Commercial Chemical Product or Waste? Commercial Chemical Product Checklist

In  2017, EPA provided additional guidance to differentiate between commercial chemical products (CCPs) and manufactured articles in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Online Document #14887. In the guidance, EPA noted that manufactured articles, such as batteries, fluorescent lamps, and thermometers, are devices designed for a purpose other than to access the device’s internal chemicals. Specifically, batteries, lamps, and thermometers are used for electrical energy, for light, or to measure temperature, respectively, and not to access the mercury, lead, or other chemicals contained in them. Therefore, batteries, fluorescent lamps, and thermometers are not CCPs.


Abandoned Chemical Products Stored
In Lieu Of Disposal

To assist manufacturers in determining if their waste is regulated as a CCP, EPA offered the following checklist:

Commercial Chemical Product Checklist

Does the facility appear to be managing the material being evaluated in  a manner that suggests it is a product  (as opposed to being abandoned or stored in lieu of abandonment)?
1	Are the containers used to store the material in good condition (vs. crushed, bulging,  corroded, dusty, leaking, incompatible with the contents, open, or overpacked)?
2	Are the containers of concern stored in a manner that suggests the material has value?  (For example, is the material protected from precipitation, locked-up when the facility is not  operating, or stored in a fenced/secure area?)
3	Does the management of the containers appear to preserve the material's integrity and serve to  prevent the material from becoming unstable, unusable or contaminated?
4	Do the containers have labels that identify the contents as product?
5	Do the container labels have information, such as lot number, manufacture date, or  expiration date, to help determine the age/viability of the material, particularly if a recommended  expiration date has been exceeded?
6	If a container is not labeled, can the facility support a claim that the contents is a product  (e.g., provide analytical testing results to verify that the material meets specifications for use,  or explain that it recently had to transfer contents to a new container due to damage to the  original container and can provide record of purchase)?
7	Does the condition of the material suggest it is a valuable product? (For example, no crystals  have formed inside or outside the container, the material is not discolored, there is no phase  separation evident)
8	Does the facility manage the material as a valuable commodity by limiting access to the material  and having security procedures in place to prevent unauthorized removal of the material?
Does the facility appear to be using the material being evaluated in the production  of its products or in support of production operations (as opposed to being abandoned  or stored in lieu of abandonment)?
1	Can the facility describe how the material is used or show where the material is used in the facility?
2	Do the containers storing the material in question appear to be stored in an appropriate location  Is the material stored according to manufacturer recommendations (e.g., recommended  temperatures, light)? Are the containers accessible? Are the materials being stored in the same  location as other similar product materials?
3	Do product specifications exist for the material or process in which it is to be used (e.g., minimum  concentration of an active ingredient, maximum concentrations of contaminants, or dates beyond  which the material should not be used)?
4	Is there a process in place for the facility to compare the properties of the material in question to  specifications that must be met in order for the material to be used for the claimed purpose, or is  documentation available to support a facility claim that the material meets such specifications?
5	Does it appear that the facility has purchased new material that will be used for the same purpose  as the material in question?
6	Are records available to demonstrate that the facility has NOT written off the material as a loss  (indicating that the facility still believes that the material has a use)?
Does the facility appear to be selling into commerce the material being evaluated  (as opposed to being abandoned or stored in lieu of abandonment)?
1	Does the facility have “active” customers or a market for the material?
2	If yes, can the facility provide a list of such customers and document recent shipments  of the material for subsequent distribution in commerce, or provide copies of contracts  from past or future sales?
3	Can the facility identify any competitors for the sale of the material to support a claim that there  is an existing or potential market for the material?
4	Can the facility provide a list of inactive or past customers that purchased the material?
5	Can the facility provide any information about a future market for the material?
6	Is a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) or SDS under OSHA’s new Globally Harmonized System  available for the material (supporting a claim that the material has been in, or will enter, commerce)?
7	Does the facility have a system for accepting/managing returned or off-specification products it  produced and utilizing that material to produce a new product? If so, is this system documented?
8	Has the material been recalled or returned from a customer? If so, can the facility explain how it  intends to use the material? Is there a market for the returned material?

