This
 1st is intended to  show nothing more than which  commodities  were reported

 Ist often*                           XJ I I - i

-------
                            MATBHAIS TRANSPORTAtldN BUREAU "
                                              »MO .  ATTACH MEvT"
TALLY OF  "CLASSIFICATIONS" OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT REPORTS RECEIVE5 if nit*
                                                                                 ' i&
Classification
Class A explosives
Class B explosives
j Class C explosives
»
i r i OIIHMU i s conipresseQ gas
\ Nonflanroablfr conprd. gas
Flammable liquid-
Combustible liquid
Flammable solfd
Oxidizing material
Poison gas or liq. CT A
Poison liq. or solioVCI ft
Irritating material
Etiologicr agent
Radioactive- materials
Corrosive* material:
Bl anfc,. Unknownv or later -
determined to be not
subject- to- these
regulations?^; ^v- -
™
1971
13
5
6
49
36
1,'Olff
• 29
83.
3
' 16-T
1
9"
555;,
. • -~-


286:
•"•—««— ««i™.
1972
5
2
7
102
61
2,322
28
117
3
244
1>




6ff-

..- .1973
11
.' ' 4

119
96
3,195
27
136
11
337
1
.- . .



HO
J°*
1974^
— .^ 7
:; 3
12
198
142
* 19
49
•158
5
'•524-
1
3;-16^
- •** ^"~-».«-

.
•••> 0
.#&
797?'
21
•~"^~ £•
•-•?'- 6-
223
T88
5,267
. 7S
43
1:35
- S12
IV Qr
r; '0-
4Vlff



JO"
••"— -«— i

• -*~t •' «i-i
• -C"

-Cjj
«j
522
16>07;
OS
- 3*
.181
63C
91
- -t«
*JC

ff,22|


- _ .;.
^464
fl

-------
                  DEPARTMENT  OF TRANSPORTATION
                 UNITED STATES COAST GUARD
                                                                     A.V
MAIUNG ADDRESS:
U.S. COAST GUARD (G-WEP-4/73)
WASHlNGTOiN. D.C. 2O5SO
PHONE: (202)  426-9568
                                                          16490/4
                                                           1 D APR  1378
  Mr.  Stephen W.  Plehn
  Deputy Assistant Administrator for
    Solid  Waste  (WH-562)
  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  Washington, D.C.   20460

  Dear Mr.  Plehn:
  This is  to confirm the agreement that was reached at our 24 March 1978
  meeting  concerning the use of the National Response Center 800 number
  for reporting any spill of hazardous waste that occurs during trans-
  portation.  Accordingly, we have no objection and in fact encourage
  that you use the toll free pollution incident reporting number
  800-424-8802 for this purpose.  We therefore recommend that section
  250.37 of the proposed 40 CFR Part 250 Standards Applicable to
  transporters of Hazardous Wastes be changed to reflect this.
                                       Sincerely
                                        Pro^c-^! Divisfan
                                      By olrasiian of the Command-rat
 SPEED
  LIMIT
 55
t*s a law we
:an live with.

-------
                     XVI °~
DOT PLACARDS
  TZT-l

-------
v
     DOT PLACARDS
      221-2-

-------
                NOV    9
                                                                             Attachment.' X7IT
       . '571

      C3MM2RCS
-Mio( OpcfQlierr *
     D. C. 20^3
                     MOTOR CA3&ISR AUTOMOBILE BODILY  INJURY
                     SJAiJiLJTY AND  PROPERTY  DAMAGE  LIABILITY
                                CSaTI?ICAT£  O? 1M5URAHC2
                                              fi!«d with
                               INTERSTATE  COMMERCE CQ.M.MJSSICM
                                         Sursox ot Operation i
                                       WasWnafo... D. C. 30-.23
                                         (Exscot«(  ii
                                                                                  'nrsrsfcte- Corrwnsrc*
                                                                                  CommiSBon Dockar Nat.
                                                                                  MC'....
                                                       arncz toe^css Of co
                                                      MOTOll CA»i(li»>
. ..  r»;«wst«d-by
•afivrro.-..
               !K> CimmfsMan. th» Coun 21S.
                                            MTT
                                                                             Data --
 Ift)

-------

  rv j...
                        January 28. 1977
 The Honorable Carol S. Vance
 District Attorney
 Barris County Courthouse
 Houston, Texas  77002
Opinion No. H-933

Re:  Whether persons
performing solid waste
disposal • services are -
motor carriers under
article 911br *V,T»C,S^
 Dear Mr. Vance:
      You have requested our opinion, regarding whether-a per so;
 who performs solid waste disposal services may be regulated
 by ijie Railroad Commission as a "motor carriers* /Article '
 9 lib, V.T.C.S.,  authorizes the Commission "to prescribe all
 rules and regulations necessary for the government of motor -
 carriers."  Sec. 4 (a).  "Motor carrier* is defined .to. include^
                                           -*• 7.     » . '  ' "    "
           any person, firm,  corporation,  company,
           copartnership, association or joirtt stock
           association . . .  controlling,  managing, —
           operating,  or causing to be operated any - •„ .
           motor-propelled vehicle used in transpprtincr •
           property for compensation or hire over any.>. '
           public highway zn  this state/ where in the .
           course of such transportation a highway   ..J-   .
           between two or more incorporated cities,  townk
           or villages is traversed.   Sec. 'l(g). '
           (Emphasis added}.
Since 1972, the Railroad  Commission has been "issuing '
cates of convenience and  necessity to persons who perform.    _
solid waste disposal services.  You ask whether such operation
may properly be deemed to employ  "motor-propelled vehicles
used in transporting property for compensation or hire," so
as to authorize the Commission to require them to obtain
certificates of convenience and necessity.
                              -1

-------
      You state that a solid waste disposal company charges
 a fee for its services to each customer based upon such
 factors as the number and size of the containers, frequency
 of pickup and corapactability of the waste.  Although  ther-
 is in most instances no separately stated charge for  the
 transportation of the waste, there is no dispute that
 transportation .costs are included within the charge w* ich
 the customer pays for the disposal service.   So long  as
 transportation costs are included in the contract price>
 ve believe that the Railroad Commission is permitted  no
 conclude that the operation embraces transportation
 "for compensation or hire" within the meaning of article Sl^
 New Way Lumber Co.  v^ Smith, 96 S.W.2d" 282,  286-87 (Tex. Suit
 1936); Attorney General Opinion S-218 (1956).   See also
 Attorney General Opinion C-126 (1963).   Cf.  Attorney  Genera^
 Opinion M-247 (1968).                                  ;;

      In order to fall within the jurisdiction of»the  Railrc
 Commission,  however, a solid waste disposal  company must al
 be deemed to transport property.   No Texas court has  ever
 determined whether garbage is "property,"  and the courts of
 other jurisdictions have not reached a  consensus on the  iss

    * *n Mssg** Y_L Public Service Commission  of .Pennsylvania
 188 A.  599,  600-01  (Pa.  1936),  the Pennsylvania Supreme
 Court held that garbage, and other refuse had "certain
 valuable uses under varied circumstances," even though i*e
 owner regarded it as being of no  value.  The Supreme Cotu
 Washington has also concluded that "ashes, cinders,  broken j
 household furniture and vegetable matter" have  a property
 value.   State v. Diamond  Tank Transport, 97  P.2d 145, 147
 (Wash.  1939).  On the other hand,  the Supreme Court of
 Arizona has determined that garbage loses  its character  as
 •property* when discarded by  its owner.  Vicso  y_£ State,
 388 P.2d 155, 163 (Ariz.  1963).  And the Supreme Court
 of New Mexico, in Fairchild v. United Service Corp.,  197
 P.M 875r  883  (N.M. 1948),  held .that,* although  garbage
may at  times include objects of value, it is worthies ; to ii
owner and is hence not embraced within the meaning of
 •property.*

