UNSPSC 51442602: Phenolsulfonphthalein

This classification denotes a diagnostic reagent with the molecular formula C19H14O5S, a preparation that US FDA regulates as an active ingredient or moiety under Unique Ingredient Identifier I6G9Y0J1OJ, chemically known as 4,4-(3h-2,1-benzoxathiol-3-ylidene)diphenol s,s-dioxide but more generally known as phenolsulfonphthalein, which bears US NIH Compound Identifier 4766. The European Medicines Agency schedules Phenolsulfonphthalein in its eXtended EudraVigilance Medicinal Product Dictionary or XEVMPD under Index SUB14835MIG.

The World Health Organization schedules phenolsulfonphthalein in its Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) Classification.

UNSPSC 51442602 Phenolsulfonphthalein is a Commodity code that captures specialized chemical products and related maintenance services, though recent state and local procurement activity under this code shows minimal alignment with the code's nominal scope. The two recent opportunities posted show a stark mismatch: Broward County Aviation Department issued an RFI on June 25, 2026, for maintenance services on Rapiscan X-ray inspection systems (600 series, 900 series, VOTI XR3D, and Gemini models), a notice of intent to procure as sole source or sole brand, with responses due July 28, 2026. Pasco County, Florida posted an RFQ on June 3, 2026, for large copper sulfate crystals and liquid copper sulfate on an as-needed basis, with proposals due June 26, 2026. Neither opportunity involves phenolsulfonphthalein, a pH indicator chemical; the Broward solicitation concerns X-ray equipment maintenance, and the Pasco solicitation concerns water-treatment or agricultural chemicals. The issuing bodies are county-level agencies — an aviation department and a general county procurement office — neither of which aligns with typical buyers of the chemical referenced in the code name.

Activity under this code shows limited recent state and local procurement momentum. The geographic spread is confined to Florida counties in two recent instances. The mismatch between the code's nominal commodity and the actual work being solicited suggests that either the tagging is incorrect in the source data or this code sees very infrequent use in state and local procurement. A business development professional evaluating this code should verify whether the code accurately reflects the organization's service or product lines before investing pursuit effort, as the recent opportunities signal either data-quality issues or genuine dormancy in this category.