LABSAFEY-L Archive 9802 February 1998
Use your browser's Find command to search for a word or phrase
Please contact swihart@purdue.edu if you know of a
way to sort the archives
Gibberish passages are attachments, they do not archive well!
HTML tags in list messages also do not always archive well.
A double line as immediately below indicates the beginning of a new message
========================================================================
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 15:23:41 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: New Members
Hello NACHO Members,
There are now 80 folks who have joined the association by subscribing to the LABSAFETY
List.
I am repeating below the welcoming message that was posted during the week. Many of you
may not have received it since there were serious delays. The delays were caused by my not
being able to figure out how these things work. Thanks for being patient.
"Welcome to the LABSAFETY list.
Participation in this list is a membership benefit of both The Laboratory Safety Workshop
and The National Association of Chemical Hygiene Officers.
This discussion list is a forum for conversation about lab safety/ CHP/CHO issues. And,
its the virtual meeting place for the growth and development of the new organization.
This is the exciting beginning. To stimulate the conversation and to get to know each
other better, it would be helpful if new members would introduce themselves and share
their concerns, questions, and ideas about lab safety and the organization itself.
Welcome to NACHO. ... jak"
One of the ways we can help the Association to grow is to all help find new members.
Please tell you friends. Please send a copy of the original announcement to others and
other lists. If you need another copy, please let me know.
Regards, ... jim
========================================================================
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 20:30:12 -0700
From: John DeLaHunt <JDELAHUNT@CC.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject: Re: How to Convince?
>In a message dated 98-01-30 10:38:54 EST, John wrote:
>
><< My central issue with lab safety at Colorado College is getting the >
Chemistry faculty to agree that it's an idea of merit, and one that they > should
change behavior over. >>
>
>This is without a doubt the big one. How to convince. I'm working
>on a list of 101 ways to convince people you are serious about lab
>safety (and, that it is important).
We've been doing student safety seminars in the upper level (300-400) chem course
(including summer research) for about 4 years now, and some of the faculty are seeing the
plain irony of them saying "Yup, he's right about ..." then breaking that rule
the next day. Not all, but some.
I liken changing the safety culture among chemistry faculty who used to tbe your
professors to pushing a rope uphill. You have to keep at it, and eventually you'll get
dirtymake some progress.
John
John DeLaHunt, EH&S *jdelahunt@cc.colorado.edu * VOX: (719)389-6678 *
* * FAX: (719)389-6981 *
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 08:22:39 -0500
From: Joan de Vastey <jdevaste@NOTHINBUT.NET>
Subject: Self Introduction
Hello all. As was requested by Jim Kaufman, I am providing this brief introduction to
myself and my interests.
I'm an industrial hygienist with approximately 13 years in the fields of industrial
hygiene and public health. After many years in the employ of others, I struck out on my
own in 1995. I have been operating my consulting firm since. I have also taken on the task
of managing a federal contract in New York for another consulting firm.
I currently have no responsibilities regarding laboratory safety, but this is certainly
one of the tasks that come across my desk from time to time. I thought that joining this
list would provide an excellent opportunity to learn more about the topic. With that in
mind, I expect that I'll be somewhat of a lurker on this list.
Kudos to Jim for starting this list.
Joan de Vastey, Consulting IH
Devastey Health and Safety Consultants, Inc.
4 Holmes Lane, Willingboro, NJ 08046
(609) 871-3522
Consulting -- Regulatory Compliance -- Training -- Work Place Monitoring
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 09:36:17 -0500
From: Kelly Hope Morgan <khmorgan@UDEL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Welcome
Comments: To: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
In-Reply-To: <2e682d53.34d2f352@aol.com>
My name is Kelly Morgan and I am a Chemical Hygiene Officer at the University of Delaware.
I was excited to see a group of chemical hygiene officers starting this correspondence.
Good Job Jim and thanks for the CHO training course in Princeton. Many times I sit here in
Delaware struggling with a problem I am sure has already been solved a million times over.
I am excited about the opportunity to share ideas.
