# Molecule Corp. Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 21-0089
- **title:** Molecule Corp. Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2021-12-10
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** 21-0089 response to Molecule Corp. Company concerning 173.22.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-21-0089.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-21-0089.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-21-0089
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/76116/210089.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

U.S. Department
of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety
Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
December 10, 2021
Mr. Nick Talken
Molecule Corp. Company
Henkel
5110 Port Chicago Highway
Concord, CA 94520
Reference No. 21-0089
Dear Mr. Talken:
This letter is in response to your August 23, 2021, letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous
Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to hazardous materials
classification. You state that your company has developed a software data platform which
provides—for any new chemical formulation—the appropriate hazard classification and
description. The output includes the UN Identification Number (UNID), hazardous materials
shipping description, hazard class, and packing group (PG) as appropriate. The automatic
assignment of hazard classification and description information is based on historical company
data (e.g., in-house testing data) and you provided further detail on how this function is
performed by the software. You seek feedback from this Office on your company’s software
approach and technique for determination of hazard class and descriptions.
In accordance with § 173.22, it is the shipper’s responsibility to properly classify and describe a
hazardous material. There is no prohibition in the HMR against using a software approach as part
of the process to perform the functions of classifying and describing a hazardous material;
however, a software approach cannot act as a substitute for the performance of testing in
determining a hazard classification, where it is required. It is our understanding that your
software approach is an assistive tool and not a replacement for company testing in the absence
of historical company test data that can be used as a comparison for a new formulation.
Therefore, if your software approach—as described in your August 23, 2021, letter—provides
the hazard classification and material description in compliance with the requirements of the
HMR and international regulations for the transport of hazardous materials, then we see no issue
with your company using this tool with regard to the shipper’s responsibility.

<<<PAGE 2>>>

Please note, this response letter is neither a validation nor a certification of your software
approach.
I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Dirk Der Kinderen
Chief, Standards Development Branch
Standards and Rulemaking Division

<<<PAGE 3>>>

Baker
From: Foster, Glenn (PHMSA)
To: Date: Dodd, Alice (PHMSA); Hillman, Kenetha CTR (PHMSA)
Subject: FW: Henkel Company Correspondence
Monday, August 30, 2021 12:23:15 PM
Attachments: EO - Kelley(Henkel) 30Aug21.pdf
21-0089
Alice and Kenetha,
Please log this in as a request for a LOI and assign.
Thanks,
Glenn
From: Kelley, Shane (PHMSA) <shane.kelley@dot.gov>
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 12:20 PM
To: Foster, Glenn (PHMSA) <Glenn.Foster@dot.gov>
Subject: FW: Henkel Company Correspondence
Can we log this as an interp? I’d like to respond that we do not review software as a function of our
Office, but that automated methods of classification are acceptable provided that the resulting
classification is accurate and conforms to the requirements of the HMR. Something like that. Can
be short and sweet.
From: Lisak, Frank (PHMSA) <frank.lisak@dot.gov>
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 12:00 PM
To: Kelley, Shane (PHMSA) <shane.kelley@dot.gov>
Subject: Henkel Company Correspondence
Hi, Shane:
The attachment is for your review.
I will keep the hardcopy in my locked cabinet until DOT resumes normal working hours.
Frank