-------
      In  1965,  the Interstate Commerce Commission  ruled that
 "debris,  including rock," has a negative value  to the person
 who  discards  it and thus loses its character as "property"
 when it  is  loaded and removed-from his premises.   Joray
 Trucking  Corp.,  99 M.C.C. 109 (1965).  More recently, however
 with the  advent of recycling techniquesr the Commission has
 reevaluated its position.  In a 1971  decision,  Transportation
 of "Waste*  Products for Reuse and  Recycling, 114  M.C.C.
 92 (1971),  the Commission ruled that  waste materials which
 are  recycled  "assume all of the characteristics of 'property.
 Id.  at 104-05.
                           •                     •
      The  apparent, acquiescence of  the Legislature- in the
 regulation  of  solid waste disposal activities by  the Railroad
 Commission  must  be taken into account.  As we have noted
 previously, the  Commission has since  1972 issued  certificates
 of convenience and necessity for disposal operations.  The
 two-  sessions of  the Legislature which have convened since
 that time could  easily  have signaled  their concern over such
 regulation  by  expressly removing solid waste disposal service:
 from the Commission's jurisdiction..  As the Supreme Court of
 New  Hampshire observed  in Waste Control Systems,  Inc. v>
 State, 314 A.2d  659,  662 (N.H.  1974),  the exercise of
 3urisdiction by  the Public Utility Commission over disposal
 operations  "was  proper .in the. absence of a definite expression
 of legislative intent that rubbish and garbage  is  not. 'proper!
 See  also Schlagel  v. Hoelsken,  425  P.2d 39, 42  (Colo. 1967) .
 In our opinion,  the Railroad Commission's assumption of
 jurisdiction over"solid  waste disposal operations, even though
of recent origin,  is sufficient, in the face of legislative
 acquiescence,  to authorize its  regulation thereof, particular!
 in view of the numerous  conflicting decisions regarding whethe
waste may be deemed "property."  We conclude therefore that,
at the present time and  absent  specific legislation on the
subject,  one who performs  solid waste disposal services may
be regulated by the Railroad  Commission as a "motor carrier.1*

                      SUMMARY

          A person who performs solid waste
          disposal  services may be regulated by
          the  Railroad Commission .as a  "motor

-------
           carrier," provided such person is other-
           wise  subject to Commission jurisdiction
           under article 911b, V.T.C.S.
                               'ery truly yours.
                              JOHN L.
                              Attorney General of Texas
APPROVED:
C. ROBERT HEATH,
Opinion Committee

-------
       3002/3003






      APPENDIX A






SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FROM






   TYPE II MEETINGS






      CONCERNING






    TRANSPORTATION

-------
CITIES INVOLVED IN TYPE II MEETINGS

       San Francisco, California
       Washington, D.C.
       Cleveland, Ohio
       Minneapolis, Minnesota
       Hartford, Connecticut
       Atlanta, Georgia
       Houston, Texas
       Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
       Seattle, Washington
       Denver, Colorado

-------
                      Summary of Comments


                       Manifest System
      The type of information on the manifest and the degree
                                      »•• ?•*

 of detail «*?* eaaaented tjtpon by those in attendance at the
meeting.  Opinions differed greatly as to what should

|be  included in the description.   Some of the data
                                                  ••yqM' ... •» L^ iw^y:

  Lsted a* important  information was:   emergency response    ' _
                     -
 >rocedures, generic  name of waste, hazard class, quantity,

  meral type  of  waste, phone numberSof the generator  and

  ransport company, physical state of the waste, chemical

 Composition,  the process from which the waste was derived,

 is  well as other pertinent information.  Some groups  complained

  lat the chemical composition was of little value since most
                                  -

  rivers would not be able to understand it in an emergency.

 ?rade names were also to be avoided for the same reasons.
                                                        -

     :The proposed format of the manifest drew varied responses.

    y suggested that  the manifest be incorporated into the

     bill of  lading.   This could be done with modifications

 such as allowing additional room at the bottom so information

     be included that would satisfy ICC/DOT requirements.
                            '#-3

-------
 Severed, in attendance recommended that a set of  data reguir
 ments rather than a format be developed, allowing the use o
 existing shipping papers.'  Most  groups believed  that the us
 of a separate uniform-format  would be more desirable and
 would facilitate computerization of the manifest.  This
                                                       • •
 uniformity would be important in. interstate transport.,and i*

 was deemed necessary to make  sure all^States used the  same
 manifest format.  The State of Kansas suggested using  Tts
 manifest as the model for the proposed manifest.

      Most groups in attendance felt that the manifest  was a
 tracking tool and should not  be used in reporting procedure
       , -
 Instead, summary reports should be issued to the designated
 .agency""or authority.
      The  circulation of the manifest was also the subject  of
 discussion.   The majority opinion was that the manifest shoold
 follow the waste delivery from generator to transporter to
 waste management facility.  The waste management facility
the*  sends a  copy of the manifest to the generator, and the
 generator then reports to th&itate.  Differences arose ove
                                                 p
 whether it was necessary for the disposer to report back tc
 the generator.
                :

-------
      Questions were raised over what to do in the event that

 a manifest,  for one reason or another,  does not  accompany a

 waste shipment.   Several groups felt that allowances should
 be made,  such  as  permitting a second party (transporter or

 disposer) to have the  option of filling out the manifest as
                                   V
 long as the generator  has certified the waste  shipment.  Waste
                                           • -
 disposers had  questions about using transfer points where

 wastes with the same manifest number may be designated for

 different destinations.  They argued that it could be neces-
                             •
.
 sary for a manifest to originate from the transfer point ifc
     -
 order to legally  ship  the waste material.


     A plan for developing manifest numbers was proposed.  The

 numbers could  be  derived by using the prefix of the company's

 phone number and  the area code.  A national data bank would

 be established with code numbers assigned to generators,

 transporters,  and disposers.

-------
Recordkeeping
     There were a number of recommendations made  concerning
the recordkeeping system.  The majority of those  present
believed that the record should be a copy of the  manifest
plus any analytical data available on the waste.   Other groups
felt that certain data should be required, rather than a
specific form for recordkeeping.  The length of retention of
records was the subject of controversy.  It was noted that
pesticide producers were required to keep records for 20 years;
although* no one suggested a retention period  this long.
             *     v
Several waste disposer facilities felt that six months was
long enough, but most groups recommended retention of from one
to three years.  Another suggestion made was that length of
retention should coincide with the statute of  limitations.

-------
             Containers, Placards, and Labels

     A number of suggestions were made concerning the informa-
tion to be placed on the label and the format that should be
followed.  Most groups felt that DOT requirements should be
followed, with some modifications pertaining, directly to
hazardous wastes.  DOT regulations require the generator's
                                                      •*.
name, the type of wastet and the chemical composition of the
waste on the label.  The manifest number and the environmental
or occupational hazards should also be required.  Others felt
                                         -
that the labels should be color coded and represent the
highest level of hazard-
     Many of those in attendance  at the meeting felt that
                         .
placards should follow DOT requirements'/with added regulations
*
                                               .

where necessary.  It was  suggested that the word,  "waste/1 be
included somewhere on the placard.   UN code numbers could
also be used with DOT placards  to  handle  the problem of
multiple hazards.  Sone persons felt that additional informa-
tion should be placed on  the  placard,' since in the event of

-------

 an accident,, the manifest could be lost  and the  placard
 would be.the"only source of information.  One group believe
                                               •
 that no additional placarding requirements were  needed, for
 ha2ardous waste transport.  Another felt that a  limit shoule
 be ioposed on the number pf placards allowed on  a vehicle.
                             v              .,..._.  • :	;._	_.
      Several persons suggested that labeling  and  placarding
 systems other  than DOT should be used for hazardous wastes.
 The NFPA system was the most commonly recommended alternative.
 An advantage to the NFPA system is that it exhibits the
 multiple hazard of the material as well as its health effects.
 A  disadvantage  is that these labels are not recognized by all
 fire and emergency response personnel.  Another alternative  s
 to develop a classification system based  on color or alphabet ical
 designation where each letter or number corresponds  to a
 particular hazard or degree of hazard.  Other suggested labeling
 systeas  are the ANSI and  the Material Safety Data Sheets.
     She
                           pertaining to container regulati  is
was to utilize DOT container requirements as long as the var-tea
being stored met DOT criteria.   For those which do not,
                                                                 1

-------
performance standards must be developed which are  adequate

to insure proper waste storage.  One group felt that con-
                                                    i
tainer  regulations were already  too  stringent and  should not

be added to.   Several groups also  recommended that DOT con-

tainer  reuse standards be modified €o allow for more recycling
                "
of containers.  Another group believed that no containers
                                             V
should  be reused under any conditions.
                                                        >
(g||| ,,l.,.^.:  '"  - •'-  	-'- inni-i-.Jill--'''-' •ninn. i-  iiin,Br!'i ,,.r-—"-^:--'"^-:——•'• ••- • •-
      Those participating in the meeting made  it  clear  that

they expected regulations to be written that  would  insure

that all vehicles carrying hazardous wastes would be clearly

marked  as such.  Transport trucks  should have "Hazardous

Waste"  or some other descriptaon  stenciled  on  the side  to warm

the  public of its contents.  Placards should  be  placed on

all  waste transport vehicles, whether it is on or off-site.