Kelly
On Sat, 31 Jan 1998, Jim Kaufman wrote:
> Welcome to the LABSAFETY list.
>
> Participation in this list is a membership benefit of both
> The Laboratory Safety Workshop and The National Association
> of Chemical Hygiene Officers.
>
> This discussion list is a forum for conversation about lab safety/
> CHP/CHO issues. And, its the virtual meeting place for the
> growth and development of the new organization.
>
> This is the exciting beginning. To stimulate the conversation
> and to get to know each other better, it would be helpful if new
> members would introduce themselves and share their concerns,
> questions, and ideas about lab safety and the organization itself.
>
> Welcome to NACHO. ... jak
>
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 09:39:48 -0500
From: "Chang, Jim C" <jcc11472@GLAXOWELLCOME.COM>
Subject: Re: New Members
Comments: To: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Greetings:
My name is Jim Chang. I am an industrial hygienist and safety engineer at Glaxo Wellcome
Inc. in the Research Triangle Park (NC).
I have been in the health and safety business for 13 years. My current areas of
specialization are faciliities design and engineering support, fire protection
engineering, risk management, emergency response, and process safety management.
I am especially interested in the lab safety list as a way to benchmark what we're doing
against others.
Thank you.
Jim Chang
========================================================================
From: Jim Kaufman [SMTP:Labsafe@AOL.COM]
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 1998 3:24 PM
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: New Members
Hello NACHO Members,
There are now 80 folks who have joined the association by
subscribing to the LABSAFETY List.
I am repeating below the welcoming message that was posted
during the week. Many of you may not have received it since
there were serious delays. The delays were caused by my not
being able to figure out how these things work. Thanks for being
patient.
"Welcome to the LABSAFETY list.
Participation in this list is a membership benefit of both
The Laboratory Safety Workshop and The National Association
of Chemical Hygiene Officers.
This discussion list is a forum for conversation about lab safety/
CHP/CHO issues. And, its the virtual meeting place for the
growth and development of the new organization.
This is the exciting beginning. To stimulate the conversation
and to get to know each other better, it would be helpful if new
members would introduce themselves and share their concerns,
questions, and ideas about lab safety and the organization itself.
Welcome to NACHO. ... jak"
One of the ways we can help the Association to grow is to all help
find new members. Please tell you friends. Please send a copy of
the original announcement to others and other lists. If you need
another copy, please let me know.
Regards, ... jim
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 10:18:29 -0500
From: "DAVID L. PERRAM" <dlperram@MTU.EDU>
Subject: Introduction
Hi,
I am the CHO for the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at Michigan
Technological University. My primary job responsibility at MTU is to generate and conduct
research. I have been at MTU since 1983 and have been a CHO since 1990. A point that I am
sure many of you can relate to is the feeling of working in a closet without a light bulb
in regards to developing and implementing the various aspects of this position. It was not
until this year that our Department formed a safety committee and the major concern of the
committee at this time is what are the liabilities associated with safety job titles.
David L. Perram
Research Scientist II
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Michigan Technological University
1400 Townsend Dr.
Houghton, MI 49931
Phone (906) 487-2713
Fax (906) 487-3292
Secretary Phone (906) 487-2098
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 11:06:14 -0500
From: Matthew Navea <mnavea@COLORCON.COM>
Subject: Re: Welcome
Hello
I am Matthew Navea, Safety Coordinator here at Colorcon (member of Berwind Pharmaceutical
Services). My background of three years has been primarily in Industrial Hygiene and
Safety applications in a secondary steel manufacturing industry. However, in my new
position, I am in a department responsible for lab safety in our various service, QC,
R&D, process, and experimental labs. So I have much less expertise in this area than I
have in the "typical" industrial safety applications. In, short I will be
looking to the collective wisdom and knowledge of this list to help me become more
educated and assist me with developing a continuously improving lab safety process.
Thanks for starting this list.
