Conference Call with the Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection 

(DEEP)

Re: Hazardous Waste Generator Standards

March 14, 2013

Participants: 

Ross Bunnell, Sanitary Engineer, Connecticut DEEP, Bureau of Materials Management and 

Compliance Assurance, Waste Engineering & Enforcement Division

David Metz, Associate, Industrial Economics (IEc)

1. Q: What does Connecticut require facilities to do to document their waste 

determinations?

A: [Submitted via E-mail on March 13, 2013]

By way of clarification, I should note that our regulations don’t explicitly require the 

maintenance of documentation for “negative determinations.” However, there are several 

aspects of our hazardous waste regs and our implementation of them that basically

achieve the same end result. More specifically:

1.) We incorporate the federal language at 40 CFR 262.11 which states that “A 

person who generates a solid waste, as defined in 40 CFR 261.2, must determine 

if that waste is a hazardous waste...” For many years, we have interpreted this 

language to apply to ANY solid waste, even if it is ultimately determined not to 

be hazardous. For example, in penalty actions for violations of hazardous waste 

determination requirements, we do not consider it an excuse if one or more of the 

determinations turned out non-hazardous. Instead, in such penalty actions, we 

will assess penalties for all wastes in which the generator failed to determine if the 

waste is hazardous, or failed to fully determine all the EPA waste codes for which 

the waste is hazardous.

2.) We incorporate the federal provision at 40 CFR 262.40(c) which says that “A 

generator must keep a copy records of any test results, waste analyses, or other 

determinations made in accordance with §262.11 for at least three years from the 

date that the waste was last sent to on-site or off-site treatment, storage, or 

disposal.” We interpret this to mean that if a generator uses testing or analysis to 

perform either a positive or negative waste determination, they must retain

records of such testing or analysis and be able to supply them to us during an 

inspection.

3.) Our regulations modify the federal language in 40 CFR 262.11 to require that 

hazardous waste determinations be repeated annually.
4.) Our regulations also modify the federal language in 40 CFR 262.11(c)(2) to 

require that any generator using “knowledge of process” to satisfy hazardous 

waste determination requirements be “able to demonstrate clearly how he applied 

knowledge of the waste in making the determination” (in other words, be able to 

document the basis for the knowledge of process-based determination).

As a result of the above, when our inspectors perform inspections, they expect to see 

documentation supporting hazardous waste determinations for each solid waste generated 

at the facility, regardless of whether or not is was determined to be hazardous. For lowrisk wastes, such as ordinary solid waste generated in individual employee trash 

receptacles, we will not expect much more than confirmation that the company

effectively keeps potentially hazardous wastes (e.g., aerosol cans and small container of 

chemical products) out of that waste stream. (We actually look in trash dumpsters to 

confirm this.) However for other, more industrial-type wastes, we will specifically

expect to see test results or properly-documented “knowledge of process” 

information. This would include commonly-overlooked wastes such as used absorbents, 

buffing and grinding dusts, rags/wipers, waste gasoline, spent antifreeze, filters, paintrelated wastes (e.g., paint overspray, used PPE, etc.), old/overstock unused or abandoned 

chemicals/products, and wastewaters treated in evaporators.

If we find that a generator has not performed a determination on such a waste stream, or 

has not done so fully or properly, we will cite it as a violation, and issue them a Notice of 

Violation or pursue other enforcement action to require them to correct the violation.

2. Q: How do facilities make waste determinations?

A: This process varies waste stream by waste stream. Facilities may use testing (e.g., 

TCLP) or demonstrate “knowledge of process” (e.g., past sampling data for the same raw 

materials, material safety data sheet (MSDS), product constituent information). 

Knowledge of process is most commonly used to identify hazardous waste streams. 

Connecticut DEEP expresses caution about the limitations of knowledge of process 

determinations—these are best used by larger, more sophisticated facilities (LQGs) with 

dedicated environmental staff. It also discourages facilities from using MSDS to make 

negative determinations because manufacturers may not reliably report some materials 

whose concentrations are below 1 percent, but that would cause a sample to fail a TCLP 

analysis. Additional information is available at: 

http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2718&q=325422&deepNav_GID=1967 and 

http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2718&q=434308&deepNav_GID=1967.

Connecticut has a three-tiered industrial waste management system. Connecticut General 

Statutes Section 22a-454 pre-dates RCRA and is broader in scope than RCRA in that it 
regulates non-hazardous waste (“Connecticut regulated wastes”). These requirements are 

less stringent than RCRA, but more stringent that other states (e.g., buffing dust). 

3. Q: Based on your experience, can you estimate the percentage of non-hazardous waste 

versus hazardous waste determinations?

A: This varies greatly by facility. Some industries are overwhelmingly non-hazardous 

(e.g., nuts and bolts manufacturing with no cleaning processes). Other industries are 

overwhelmingly hazardous (e.g., stainless steel, brass, chrome plating, anything leadbased). Some indicators of hazardous waste include strong acids, caustics, lead, and parts 

cleaning.

4. Q: How do facilities report closures (either entire facility or individual unit closures)?

Can you estimate the approximate annual number of closures?

A: Notification of closure is not currently required. State closure requirements have been 

expanded to apply to LQGs and SQGs. Connecticut is also proposing a notification 

process for closures. Currently, inspectors will ask if any RCRA units have been closed 

when they do facility inspections. Identifying closures may be self-implementing process 

because they are reported (or not reported) through the maintenance of EPA identification 

numbers, which track generator status changes.

Follow-up items:

1) Ross will look into data on the number of generator status changes observed each 

year. (replied on March 15, 2013)

2) Ross will provide some sample inspection records to IEc that document waste streams 

determinations.