Sovereign Specialty Chemicals — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1of 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 2Q3. 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 3Boothe § 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 4Page 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 5Page 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.#