Thanks,
Matthew D. Navea
Safety Coordinator
Colorcon
mnavea@colorcon.com
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 11:37:37 EST
From: Wayne Wood <wayne@PHYRES.LAN.MCGILL.CA>
Organization: McGill University
Subject: Welcome
My intro:
Let me begin by congratulating Jim on this initiative. It will be interesting to see how
this evolves, as I think lab safety is a big enough topic to merit its own list. It's now
up to us to make it work.
I have been involved in lab safety at a professional level for 15 years, and prior to that
for about 10 as a lab person and safety keener. In my present position at McGill
University I have in excess of 1000 labs of all types to worry about in the faculties of
Medicine, Science, Engineering, and Agriculture, so I have plenty of war stories to share.
As well I am active externally consulting mainly to enterprises in the research,
education, and pharmaceutical sectors.
I am also active in the area of lab safety training. Along with a colleague from Calgary,
Gene Shematek, I have had the opportunity to present lab safety courses at various
professional conferences. This all began with a lab safety manual we put together for the
Canadian Society of Laboratory Technologists a little while back, which resulted in
various invitations to present. And since I am already blowing my own horn I thought this
would be a chance to put in a plug for our next appearance - at the Pittsburgh Conference
(on analytical chemistry) in New Orleans on March 2 and 3. I have tacked on the course
description below. For more info, the Pittcon web site can be found at:
http://www.pittcon.org/
Wayne Wood
Manager, Environmental Safety Office
McGill University
Montreal, QC
H3A 2A7
voice: 514-398-4563
e-mail: wayne@phyres.lan.mcgill.ca
http://www.mcgill.ca/eso/
____________________________________________________________________
Course Descriptions
Course
Number: 624
Course Title: Laboratory Safety and Hygiene
Presenter & Affiliation
Gene Marie Shematek
Calgary Regional Health
Authority
Wayne Wood
McGill Environmental Safety Office
Course Time/Location/Fee: Two Day Course
Monday and Tuesday
March 2
March 3, 1998
8:30 AM - 5:00 PM
Room 3
Registration by 2-12-98 $400 + $10 Text /
after 2-12-98 $625 + $10 Text The
registration fee includes instructional
materials prepared by the instructors. Must
be registered for the Pittsburgh
Conference to take this course.
Course Description
This short course provides an overview of
critical issues in laboratory health and
safety. Both clinical and research
laboratories are considered. A
presentation of commonly encountered
chemical, physical and biological hazards
will include a detailed discussion of
control measures. Rather than a
regulation-driven perspective, this course
will focus on hazards and controls and
common problems encountered (i.e.
transient odors, storage issues, etc.). By
concentrating on basic principles,
hazardous waste disposal, fire prevention,
ergonomics, and equipment safety will be
addressed from a generic perspective,
without reference to specific brands of
equipment or specific regulations. Program
design and management issues will also be
discussed, including loss control
elements.
The course is presented as a full-day
program and will consist of lectures,
overheads, videos, and class discussion.
It is designed to meet the basic needs of
those with responsibilities for health and
safety management in the laboratory,
presenting primarily an overview of a
range of issues most frequently
encountered. Class discussions will permit
an exchange of information and sharing of
experience, providing networking
opportunities for the participants. To
assist those wishing to pursue a more
in-depth understanding of specific issues,
the instructors will provided lists of
reference material which may be consulted.
Course Instructers
This course has been designed and will be
delivered by Wayne Wood and Gene Marie
Shematek. Both instructors hold CIH and
ROH certifications, as well as Msc(A)
degrees in Occupational Health Sciences
from McGill University. They are the
co-authors of the CSLT Guidelines for
Laboratory Safety, editions 3 and 4, and
have designed and delivered numerous
courses, including Occupational Safety
Management at McGill University. Wayne is
employed as the Manager of the McGill
Safety Office and has worked as a
consultant to a broad range of industries.
Gene is presently employed as the
Corporate Leader, Occupational Health and
Safety, in the Calgary Regional Health
Authority. She has served as the Safety
Advisor to the Canadian Society of
Laboratory Technologists since 1989, and
teaches industrial hygiene and safety
management in Calgary.
