# Sovereign Specialty Chemicals — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 04-0093
- **title:** Sovereign Specialty Chemicals — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2004-06-03
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** 04-0093 response to Sovereign Specialty Chemicals concerning 173.115, 173.306.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0093.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0093.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0093
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2004/040093.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

of Transportation
U.S. Department
400 Seventh St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Research and
Administration
Special Programs
JUN
3 2004
Mr. Kevin W. Johnston, CIH, CSP
Ref. No. 04-0093
Director, Health, Safety & Environmental Affairs
Sovereign Specialty Chemicals
710 Ohio Street
Buffalo, New York 14203
Dear Mr. Johnston:
This responds to your April 6, 2004 letter requesting clarification on the hazard class of your
products under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180).
Specifically, you request clarification on the hazard class of your products containing adhesives
and gas propellants packaged in DOT specification cylinders.
According to your letter, your company manufactures certain adhesives and gas propellants
packaged in DOT specification cylinders. Because of some confusion within the industry group
that supplies such products regarding the appropriate method for determining whether the
products meet the definition of a flammable gas, you are requesting our confirmation on the
appropriate classification methodology.
Your questions are paraphrased and answered as follows:
Q1. Do the aerosol test methods specified in § 173.306(i) only apply to aerosols packaged in
containers not exceeding one liter?
quantity provisions of § 173.306. If your products do not meet the criteria for shipment as
Al. Yes. The tests specified in § 173.306(i) are required for aerosols shipped under the limited
limited quantities, the tests specified in § 1 73.306(i) may not be used for your products.
Q2. Does the flammability of the adhesive products packaged in the non-refillable DOT
specification 39 cylinders have to be determined using the tests methods specified in § 173.306(i)
or ASTM E681-85 as referenced in § 173.115(a)?
A2. The flammability tests specified in § 173.306(i) are required for aerosols shipped under the
limited quantity provisions of § 173.306. If your products do not meet the criteria for shipment
as limited quantities, their flammability may not be determined using the test specified in
§ 173.306(i). If your products meet the definition specified in § 173.115(a) for Division 2.1,
Flammable Gas, they must be classified as Division 2.1 materials using ASTM E681-85,
Standard Test Method for Concentration Limits of Flammability of Chemicals or other
equivalent method approved by the Associate Administrator.
173.115
173.306(1)
040093

<<<PAGE 2>>>

Q3. Are we correct that the flammability of the adhesive products packaged in DOT
specification 4BW cylinders must be determined using ASTM E681-85 as specified in
§ 173.115(a) unless DOT specifically approves an alternate equivalent test method?
A3. Yes. The flammability of the adhesive products packaged in DOT specification 4BW
cylinders must be determined using ASTM E681-85 as specified in § 173.115(a), unless an
alternate equivalent test method is approved by the Associate Administrator.
Q4. Has DOT approved any alternate test methods (such as the flame projection test method
specified in 16 CFR 1500.45 for consumer products) for flammable gas determinations as
provided for in § 173.115(a)? If approval applications are published, will the public have the
opportunity to comment if a party applied to use an alternate test methods?
A4. No, there are no approvals applications in our approvals data base applicable to flammable
gas determinations as provided for in § 173.115(a) such as alternate test methods concerning the
flame projection test specified in 16 CFR 1500.45 for consumer products. Unlike applications for
exemptions, which are published in the Federal Register on a monthly basis, applications for
approvals are not generally published. However, on occasion certain approval applications are
published when public comments are requested. In addition, alternate test methods may be
proposed in a notice of proposed rulemaking with a comment period requesting comments from
the regulated community and the public.
Q5. If an adhesive product tests as non-flammable using the consumer products test method
specified in 16 CFR 1500.45 and flammable using one of the DOT-specified test methods, would
the results using the DOT-specified test method take precedence and compel the product to be
classified as flammable?
A5. Yes. For transportation of hazardous materials in commerce, the DOT-specified test
methods in the HMR would take precedence in classifying the adhesive product as flammable.
I hope this answers your inquiry.
Sincerely
Chief, Standards Development
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards

<<<PAGE 3>>>

Boothe
§ 173.115
3173.306 (i)
SOVEREIGN
Compress
Gras
SPECIALTY CHEMICALS
Kovin V. Joinston, 1H, 834-0093
Director, Heath, Safety, Environmental Affairs
Packaging and Converting
Industrial
Construction
710 Ohio Street
Office: (716)-856-4910 Ext 288
Buffalo, New York 14203
Fax:
www.sovereignsc.com
(716)-847-1837
April 6, 2004
Mr. Edward T. Mazzullo
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Attn: DHM-10
Research and Special Programs Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
400 7* Street SW
Washingtor, DC 20590-0001
Re:
Clarification of Flammability Determination for Adhesive Products
Dear Mr. Mazzullo:
interested in the proper classification of these products under the U.S. Department of
As a manufacturer and shipper of adhesive products in pressurized containers, we are
are requesting your confirmation of the appropriate classification methodology.
Product Description
For your reference, the products in question consist of DOT specification cylinders
substrates.
detachable hose and spray gun, which can be used to spray-apply the adhesives to various
DOT Regulations
DOT defines a flammable gas as material that is gas at 20 °C or less and 101.2 kPa or
equivalent method approved by the Associate Administrator. 49 C.F.R. § 173.115(a).

<<<PAGE 4>>>

Page 2
DOT defines an aerosol as any non-refillable receptacle containing a gas compressed,
liquefied, or dissolved under pressure, the sole purpose of which is to expel a nonpoisonous
liquid paste, or powder and fitted with a self-closing release device that allows the contents to
be ejected by the gas. 49 C.F.R. § 171.8. As noted above, some of the adhesive products of
others do not appear to fit within this definition because they are packaged in refillable
interest satisfy this definition (e.g., those packaged in the Specification 39 cylinders), while
containers (e.g., Specification 4BW cylinders).
determined by the tests specified in 49 C.F.R. § 173.306(i). Section 173.306(i) specifies that
According to 49 C.F.R. 3 173.115(a)(2), the flammability of aerosols is to be
an aerosol is flammable if a positive result is obtained using any of the following three
the language in section 173.115(a)(2) nor the definition of aerosol in section 171.8 reference
i is not year of her lie est metrol species in 4C. F.. 5173306s to lim or munities,
used for aerosols in containers exceeding one liter capacity.
Questions
1. Do the aerosol test methods specified in 49 C.F.R. § 173.306(i) only apply to aerosols
packaged in containers not exceeding one liter?
2. Must the flammability of the adhesive products packaged in the non-refillable
Specification 39 cylinders be determined using:
a. the aerosol test methods described in 49 C.F.R. § 173.306(i); or
b. ASTM E681-85 as referenced in 49 C.F.R. § 173.115(a)?
3. Are we correct that the flammability of the adhesive products packaged in the
Specification 4B W cylinders must be determined using ASTM E681-85 as specified in
49 C.F.R. $ 173.115(a) (unless DOT specifically approves an alternate equivalent test
method)?
4. Has DOT approved any alternate test methods (such as the flame projection test method
leterminations as provided for in 49 C.F.R. § 173.115(a)
pecified in 16 C.F.R. § 1500.45 for consumer products) for flammable ga:
We understand that DOT normally does not publish applications for approvals.
Would DOT provide an opportunity for public comment if a party applied to use
an alternate test method such as the consumer products method referenced abov
for flammability determinations
5. If an adhesive product tests as non-flammable using the consumer products test method
nethods, would the results using the DOT-specified test method take precedence an
specified in 16 C.F.R. § 1500.45 and flammable using one of the DOT-specified tes
compel the product to be classified as flammable?
Sovereign Specialty Chemicals, Inc.

<<<PAGE 5>>>

Page 3
We thank you for your assistance in clarifying these matters.
Very truly yours,
Sovereign Specialty Chemicals Inc.
burt pisto
Director, Health, Safety & Environmental Affairs
Kevin W. Sohnston, CIH, CSP
Soverelgn Specialty Chemicals, Inc.
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 8700