      Several groups felt that hazardous waste destined for

on-site disposal should not be subject to  any special  labeling
•
or placarding requirements.


-------
                      Other Comments




      The status  of recyclable materials was a subject of


 discussion.   Most  groups felt that these materials should  be


 exempted from the  regulations.  Less restriction would have
    •
 :he effect of promoting the reuse of these wastes.



      The State of  Kansas suggested that before a waste>is


 transported,  the generator must fill out a detailed waste


 disposal request.   The information is then used by both the


 transporter and  disposerrand parts of it appear on the manif st



      Several  groups recommended that emergency response


 personnel  and response manuals be upgraded.   Truck drivers,

 police,  and fire departments should be educated in .spill

                 - ^t
             'PiftSJS- ^t*1055-  Th« emergency response manuals

       use are too difficult to be understood by first-line

emergency units and should be rewritten.



     One group wanted to know what the liability would be


of the generator who declares a waste non-hazardous  based on

tests but later events prove it to be hazardous.

-------
                    >  HARTFORD,  CONN.
               DATE -  April  6, 1977

                  MANIFEST SYSTEM
1.  Do not require manifest to be submitted to an authority.
                          summary reports to be submitted.
2.  The manifest should list emergency response procedures
    to transporters and emergency response personnel.  The
    generator is required to furnish this information.
            ;                        -.                 . •
    A form similar tc NIOSH Material Data Safety Shee^ should
    be filled out by the generator.

    Manifest should be suitable for ICC/DOT requirements.
              ing drums of\ dilute material rather than bulk/
    should each drum have a different identification if  only
    pie concentrations differ and not the type of waste?

    The 'generic name and hazard class of the material should
    be listed.
                             - //

-------
                PLACE - King of Prussia,  PA.
                     DATE - May 11, 1977
                       MANIFEST SYSTEM

1.   The manifest is a tracking tool and is not the sole
     source of information for the waste management facility.
     Waste facilities will not accept waste unless they
     know in advance the chemical composition.   (Rollins does
     not depend on the manifest for information).

2.   Information is supplied by the generator to the waste
     disposer by contract.  A sample is furnished to the
     waste disposer or analyzed by the generator.   Often the
     waste disposer analyzes the waste sample also.
3.   Quantities and general type of waste (flammable, corrosive,
     etc.} should go on the manifest.  Otherwise,  it should be
     kept as simple as possible.

4.   For off-site transporting, the manifest should be the
     record for the transporter.

5.   The Manifest format should allow additional information  to
     be included at the bottom of the form so that 'it can be
     used to satisfy ICC/DOT regulations.

-------
            PLACE - Seattle, Washington
                DATE - May 25.  1977

                  MANIFEST SYSTEM

    A set of data requirements  should be developed rather
    than a set form.  This would allow the use of existing
    shipping papers.

2.  Allowances should be made for emergency situations
    where no manifest is present with the waste shipment.

    A second party (i.e.,transporter^ disposer)  should have
                        .'
    the option to fill out the manifest as long as the
    generator has certified the waste shipment,

4.  Use the NFPA labeling system.

    The manifest should be used in the channels of commerce.
    It should follow the waste from generator to transporter
    to waste management facility.

-------
    PLACE - Oklahoma State Department of Health
               DATE - April 22, 1977
                  MANIFEST SYSTEM
    The manifest should be used only in tracking the

   . waste material*


2,  The information on -manifest should  be  similar to the

    Kansas manifest model.
                                V

-------
                   PLACE - Atlanta, GA.
                   DATE - April 8, 1977
                      MANIFEST SYSTEM

U   The manifest form should be uniform and easily com-
    puterized.

I.   The State should not have any  option  to modify the
    manifest for interstate movement of wastes.  This is
    necessary since interstate transport  regulations are
    the same.  In  intrastate transport, the regulations
    may be different.

J.   Information on the  manifest  should include chemical
    composition, principal hazard, emergency  response, and
    the phone numbers of  the generator and the trucking company.

4.   A  copy of the  manifest should be  returned to the generator,
    and the generator  should report to the State.

5.   DOT requirements  should be the basis  of  the  manifest,
    and transporters  should have some part in the  development
    of the manifest  form.

-------
2.

3.
              PLACE - Houston, Texas
               DATE - April .13, 1977
                  MANIFEST SYSTEH
1.  The Manifest should be part of the presently used bil

    of lading.
DOT regulations should be followed as much as possible

The manifest should include an identification of the

waste.  This includes the name of the chemical, the

state (solid, liquid, gaseous), the broad chemical

classification, and the process from which it is

derived.  Other information may also be included.

-------
              PLACE - Cleveland, Ohio
               DATE - March 14, 1977
                  MANIFEST SYSTEM



1.  The manifest should be a simple form for tracking the

    hazardous wastes.


2.  The manifest should be a uniform and basic format.

3.  NO trade names should be on  the manifest.

4.  The manifest should include  the hazards of the waste,

    how to deal with  it,, and a  safety data  sheet.

                                                      ""»•

5.  The bill of lading should  be the basis of the manifest.

6.  The manifest should contain  emergency  response instructions,

-------
            PLACE - Minneapolis, Minn,
               DATE - March 10, 1977
                  MANIFEST SYSTEM



1.  Transport companies indicated that they would like more

    information about what steps they should take  to avoid

    health and environmental problems in the event of a

    spill.  Chemical composition was  of little value to

    most drivers since they would not know what  to do with it,


2.  If a waste disposer uses a facility as a transfer point,

    problems can arise since a waste  generator only supplies

    one manifest even though the waste will go to  several

    locations.


3.  The maxiipvro number of copies that can  be produced from

    the manifest is five.  Others would be illegible.


4.  The manifest should accompany the waste from generator

    to transporter to waste management facility.  A copy

    should be sent back to the generator.


5.  If a company operates a transfer  point, a manifest may

    have to originate from there for  wastes shipped from

    that point.

-------
           PLACE - San Francisco, Calif,
              DATE - February 1, 1977
                  MANIFEST SYSTEM



1.  The manifest must be consistent with DOT requirements.

2.  The manifest numbers could be derived by using the prefix

    of the company' s phone number and the area zip code.

    A national data bank should be establisht4with code

    numbers assigned to generators, transporters, and disposers.


3.  The description on the manifest often is not sufficient

    to know what is being carried.  A more detailed des-

    cription along with emergency response and handling

    information is needed.


4.  The manifest must be completely filled out giving an

    accurate description, handling, and emergency response

    procedures.

-------
                    PLACE - Denver, Colo.
                            DATE -
                       MANIFEST SYSTEM



1.   The EPA should designate a manifest number for each

     generator.  Each manifest bears that number plus

     the generator's own numbers.  Each State then checks

     the generator's number against those of the waste

     disposers, and then sends the others to the EPA or to

     the appropriate State agency.

-------
               Place:  Hartford, Connecticut







             Containers, Placards, and Labels








1.   DOT label, placard, and container requirements should



     be met when applicable.






2.   NFPA labels should be used when a substance which is



     hazardous to health is in transport.





3.   Do   label and container requirements need to be met



     when the waste is not transported off-site?





4.   Trucks should be marked when carrying hazardous material.
                               --2

-------
           Place:  King of  Prussia, Pennsylvania







             Containers, Placards, and Labels







1.   Labels should state the  contents of the containers.



     These should contain those called for by DOT regulations



     and a description of the material.





2.   Placards should be consistent with DOT requirements.



     The word* "waste"should  be included on the placards.





3.   An alternative to the  above would be to have separate



     placards labeled Waste A, Waste B... etc.  The  alpha-



     betical designation would reflect the degree of hazard,





4.   A recommendation should  be made to DOT to allow the reuse



     of containers if they  do not leak.  This may be contrary



     to DOT regulations, however.