Caltha LLP | Your EH&S Compliance, Auditing 

and EMS/SMS Partner

PPE Assessment and Employee Exposure Review For Minnesota Manufacturer

Caltha LLP Project Summary

Project: PPE Assessment
Client: Chemical Formulating Facility
Location(s): Minnesota

Key Elements: PPE assessment, OSHA hazard communication, employee training, safety data sheet, employee exposure control

Overview: Caltha LLP was retained by this chemical processing facility to conduct a PPE assessment for specific processing areas, including dry mixing, blending, wet mixing, and packaging. Caltha staff reviewed raw material and finished product safety data sheets, as well as specific tasks being conducted in each area. For each area, a standard set of employee PPE was prescribed; specific materials which require additional or other types of PPE were then identified. Employees were provided training, including visual reminders at each work station, to alert them when PPE beyond the standard was required.

For more information on Caltha LLP services, go to the Caltha Contact Page

EPA Guidance On Aligning Pesticide Labels With GHS Requirements

The US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) has released a Pesticide Registration Notice (PR Notice) in the April 20 Federal Register entitled “Pesticide Registration Notice 2012-1: Material Safety Data Sheets as Pesticide Labeling.” OPP puts out PR Notices to inform pesticide registrants and others about important policies, procedures, and registration-related decisions, as well as guidance to registrants and OPP personnel.

The Notice provides guidance to pesticide registrants concerning the relationship between EPA-approved labels for pesticides registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS, also known as the Safety Data Sheet or SDS), required by OSHA. It explains how registrants can ensure their FIFRA labeling and SDSs comply with both EPA and OSHA requirements. The New PR Notice is intended to update previous PR Notice 92-4, in which EPA determined that a MSDS that accompanies a pesticide product is considered part of the pesticide’s labeling, but may accompany a pesticide product without notification or approval from the Agency, provided the labeling is consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 156.

OSHA requires SDSs under its Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) at 29 CFR 1910.1200, and is moving to align HCS requirements with the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). OSHA published its final rule for HCS on March 26, 2012, and will begin to accept SDSs that are prepared according to the final rule’s requirements on May 25, 2012.

EPA has not yet moved to amend its labeling regulations to be consistent with the GHS, which leads to differences between EPA’s current requirements and OSHA’s new requirements related to classification criteria, hazard statements, pictograms, and signal words. EPA and OSHA worked together to develop PR Notice 2012-1 to address concerns about those differences. EPA says the PR-Notice is intended to aid registrants in assuring that SDSs for their products are not considered inconsistent with the EPA-approved product labeling for pesticides registered under FIFRA by providing guidance on how a registrant may reconcile an SDS with its associated FIFRA labeling.

EPA is also asking for public comment on the information collection activities and related burden estimates associated with the guidance provided in PR Notice 2012-1. Comments must be received on or before June 19, 2012.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EH&S compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EH&S management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

EPCRA 312 Tier II Reports Due March 1, 2012

EPCRA Tier II Hazardous Chemical Storage Reports are due March 1 for sites subject to hazardous chemical reporting. Under the Federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), any facility that stores hazardous chemicals can have both one-time and annual reporting, specified in Section 311 and 312 of EPCRA. Under EPCRA, hazardous chemicals are any substances for which a facility must maintain a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) under the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard – if a material has an MSDS, it is considered to be a hazardous chemical under EPCRA. This can include materials which might not immediately be considered “chemicals”, such as batteries, fuels, metals, etc.

EPCRA rules apply to all types of sites, and are not limited to a particular industrial sector – reporting sites can be commercial, institutional, warehousing, retail or any other type of site which could store or use chemicals. Facilities with chemicals in quantities that equal or exceed the thresholds must report. The thresholds can be specific to different types of chemicals and can be as low as 500 pounds for some materials, and as high as 10,000 pounds.