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 11:45:56 EST
From: Joshua Burnie <JABurnie@AOL.COM>
Subject: HELLO
Hello Everyone,
My name is Josh Burnie. I am a graduate of Curry College class of 1996 and have a BA in
chemistry. I work part time as the Assistant Director of the Laboratory Safety Workshop. I
work full time as a Laboratory Safety Consultant for Kaufman & Associates.
Josh
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 11:52:32 -0400
From: Heather Ratcliffe <heather_ratcliffe@UNC.EDU>
Subject: Re: How to Convince?
Trying to get Principal Investigators to believe in the current safety guidelines is a
challenging job. I mention liablility ...a university is a potful of money when it comes
to lawsuits (even if they are settled out of court) . PIs are ultimately responsible for
personnel within their labs would you want someones life on your hands due to the fact
they weren't following standard safety guidelines?? )
The other thing I do is convince the student population, talk to them directly give them
rational reasons and examples of real accidents...after all they are in the higher
education system for a reason.
One good example is haz. waste regulations..I appeal to the students by telling them it is
there generation that has made the rules on the regulation of waste...look at the effects
of oil spills and industry on the environment...you'd be suprise how their ears suddenly
open up!!
-----Original Message-----
From: John DeLaHunt <JDELAHUNT@CC.COLORADO.EDU>
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU <LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU>
Date: Sunday, February 01, 1998 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: How to Convince?
>>In a message dated 98-01-30 10:38:54 EST, John wrote:
>>
>><< My central issue with lab safety at Colorado College is getting the
>> Chemistry faculty to agree that it's an idea of merit, and one that they
>> should change behavior over. >>
>>
>>This is without a doubt the big one. How to convince. I'm working
>>on a list of 101 ways to convince people you are serious about lab
>>safety (and, that it is important).
>
>We've been doing student safety seminars in the upper level
>(300-400) chem course (including summer research) for about
>4 years now, and some of the faculty are seeing the plain
>irony of them saying "Yup, he's right about ..." then
>breaking that rule the next day. Not all, but some.
>
>I liken changing the safety culture among chemistry faculty
>who used to tbe your professors to pushing a rope uphill.
>You have to keep at it, and eventually you'll get dirtymake
>some progress.
>
>John
>
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 12:05:04 -0400
From: Heather Ratcliffe <heather_ratcliffe@UNC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Introduction
I am a safety inspector for the University of North Carolina My specific area is
Laboratory Safety. My background is a dbl major in biology and chemistry with 5.5 yrs in a
lab doing cancer and blood research. We currently have approximately 500 PIs on campus. I
usally do about 20 inspections/month on a scheduled basis plus I investigate employee
accident and workers compensation reports related to labs and a whole lot more!
I am also on the Emergency Response Team for the University for the laboratory
incidents..chemical spills, odors etc. (HAZWOPER training ). I am also an EMT and
currently in a Paramedic class.
Looking to get CHO certification information...any suggestions??
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 11:39:40 -0600
From: Susan Lauterbach <sklauterbach@CHEMDEPT.CHEM.UOKNOR.EDU>
Subject: Re: Welcome
In-Reply-To: <2e682d53.34d2f352@aol.com>
This is Susan Lauterbach in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University
of Oklahoma. In addition to being the CHO, I'm also manage undergraduate chemistry
laboratories. Since everyone else is making introductions, I thought I'd let you know that
I'll participate when I can (REAL BUSY!!!). The idea of convincing people to accept the
concept of safety concept is liability. That's the issue that got safety rolling in this
department, plus 2 faculty members who are committed to EHS issues.
Got to go put out fires....
Susan
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 11:41:43 -0600
From: mathiason dennis <mathias@MHD1.MOORHEAD.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: INTRODUCTION
A brief overview: Currently serve as CHO and as director of campus EHS. We cover all
indivduals(students,faculty, staff, contractors and visitors) under Minn OSHA rules. We
also have a campus EHS committee and operate under MN Right to Know Act. My background is
basically that of an academic chemist. I have been in the chemistry dept 32 years. I
started out doing so-called chem magic shows, (all those colorful events, explosions, etc)
back in the 50s. At home on the farm we brewed wine and beer and dealt with all of the
problems associated with farming (still the most dangerous occupation in USA.