-------
                    Seattle, Washington







             Containers, Placards, and Labels








1.   The DOT label with the manifest number should be attached



     to the waste containers.  It is also necessary to include



     in the label the environmental and occupational hazards



     of the waste.





2.   DOT requirements for containers should be used where



     they apply.  Those not covered by DOT need to have per-



     formance standards developed.





3.   It is necessary to develop placards that designate a



     cargo as a hazardous waste.





4.   A transporter cannot accept wastes without a label



     attached.  The transporter should not be required to




     relable wastes.





5.   The manifest number should be on the container to protect



     against removal of the label.






6.   Do not reuse old drums.

-------
             Oklahoma State Department of Health

               Containers, Label, and Placards

 1.    DOT containers  should be required where applicable.

 2.    If waste  material does not meet DOT criteria, then per-
      formance  standards must be developed.

 3.    Containers should be adequate and proper for handling,
      transporting, and storing of hazardous wastes.

 4.    DOT labels should be used with a manifest number included
      The manifest number would be the key to what is in the
      container.  For multiple contained wastes being addressed
      on  a manifest, each drum would need to be numbered,
5.    DOT placards with UN code numbers should be used to
      handle the problem of multiple hazards.

6.   NFPA labels are not recognized by all  fire personnel and
     should not be used.

-------
                     Atlanta, Georgia


             Containers, Placards, and Labels


1.   Labels are necessary on 11 drums.


2.   The labels should represent the highest possible hazard.

                                                      •?-
3.   The NFPA system should be used, modified to reflect

     environmental hazards.


4.   Labels should be detailed  with characteristic markings

     and coding.

-------
                      Houston, Texas








              Containers, Placards, and Labels







1.   No special placards should be utilized for waste transport.





2.   Transport trucks  should have "Hazardous Waste" stenciled



     on the side of the truck so that the public will "know



     what is in them.





3.   Containers should meet the DOT requirements and performance



     standards.

-------
                      Cleveland, Ohio


             Containers, Placards, and Labels



1.   Hazardous waste destined for on-site disposal should

     not be subject to any special labeling requirements.

                                                      ***
2.   Vehicles which carry hazardous waste should be placarded

     with the hazard type and the word, "waste."


3.   ANSI labels should be used  along with spill and leak

     statements.

-------
                   Minneapolis, Minnesota







              Containers/ Placards, and Labels







1.   EPA should adopt DOT labeling and container standards.



2.   A marking should be made on the drum pertaining to the



     class of waste contained within it.   These labels should



     be color-coded and be related to the dangers.



3.   Material Safety Data sheets should accompany all wastes



     being transported and should follow NFPA/MCA suggested



     procedures.

-------
                        San Francisco
              Containers, Placards, and Labels

1.    The DOT placarding requirements are insufficient concern-
     ing vehicles carrying hazardous wastes.  There should be
     a limit on the number of placards placed on a vehicle.

2.    If the manifest cannot be found in case of an accident,
     the placard would have to supply the emergency information.
     Additional information should be placed on the placard.

3.    No new placards should be required but additional informa-
     tion should be placed on existing placards.

4.    NFPA labels that exhibit the multiple hazard of the
     material should be used.  These labels should be on the
     container and visible from a distance.

5.    Waste materials do not need to be placarded.  The vehicles
     carrying the waste must be marked, however.

6.    Placards should be placed on all waste transport vehicles,
     regardless of whether it is on or off-site.

7.    Container and vehicle specifications should be modified
     to be less stringent for the transportation of hazardous
     waste.

-------
                     Denver, Colorado







             Containers, Placards, and Labels







1.   Labels can be keyed to shipping papers.   DOT regulations



     require the. generator's name, the type of waste, and



     the chemical composition of the waste on the label.





2.   Containers should be reusable.





3.   DOT should be asked to lower reuse standards.

-------
                      Seattle, Washington

                       Other Comments

1.  A generator should not be required to do additional
    testing once a waste has been  identified as hazardous.
    Information kept  on file should show why the substance
    was classified as hazardous.

2.  A data system should be set up so that a generator can
    determine from this data whether a waste is hazardous
    without doing elaborate testing.

3.  Recycled materials should not  be exempt from the regulations.

-------
                       Atlanta, 6A.

                      Other Comments

1.  Truck drivers,  police, fire department and others
    should be educated in spill response and clean-up
    methods•
                           4-32

-------
                 San Francisco, California







                       Other Comments







1.  The emergency response manuals currently in use are



    too difficult to be understood by first-line emergency



    units (first to arrive).  A less complex manual should



    be prepared.

-------
                     Minneapolis,  Minn.

                       Other Comments

1.  it is often necessary to seggregate incompatible wastes.
    A system should be developed to be sure such wastes are
    not stored together.
2.  Wastes destined to be recycled should  be exempted from the
    manifest requirements in order to promote such reuse.

-------
               Oklahoma State Dept. of Health




                       Other Comments




1.  Before a waste can be  transported, the State of Kansas

    requires^that a detailed waste disposal request  form be filled

    out by the generator.  This  information is used by the

    transporter and waste  management facility.  Information

    on the manifest comes  from this document.


2.  What should be done about waste generated on-site/off-site

    and disposed of at a different location owned by tfte

    generator?  Should they be exempt from the manifest system?

                     A - .
3.  Common carriers did not recommend putting the phone number


    'on the vehicle - but felt that it should be on the manifest.

-------
                       Cleveland, Ohio

                       Other Comments

1.  Transporters involved in  spills could be considered
    generators of wastes.  They  should not, however;  have
    the same regulations imposed upon them as upon  the
    originating generators, as this may hinder the  clean-
    up effort.
2.  It would be difficult to enforce transporter liability
    insurance standards without a permit system for transporters

-------
                        Denver, Colo.

                       Other Comments

1.  What is the liability of the generator who declares
    a waste non-hazardous based on tests, but later events
    prove it to be hazardous?

2.  EPA should operate a quality control program to watch
    over labs which test wastes for generators?
                                -3 7

-------
    APPENDIX B






SUMMARY OF COMMENTS






         ON






   SECTIONS 3003






 ANPR MAY 2, 1977

-------
Applicability of Standards to all Hazardous Waste Transporters


1.  Are there reasons to develop separate standards applicable
to each mode of transportation (motor carriers,  tank vessels,
barges, rail, pipeline, air, etc.)


                       State Agencies


     Most State agencies felt that separate standards are
necessary for each mode of transport.  Some indicated that
DOT and ICC regulations already differentiate and are suffi-
cient to regulate the industry.  Washington, Virginia, and
Hennepin County, Minnesota, held this viewpoint.   The State
of Washington Highway Commission recommended that separate
standards be developed for hazardous waste transport.  Texas
Water Control Board  stated that standards should  be proposed
that emphasize the motor carrier mode of transport.   The
Department of Environmental Quality and the Dayton Regional
Air Pollution Control Agency proposed that uniform standards
be developed for all modes of transport.

                      Waste Generators

     Waste generators all agreed that separate standards are
necessary.  Union Carbide and Mobay Chemical Co.  felt that
the present DOT regulations differentiated enough and were
adequate.  Your Seattle Light felt that separate  standards
need to be developed.  While the Malone Company indicated
that more stringent  standards are necessary for water vessels.

                      Waste Management Facilities

     Most waste processors indicated that standards should
be broad and applicable to all modes of transportation.
This view was held by Rollins and Chemical-Nuclear Systems.
Chemical Processors  felt that ICC and DOT regulations were
adequate for now but that a review should be made at a later
date.
                           8-*

-------
                   Associations


     The Southern Agricultural Chemical Association and the
Compressed Gas Association  felt  that DOT  regulations were
sufficient in their coverage  and already  differentiate
between modes.  The New Jersey/Business and  Industrial Associ-
ation believed that hazardous waste  should be regulated the
same way hazardous materials  are.


                        Transporters

     The Association of American Railroads indicated the
need for separate standards and  felt that these standards
should follow DOT requirements which recognize "natural
differences" between the modes.

