UNSPSC 51311603: Mepyramine or pyrilamine

This classification denotes a histamine-1 receptor antagonist with the molecular formula C17H23N3O, a preparation that US FDA regulates as an active ingredient or moiety under Unique Ingredient Identifier HPE317O9TL, chemically known as 1,2-ethanediamine, n-((4-methoxyphenyl)methyl)-n,n-dimethyl-n-2-pyridinyl- (9ci) but generally known as mepyramine, which bears US NIH Compound Identifier 4992. European Medicines Agency schedules Mepyramine in its eXtended EudraVigilance Medicinal Product Dictionary or XEVMPD under Index SUB08762MIG.

UNSPSC 51311603 Mepyramine or pyrilamine is a Commodity code that nominally designates a specific antihistamine drug, but the recent state and local procurement activity under this code shows a substantial mismatch. Seminole County, Florida's only recent solicitation tagged to this code (IFB 60459723LAS) sought naloxone and drug deactivation systems — opioid-reversal and harm-reduction products wholly unrelated to mepyramine's therapeutic class or typical application. The county's procurement is community health-focused, designed to support overdose response and drug-disposal initiatives with quarterly deliveries and fixed-fee pricing. Vendors must meet standard compliance requirements including drug-free workplace certification, E-Verify authorization, and applicable federal regulations such as the Clean Air Act and Federal Water Pollution Control Act, with potential FEMA funding oversight. The contract carries a three-month probationary termination clause and includes a two-year initial term with a one-year renewal option.

The source contains only a single recent opportunity with a posted date of June 30, 2026 and a response deadline of July 26, 2023 — the date sequence is inconsistent in the source material. Seminole County, Florida is the only issuing body represented in the recent-opportunities data for this code. The mismatch between the code's nominal pharmaceutical scope (mepyramine) and the actual procurement (naloxone and drug-deactivation systems) suggests either a data-classification error in the state and local procurement system or a broad tagging practice that does not reflect the products actually being bought. No additional geographic spread or issuing-body pattern is evident from the available source material. Business development professionals should treat this code's recent activity as sparse and potentially misaligned with the code's stated commodity definition.