Overview
Indication its no longer useable for intended purpose
So what is the deal with “waste” versus “used” and why is that acceptable labeling now?
- Past – “Waste” = Waste Determination
- Present – “Waste” ≠ Waste Determination
- “Waste”, “used”, “spent”, “excess” are all considered acceptable.
- Words “hazardous waste” are not usually acceptable.
The first element to consider when determining whether a container is adequately labeled is if it contains some sort of indication that the chemical is no longer usable for its intended purpose. In the past, EHS advised the campus to avoid the word “waste” when labeling waste containers. In fact, we would even cite a laboratory for using the word “waste.” The reasons for this was that the regulators applied a very literal interpretation (in the context of hazardous waste container labeling requirements) to the word “waste.” They reasoned that if the container had been labeled as “waste” then someone in the lab had made a waste determination. As we just discussed, lab staff are not, nor have they ever been trained to RCRA standards and are therefore not qualified to make a waste determination. This led to Notices of Violation related to training requirements and even improper waste determinations. The fix was essentially semantics. We attempted to remove the word “waste” from everyone’s vocabulary. Some old timers still refuse to utter the word!
Eventually, regulatory agencies recognized that in a university setting, this literal interpretation of the word “waste” on a container was burdensome and it was unrealistic to expect all staff and students to be adequately trained in RCRA requirements. It was also recognized that in practice, regardless of what word was being used to identify discarded material, UNL and other institutions had implemented an effective program to ensure a waste determination was being made by a qualified individual and the waste was subsequently managed properly when disposed.
EPA even passed new regulations specific to Colleges and Universities. Their new approach recognized that EHS staff are the ones actually making the waste determination. That removed the stigma of the word “waste.” So, we are no longer concerned with the word “waste.” The bottom line is that the container must be marked in some way to indicate that the material is no longer usable for its intended purpose; commonly used adjectives include “used,” “spent,” “excess,” and “waste.” Acceptable terms are not limited to these.
However, use of the words “hazardous waste” as an indication that a material is no longer usable for its intended purpose is not allowed, with one exception. That exception would be in situations where a waste material of a certain and consistent composition is generated and EHS has made the waste determination and it is on file. In those cases, a waste collection container could be labeled with these words without triggering the RCRA training requirements for laboratory workers.