I Got Your Number. Is It Still The Same?

I thought borrowing a line from the Jackson Browne song, “You Love the Thunder” would be appropriate for this blog because he’s the man and it is about chemicals in the same hazard class, but with different UN numbers. I had all of his cassettes when I was teenager. I will never forget the summer I “lived” in the back yard of a friend’s auto body repair shop in Kutztown. I had spent the first month of that summer up in Canada, on canoe trip as a steersman, with my high school, Saint John’s Cathedral Boys School in Selkirk. The trip started just south of the tar sands on the Athabasca River in Alberta and ended in Yellowknife, on Great Slave Lake in the Northwest Territories. I found out when I got back that Dad had rented my apartment while I was gone and I didn’t want to pay rent for the rest of the summer, so I camped in a small 2-man tent, using the shop’s bathroom to shower. I would back up my MG to the door of my tent each night, put the gear shift into reverse and use the back up lights to entertain or as a reading lamp, listening to Jackson Brown on the little white convertible’s cassette player. It was the best summer of my life.

Placarding bulk and non-bulk containers of materials in the same hazard class, on the same vehicle could require two separate placards, even though the materials are in the same hazard class. I learned this after I sent out my recent blog “Dangerous, Will Robinson, Dangerous” on the DOT Dangerous placard, which I wrote to answer a customer’s question on placarding mixed loads of different containers of EPA hazardous waste, which they were loading onto their trucks.

He had a bulk container, a tote of Class 8 Corrosive materials in the back of the vehicle with 6 drums of a different Corrosive material, both in the same Hazard Class, but different UN identification numbers. He knew that he had to placard because the bulk tote triggered the corrosive placard with the tote’s material’s UN number, under the placarding requirements in 172.504 and bulk marking requirements 172.302.

It was the drums that concerned him. He was over 1001 pounds aggregate gross weight of Table 2 nonbulk containers, so the non-bulk drums of the corrosive would trigger the corrosive placard without the UN Number, under 173.504(c). The question was, could he use the UN numbered corrosive placard with the bulk container’s UN number for both the bulk and non-bulk containers of corrosives.

The answer turned out to be no. The bulk and non-bulk containers of corrosives could only share the UN numbered placards if both the bulk and non-bulk containers of corrosives share the same UN number. So it seems that the shipment of bulk and non-bulk corrosives with different UN numbers requires two corrosive placards, one for the bulk container displaying the bulk container’s UN number and one without a UN Number for the Table 2 non-bulk containers of corrosives.

Some of my readers may think it is foolish of me to provide free advice to them on the hazardous material, waste, chemical and substance regulations. But I must admit it is purely selfish. In the 25 years that Hazmat Rob’s Blog I GOT YOUR NUMBER. IS IT STILL THE SAME? I have been running seminars, I have never, ever, truly understood any government regulations by just reading or discussing it. It is only when I am forced to answer a difficult question, on a specific topic, that it really allows me understand the requirements. However, the best part of this is that sometimes by answering your specific question, it will help me understand a problem that I had with that regulation that I didn’t fully understand. So don’t hesitate to call or email me your questions. It might just allow me to understand that regulation a little bit more clearly. In fact, I might use your question as an example in my seminar or to explain it to someone else when they call. You’ve got my number. Thank you for your readership and support.

Robert J. Keegan
Publisher and President
Hazardous Materials Publishing Company, Inc.
Transportation Skills Programs, Inc.

©2017 Hazardous Materials Publishing Company, Inc

DO ME A SOLID

NEW HAZARDOUS WASTE RECORD KEEPING

DETERMINATION REQUIREMENTS

I cannot think of any company that does not generate some type of solidwaste. But, EPA is not sure that every company who generates solid waste is making an accurate determination as to whether that solid waste is ahazardous waste. All hazardous waste is solid waste. What I mean is, the hazardous waste regulations are found in 40 CFR Subchapter I of the SolidWaste Regulations under EPA, that’s why generators must keep track of their solid waste, in order to ensure their hazardous wastes are properly managed under the RCRA regulations. Currently, I believe 17 States require generators to document and track their solid wastes.