<<<PAGE 4>>>

Albert - Open Letter to Department of Transportation - United States of America
Date: August 23rd, 2021
Director, Standards and Rulemaking Division
Mr. Shane Kelley
U.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)
Washington, DC 20590
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE East Building, 2nd Floor
Dear Mr. Kelley,
formulations and materials. Specifically, this data platform was built to capture structured data which can be used to accelerate innovation and
Over the paşt 4 years, we have been developing a software data platform (called Albert) which facilitates our ability. to invent new chemical
formulation and design of experiment, task management, reporting and visualization, and many more. However, the intent of this Open Letter is
enhance collaboration between chemists or laboratories. Albert has many capabilities and functions, include chemical inventory management,
to describe a specific feature of Albert that is related to the shipment of Hazardous Materials (HM) / Dangerous Goods (DG).
for each relevant transportation regulation (49 CFR, IATA, IMDG). The output of this classification includes: UN Number, Hazard Materials
Within the Albert platform, any chemist who has created a formulation can automatically receive the appropriate HM / DG Shipping Classification
based on all historical data within Albert, where the newly created formulation is compared to historical formulations, to ensure compliance with
Shipping Description, Hazard Class or Classes and Packing Group as appropriate. This automatic assignment of HM / DG shipping information is
the shipping regulations. The remaining content within this letter will describe in detail how this comparison and automatic assignment is done.
Historical Data:
the number of formulas which have been created, per Transportation method:
Within Albert, we have over 20 years worth of historical formulas that have been commercialized and shipped within the USA. Below you can see
Transport Method
Count of Unique Formulas
49. CFR
26449
IATA
29699
IMDG
30147
you can see the specific UN Numbers and Packing groups that are contained within this dataset. These Classifications were all performed
For all of these historical formulations, a Risk Assessment and HM / DG Classification was performed by a certified expert within Henkel. Below
manually by a certified Risk Assessment expert team, primarily located in Dusseldorf, Germany.
*Classification Format: (UNnumber_PackingGroup)*
TRANSPORT METHOD: CFR
100000
17852
10000
1461 1364
1000
872
729
654
Count of Unique Formulas
430
302 271 263
250
217 211 175 168
153
152 146
130
130
130
100
107
100
96
86
10
1
Not Regulated
UN3082II
UN1133_]1
UN1993_1
UN3264_|
UN1814_1
UN285 I
UN1824,1
UN3264_II
UN2922 _II
UN1139_1
UN1823 _I
UN2735_II
UN3262_]I
UN2735_]1
UN1263_1
÷ 1:
→ 118G
he ture co
Classification

<<<PAGE 5>>>

TRANSPORT METHOD: IATA
100000
19085
10000
3096
1409 1198
1000
749
510 477
Count of Unique Formulas
306 277 267
258
228 223
177 172 165 154 151 133 133
100
132
112 103 98
86
10
1
Not Regulated
UN7264_1
4UN3334II
U280 I
UN1824_
UN3264 I
UN1139.|
UN2922_11
UN1823_]|
UN2235_II
UN3262_JI
UN2735_]!
UN1993_!
UN1760_1
UN1719_
UN279_|
Classification
TRANSPORT METHOD: IMDG
100000
21147
10000
1999 1462
1000
763
707
635
Count of Unique Formulas
306
276 267 265
230 225
190
177
177 165
163 142 134
100
131
126 110
96
90
82
82
10
1
Not Regulated
UN1133_"
UN3264_||
UN1950
UN1814.1
UN2922_"
UN3262,1
UN2735 "
UN 1866_11
UN3266_I|
Classification
Automatic Generation of Classification for New Formulas:
Algorithm Similarity:
factors, including GHS classification, Flash Point, Reaction Exotherm, Product Type, State of Matter, Chemical Composition, and others. The
It is very important to understand how the similarity is determined by the above mentioned Algorithm. This similarity is a combination of many
purpose of the Algorithm is to determine the best combination of factors (mentioned above) which allow for the closest formula comparison.
Validation of Algorithm:

<<<PAGE 6>>>

data. First, we split the historical data into 2 partitions, with 80% in the "training set" and 20% in the "test set". For each of the transportation
In order to ensure this method of "lookup" is accurate for a wide variety of new potential formulas, we performed statistical testing on the historical
DG classification to the actual classification from the "test set". The results of this test ensures complete accuracy across all historical and new
methods, we took the "test set" and used algorithm with the "training set" to determine the HM / DG classification. We then compared this HM /
data.
We understand that compliance with these regulations is paramount at all times from the beginning to end of the classification and transport cycle.
Open Questions:
1. Based on the information provided, assuming the above information is accurate, we would like to solicit any input from the Department
on our approach.
2. Please provide any other feedback on our software driven approach and techniques.
3. Please provide your position on our methods stated above, given that it has been shown to be more accurate than manual classification.
Thank you and we look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Nick Talken
Ken Kisner
Head of Albert Data Platform
Head of Digital Innovation
nick.talken@henkel.com
ken.kisner@henkel.com
(925) 381-6796
Nick Talken
(925) 381-1253
Ken D. Kisner
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 9026