As an overview, to comply with EPCRA hazardous chemical storage reporting requirements, for any hazardous chemical used or stored on-site above threshold amounts, facilities must maintain a MSDS, and submit the MSDSs to their State Emergency Response Commission (SERC), Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) and local fire department. Over time, if the site recieves revised MSDS, most current MSDS must also be submitted. Facilities must also report an annual inventory of these chemicals by March 1 of each year to their SERC, LEPC and local fire department. Under the Federal rule, facilities could provide a report using either a Tier I or Tier II form. However, in practice most States require the Tier II form be used.

Request information on EPCRA Reporting consultant services

FAQ: How are Tier I and Tier II reports different?

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the preparation and submittal of chemical storage reports, preparation of Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reports, and preparing cost-effective EH&S management programs.


For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

OMB Extends Review of OSHA Globally Harmonized System Rule

The Office of Management & Budget (OMB) has extended its review of the final rule on hazard communication requirements in the workplace, which had been expected to be completed in January 2012. In 2011, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration submitted its final rule which would revise labeling and material safety data sheet requirements to align with the "globally harmonized system" (or GHS) used in many other countries. This final rule must be reviewed and approved by OMB prior to being published in the Federal Register.

For more information on the GHS rule, go to:

Summary of Globally Harmonized System for hazard communication and labeling

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EH&S compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EH&S management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

OSHA Submits Final GHS Rule To OMB

On October 25, OSHA took the last step to officially adopt the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling (GHS) into the U.S.'s Hazard Communication Standard. On that day, OSHA submitted the final rule to The Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB then has up to 90 days to review and finalize the rule before it is published in the Federal Register, and becomes final.

Based on this schedule, the final rule is expected to be published in January 2012.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EH&S compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EH&S management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Publication of Final Hazard Communication Rule Delayed

The U.S. Department of Labor - Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) has announced that its final Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) rule, originally scheduled for released in August 2011, has been delayed for a few weeks due to the extensive review of the final standard. The final standard is not expected to be published in September 2011. The final Hazard Communication rule is entering final Departmental review and will be sent to OMB once this review is complete

OSHA had proposed a three-year implementation period to phase in compliance with the revised hazard communication rule. During the rulemaking comment periods and at the public hearings, stakeholders submitted recommended implementation periods ranging from 3 to 15 years. OSHA has indicated that it has considered all of these comments and the implementation period will be announced when the final rule is published. However, a company may opt to classify the products now according to GHS as long as it also follows the current Hazard Communication Standard. OSHA did not propose any changes in the language requirements in the Hazard Communication Standard. However, GHS is designed to enable workers of limited literacy in the English language to understand the information.

OSHA’s preliminary estimate is that updating the Hazard Communication Standard will create a substantial annualized savings for employers of at least $585 million. The majority of these benefits will be realized through increases in productivity for health and safety managers as well as for logistics personnel.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EH&S compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EH&S management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

New EPCRA Tier I & Tier II Reporting Forms Proposed

US EPA has proposed a significant revision to the forms and types of information required to be submitted under EPCRA Tier I and Tier II. Title III of SARA (EPCRA) established authorities for emergency planning and preparedness, emergency release notification reporting, community right to-know reporting, and toxic chemical release reporting. It is intended to encourage State and local planning and preparedness for releases of extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) and to provide the public, local governments, fire departments and other emergency officials with information concerning chemical releases and the potential chemical risks in their communities.

As background, under the emergency planning provisions of EPCRA (40 CFR part 355), a facility is required to provide a one-time notification to the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) and the local emergency planning committee (LEPC) if the facility has any EHS present at the site in excess of its threshold planning quantity (TPQ). Reporting requirements under the community right-to-know provisions, sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA are ongoing obligations. Sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA apply to owners and operators of facilities that are required to prepare or have available a material safety data sheet (MSDS) for a hazardous chemical defined under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) Hazard Communication Standard (HCS). If the hazardous chemical is present at or above the reporting thresholds, the facility owner or operator is required to submit a MSDS to the SERC and LEPC. Under section 312 of EPCRA, if a hazardous chemical is present at or above the reporting threshold, the facility owner or operator is required to submit an emergency and hazardous chemical inventory form (Tier I or Tier II) to the SERC, LEPC and the local fire department annually by March 1.