2.  What kinds and length of  storage of records


                       State  Agencies

     The Texas Water Quality  Board and the Regional Air
Pollution Agency of Dayton  recommended that  the manifest
copy should be retained by  the transporter for three years.
The Texas Department of Health Resources  felt that records
should be retained by the transporter the same amount of
time as required of generators and disposers.  Commonwealth
of Virginia indicated the length of  retention should depend
on the statute of limitations proposed under RCRA.  The
Department of Interior suggested that recordkeeping length
should be tailored to the pertinent  characteristics of the
hazardous waste.  The Washington Highway  Commission recommended
that the retention period be  decided upon at a later date.


                      Waste Generators
     Both the Mobay Chemical Co.  and the Tom River Corporation
indicated that the manifest be maintained for three years.
The record should consist of the  bill of lading with the
generator identification numbers  on it.

-------
                 Waste Management Facilities
     There was  no  consensus of opinion among waste disposers,
Chemical  Processors,  Incorporated recommended that records
be  retained  up  to  the statute of limitations.  Chemical-
Nuclear Systems felt  that each State should determine retent-
ion length.  Rollins recommended that the manifest system be
applied to all  modes  of transport and that record retention
should be three years.
                        Associations
      The American Iron and Steel Association suggested that
 the  manifest and recordkeeping system should be required only
 for  shipments outside the plant area.  Southern Agricultural
 Chemical Asso. felt that two years would be sufficient for
 recordkeeping length of retention.
                        Transporters


     The Association of American Railroads believed that the
DOT  recordkeeping system should be utilized.  National Tank
Truck Carriers thought that State and ICC regulations differed
and  should be uniform and that microfilming of records be
allowed.


3.   What special handling procedures, if any, may be necessary
to assure the delivery of the manifest to the designated
facility.
                       State Agencies


     State agencies proposed several different measures to ensure
the delivery of the manifest.  The Washington State Highway
Commission suggested that a second copy of the manifest be sent
by registered mail from the generator to the disposer.
Washington State Department of Ecology recommended the arrest
of a transporter for failing to deliver s shipment of waste
to the designated facility.  The Dayton Regional Air Pollution
Agency felt that the transporter should provide the cosignee
with a manifest.  It might also be advisable to require
generators and shippers to send copies of the manifest to the
designated facility.

-------
                      Waste  Generators


     All generators were  in  agreement that  some method of
certifying that a waste reached  the  proper  destination be
developed.  Both the Malone  Co.  and  Union Carbide recommended
that the disposer send a  copy of the completed manifest or
invoice to the generator  certifying  proper  disposal of the
waste.  Proctor and Gamble suggested that the hauler send a
note of certification to  the generator with penalties imposed
for failure to do so.
                 Waste Management Facilities


     Both Chemical-Nuclear  Systems and  Rollins believed that
the manifest should  stay with  the shipment and that the
transporter should be fired if he does  not deliver a manifest
with the waste to the waste management  facility. Chemical
Processors felt that no additional regulations are needed to
ensure delivery of the manifest.


                        Associations
     There was unanimous agreement  that  a completed manifest
should accompany every  shipment  of  hazardous waste.  Both the
Southern Agricultural Chemical Association and the New
Jersey Business and Industrial Association adhered to this
viewpoint.
                        Transporters


     The National Tank Truck Carriers proposed that the
current practice of requiring  a bill of  lading, signed by
the then returned to the  shipper be continued.  The Association
of American Railroads felt that no requirements were needed
for the railroads since the presently used pedigree assures
safe delivery.

-------
4.  Sufficiency of  existing Federal regulations to protect
ppublic health, and  environment during transportation of
hazardous wastes.   Should  additional placards be developed
to  identify hazardous wastes?  Is the classification of
hazardous wastes, for example, as "flammable not otherwise
specified"  sufficient for  environmental emergency response?
Are special safety  rules needed for hazardous wastes in
addition to existing rules?  Should the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety regulations be  adopted for motor carriers of hazardous
waste?
                       State Agencies

     Most of the agencies responding indicated that the DOT
regulations for placarding and labeling with some additions
would be sufficient to cover hazardous waste transport.  The
Texas Water Quality Board suggested that a color coding
system be included where each color is representative of a
hazard class.  Washington Highway Commission, Hennepin
County, Minn., and the Department of Environmental Quality
believed that the DOT requirements were sufficient and that
EPA and DOT should work together when developing new ones.
The Dayton Regional Air Pollution Agency thought that existing
DOT regulations were acceptable except that a new class of
hazardous materials should be developed.  In their opinion,
there was no need for any placarding regulations.  They
also suggested the FMCS regulations be enforced upon all
motor carriers.  The San Francisco Fire Department recommended
using placards which conform with NEPA standards and contain
emergency response information.
                      Waste Generators


     All those who responded to this issue were in agreement
that the DOT regulations were sufficient in most cases. Some
felt that additions would be necessary in a few areas. The
Diamond Slummock Co. felt that substances which were a
special threat to health and welfare need more stringent
regulation.  The Malone Co. suggested that in addition to
the DOT regulations, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety system
be adopted.  Shell Oil Co. believed that DOT regulations were
adequate but wanted to avoid distinguishing between hazardous
materials and wastes.  Both Phillips and Tom River Chemical
Corp. wanted to avoid the use of additional placards.  Most
generators indicated that changes in the  regulations  should be
coordinated with DOT.

-------
                 Waste Management Facilities


     The consensus opinion was that existing regulations
should be adopted and studied for a length of time to see if
they are sufficient.  Those with this opinion included
Chemical-Nuclear, Rollins,and Chemical Processors.


                        Associations


     All those who responded were in agreement that the DOT
regulations for placarding and labeling would insure environ-
mental safeguarding.  No  need was felt for additional regu-
lations.  This opinion was expressed by the Compressed Gas
Association, New Jersey Business and Industrial Assoc.,
Southern Agricultural Chemical Assoc., and the National
Agricultural Chemical Assoc.


                        Transporters


     Opinion was divided, pertaining to the  sufficiency of
DOT regulations.  The National Tank Truck Carriers suggested
that additional placards  could be needed  if  the waste was
especially hazardous.  The Association of American Railroads
believed no additional placards  would  be  necessary. Both
companies wanted additional  information on  the placards,
including exact  identification  of  the  waste and emergency
response procedures.


5.  What additional,  if  any,  vehicle  inspection or certification
rules  are needed for  transport of  hazardous waste.
                         State Agencies


      Both agencies responding, The Washington Highway Commission
 trackers register with a regulatory agency and that
 certification may be desirable.
                                £-7

-------
                      Waste Generators
     Most agreed that DOT and State regulations which pertain
to hazardous chemicals should be adopted for hazardous wastes.
Union Carbide, Stauffer Chemical, and American Cyanid upheld
this view.  Tom River Chemical Co. felt no additional regu-
lations were necessary.
                 Waste Management Facilities


     Chemical-Nuclear and Chemical Processors both felt
there was no need for additional rules.  Rollins recommended
licensing and insurance regulations plus additional generator
and disposer safeguards and not more transporter regulations.
                        Associations


     The Southern Agricultural Chemical Assoc.  and New Jersey
Business and Industry Assoc. recommended that DOT regulations
be adopted in full for hazardous waste.


                        Transporters


     The Association of American Railroads felt that no
additional regulations were needed for the railroads.  The
National Tank Truck Carriers believed that a shipper should
be required to certify that he has tested the hazardous
material and has identified the hazard classification.


6.  Is there a need for contingency spill clean-up plans in
addition to those established under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, sfor hazardous waste spills.


                       State Agencies


     Nearly all agencies felt there was a need for additional
contingency spill plans.  The San Francisco Fire Department
thought it was important to provide for training and equipping
of emergency response personnel.  The Commonwealth of Virginia

-------
believed that the clean-up of spills should be a responsibility
delegated to the State but with the backing of the EPA.   The
Interior Department suggested using spill contingency plans
that depend on the mode of transportation as well as the
quantity of spilled waste.   In their opinion, FWPCA regulations
covering such emergencies should be reviewed. The Washington
State Highway Commission and the Texas Water Quality Board
felt that no additional rules are  required.
                      Waste  Generators
     Most generators  thought that present contingency plans
were enough.  Stauffer,  Chevron,  and Tom River Chemical were
of this opinion.   Chevron felt that the generator  should be
responsible  for  the cleanup     Union Carbide recommended
that the contingency  plan not accompany the shipment in
order to lessen  the paperwork.  Your Seattle Light Co.
suggested that additional waste cleanup  plans different
from those of the FWPCA Act be set up.


