{"operation":"document","citation":"22-0083","title":"Pilot Chemical Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2022-11-04","effective_on":null,"summary":"22-0083 response to Pilot Chemical Company concerning 172.203, 173.225.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-22-0083.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-22-0083.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-22-0083","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/76926/220083.pdf","body":"<<>>\n\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\nNovember 4, 2022\nMs. Megan O’Connor\nEHS Contractor\nPilot Chemical Company\n9075 Centre Pointe Dr., Suite 400\nWest Chester, OH 45069\nReference No. 22-0083\nDear Ms. O’Connor:\nThis letter is in response to your August 12, 2022, email requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the shipping\ndescription for organic peroxide formulations. Specifically, for a hazardous material classified\nand described as “UN3109, Organic peroxide type F, liquid, 5.2” you ask whether a\nconcentration is required to be included in association with the technical name for “Peroxyacetic\nacid, type F, stabilized” as listed in the § 173.225(c) organic peroxide table. You state your\nbelief that the addition of a concentration (i.e., ≤ 43%) for this organic peroxide formulation\nwould be redundant because any shipment using that technical name as part of the hazardous\nmaterials description would by definition contain no more than 43% peroxyacetic acid.\nThe answer is no. The organic peroxide concentration is only required to be included with the\ntechnical name for organic peroxides which may qualify for more than one generic listing. For\nsuch instances, the technical name must include the actual concentration being shipped or the\nconcentration range for the appropriate generic listing. For example, “UN3102, Organic\nperoxide type B, solid, 5.2, (dibenzoyl peroxide, 52-100%)” or “UN3108, Organic peroxide\ntype E, solid, 5.2, (dibenzoyl peroxide, paste, <52%)”. See § 172.203(k).\n\n<<>>\n\nFinally, please note that, while you are not required to indicate that the concentration of\nperoxyacetic acid is not more than 43%, including the concentration in association with\nthe technical name would not be prohibited.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nDirk Der Kinderen\nChief, Standards Development Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<>>\n\nCasey\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nTo: Subject: Date: Dodd, Alice (PHMSA); Hazmat Interps\nFW: Formal Letter of Interpretation Request - Organic Peroxide Concentrations\nMonday, August 15, 2022 4:32:03 PM\nAttachments: image001.png\n22-0083\nHello Alice,\nPlease see the request for an LOI below. Thank you.\nRachel (HMIC)\nFrom: Megan E. O’Connor \nSent: Friday, August 12, 2022 12:35 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) \nCc: Megan R. Landers \nSubject: Formal Letter of Interpretation Request - Organic Peroxide Concentrations\nCAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do\nnot click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content\nis safe.\nMr. Shane Kelley\nDirector, Standards and Rulemaking Division\nU.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE East Building, 2nd Floor\nWashington, DC 20590\nDear Mr. Kelley,\nWe are requesting a formal letter of interpretation to determine if concentration ranges of the\norganic peroxide component are required in the technical name for Class 5.2 organic peroxides\nwhose technical name only appears once on the Organic Peroxide table from 49 CFR 173.225(c).\nSpecifically we are inquiring about the requirements of “UN 3109, Organic peroxide type F, liquid,\n5.2, (Peroxyacetic acid, type F, stabilized).” Does the concentration range of peroxyacetic acid need\nto be included in the technical name?\n49 CFR 172.203(k) states:\n“For organic peroxides which may qualify for more than one generic listing depending on\nconcentration, the technical name must include the actual concentration being shipped or\nthe concentration range for the appropriate generic listing. For example, “UN 3102, Organic\nperoxide type B, solid, 5.2, (dibenzoyl peroxide, 52-100%)” or “UN 3108, Organic peroxide\ntype E, solid, 5.2, (dibenzoyl peroxide, paste, <52%)”\nIt gives the example of “Dibenzoyl Peroxide” which has 11 separate entries on the organic peroxide\ntable, some of which have the same UN number. The only way to distinguish between some of these\nentries would be to give the concentration range. Our understanding is the concentration of the\n\n<<>>\n\norganic peroxide is required only to distinguish between two otherwise identical technical names.\nTherefore the shipping name, “UN 3109, Organic peroxide type F, liquid, 5.2, (Peroxyacetic acid, type\nF, stabilized, <43%)” would be redundant because any shipment using that technical name would by\ndefinition contain peroxyacetic acid ≤43%. We believe the correct shipping name would be, “UN\n3109, Organic peroxide type F, liquid, 5.2, (Peroxyacetic acid, type F, stabilized),” and the\nconcentration is not required in this case.\nPlease let us know if we are correct in our understanding. Thank you very much for your help.\nSincerely,\nName: Megan O’Connor\nOrganization: Pilot Chemical Company\nPhone: 513-996-7927\nAddress: 9075 Centre Pointe Dr., Suite 400, West Chester, OH 45069\nEmail: meoconnor@pilotchemical.com\nMegan E. O’Connor\nEHS CONTRACTOR\nOffice: 1-513-996-7927\nPilotChemical.com Facebook LinkedIn Twitter","truncated":false,"body_characters":5253}