WASTE DETERMINATION

EPA requires that “hazardous waste determination for each solid waste must be made at the point of waste generation, before any dilution, mixing, or other alteration of the waste occurs, and at any time in the course of its management that it has, or may have, changed its properties as a result of exposure to the environment or other factors that may change the properties of the waste such that the RCRA classification of the waste may change.”

LISTED OR CHARACTERISTIC WASTE

There are basically two ways for a person to become a hazardous waste generator, first would be by generating a listed waste, like a listed spend solvent, in 262.31, by carrying out a listed waste process in 262.32, or by discarding a listed pure chemical in 262.33 in 40 CFR Subpart D The Lists of Hazardous Waste. Then, regardless of whether the waste is listed or not, the generator would be required to see if the material meets the definition of ignitable, corrosive, reactive or toxic prescribed by the tests in 262.20, Subpart C The Characteristics of a Hazardous Waste.

SUBPART D LISTED

EPA acknowledges that most generators use generator knowledge to make their hazardous waste determinations, which is appropriate, if accurate. In the new Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements rule; EPA states, “ In fact, generators can only use knowledge of their process and knowledge of the materials used in the production process to determine whether their waste meets any of the F-, K-, Pand U- waste listings.”

SUBPART C CHARACTERISTIC

However, generators of characteristic waste have the option of either carrying out the testing in Subpart C, as prescribed, or simply using their generator knowledge of the manufacturing process, information about the product, its components, any by-products and generator testing on the material that could cause the material to be a hazardous waste.

If the available knowledge or alternative testing done by the generator, is inaccurate to making the correct determination, the person must have a representative sample of the waste tested according the Hazardous Waste Characteristics in Subpart C or an equivalent method approved by the Admistrator. But, be aware if testing is required then the material must be managed as hazardous waste, until test results are received, confirming or ruling out it’s further management as a hazardous waste.

This is not new, this is considered to be a clarification under the new rule. Regardless whether the waste is tested under Subpart C or is listed in Subpart D generators must document and maintain their hazardous waste determination records.

TESTING DOCUMENTATION RECORDS

The hazardous waste testing documentation record keeping requirements have recently been clarified in 40 CFR 262.11 Hazardous Waste Determination And Record Keeping, for the types of information that inspectors will be asking for when testing is carried out by the generator, and which would include:

1. The chemical or physical characteristics of the wastes.

2. Information on the chemical and physical properties of the chemicals used or produced by the process or otherwise contained in the waste.

3. Results from the testing, that illustrates the properties and characteristics of the solid waste used to determine if the material is a hazardous waste.

GENERATOR KNOWLEDGE DETERMINATION RECORDS

However, when testing is not performed on a solid waste, to determine if it is a hazardous waste, generators must qualify the wastes determination by maintaining the following documentation for inspectors:

1. The chemical constituents, including feedstocks and other inputs to the production process.

2. Products, by-products, and intermediates produced by the manufacturing process.

3. Chemical or physical characteristics of the wastes.

4. The chemical and physical properties of the chemicals used or produced by the process.

5. Methods and results of any testing, other than those in Subpart C, that were used as part of a person’s knowledge to determine whether the solid waste is hazardous waste.

RETENTION OF RECORDS

It should also be noted that all hazardous waste determination records must be kept for three years from the date that the waste was sent for disposal, unless the record retention requirements are automatically extended in the event of an unresolved enforcement action or requested by the EPA. This is only one of the recent clarifications in the new Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule, that are contained in our new 2017/2018 Hazardous Materials Substance and Waste Compliance Guide. All of which will be covered in our in-house and regularly scheduled Hazardous Material Substance and Waste Compliance Seminars, which should be in your town soon. If you have any questions, comments or input please let us know. Thank you for your leadership and support.

Thank you for your readership and support.

Robert J Keegan
Publisher and President
The Hazardous Material Publishing Company
Transportation Skills Programs
rjkeegan@hazmat-tsp.com

Waste Generator Seeking Closure

The word ‘closure’ can be used for both physical and mental states. 

The “physical act” of closing something, to terminate a position, to close a door, stop operations. For example; The bar is now closed. 

The “mental state” of closure as in; attempt to get over or move on, attaining a sense of post experience contentment or finality. For example; Mother and I had finally reached closure.

