Summary of Stakeholder Comments By Topic 

(Treatment) 

Stakeholder: American Chemical Society Topic: Treatment of Hazardous Waste in 

Laboratories

Comment: 3. Treatment of Hazardous Waste in Laboratories

BACKGROUND: In 1990 Congress passed the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) in which the 

following national policy was stated:

The Congress hereby declares it to be the national policy of the United States that pollution 

should be prevented or reduced at the source whenever feasible; pollution that cannot be 

prevented should be recycled in an environmentally safe manner whenever feasible; pollution 

that cannot be prevented or recycled should be treated in an environmentally safe manner 

whenever feasible; and disposal or other release into the environment should be employed only 

as a last resort and should be conducted in an environmentally safe manner. 

On-site treatment of hazardous wastes in a safe manner by knowledgeable staff would allow 

laboratories to contribute significantly to Congress's stated goals for recycling and treating 

wastes whose generation cannot be prevented. Unfortunately, current regulations promulgated 

pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) only allow the following 

treatment processes without a permit: elementary neutralization and treatment in

accumulation containers. In July 2003 the Board of Directors of the American Chemical Society 

(ACS) issued the following statement:

The American Chemical Society recommends that legislation, rulemaking, and guidance 

allow qualified laboratory personnel to treat small quantities of hazardous waste without a 

permit. The ACS supports the U.S. EPA's efforts to identify and resolve some of the unique 

problems and inefficiencies imposed on laboratories by the prescriptive RCRA hazardous waste 

management regulations. These regulations were designed for the larger, more homogeneous 

waste streams typically generated by industry. They were not designed to support effective and 

efficient management of laboratory waste streams, which. Laboratory operations are not scaled 

down versions of industrial processes. Laboratory activities are diverse and vary from day to day, 

producing wastes that typically are composed of smaller quantities of a much larger number of 

different chemicals, which are containerized at the point of generation.

PROPOSAL: While suitable treatment technologies exist for processing many laboratory wastes 

on site, the process for obtaining and maintaining an appropriate RCRA permit under current 

regulations is far too onerous and expensive for most laboratory facilities. The ACS recommends 

that the U.S. EPA amend current regulations to exempt treatment by the generator of small 

quantities of laboratory wastes from the definition of "treatment" or allow such treatment through 

a "permit by rule" or other regulatory process. Such changes to current RCRA requirements will 

allow laboratories to betterachieve Congress's goals of waste minimization, recycling and hazard 

reduction. 

On-site treatment of laboratory wastes can significantly reduce volumes of waste transferred to 

off-site facilities for disposal, reducing risks to human health and the environment from releases 

during transportation and disposal. Even if off-site disposal is ultimately required, treatment can 
reduce hazard levels and handling risks. Treatment of some laboratory waste streams can allow 

subsequent recycling or reuse of materials that otherwise would have to be disposed. 

Laboratories meet the two primary requirements for safe and effective on-site treatment of small 

quantities of hazardous wastes:

Availability of qualified personnel with the appropriate scientific training, chemical expertise, 

technical skills, and knowledge of the waste streams, and

Availability of proper facilities and equipment. Laboratory waste treatment should be allowed in 

two areas: in satellite accumulation areas near where wastes are generated and in central 

accumulation areas. The following types of conditions could be imposed on laboratory treatment 

to ensure that treatment procedures are safe and protective

of the environment and that the ability to treat wastes is not abused: Limit the batch size for 

treatment - e.g. 5 gallons/20 Kg or less per batch Limit the monthly treatment volume - e.g. 50 

gallons/100 Kg or less per 

month 

Stakeholder: Linden Industrial Association Topic: Clarify DEFINITION OF TREATMENT

Comment: DEFINITION OF TREATMENT: The definition of what constitutes treatment 

should be narrowed so as to not prevent the types of waste minimization efforts referred to in 1. 

above. In addition, specific operations associated with beneficial reuse, recycling or reclamation of 

materials at a waste generating facility should not be classified as waste treatment (distillation, 

filtration, etc.).