Request information on EPCRA reporting support services provided by Caltha

The Tier I and Tier II forms were first published in 1987 and were amended in
1990. Recently, State and local agencies requested that EPA modify these forms to include new data elements and revise existing data elements to make it more useful for emergency planning and response.

What is the difference between Tier I and Tier II reporting requirements under EPCRA?

One of the important changes proposed for the EPCRA Tier I and Tier II reporting forms helps clarify how quantities of EHS chemicals were determined. In a final rule published in 2008, EPA clarified how to report a hazardous chemical mixture. The facility has to aggregate all amounts of that EHS present throughout the facility in mixtures and in pure form to determine if the reporting threshold for EHS has been met or exceeded. If the reporting threshold for that EHS is exceeded, then the facility would have an option to report the mixture or the EHS component.

The current Tier I and Tier II reporting form requires facilities to report the name of the mixture, indicate whether the mixture contains an EHS, indicate the physical and health hazards of the mixture, and report the amount present on-site, as well as the type of storage and storage locations. The regulated community and the state and local agencies, however, are unsure if the amount present on-site refers to the mixture or the non-EHS hazardous chemical or the EHS in the mixture. In order to clarify the reporting of pure chemicals vs. mixtures, the proposed Tier II form has separate entries for mixtures and pure chemicals.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EH&S compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EH&S management programs.


For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

OSHA GHS Hazard Communication Final Rule Expected In August 2011

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has released their timetable on the adoption of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) into the federal hazard communication standards. After a long rulemaking process, which began with an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in September 2006, a Final Rule is expected to be completed in August 2011.

The current OSHA hazard communication standard used in the United States is not consistent internationally and can cause complications when dealing with international trade. Adoption of the GHS into federal requirements will allow US manufacturers, employers and employees to use a hazard communication system that is more recognizable worldwide. Several countries, including the European Union, have already adopted the GHS, with varying implementation schedules.

[Read a Regulatory Briefing on the proposed GHS standard]

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EH&S compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EH&S management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Fuel Conditional Exemptions From EPCRA Tier 2 Reporting

Do facilities need to report fuels stored on-site under EPCRA 311 and 312? In most cases, fuels must be considered under EPCRA 311 and 312, and must be reported on Tier I or Tier II forms if the maximum inventory during the reporting year exceeds the EPCRA reporting threshold of 10,000 pounds, or lower if an Extremely Hazardous Substance (EHS). There are some limited exceptions for fuel storage. However, these apply only to retail establishments and only to storage in underground storage tanks (USTs). For such facilities, the condition exemption applies only to two fuel types: •For gasoline at a retail gas station, the threshold level is 75,000 gallons, if storage meets some specific conditions •For diesel fuel at a retail gas station, the threshold level is 100,000 gallons, again if storage meets some specific conditions.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the preparing hazardous material and chemical inventories for EPCRA Tier I and Tier II reports, preparing EPCRA 311 and EPCRA 312 reports, and preparing cost-effective chemical inventory and MSDS management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at

info@calthacompany.com

or

Caltha LLP Website

OSHA - Proposed Globally Harmonized System GHS for MSDS

OSHA has proposed to modify its existing Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) to conform with the United Nations’ (UN) Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). The Agency anticipates this improved information will enhance the effectiveness of the HCS in ensuring that employees are apprised of the chemical hazards to which they may be exposed, and in reducing the incidence of chemical-related occupational illnesses and injuries.

The proposed modifications to the standard include:

• revised criteria for classification of chemical hazards;
• revised labeling provisions that include requirements for use of standardized signal words, pictograms, hazard statements, and precautionary statements;
• a specified format for safety data sheets; and related revisions to definitions of terms used in the standard, requirements for employee training on labels and safety data sheets.

OSHA is also proposing to modify provisions of a number of other standards, including standards for flammable and combustible liquids, process safety management, and most substance-specific health standards, to ensure consistency with the modified HCS requirements.

Written comments by December 29, 2009.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation hazardous material hazards, developing handling procedures, and preparing cost-effective waste management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

EPCRA 311 - 312 Reports - Amendments to Reporting Requirements

On November 3, 2008, US EPA published a revision to rules under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) Sections 311 and 312.