I believe, that both may be attainable under the new container accumulation unit closure requirements in the Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule. For many years EPA has felt that the large quantity generator (LQG), Central accumulation area closure requirements, which were previously found in the newly reserved Section 262.34, and it’s references into Part 265, were confusing and difficult to follow. Which has prompted them to clarify and consolidate the closure regulations for LQG’s closure requirements into 262.17(a)(8). The major impact being the requirement that LQG Central Accumulation Area (CAA,) accumulation units once closed, must meet the same requirements as tanks, drip pads and containment buildings.

FACILITY CLOSURE
It should not be a surprise to you, that EPA still requires notification, when a LQG closes their facility that generate hazardous waste using form 8700–12, no later than 30 days prior to closing the facility. Then, have the additional burden of re-notifying EPA on the same form within 90 days after closing that the facility has met the closure performance standards that now appear in the newly consolidated 262.17(a)(8). However, one of the two new options that now apply for the closure of your hazardous waste container accumulation units, at any time before closing the facility might.

WASTE ACCUMULATION UNIT CLOSURE

OPTION 1|
These new requirements could require large quantity generators, who stop the storage of hazardous waste in container accumulation units, located within a LQG facility, before the facility is finally closed, meet all the requirements newly re-incorporated into 262.17(a)(8) for the clean closure of the waste accumulation unit.

OPTION 2
However, as previously mentioned, the new rule does provide a second option. Which, allows the generator to simply enter a notice into the facility’s operating record within 30 days after closure, identifying the waste accumulation unit’s location. Personally, I prefer this second option. Which, gives the generator an exemption from the clean close requirements until, the facility is shut down. Providing the generator the opportunity to reopen the unit at a later date, and allow for the removal of the closure notice from the operating record.

PHYSICAL CLOSURE
It’s always been straightforward that EPA requires notification when a LQG shuts down, using form 8700–12. no later than 30 days prior to “closing the facility”. With, the additional burden of re-notifying EPA on the same form within 90 days after closing that, the facility has met the closure performance standards that now appear in the newly consolidated 262.17(a)(8). Here’s what’s new, the two new options that now apply for the “closure of your hazardous waste container accumulation units”, at any time before the facility has closed.

CLEAN CLOSE
The clean closure standards for waste accumulation units would mandate the control, minimization, or elimination of contaminants to protect human health and the environment. To meet this goal LQG’s must insure that there will be no future escape of the hazardous waste constituents, leachate, contaminated runoff, or its decomposition by-products, into the groundwater or atmosphere. This would include any required decontamination of equipment or structures, and the removal of any remaining hazardous waste residues from waste accumulation units, containment system components, soils or subsoils.

CLOSURE WASTE’S MANAGEMENT
Any hazardous waste generated during the accumulation unit closure process or closure of the generator's facility, be managed as a hazardous waste, including the proper management, 90 days storage times and the final disposal at a permitted treatment, storage and disposal facility (TSDF). Be aware, that these closure requirements for the accumulation units are considered to be one of the “conditions for your exemption” from getting a TSDF permit. So, failure to meet these requirements would not lead to a citation under the closure regulations, but, could make you liable for operation of a un-permitted TSDF, including all it’s fines and penalties.

FACILITY’S LANDFILL DESIGNATION
If clean closure is not an option and contaminated soils and wastes cannot be practically removed or decontaminated, at the time of the facilities closure, the waste accumulation unit would be considered a landfill. Which, might require installing groundwater monitoring wells around the area and a post-closure groundwater monitoring program lasting up to 30 years.

MENTAL CLOSURE
As for the “Mental Closure” available in this new rule, I believe that can be attained in one of two ways as it regards to the accumulation unit closures. The first path to mental closure could be realized by performing clean closure for your waste accumulation units immediately upon their shutdown, experiencing a post clean closure contentment. Or, don’t ever start accumulating hazardous waste in a central accumulation area. Ship all your hazardous waste off site directly from a satellite accumulation area, for which the accumulation unit closure requirements do not apply. Avoiding the painful closure requirements all together. Then, by using either of these options, I believe one might attain a true sense of mental closure. Eliminating any uncomfortable future waste accumulation unit closure requirement engagements with the EPA.