Stakeholder: Pacific NW National 

Laboratory

Topic: Clarify DEFINITION OF TREATMENT

- articulating the salient points in existing 

guidance

Comment: 262.34: The Treatment by Generator (TBG) program has been very effective in 

reducing hazardous waste generators’ dependence on offsite treatment, storage, and/or 

disposal (TSD) facilities. This also enables generators to reduce the hazards of their waste at the 

generation site and reduces the quantity and hazard of waste transported over public highways. We 

encourage EPA to continue this program, and to consider articulating the salient points in 

existing guidance within the regulations to assure broad and consistent implementation by eligible 

generators.

Stakeholder: State of Alabama Topic: Clarify DEFINITION OF TREATMENT

- in containers

Comment: Changes are needed to clarify specific regulations:

Generator Treatment: - 262.34 should state explicitly whether generators are allowed to treat 

in containers. In fact, ADEM believes that this “interpretation-by-analogy” of 262.34 is 
confusing, encourages generators to handle waste in a manner that was not anticipated when the 

RCRA was originally adopted, and sometimes results in situations that make enforcement of the 

permit requirements of 40CFR265 difficult. Rather than following this approach, ADEM has 

consistently maintained that generators should not, as a general rule, treat hazardous waste onsite 

without a permit. Instead, ADEM has created specific exemptions from permitting in Chapter 

335-14-8 of the Division 14 of the ADEM Administrative Code, which is the State of Alabama’s 

equivalent to 40CFR270, for certain common types of treatment. The regulatory language used by 

ADEM to do so is as follows:

2. Specific exclusions. The following persons are among those who are not required to obtain a 

AHWMMA permit: 

()

(viii) Generators treating on-site generated hazardous wastes by evaporation in tanks or containers 

provided that:

(I) The generator complies with the applicable requirements of Chapter 335- 14-3,

(II) Such treatment does not result in the emission or discharge of hazardous wastes or hazardous 

constituents into the environment in excess of any standard(s) promulgated by the Department or 

the Environmental Protection Agency,

(III) With respect to treatment, the generator complies with the applicable requirements of Rules 

335-14-5-.02(5), 335-14-5-.02(6), 335-14-5-.02(7), 335-14-5- .02(8), 335-14-5-.03, 335-14-5-.04, 

335-14-5-.07(2), 335-14-5-.07(5), 335-14-5-.09 and 335-14-5-.10,

(IV) Such treatment minimizes the amount of hazardous wastes which are subsequently generated, 

treated, and/or disposed, and

(V) The generator provides the Department with written notice of intent to treat such hazardous 

wastes on or before the effective date of 335-14-8-.01 or at least 60 days prior to the initiation of 

waste treatment, which ever date occurs last. This noticemust provide documentation of 

compliance with the requirements of 335-14-8-.01(1)(c)2.(viii)(II), (III), and (IV), and must be 

maintained for the life of the facility and be available for inspection;

()

(x) Generators treating on-site generated hazardous wastes in tanks or containers by physical or 

mechanical processes (e.g., compacting rags, crushing fluorescent lamps) solely for the purpose of 

reducing the bulk volume of the waste which must be subsequently managed as a hazardous waste 

provided that:

(I) The generator complies with the applicable requirements of Chapter 335- 14-3;

(II) The treatment process does not result in a change in the chemical composition of the waste(s) 

treated;

(III) No mixing of different waste streams occurs;

(IV) No free liquids are included in the waste(s) to be treated or generated by the treatment 

process;

(V) The potential for ignition and/or reaction of the waste during treatment and/or as the result of 

treatment does not exist;

(VI) The treatment reduces the volume of hazardous waste which must be subsequently managed;

(VII) Such treatment does not result in the emission or discharge of hazardous wastes or hazardous 

constituents into the environment in excess of any standard(s) promulgated by the Department or 

the Environmental Protection Agency;

(VIII) With respect to treatment, the generator complies with the applicable requirements of Rules 
335-14-5-.02(5), 335-14-5-.02(6), 335-14-5-.02(7), 335-14-5-.02(8), 335-14-5-.03, 335-14-5-.04, 

335-14-5-.07(2), 335-14-5-.07(5), 335-14-5-.09, 335- 14-5-.10; and

(IX) The generator provides the Department with written notice of intent to treat such hazardous 

wastes on or before the effective date of 335-14-8-.01 or at least 60 days prior to the initiation of 

waste treatment, whichever date occurs last. This notice must provide documentation of 

compliance with the requirements of 335-14-8- .01(1)(c)2.(x)(II), (III), (IV), (V), (VI), (VII), and 

(VIII), and must be maintained for the life of the facility and be available for inspection.

