Faxback 11868
9441.1994(24)
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
August 30, 1994
Ms. Kristina M. Woods
Environmental Counsel
Law Department
Ashland Chemical Company
P.O. Box 2219
Columbus, Ohio 432l6
Dear Ms. Woods:
Thank you for your letter dated August 3, 1994 requesting
verification of Ashland Chemical's position regarding the
regulatory status of high purity chemicals that are initially used
by Ashland's high purity chemical customers and are then sold to
other businesses for further use. Ashland's position is that reuse
of the chemicals constitutes continued use of a product and that
therefore, these materials are not subject to regulation as spent
materials under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
regulations.
Under the existing RCRA regulations, a "spent material" is "any
material that has been used and as a result of contamination can no
longer serve the purpose for which it was produced without
processing." As you correctly note, the RCRA definition of spent
material does not include materials that are reused for their
original purpose, provided that the materials do not undergo
reclamation or reprocessing prior to their reuse. For example, as
you note, the reuse of a solvent (first used to clean circuit
board) as a metal degreaser constitutes a legitimate use of a
product for its original purpose. In this example, the fact that
the solvent is "spent" in terms of its use as a circuit boards
cleaner does not make it a spent material as defined by RCRA.
Rather, as long as the solvent does not undergo reclamation prior
to its reuse as a metal degreaser, it would be considered a product
excluded from jurisdiction under RCRA. It is important to point out
here that the determining factor is not whether a used chemical is
marketable, but rather whether it is reused in a manner consistent
with its original use without prior reclamation.
Additionally, you should note that the Office of Solid Waste (OSW)
recently established a Definition of Solid Waste Task Force to
review the current system by which hazardous waste recycling is
regulated. Over the past year, the Task Force has developed
recommendations on how to improve the RCRA regulations to encourage
the safe recycling of hazardous waste. The Task Force proposes a
tiered regulatory system for hazardous waste recyclers based on the
source of the recyclable materials and the recycling location. The
Agency is currently considering revising its RCRA regulations based
on these recommendations.
Under the Task Force proposal, Ashland's customers would be
subject to regulation under RCRA as "Category A" recyclers.
Category A includes spent materials directly reused off-site.
(Under the Task Force' revised definition, the used chemicals that
Ashland sells for reuse off-site would be considered spent
materials.) As Category A recyclers, Ashland's customers would be
subject to the minimum requirements for a RCRA recycler. These
include notifying the Agency of recycling activities, use of a
"recyclable materials" manifest for materials transport, and filing
a biennial report on the volume and type of waste generated, how it
was managed, and whether it was managed on- or off-site. The
Agency will be making a decision on whether and to what extent to
proceed with the Task Force recommendations over the next several
months.
Finally, you should also note that EPA Regions and States
authorized to implement the hazardous waste program make
determinations regarding the requirements that apply to specific
materials and facilities. Some States have programs more stringent
than the Federal hazardous waste program. I hope this addresses
your concerns. Please call Mitch Kidwell at (202) 260- 8551 or
Becky Daiss at (202) 260-8718 if you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
David Bussard, Director
Characterization and Assessment Division
---------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ashland Chemical Company
Division of Ashland Oil Inc.
Law Department
P.O. Box 2219
Columbus, Ohio 43216
August 3, 1994
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
Michael Shapiro
Director, Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M. Street S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Subject: Resale of High Purity Chemical Products
Dear Mr. Shapiro:
Ashland Chemical Company's Electronic Chemical Division (ECD) in
support of our waste minimization efforts, requests that the U.S.
EPA Office of Solid Waste review the enclosed position paper
regarding the resale of high purity chemical products. The position
paper provides the rationale for Ashland's position that this
activity will not involve solid waste based on Federal regulations.
Ashland is also basing this position on language from the Federal
Register in which the United States EPA describes essentially the
same activity we are proposing and exempts it from solid waste
regulation. More specifically, Ashland relies on 50 Federal
Register 614 Part II(I)(A)(1): Spent Materials, in which the Agency
describes exemptions from the category of spent materials. "An
example of this is where solvents used to clean circuit boards are
no longer pure enough for that continued use, but are still pure
enough for use as metal degreasers. These solvents are not spent
materials when used for metal degreasing. The practice is simply
continued use of a solvent. (This is analogous to using/reusing a
secondary material as an effective substitute for commercial
products.)"
