{"operation":"document","citation":"08-0291","title":"Evonik Degussa Corporation — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2009-02-11","effective_on":null,"summary":"08-0291 response to Evonik Degussa Corporation concerning 172.101, 173.2.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0291.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0291.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0291","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2008/080291.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\n1200 New Jersey Ave., SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nFEB 1 1 2009\nMr. John Foglio\nManager, Hazardous Materials\nTransportation Safety\nEvonik Degussa Corporation\n379 Interpace Parkway\nP.O. Box 677\nParsippany, NJ 07054-0677\nReference No. 08-0291\nDear Mr. Foglio:\nThis is in response to your November 20,2008 letter concerning the most appropriate proper\nshipping name for a material that meets the definition of a Packing Group I1 flammable liquid\n(Class 3), Packing Group I1 corrosive (Class 8), and Packing Group I11 poisonous (toxic,\nDivision 6.1) liquid under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-\n180). You state your supplier describes the material as \"UN 2924, Flammable liquids,\ncorrosive, n.0.s. (Hexamethyldisilazane), 3, 8, 6.1, PG 11.\" You state the Hazardous Materials\nTable entry for the UN 2924 description and the corresponding emergency response\ninformation do not include safety information on toxic materials. You ask if \"LN 3286,\nFlammable liquid, toxic, corrosive, n.0.s. (Hexamethyldisilazane), 3,6.1, 8, PC 11\" is the\nmore appropriate proper shipping description for this material.\nIf a material meets the definition of more than one hazard class and is not specifically\nidentified by name in the Hazardous Materials Table (HMT; 5 172.101), then\n5 172.101(~)(12)(iii) states the hazard class of the material must be determined using the\nprecedence criteria specified in 5 173.2a7 and a proper shipping name must be selected,\naccording to the methods prescribed in 9 172.101(~)(12)(ii), that most appropriately describes\nthe material. To properly class a mixture containing hazardous components, you must\nanalyze and test the entire mixture to determine its hazard class and, if applicable, any\nsubsidiary hazards. Please note that a mixture may or may not exhibit the hazards of one or\nall of its components. It is the shipper's responsibility to properly classify a hazardous\nmaterial and assign it a proper shipping name from the Hazardous Material Table (HMT;\n5 172.101). See 5 173.22.\nBased on the information you provided about the mixture and the precedence criteria\nprescribed in 5 173.2a7 the Class 3-Packing Group I1 takes precedence, followed by Class 8-\nPacking Group 11, and then Division 6.1-Packing Group 111. In addition, this material is\nassigned a PG I1 in accordance with Note 1 of paragraph (b) of 5 173.2a which states the most\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nstringent packing group assigned to any of the hazards a material exhibits will take\nprecedence. Therefore, it is the opinion of this Office the proper shipping description \"UN\n2924, Flammable liquids, corrosive, n.0.s.\" does not accurately identify the toxic hazard of the\nmaterial, and the description \"UN 3286, Flammable liquid, toxic, corrosive, n.0.s.\n(Hexamethyldisilazane), 3, 6.1, 8, PG 11\" is more appropriate. See 5 1 72.10 1 (c)(12).\nI hope this satisfies your request.\nSincerely,\nHattie L. Mitchell\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nw -\nI N D U S T R I E S\nNovember 20, 2008\nOb* \"' EVONIK OECUIIA CORPORATION\nAssociate Administrator for\n379 lnter~ace Parkwav\n- ~\nHazardous Materials Safety P.O. BOX 677\nParsippany, NJ 07054-0677\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administratio11 w . e v o n i k . c o m\nAttention: Office of Hazardous Materials Standards (PHH-10) Phone + 1 973-541 -8042\nFax +1 973-541-8040\nDepartment of Transportation John.foglio@evonik.com\nEast Building\n1200 New Jersey Ave, SE.\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nRe: Classification\nDear Mr. Edward Mazzullo,\nWe purchase a substance and subsequently offer it for\ntransportation. It is shipped to us as UN 2924, Flammable\nLiquid, Corrosive, n.o.s., 3 (8) 6.1 , PC II,\n(~exameth~ldisilazane). Note that 6.1 is mentioned as a\nsubsidiary hazard. We do not agree with'the classification of\nour supplier since the material is toxic, (6.1, PG Ill) in\naddition to being flammable iiquid (3, PC I I ) and corrosive (8,\nPG I!). We feel that the entry UN 3286, Flammable Liquid,\nToxic, Corrosive is more appropriate because this entry\nrefers to a schedule in the E/R Guide that warns for tbxicity.\nThe schedule for UN 2924 makes no mention aboutaioxicity.\nWe approached our supplier and we were told that the\nhazard of corrosive takes precedence over toxic because\nclass 8, PC; II is more dangerous than division 6.5, PG Ill.\nTherefore, thev cannot use an entry that puts the word toxic\nbefore corrosive.. We agree that corrosive PG II takes\nprecedence over toxic, PG Ill but we think that UN 3286 can\nbe used. We were told that they cannot not change their\nclassification unless DOT inserts a new entry for Flammable\nLiquid, Cosrosive, Toxic, n.0.s. vs. the current one that puts\nToxic before Corrosive.\nI\n. I\n. ,\nPage 1 of 2\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nw I N D U S T R I E S\nWe always like to use the same classification of the\nmanufacturer but under the circumstances we think it is\ndangerous to use UN 2924 because of the lack of E/R\nprocedures for toxicity. The manufacturer feels that nothing\nneeds to be changed because they put a toxic label on the\ndrums. We feel that the UN number and proper shipping\nname are of utmost importance when there is a spill.\nShould the classification for a substance which is flammable\nliquid in PC II, corrosive liquid, PC II and toxic liquid, PC Ill\nbe UN 2924, Flammable Liquid, Corrosive, n.0.s. 3, (8), (6.1)\nPG II or UN 3286, Flammable Liquid, Toxic, Corrosive, n.o.s.,\nPC I I ?\nWe want to make sure that our interpretation is correct and\nthe order of the subsidiary hazards in the proper shipping\nname is not as irr~portant as not mentioning one hazard\n(toxic) at all in the proper shipping name. We thank you in\nadvance for your much needed assistance.\nSincerely,\nJohn Foglio\nManager Hazardous Materials\nTransportation Safety\nPage 2 of 2","truncated":false,"body_characters":5901}