CLOSING ARGUMENTS
If your goal is for closure in life, I cannot be much help. But, sincerely hope it is found! However, if you’re looking for it at work I might be able to help, as all of these accumulation unit closure requirements can be found in the new 2017/2018 Hazardous Materials Substances and Wastes Compliance Guide. And, of course I will be covering them extensively in the Hazardous Materials, Substances and Waste Compliance Seminar, when I come to your town, or during your in-house seminar.

Thank you for your readership and support.

Robert J Keegan
Publisher and President
The Hazardous Material Publishing Company
Transportation Skills Programs
rjkeegan@hazmat-tsp.com

Better Small than Large

Small versus large, which is better? I guess it depends. Is a large family better than a small family? Is it better to work for a large company or a small company? Should you go to a large college or a small college? Many of these answers have to do with personal preferences. Unfortunately, when your company generates hazardous waste, these decisions may not be up to you. There’s no doubt in my mind, I would rather be a small quantity generator, than a large quantity generator. This is because of the five major differences between large and small quantity generators under the EPA Hazardous Waste Regulations.

Photo by GlobalP/iStock / Getty Images

LARGE QUANTITY GENERATORS

Large quantity generators must meet additional requirements when they store and accumulate hazardous waste. They must meet Subpart CC in the Air Emission Standards. They have additional requirements for tank storage under Subpart J of Part 265. They must ensure their ignitable and reactive waste is not stored within 50 feet of the property line. They have additional requirements for closure of their facilities and hazardous waste accumulation units. They must meet Preparedness, Prevention and Emergency Procedures for large quantity generators in Subpart M of Part 262.

AIR EMISSION STANDARDS
The Subpart AA, BB, and CC Air Emission Standards are not just for TSDFs. All TSDFs must meet the AA Air Emission Standards for Process Vents and the Subpart BB Air Emission Standards for Equipment Leaks, which have been in effect since June 1990. But, then on December 8, 1997 the Subpart CC Air Emission Standards for Tanks, Surface Impoundments, and Containers became effective for both TSDFs and large quantity generators. These air emission standards have become a major component of enforcement actions in recent years.

HAZARDOUS WASTE TANKS
Unlike very small and small quantity generators, large quantity generators must meet Subpart J of Part 265 for tanks. Before the Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule came in to effect, small quantity generators had to meet the same requirements for tanks of hazardous waste as large quantity generators, but this may no longer be the case. Depending on your state’s approved hazardous waste management program, some small quantity generators will no longer have to meet the treatment, storage & disposal requirements for tank storage. However, this is not the case for large quantity generators, as they must still meet the requirements for storage of hazardous waste in tanks, in the same manner as a permitted TSDF.

IGNITABLE AND REACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE
Large quantity generators have additional requirements or Special Conditions for Ignitable and Reactive wastes, unlike smaller generators. Any container holding ignitable or reactive waste must be located at least 50 feet from the facility’s property line. Again, because small quantity generators have limits on the amount of waste that they can store on-site at one time, they don’t have to meet this requirement. You should be aware that there is an exception if you’re able to obtain written approval from the authority having jurisdiction over your local fire code, which must be maintained as long as those wastes are accumulated in those areas.

HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY AND ACCUMULATION UNIT CLOSURE
Then in addition to the requirements above, large quantity generators must meet closure standards for containers, tanks, drip pads and containment buildings. LQGs will have two choices when closing a facility or waste accumulation units around their plant. First, they can place a notice in the operating record within 30 days after closure, identifying the location of the unit within the facility. The second option would be to meet all of the closure performance standards of paragraph in 262.17(a)(8)(iii), for container, tank, and containment building waste accumulation units and paragraph (a)(8)(iv), for drip pads.

That is not all; LQGs must notify EPA on form 8700–12 no later than 30 days before closing the facility. Then, they have the additional requirement to notify EPA on the same form within 90 days after the facility has been closed and the closure performance standards have been met. If the large quantity generator’s facility cannot meet the closure performance standards or it receives an extension, EPA could require them to close as a landfill under 40 CFR 265.310.

PREPAREDNESS, PREVENTION AND EMERGENCY PROCEDURES
Both large and small quantity generators must prepare Preparedness and Prevention Plans to “minimize the possibility of a fire, explosion, or any unplanned sudden or non-sudden release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents to air, soil, or surface water which could threaten human health or the environment.” But, needless to say, large quantity generators have further requirements, in this case. In addition to the preparedness and prevention plans, large quantity generators must meet The Contingency Plan requirements in 262.250.

