Pressure Points
The Devil is in the Definitions
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the products we manufactured
followed the same regulations throughout the
entire world? It’s a nice dream for those working with
regulations, certainly. Not only do regulations differ country
to country or state to state, but even the definition of what the
product is can differ as well.
Take aerosols, for example. We in the industry know an aerosol
when we see one. We may not know the exact chemical makeup
or where the materials used to design the aerosol come from, but
we know that it is an aerosol. The problem is, the definition of an
aerosol varies depending on if you are in the U.S. or in another
country.
According to the U.S. Hazardous Material Regulations (HMR)
49 CFR §171.8, an aerosol means an article consisting of any
non-refillable receptacle containing a gas compressed, liquefied or
dissolved under pressure, the sole purpose of which is to expel a
nonpoisonous (other than a Division 6.1 Packaging Group III material)
liquid, paste or powder and fitted with a self-closing release
device allowing the contents to be ejected by the gas.
We in the industry know an aerosol when we see one. We may not know the exact
chemical makeup or where the materials used to design the aerosol come from,
Notably, the HMR definition differs with the definition of
an aerosol found in the UN Model Regulations (UNMR), the
International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, the
International Civil Aviation Organization Technical Instructions
on the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO TI) and
the Regulations governing European Road Transport (ADR).
From the UNMR: “Aerosol or aerosol dispenser means a nonrefillable
receptacle meeting the requirements of Part 6.2.4, made
of metal, glass or plastics and containing a gas, compressed, liquefied
or dissolved under pressure, with or without a liquid, paste or
powder, and fitted with a release device allowing the contents to
be ejected as solid or liquid particles in suspension in a gas, as a
foam, paste or powder or in a liquid state or in a gaseous state.”
The UNMR has the provision “with or without a liquid, paste
or powder” in its definition of an aerosol, which allows gas-only
aerosols to be treated similarly as other aerosols. The lack of this
provision in the U.S. definition precludes allowing an aerosol to
be a product that expels gas only, whether that is just the propellant
or a gas mixture that the propellant expels.
Products impacted by this include electronic dusters, safety
horns, keyboard dusters and chewing gum removers, all of which
have a safe track record of shipping within the U.S.
Disallowing these products to be classified as an aerosol incurs
additional costs by requiring shipment under special permits,
such as U.S. Dept. of Transportation (DOT)-SP 10232, DOT-SP
14188 and DOT-SP 14286. It also adds a layer of complication for
transportation packaging, permitting and handling. While freight
costs for shipping products under these special permits are the
same as other aerosols, manufacturers have to mark the containers
and use corrugated cardboard packaging in accordance with the
permit. Any facility that offers or reoffers the package for transportation
must maintain a copy of the special permit. Duration of
the special permit is initially for two years and subsequent renewals
may be granted for up to four years, thus companies need to
continually reapply for the permit to be reissued without a modification
to the definition. Any employee performing a function
required by a special permit or shipping a special permit package
is required to receive specific training of their responsibility with
respect to the special permit and its requirements, including shippers
and carriers of the product.
The Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA) along
with the Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles,
Inc (COSTHA), the National Aerosol Association (NAA) and
American Coatings Association (ACA) have petitioned the Pipeline
& Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) to
harmonize the HMR with the UNMR’s definition of an aerosol.
By harmonizing this definition, the aerosol industry will be able
to ship gas-only aerosols as though they were any other aerosol,
without shipping them as hazardous materials (HAZMAT) or utilizing
special permits, thereby minimizing costs and undue burden
upon manufacturers, handlers and shipping distribution.
Modifying the current definition in the HMR is a step in the
right direction. However, we must consider the larger role that
regulatory definitions play with regards to promoting or stifling
innovation in the industry. Refillable aerosols are an area of huge
growth potential, but sticking with the status quo means that
before going to market, we’ll need to again petition to modify the
HMR and UNMR definition to allow refillable containers to be
considered aerosols. Without forward looking modifications to
the aerosol definition, we will continue to repeat this cycle,
stifle innovation, lengthen time to market and add pointless
complications for manufacturers, handlers and shipping distribution.
Spray
10 Spray November 2017
but we know that it is an aerosol.
Steve Bennett , PhD
VP, Scientific Affairs, CSPA