Stakeholder: PhRMA Topic: Incorporate into regulations guidance 

associated with treatment in containers

Comment: 265 Subparts I and J – EPA has written guidance that clarifies that generators can 

conduct treatment in tanks and containers in less than 90-day storage areas. PhRMA recommends 

that EPA incorporate this into the regulations.

Stakeholder: State of Florida Topic: Clarify types of treatment allowed 

without a permit

Comment: Requirements for on-site treatment and disposal: 262.10(c).

262.10(c) has misled a number of generators who assume that they may dispose of hazardous 

waste on-site without a permit, or may treat hazardous waste by burning or fuel blending. The 

section should state explicitly what types of treatment in tanks andcontainers are allowed without a 

permit, and should state “This section does not exempt a generator who treats, stores or disposes of 

hazardous waste on-site from the applicable standards and permit requirements set forth in 40 CFR 

Parts 264, 265, 266,268 and 270.”

Stakeholder: State of Florida Topic: Rename Subpart C

Comment: 262 Subpart C – Pre Transport Requirements. This subpart should be re-named, as it 

also covers requirements for storage prior to on site treatment or disposal. FDEP suggests 

“Storage (or Accumulation) and Treatment Requirements.” 

Stakeholder: American Petroleum Institute 

(API) 

Topic: Incorporate into regulations guidance 

associated with treatment in containers

Comment: EPA has written guidance that clarifies that generators can conduct treatment in tanks 

and containers in less than 90-day storage areas. API recommends that EPA incorporate this 

guidance into the regulations.
Possibly new comment:

Stakeholder: State of North Carolina Topic: Clarify types of treatment allowed 

without a permit

Comment: 40 CFR 262 regulations should provide a list of allowable treatment activities (e.g. 

on-site distillation) that can be performed in the containers and tanks at satellite accumulation 

areas and in the 90-day or 180-day storage area of a generator’s facility.

Stakeholder: Graphic Arts Coalition 

(GAC)

Topic: Reconsider the whole subject of hazardous 

waste treatment when “treatment” is in place for 

purposes of facilitating reuse of a spent material

Comment: The GAC strongly encourages EPA to reconsider the whole subject of hazardous waste 

treatment when “treatment” is in place for purposes of facilitating reuse of a spent material. All 

printers regardless of size use ink and cleaning compounds. The spent materials are generally 

considered hazardous due to the characteristic of ignitability. A company should be allowed to 

“treat” a waste, including thermal treatment, without having to secure a permit or interim status 

when the waste is destined for reuse on site. EPA has already partially set the stage for this 

recommendation by allowing SQGs the opportunity to “treat waste on site in accumulation tanks 

or containers without a permit or interim status provided that they comply with applicable 

provisions in 40 CFR 262.34 and the treatment is not thermal treatment (Guidance Memo – Small 

Quantity Generator Treatment in Tanks dated 8/1/2003).

GAC recognizes an opportunity already exists for generators to recycle waste materials when the 

process is closed looped and part of the primary manufacturing process. However, these 

restrictions make recycling infeasible in a typical printing plant. The most common materials 

available for recycling are cleaning compounds however the nature of manual cleaning doesn’t 

lend itself to a “closed loop” process. And, the most common method of recycling is distillation, a 

process that is thermal and “open loop” in nature. Consequently, printers either dispose of their 

cleaning compounds off-site, often at cement kilns for fuels blending, or send the cleaning 

compounds to an off-site treatment facility where the cleaning compounds are distilled and 

returned to the printer for reuse on site. In practice, these restrictions discourage recycling and are 

counterproductive to good environmental management. 

Introducing an element of flexibility that allows generators to treat hazardous wastes on site in an 

“open loop” process where the entire life cycle of the process occurs on site should be a practice 

encouraged by the Agency. Treatment and reuse on site reduces the risk of an over-the-road 

spill, reduces fuel use and emissions associated with transportation, reduces energy needed 

to manufacture new raw materials replacing the spent material, and can be economically 

advantageous. 

9 commenters; 10 comments