LQG CONTINGENCY PLANS
All large quantity generators must have a contingency plan for their facility which “must be carried out immediately whenever there is a fire, explosion, or release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents which could threaten human health or the environment.” The contingency plan must describe the actions taken by facility personnel in emergencies; it must be submitted to all local emergency responders like, police departments, fire departments, state and local emergency response teams, and the local emergency planning committee, or anyone else, if appropriate, that may be called upon in emergencies.

EMERGENCY COORDINATOR
Then finally, large quantity generators are required to designate individuals as emergency coordinators, who must be on-site or able to respond in a short period of time, by reaching the facility, for coordination and implementation of the required emergency procedures in 262.265. These large quantity generator emergency procedures include activation of alarms, communication systems, evacuation coordination and the notification to appropriate state and local agencies and the EPA regional administrator.

EPISODIC RELEASES
I don’t know about you, but if I were currently a large quantity generator and did not want to meet all the additional large quantity generator requirements, I would try to take advantage of the new episodic release provisions, which allow very small and small quantity generators to generate large quantities of hazardous waste within a 60 day period and not lose their current status. This, of course, will all be based on whether or not your state adopts the episodic release regulations in their approved state hazardous waste programs.

It’s not easy to meet the requirements when you are a hazardous waste generator, but it makes sense that the more waste you generate, the more requirements you have to meet. All of these new regulations can be found in our brand New 2017/2018 Hazardous Materials, Substances and Wastes Compliance Guide, which is now available. And of course, I will be covering each of these topics in detail in our seminars and future blogs, but in the meantime if you have any questions or comments please feel free to contact me.

Thank you for your readership and support.

Robert J. Keegan
Publisher and President
Hazardous Materials Publishing Company, Inc.
Transportation Skills Programs, Inc.
rjkeegan@hazmat-tsp.com
©2017 Hazardous Materials Publishing Company, Inc.

Do You Know Your Q Levels

Some things should never be together, like hot dogs and ketchup, fingernails and chalkboards and, of course, Sean Penn and Madonna. Well, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) feel the same way when you ship combination packaging of dangerous goods or hazardous materials by both air and ground. Regardless of whether you are shipping by ground or air, DOT states under Forbidden Materials in 173.21(e) that it is forbidden to offer or ship “a material in the same packaging, freight container, or overpack with another material, the mixing of which is likely to cause a dangerous evolution of heat, or flammable or poisonous gases or vapors, or to produce corrosive materials”.

When incompatible materials are mixed in the same container or overpack in the ground mode, it can be a problem. However, when the same materials are shipped in the same container by air, it can be disaster. That’s why in the air mode both DOT and ICAO have additional requirements when mixing different hazardous materials into the same outside packages. They not only restrict certain articles, they also restrict the amounts of hazardous materials in combination packaging. The trouble is they both have different ways of arriving at those restricted amounts.

Under the Department of Transportation, combination packaging means “a combination of packaging, for transport purposes, consisting of one or more inner packagings secured in a non-bulk outer packaging. It does not include a composite packaging.” When required or when shipping by passenger aircraft, hazardous materials or dangerous goods must be packaged in the proper combination package, in at least two separate containers, inner and outer.

Most combination packaging only contains a single hazardous material. Very few shippers of hazardous material relish the prospect of placing different types of hazardous materials into the same outside packaging when shipping by air. That’s right, even when shipping by air you can place more than one hazardous material into the same outer packaging. But how much? Well, that is based on whether you are shipping under the Department of Transportation (DOT) Hazardous Materials Regulations or under the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Technical Instructions.

Under ICAO in the air mode, shippers who decide to mix different hazardous materials in a combination packaging are required to employ a mathematical formula to derive the Q value. First you are required to divide the total amount authorized for that material in the Dangerous Goods List into the amount of material in each inner container, to ascertain a Q value for each substance. Then, the shipper is required to add up the individual Q values for each inner container to ensure the container’s total Q-value does not exceed the number 1.