                  Waste Management Facilities


     All disposers felt that additional plans were necessary.
Rollins suggested that the contingency plans be  keyed to the
type of waste and the area where the spill could occur.
Chemical Processors recommended that plans like  those drawn
up  for oil  spills be applied to hazardous chemicals  and
wastes.


                         Associations


     The  Southern Agricultural Chemical Assoc.  and the New
Jersey Business and Industry Assoc. both felt that existing
plans  are adequate.


                         Transporters


      Both transporters  responding  to this question indicated
 that additional  spill contingency  plans would be unnecessary.
 The Nationar?ankPTruck Carriers maintained that the filing
 of contingency clean-up plans is unnecessary since each
 spill is unique.

-------
7.   Is  there need to establish minimum  insurance coverage
requirements for hazardous waste  transporters to cover  the
cost of spill clean-up and possible environmental damage?


                        State Agencies


      All agencies agreed that  minimum insurance requirements
should  be set up.  The Washington State Highway Commission,
Department of Environmental Quality, and Commonwealth of
Virginia responded with this opinion.  Virginia also expressed
concern that small companies could be driven out of business
because of the high cost of insurance and that a permit
system  could be set up to regulate hazardous waste transporters
                      Waste Generators
     There was general agreement that insurance requirements
 should be set up.  Your Seattle Light Co. and Tom River
 Chemical Corp. recommended that carriers be insured to cover
 the clean-up oosts.  The Malone Co. suggested minimum insurance
 plus a  $5,000,000        umbrella policy to cover all
 accidental spills.  Mobay supported the insurance regulations
 but felt that the transporter should be held responsible for
 any spills occurring during transport.  Union Carbide suggested
 that insurance be paid for through public funding.  Stauffer
 Chemical Corp. felt that no regulations concerning insurance
 were necessary while Shell Oil thought that damage and cost
 liabilities should be born by the party responsible for the
 spill.
                 Waste Management Facilities


     The consensus among waste disposers was that a minimum
insurance requirement was needed.  Chemical-Nuclear Systems
recommended that the Federal government provide the necessary
insurance coverage.  Chemical Processors suggested that the
EPA determine if the insurance industry was willing to insure
transport of hazardous wastes.  Rollins agreed that insurance
regulations were needed.

-------
                        Transporters


     Neither of the transport companies supported minimum
or additional insurance requirements.  The Association of
American Railroads felt that no  insurance regulations were
needed other than to cover unique hazards or extensions of the
Price-Anderson Act.  The National Tank Truck Carriers thought
that insurance presently carried by most transporters was
adequate and that additional insurance would be expensive and
hard to find.  They suggested regulating and insuring private
carriers and the "midnight dumper ."
                              £-//

-------
                 Other Comments and Opinions


                       State Agencies


     A number of agencies were concerned about duplication
between DOT and EPA regulations.  Most felt that DOT regulations
were sufficient and that few additional rules would be neces-
sary.  The Texas Department of Health Resources and the Regional
Air Pollution Agency of Dayton held this view.  The Georgia
Game and Fish Division wanted extra precautions to prevent
disposal of wastes in streams, lakes, etc.   and to keep
contaminated runnoff out of water resources.  The San Francisco
Fire Department suggested that transporters carry one. waste
at a time to avoid mixing. Hennephin County,  Minnesota, proposed thai
certain sections of the "Minnesota Pollution Control Agency  ,(
Rules and Regulations" be adopted.  The Wayne County, Michigan,
Department of Health called for comprehensive regulations that
controlled a waste from "cradle to grave."   The Washington
Department of Ecology recommended that hazardous wastes be
treated the same as other hazardous comodities.  The State of
North Carolina suggested that State regulations be uniform and
that the Federal government provide minimum standards in order
to assure a degree of uniformity.   The Interior Department felt
that these regulations could also cover pesticide transport ,
and the DOT regulations should be reviewed  for adequacy.


                      Waste Generators


     Generators also called for the use of  DOT requirements as
a basis for transportation regulation.  Some companies felt
that DOT/ICC regulations were sufficient.  Companies in this
category included American Cyanid, Kraft Inc., Chevron, Systems
Technology Corp., and the Tom River Chemical Co.  Other
businesses believed that additions were needed to the DOT
regulations and that these additions should be coordinated with
DOT.  Companies in this category were Diamond Shamrock, Florida
Phosphate Council, and Velsicol Chemical Co.

     Several companies suggested that transporters accept most
of the responsibility if an accident should occur.  Proctor
and Gamble stated that regulations should emphasize the
responsibility of the hauler and not the generator.  Olin-Brass
believed that the generator should not be liable for a regulation
violation by a second party.

-------
     The Alabama Power Co. felt the need for a definition of
a hazardous waste transporter.  They also believed that intra-
company transport should occur without being registered by
a manifest system.  The Cad Nickel Plating Co. wanted to exempt
industries which produce sludge due to EPA effluent regulations.
Celanese recommended the use of a manifest which includes a
safety warning  but not a description of waste characteristics
and a phone number for hauler and State emergency response
teams.  Mobay Chemical Co. felt that Federal regulations should
be uniform and should not conflict with one another.


                 Waste Management Facilities


     Chemical-Nuclear Systems suggested that the transport
industry should provide regulations for itself through the
ICC and DOT.  These regulations apply only to off-site
transport.


                        Associations


     The American Iron and Steel  Institute felt that transporters
should be liable for safe and proper handling during transport
as well as for the condition of the transport vehicle and
personnel.  The National Agricultural Chemical Association
endorses the comments of the Southern Agricultural Chemical
Association particularly with regard to avoiding conflicts
with other regulations.


                        Transporters


     The National Tank Truck Carriers emphasized the need to
properly package a waste  shipment.  They also wanted to
avoid regulation duplication and  preferred to have all
regulations governed by DOT.

-------
          APPENDIX C



Joint Notice of Public Meetings



42 FR 51625, September 29, 1977
               C-l

-------
          ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
           DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
          MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU
     OFFICE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OPERATIONS

          JOINT NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING

          DEVELOPMENT OF REGULATIONS FOR
       THE TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE


     The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976

(RCRA) was signed into law on October 21, 1976.  It mandates

a comprehensive Federal-State-local approach to all aspects

of waste management, including resource conservation and

recovery, land disposal of municipal and industrial wastes,

and authorizes a new regulatory program for hazardous wastes

     The Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) under Sub-

title C—Hazardous  Waste Management—is required to write

standards for generators,  shippers, transporters, and

receivers of  hazardous waste.   In addition EPA is required

to develop criteria and a  list to define what  are hazardous

wastes.

     During the  analysis  of the RCRA requirements, it

became  apparent  that current Department  of Transportation

 (DOT)  regulations  under  the Hazardous  Materials Transporta-

tion Act of 1974 (HMTA) may have the potential to be expandet

to  partially  meet the mandate of RCRA.   EPA  would like  to

maximize the  coordination of  the RCRA regulatory require-

ments with existing DOT rules for the  benefit of all parties.
                                     '977)
                       C-2

-------
     The Act requires that regulations developed under 3u]
title C of RCRA be consistent with the requirements of «•
and the regulations thereunder.  In addition,  it authorj.z.
the EPA to make recommendations to DOT respecting regula-
tions for hazardous wastes under HMTA and for the additio:
of materials to be covered by that Act.
     Authority for the regulation of hazardous waste tran
portation is contained in both HMTA and RCRA.   The HMTA  i,
concerned with the protection of public safety, health,  a:
property during the loading, transportation,  storage inci<
to transportation, and unloading of hazardous materials.
HMTA requires the Secretary of Transportation to desigrat.
materials as hazardous upon finding that the  transportatii
of a particular quantity and form of material in coromer*
may pose an unreasonable risk to health and safety or
property.   The materials designated as hazardous may incl
 but are not limited to:  explosives,  radioactive materia
etiologic agents,  flammable liquids or solids, combustibl<
liquids or solids, poisons, oxidizing or corrosive matari
als,  and compressed gases.
     Under Subtitle C, RCRA is concerned with the protect
of the public health and the environment from improper
hazardous waste management during transportation, treatrae
storage or disposal.  Hazardous waste as defined by RCPA
is a solid waste,  or combination of solid wastes which
because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, cr<
ical, or infectious characteristics may cause, or signi fi