The key revisions included the following:

• Clarification on acceptable calculation methods for mixtures containing EPCRA chemicals to determine if reporting thresholds are exceeded;
• Defining the time allowed to report changes at the facility relevant to EPCRA chemicals to appropriate agencies. This includes notifying that the facility is no longer in operation, then new extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) are present at the facility, if EHSs are moved to a different location at the facility, if EHSs are no longer present at the facility, and other changes relevant to emergency planning.

For more information, refer to:

Regulatory Briefing - Revision to EPCRA Reporting Requirements

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Globally Harmonized Standard (GHS) - Relationship to Other Regulatory Programs

Implementation of the Globally Harmonized Standard (GHS) in the US will indirectly affect other regulatory compliance programs. The communication of hazards is required by OSHA, however certain aspects are also regulated by other agencies. The USEPA regulates labeling and hazard communication for pesticides; the US DOT regulates the labeling and placarding of hazardous materials while in transport. These agencies will also be responding to the GHS.

Although required by OSHA, the information contained in an MSDS will be used by other regulatory programs. For example, many facilities that have an air emission permit and must prepare an annual air emission inventory (AEI) will utilize the information contained in their raw material MSDSs to determine their facility emissions. Facilities may also use the MSDS data to determine if wastes contain chemicals that are used to identify “hazardous wastes”. Previously, information on other regulations that may apply to a chemical has not been required to be included in an MSDS. This is primarily due to the fact that OSHA, the agency requiring the MSDS, did not have authority in these other areas. In many cases, companies preparing MSDSs have included information on other regulatory programs. For example, an MSDS will often list the Reportable Quantity (RQ) under CERCLA in the event of spills. Under the GHS, information on other regulations that apply to the substance is required on the MSDS. One of the challenges chemical manufacturers and distributors will have is to determine what regulations apply – especially considering that this is an “international” system, and therefore would not be limited to the regulations of one country, such as the US.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website

Changes To Hazard Communication Requirements Under Globally Harmonized Standard (GHS)

In 1992, the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED) adopted a mandate that a standardized system be developed to classify, label and communicate the hazard of materials. Several countries, including the US and Canada, had developed their own systems; however, inconsistencies between the individual requirements of these countries made international trade more challenging. While similar, the regulations of each country are different enough to require multiple labels and safety data sheets for the same product in international trade. A multinational work group, including representatives from U.S. Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA), began developing the standard, now termed the Globally Harmonized System (GHS).

The GHS was adopted by the United Nations (UN) in 2003 and there is an international goal for as many countries as possible to implement the GHS by 2008. OSHA intends to revise the Hazard Communication Standard to align with the GHS and published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in 2006. The current Hazard Communication Standard affects many, if not most, industrial and commercial employers in the US. Most will have developed Hazard Communication programs to meet the current OSHA requirements. Changes to the requirements will impact most of these companies.

The revision to the Hazard Communication Standard will also directly affect manufacturers and distributors of chemicals. These companies may need to review and revise existing Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) to meet new requirements.

This article highlights some of the key changes reflected in the GHS compared to the current OSHA Hazard Communication Standard.

Labeling requirements. The GHS will expand the information required for labeling. Under the current OSHA requirements, labels need to identify: 1) chemical or common name, and 2) nature of hazard.

Hazard Classification. One of the most significant changes compared to the current OSHA requirement is the classification of hazards. Although the current standard does include a system of hazard classification, the GHS revises this classification system and the criteria used to assign hazards to chemicals. The GHS also incorporates a standard list of potential health effects to be considered.

Training. The training requirements under the GHS are less prescriptive compared the current OSHA Hazard Communication Standard.

Material Safety Data Sheets. The basic information required in an MSDS will be similar to what is currently familiar to most employees and employers. However, several sections will become mandatory; these include Ecological Information, Transportation Information, Disposal Information & Regulatory Information. Although these sections are often voluntarily included in MSDS, the GHS will require they be included in all MSDSs.

Transportation Placarding. The GHS provides for standard pictograms to be used to mark dangerous goods in transport.


For further information contact Caltha LLP at
info@calthacompany.com
or
Caltha LLP Website