So if you have a .5 L bottle of Class 3 flammable liquid, .5 L bottle of Class 8 corrosive liquid and .5 L bottle of a Division 6.1 oral poison in one outer packaging, you would be required to ascertain the total maximum amount Do YOU Know Your Q Value? Do YOU Know Your Q Value? Hazmat Rob’s Blog allowed in each container for each of the chemicals in the IATA 4.2 Dangerous Goods Table (which contains the ICAO Dangerous Goods List), so that you could divide the maximum outer container’s amount into the amounts in each of the inner containers. Let’s say the Dangerous Goods List authorizes each of the above listed dangerous goods for maximum total amounts of up to 5 L in each inner container. Well, if you divide 5 L into .5 L, it equals .1. If the shipper were to add the .1+.1+.1, the Q value for each of the three bottles, they would be able to determine the total Q value for the outer packaging would only be .3, well below the Q value of 1.

However, under IATA and ICAO, if the first of the individual bottles in the above mentioned combination packaging is 5 L, then that first bottle inside the combination package would already have a Q value of 1. That is because if you divide the 5 L in that first bottle into the maximum allowed in the outer container, 5 L, you will arrive at the number 1. So the container could not be shipped with those other hazardous material in the same outer container because the combination packaging with all its different dangerous goods inside the outer package would immediately exceed the Q value of 1.

In addition, under IATA and ICAO the shipper would also be required to state the Q value of the combination container on the shipper’s declaration (dangerous goods documentation). That’s only by air under the ICAO Technical Instructions, the use of which DOT authorizes in 49 CFR 171.23 and .24 domestically under 49 CFR in the HMR. However, when you ship different hazardous materials in the same outside packaging by air domestically under the DOT regulations, there are no Q values. DOT, in place of the Q values, states in 173.27 only that when combination packagings are intended for transportation by aircraft, the total net quantity does not exceed the lowest permitted maximum net quantity per package as shown in Column 9a or 9b, as appropriate, of the §172.101 Table.

This means, under DOT domestically, if you have the same three different hazardous materials in an outer container, and the Class 3 flammable liquid’s outer package was authorized for 5 L, the Class 8 corrosive’s outer package was authorized for 5 L, but the Division 6.1 poison was authorized for 1 Liter in each outer packaging in the 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table, the total amount allowed in the outer packaging would only be 1 L (the lowest of the three material in the outer package). You’re probably already aware that both the regulations require the complete package to meet the Packing Group indicating the highest order of hazard for the hazardous materials contained in the package. So if the flammable liquid was a Packing Group III, the corrosive liquid was a Packing Group III, but the poison was a Packing Group I, the combination packaging would have to be Packing Group I.

Regardless of whether you are shipping by air or ground, 173.24a also requires that all combination containers of mixed contents must not be packed or mixed together in the same outer packaging with other hazardous or non-hazardous materials if the materials are capable of reacting dangerously with each other and causing combustion or dangerous evolution of heat, the evolution of flammable, poisonous, or asphyxiant gases, or the formation of unstable or corrosive materials. It should also be noted that in the air mode, corrosive materials when packed with other hazardous materials (except ORM-D) in bottles must be further packed in securely closed inner receptacles before packing in outer packagings.

Shipping hazardous materials can be hard enough separately, but when you place different hazardous materials together in the same outer container you might be required to produce some documentation to defend your choice of the “compatible materials” in your combination containers. There’s no list or chart to tell you what can go together in the same package in the regulations, so the responsibility and liability falls on the shoulders of the shipper to document that different materials in combination packagings will not react if they co-mingle.

Packaging enforcement now takes place at the shipper’s facility. Under the old specification container requirements, when the container failed in transportation, the DOT would look to the manufacturer to ensure the container was made to the proper specifications. Unfortunately, the Performance Oriented Packaging, or POPS, requirements that fully came into effect in 1996 switch all the liability for packaging onto the shippers. Now when a container fails in transportation, the Department of Transportation will look to the shipper to ensure the container was properly closed, not overfilled and compatible with its ladings.

There is a big difference between things that should not be together and things that can not be together. If you are unsure, err on the side of caution and ship them in separate containers. If you have a question on containers, whether single, combination, bulk or non-bulk, give us a call or send us an email and we will take you through it. Thanks for your readership and support.

Robert J. Keegan
Publisher and President
Hazardous Materials Publishing Company, Inc.
Transportation Skills Programs, Inc.

©2017 Hazardous Materials Publishing Company, Inc.