-------
cantly contribute  to  an  increase  in mortality or an increas
in serious irreversible,  or  incapacitating reversible,
illness or pose a  substantial present or potential hazard t
human health or the environment when improperly treated,
stored, transported,  or  disposed  of.  in turn, RCRA defines
"solid" waste  to include solid, liquid, semisolid, or con-
tained gaseous material  resulting from industrial, commer-
cial, mining,  and, with  some-exception, agricultural opera-
tions, and from community activities.  The Administrator
shall taJce into account,  when designating hazardous wastes,
toxicity, persistence and degradability in nature, potential
for accumulation in tissue,  and other related factors such
as flammability, corrosiveness and other hazardous charac-
teristics.
     For the transportation  of hazardous wastes under RCRAf
Section 3002 requires the Administrator to develop standards
for generators/shippers  of hazardous wastes concerning
labeling practices for any containers used for storage,
transport, or  disposal that  will  identify accurately such
wastes; use of appropriate containers, and use of a manifest
system to assure that all hazardous waste generated is
designated for treatment,  storage or disposal to a permitted
hazardous waste management facility.  The manifest as de-
fined by the Act means the form used for identifying the
quantity, composition, and the origin, routing, and desti-
nation of hazardous waste during  its transportation from the

                       c-y

-------
 point of generation to the point of disposal,  treatment,
 storage*  Section 3003 requires  the Administrator to d4
 standards for transporters of  hazardous waste  concerning
 recordkeeping, transportation  of hazardous washes only if
 properly labeled, compliance with the manifest system and
 transportation of all  the  hazardous wastes to  the designa
 permitted facility..  In addition, the Administrator  is
 considering the development of standards for the  acceptan
 of hazardous waste for transport, loading and  stowage of
 hazardous wastes,  notification in the event of a  spill an
 spill reporting, marking and placarding of vehicles,  and
 notification of the transportation of hazardous wastes.
      Many of the standards being considered under RCRA £QJ
 transportation are currently required under HMTA.  Specif
 ally,  definition of a hazardous material (waste) ,  labelin<
 placarding,  packaging, manifest  {shipping document) ,  spil
 notification and reporting, and loading and stowage.   In
 addition, HMTA. has provisions for the development of  stan<
 ards concerning recordkeeping and registration.
     In December of 1976 the Department of Transportation
 evidenced concern for the development of regulations  for
 hazardous waste transporters.   HM-145,  Environmental an 1
 Health Effects Materials Advance  Notice of Proposed Rul i-
making, published December 9,  1976,  in the Federal Registe
                        C-5

-------
presented several questions  concerning hazardous wastes:
"with regard to hazardous  wastes, what classification syste:
may be used to clearly  identify mixtures as opposed to
single compound materials; what packaging may be appropriate
for transportation;  and how  e:_-.sting  transportation docu-
mentation can be used to cover transport of hazardous wastes
from the generator  (sjtiipper) to the disposer  (consignee) ."
Several comments were received expressing concern  for the
development of hazardous waste transportation regulations b}
both EPA and DOT.
     A one-day public meeting will  be held on October 26,
1977, to solicit public, industry,  State and local govern-
ment comment on the regulation of hazardous waste  transpor-
tation by the Department of  Transportation and  the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.  The public meeting.will begin at
9:30 a.m. at the Ramada O'Hare Inn, Mannheim and Higgins
Road, Des Plaines,  Illinois  (312/827-5131),  Interested
members of the public;  representatives  of industry that ship
as well as transport hazardous materials  (waste) ;  entities,
both public and private, that respond to  transportation
emergencies; State and local governments; and  firms  fhat
receive hazardous  wastes for storage, treatment, ~~and dis-
posal are urged to attend and respond to  any or all  of  the
discussion topics  listed below, as  well as  any  other issues
concerning  the regulation of hazardous waste  transportation.

-------
     The meeting is open to the public and will be conducte
                             f
by a panel from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency an
the U.S. Department of Transportation.
     The following procedural  rules will apply.  The Chair-
man of the panel is empowered  to  conduct the meeting in a
manner that  in his judgment will  facilitate the orderly
conduct of business,  to schedule  presentations .by partici-
pants, and to exclude material which is  irrelevant, ex-
traneous, or repetitious,   The time allotment for oral
statements  shall be  at the discretion of the Chairman, but
shall not ordinarily exceed 15 minutes.   With the permissio:
of any person offering a statement, questions may be  asked
by members  of the panel.  At the discretion of  the  Chairman
a procedure may be made available for presentation  of per-
tinent, questions  from other persons to participants.
 Individuals with  prepared statements are requested to bring
 at least one copy for the record.  Persons unable to attend,
 but wishing to comment on the Discussion Topics,  are invitee
 to send written comments to the  address below by November 9,
 1977.
      A transcript of the meetings will be made and acopy of
 the transcript, together with copies of all documents pre-
 sented at the meeting,  and all written  submissions will
 constitute  the  record of  the  meeting.  A copy of the record
 of the meeting  will  be available for public inspection by
 December 16,  1977,  at the U.S. Environmental Protection

-------
Agency, Office {of Solid Waste, Hazardous Waste Management

Division v-Docket Section, Room 2111,  401 M Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460 and at the Department of Transpc

tation, Room 6500, Trans Point Building, 2100 Second Stree

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590.

     Anyone desiring additional information on the meetinc

or wishing to be placed on the program to  present a state-

ment is requested to contact:  Mrs. Geraldine Wyer, Public
                                   «
Participation Officer, Office of Solid Waste, WH-462,  U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,  D.C.  20460

(Phone:  202/755-9157) before October 21,  1977.

-------
                 DISCUSSION TOPICS




     1.  Regulations being developed by the Environmental


Protection Agency  and  existing regulations of the Department


of Transportation  impact  the  transportation of hazardous


wastes.  Which Agency  should  take the  lead in developing


the regulations  for hazardous waste transportation?  What


approach should  be taken? Should DOT  modify its definition


of hazardous materials to include all  hazardous wastes?


(Wastes which are  bioaccumulative,  toxic  above current DOT


definition levels, infectious, carcinogens, or having poten-


tial for genetic change are  likely  to  be  identified under


RCRA as hazardous  wastes  and  are not currently covered by


the DOT Hazardous  Materials  Regulations.)  Should EPA then


incorporate DOT  regulations  by reference~or should EPA con-


sider  a separate set  of regulations to supplement the gaps


in DOT regulatory  coverage,  in that EPA regulations would


cover  only wastes  which are  hazardous, not all hazardous


materials?
                 \
     2 .   If DOT does modify its—definition of hazardous


materials  to include  all hazardous  wastes, should DOT regu-


lations specifically address the transportation  of hazardous


wastes or  treat  them the same as hazardous materials that


are bioac^umiilafciyeL,.. toxic,  infectious, carcinogenic, etc.?


     3.   Section 3002 of RCRA requires the development of a


manifest  (shipping paper) to assure that  the  hazardous waste

-------
is designated to a permitted hazardous waste management
facility and that all the hazardous waste is delivered to
that facility.  Should DOT modify its shipping paper re &i
ments to fulfill the needs of the RCRA manifest or should
EPA develop requirements to supplement existing shipping
paper requirements  (including the possibility of a separa-
document)?
     4.  Are the current DOT requirements for labeling,
marking and placarding sufficient for handling of hazardox
waste in transportation?  For those hazardous wastes whici
will not fall under DOT purview,  should EPA develop
labels and placards of separate design or should DOT
develop the labels and placards for these hazardous wastes
that are compatible with current DOT design?
     5.  HMTA authorizes the registration of anyone tra!
porting hazardous materials; RCRA requires notification of
the transportation of hazardous wastes.   Should registrati
requirements be developed for transporters of hazardous
wastes?
     6. .In the event of an accident or a spill of a hazar
ous material during~loading, transportation, or unloading,
DOT requires notification of the incident and the filing o
a report.   For the spill of hazardous waste, EPA is also
considering similar requirements.  Should notification of
spills be directed to EPA, DOT (Office of Hazardous Materi
Operations), or the U.S. Coast Guard National Emergency