Following your review, please provide written verification that
Ashland's position is consistent with the U.S. EPA's solid and
hazardous waste regulations. Ashland has been in contact with the
appropriate agency in Texas, the location of the proposed activity,
to determine the appropriate state regulations that might affect
transporting, manifesting and management of this process. The Texas
Water Commission (now Texas Natural Resources Conservation
Commission) agreed with our position. (See attached letter.)
Thank you for your assistance with this matter. If you have any
questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at the above
number or Herb Richardson in our Electronic Chemicals Division at
(614) 889-4551.
Very truly yours,
Kristina M. Woods
cc: Herb Richardson
---------------------------------------------------------------
Enclosure
---------------------------------------------------------------
TEXAS WATER COMMISSION
John Hall, Chairman
Pam Reed, Commissioner
Peggy Garner, Commissioner
March 23, 1993
Mr. Don E. Gebhardt
Environmental Engineer
Ashland Chemical, Inc.
P.O. Box 2219
Columbus, Ohio 43216
Re: Review of Position Paper on the Resale of Spent High
Purity Chemical Products
Dear Mr. Gebhardt:
We have reviewed the position paper for the resale of spent high
purity chemical products at your Electronic Chemical Division,
submitted to the Texas Water Commission (TWC) on March 17, 1993.
From the information submitted to TWC, it appears that your
proposed activity is not subject to permitting requirements.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr.
Srinath Venkataramiah, at (512) 908-6382.
Sincerely,
Chris Peckham, Supervisor
Facility Team I
Industrial and Hazardous Waste Permits Section
---------------------------------------------------------------
Enclosure
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ashland Chemical Company
Electronic Chemicals Division
Regulatory Position
Regarding: "Spent" High Purity Chemical Product Sales
The Electronic Chemicals Division of Ashland Chemical Company
("Ashland") is proposing to develop a clearing house to collect and
distribute "spent" High Purity chemicals from our high purity
chemical customers. (We are using the term "spent" in the sense
that these chemicals are no longer suitable for use in the
production of semiconductors; but they are suitable for use in
other applications. Thus, they are not spent by RCRA definition.)
The intent of this service is to help our customers minimize their
waste disposal through the reuse of the spent chemicals by other
industries. We also believe that without this clearing house many
of these products would be neutralized and discharged to sanitary
sewers or disposed of as hazardous waste. Ashland, as the clearing
house, will utilize its existing technical grade customer base and
high purity chemical customer, base to conserve resources and
minimize the waste generated by our customers.
To further explain our position it is important that you understand
that our current business is unique. Ashland's primary customers
are semiconductor manufacturing plants. These are extremely clean
operations which require that Ashland supply products mixed in a
clean room environment, filtered and particle counted, and packed
in specifically designed containers which preserve chemical
integrity. Most product specifications require that even the lowest
grade clean room chemicals contain no more than 300 parts per
million of metallic impurities. Higher quality products are sold
with a guarantee that they contain less than one part per billion
per element of metallic contaminant. In contrast, the standard
chemical blending, packaging, and distribution business does not
depend on extremely low particle counts, and metal contaminants are
usually not even measured. The proposed clearing house(s), at an,
as yet undetermined site(s), would essentially consist of
collecting, and in some cases consolidating, these streams and
redistributing them to other markets with no further processing.
The materials that would initially be collected and redistributed
would include sulfuric acid, isopropyl alcohol, hydrochloric acid,
hydrofluoric acid, and phosphoric acid.
Ashland will establish an extensive paper trail and quality control
program to assure that all materials collected are marketable. All
materials prior to receipt will be extensively characterized. Due
to the nature of the generator operations it is expected that
product variability will essentially be non-existent. Records of
all product pick ups, on-site storage, and shipments will be well
documented, readily available for review and retained for a period
of five years. Documentation of the purchaser's use will also be
maintained to demonstrate that product use can not be construed to
be "use constituting disposal".
Regulatory Requirements:
It is Ashland's position that under Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, specifically 261.2(e)(1), the materials would not be
classified as a solid waste and, therefore, the materials would not
be a hazardous waste. This section states:
Materials are not solid wastes when they can be shown to be
recycled by being:
(i) Used or reused as ingredients in an industrial
process to make a product, provided the
materials are not being reclaimed; or
(ii) Used or reused as effective substitutes for
commercial products; or
(iii) Returned to the original process from which
they were generated, without first being
reclaimed. The material must be returned as a
substitute for raw material feedstock, and the
process must use raw materials as principal feedstocks.
Based on this citation, it is our position that we are not required
to file permit applications or notices of activity since this
operation will not involve any hazardous or residual waste. If
necessary, Ashland will file for local building, operating and air
permits should new facilities or tankage be required.