-------
Response Center?   Should EPA and  DOT  receive incident
reports  (DOT  for  hazardous materials  and EPA for hazardous
wastes) , or should all reports be filed with DOT  (even when
spilled hazardous wastes are not  covered by DOT regulation)
     7.  In the event of a spill, the material cleaned up
may become a  hazardous waste.  Should DOT  or EPA develop the
regulations for handling the spilled  hazardous material?
     8. HMTA  authorizes DOT to require training to be con-
ducted by shippers and transporters of hazardous materials.
Are training  programs necessary relative to emergency
response and  cleanup of hazardous wastes specifically?  If
so, to what extent should they be required?
     9.  Since hazardous wastes are mixtures or may  be mixed
during collection for transportation, is  it necessary for
DOT to modify its loading and stowage requirement to address
the mixing  and stowage of incompatible wastes?
     10.  Any other comments relevant to the development of
regulations  for transportation of hazardous wastes by the
Department  of Transportation and the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency are welcome.
                                            I .
                                 lomas C. Jorj:.ing
                            Assistant Administrator \
                       for Water and Hazardous Materials
                               Alan I. Roberts, Director
                        Office of Hazardous Material Operatior
 Date:  	
                            C- //

-------
           APPENDIX D




External Review Comments/Actions
                D-l

-------
U.S. Coast Guard
National Response Center
(NRC) phone number can
only be used for 311
Regulations list appropriate EPA
regional 24-hour telephone
emergency line.
The Aluminum Assn.
Am. Petroleum Institute
National Tank Truck Carriers
Assn. of Am. Railroads
Manufacturing Chemists Assn.
Urges continued close
cooperation with DOT.
Regulations are being coordinated
with DOT.
 Oscar  E. Erickson,  Inc.
All required repotts
should be sent to DOT
for relay to EPA.
Regulations modified to require tha
reports be sent to DOT.
 California  Dept.  of  Health
 Oscar E.  Erickson,  Inc.
 Illinois  Environmental
   Protection Agency
 State of  Washington,
   Dept. of Ecology
Manifest should be the
only shipping document
required
No action taken; regulations reflec
multi-model handling and existing
paper handling procedures.
 Manufacturing Chemists
   Assn.
Spills not covered by DOT
classification should be
reported directly to EPA
using DOT form.
Current thinking is to require that
all spills be reported to DOT; thos
not covered by DOT classification
would be sent to EPA by DOT.

-------
    Manufacturing Chemists
      Assn.
    American Petroleum
      Institute
    Manufacturing Chemists
      Assn.

    National Tank Truck
      Carriers
"Premises" should be de-
fined and be consistent
with definition of "site."
Since ICC already requires
that vehicles be marked with
appropriate number, redun-
dant for EPA to require
additional number.
"Premises" replaced by "site. '
Definition of "site" made
consistent with other sections,
Current thinking is to use
existing ICC or PUC requirements,
    National Tank Truck
      Carriers
Unnecessary to number trail-
ers since they will be
attached to a numbered power
unit.
Agr"ee and regulations modified,
.'   Oscar E. Erickson,
*»     Inc.
    Illinois Environmental
      Protection Agency
Don't overemphasize hazard
of waste in placarding/
i.e., toxic.
Only DOT placarding will be re-
quired.
    Chem Nuclear
Transporters should be allow-
ed to accept small quantities
of hazardous waste which are
not properly labeled, follow-
ed by repackaging.

Hazardous Waste should not be
delivered to an unattended
disposal or treatment
facility.
Transporters can accept hazardous
waste but must  properly container:!
label, and load prior to transport
                                                                 No  action taken.   Should be arranc
                                                                 between transporter and disposer.

-------
Association of
  American Railroads
Assn. of Am. Railroads

American Petroleum  Inst.
Monsanto
Supports modiixcation of
DOT Hazardous Materials
Incident Report to accommo-
date EPA's specific require-
ments.
                              Two classifications  should
                              be required on  shipping
                              document  for  those hazardous
                              wastes and materials which
                              meet both EPA and DOT re-
                              quirements .
Definition of "Common
carrier" should be changed
to include all modes.
No  action  taken.
                              No action taken
Definition modified to reflect
comments.
 Assn.  of Am.  Railroads
Exempts transporters from
inspecting vehicles which
are loaded and sealed by
generators to determine if
properly labeled.

Require shipper to comply
with appropriate compati-
bility and stowage chart
when shipper loads.
Discussed in Preamble.
                                                            Not authorized under 3002
                                                            and 3003.  DOT regs. may apply.
 California  Dept.  of Health

 Oscar  E.  Erickson, Inc.

 Nottingham  Co.,  Inc.

 State  of  Idaho

 Ohio Liquid Disposal
Support permitting system
for transporters.
Will not require permits at this
time, since ICC requires permits
for all interstate transporters
and most intrastate carriers are
are permitted by State PUC's.

-------
  National  Solid Waste
    Management Assn.

  Rollins Environmental
    Services
   California Dept,
     of  Health
   Region VII
   Dept.  of Environmental
     Quality
&  State of Vermont
,'    Illinois EPA
   The Standard Oil
     Company
Requirement to maintain
records for three years
is excessive.
Regulations should clarify
circumstances when a de*
livery document is more
appropriate than a manifest.
State accident response
system number (if design-
nated) should be listed.
Regulations' should outline < •'«
specific emergency situations
which require reporting.
(DOT does this.)
Consistent with. ICC and most Stat<
which require retention of
records for three years.
Clarification made in  regulation!
to require delivery document only
when no original manifest.
Regs.concerned with Federal, not
State standards.  Mentioned in
Preamble.
                                                               Discussed in Preamble
   State of Idaho
   National Solid
     Waste Management Assn,
Information pertaining to
emergencies should be for-
warded to the Regions.
Regions will be notified.
Acceptance of waste - mean-
ing of  "Improper"  is too
vague.
Deleted from regs,

-------
   National Solid Waste
     Management Assn.

   Illinois EPA

   National Tank Truck
     Carriers
Procedures foi loading and
stowage of hazardous waste
not covered by DOT should
be included.  Unclear as
to how incompatibility is
determined.
Removed from regulations
DOT regulations referenced.
y
 \
   National Solid
     Waste Management Assn.
Transporter should be re-
quired to notify generator
of intent to mix loads.
Procedures for later certi-
fication of manifest when
certification is not requir-
ed upon delivery should be
clarified.

Procedure for transporter to
modify manifest to change
destination should be
established.
According to available data, mixing
is rare.
No Action.
                                                               Certification on manifest or other
                                                               delivery document is required upon
                                                               delivery.
                                                               Addressed in Working Group
                                                               mtg.  Will be worked out between
                                                               generator and transporter.  3002
                                                               modified manifest to provide for
                                                               alternate destination.
    Ohio Liquid  Disposal

    National  Solid
      Waste Management Assn,
Both EPA and DOT should be
notified of emergencies.
EPA will be notified by telephone.
Upon notification, EPA will notify
DOT.
    Ohio Liquid Disposal
Notification of cessation
of service should be requir'-
ed within 30 days or less.
Regulations modified,

-------
Ohio Liquid Disposal

The Aluminum Assn.

Interex Corp.
Emergency Situations-
volume limitation should
be included.
Regulations are consistent with
DOT's which require notification
of any quantity.
Ohio Liquid Disposal
Manufacturing Chemists
  Assn.
American Iron and
  Steel Institute
EPA Region X
Reference to notifying
fire department should
be deleted.
Regulations modified to delete
reference.
Transporter should be
liable for hazardous waste
during transport.
Regulations cannot assign liabili<
Emergency Situations-
include list of on-scene
coordinators.

Include procedures for
handling manifest after
emergency situation is
over.
Reference to on-scene coordinators
deleted.
                                                            Generator topic
U.S. Coast Guard
Loading and Stowage-add
reference to bulk vessels.
Regulations modified to add referc
to CPR 176 Subpart C through O an*
46 CFR.
American Petroleum
  Institute

Region VII
General Requirements-include
private carriers
Regulations modified to include
all carriers.

-------
 American  Petroleum
    Institute
  Manufacturing Chemists
    Assn.
ft)
Unnecessary t^ record notifi-
cation number on manifest.
Notification number
  ll  facilitate data reporting by
jenerator  and waste facility.
No additional marking should
be required for hazardous
waste which don't fall with-
in DOT classification.
^gree

-------