(Incidentally-still farming - love it!). My research, among other things,has involved
environmental studies related to landfill and industrial waste leaching into ground and
surface water; superinsulated construction and indoor practices as they affect IAQ, safe
ways to perform interesting chem demos, and GC-MS studies of synthesized organometallics.
For the past 12 years I have been actively engaged in haz material cleanup, and in
developing a new safety education program for students entering the chemistry laboratory
program at Moorhead State. We require students to take and pass a 12 hr safety course.
Failure to pass means they cannot get a grade in any lab course. Students are allowed
three attempts to pass. Over the past four years, first take pass rates have improved from
60-75-83-99 %. The key to success is providing them a holistic, understandable, safety
education program that, most importantly, involves them. And chem faculty are
participants. The program gets very enthusiastic endorsement from the students.
Incidentally, the use of goggles in our laboratory dates back to about 1969. So we have
been promoting this approach for a number of years. One of the reasons is that we have had
an UG research program that has involved use of challenging compounds (boranes,
organophophoranes, fluorine and derivatives, strong oxidizing media, peroxo derivatives,
etc). With these you had better have a safety program.
My current major task is overseeing the replacement of our laboratory hood system. Details
of this very interesting project will be presented at 1998-9 CHAS and LSEM meetings.
In summary: It has been an enjoyable and rewarding time! The opportunity to solve problems
is what keeps us going. Definitely beats watching TV!
Dennis R.Mathiason, Director, Department of Environmental Hlth & Safety
Moorhead State University, Moorhead,MN 56563
email: mathias@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu Fax 218-236-2882 Ph 218-287-5056
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 12:54:40 -0500
From: Dan Hurley <dhurley@WFUBMC.EDU>
Subject: Hello
My name is Dan Hurley. I am Sr. Industrial Hygienist at Wake Forest University School of
Medicine. I have about 20 years experience in Environmental Health and Safety covering
issues including Environmental Management, Environmental Health an Occupational safety. I
am a CIH. I look forward to some interesting discussions with regards to chemical hygiene
and lab safety
Daniel J. Hurley, CIH
Wake Forest University School of Medicine
910-777-3078
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 13:31:41 -0500
From: Janeen LaPierre <JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU>
Subject: How to Convince? -Reply
Content-Type: text/plain
In my experience here at UNE, I have found that all people learn best by example. I also
find that if you can break your faculty into smaller units of three or four people who are
of like discipline, you can tailor your approach. I would have weekly meetings with the
four chemistry faculty. We could deal with problems and I could address training that was
relevant in their daily activities.
I guess it is not as much a matter of convincing as it is educating people. I have had to
outline the problem, educate them about the why, and then give them some solutions to try.
Dictating does not work in the university environment, by and large. I like to use the
meeting system to get training done and problems addressed.
Make safety personal and you have a better chance of getting folks to adopt a safety
mentality.
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 13:29:41 -0500
Reply-To: deputyn@emu.edu
Comments: Authenticated sender is <deputyn@inserv1.emu.edu>
From: Nancy Deputy <deputyn@EMU.EDU>
Organization: Eastern Mennonite University
Subject: Hello
Hello Jim!
I am a Chemical Hygiene Officer and a Science Center Technician at a small private
university. I work part-time doing two jobs which makes my time very limited.
My background is a B.S. in Biology with a close minor in Chemistry. I have worked in labs
as a lab tech for 10years ( Research-head injury in the neurosurgery dept.,
Environmental-analyzing drinking and wastewater, Agricultural- analyzing animal feed and
soils, Chemical- analyzing medical drugs for a big pharm. company. I went back to school
to pursue a teaching career. I taught high school chemistry and earth science for three
year. I have also volunteered on the rescue squad as an Emergency Medical Technician and
Shock Trauma Technician for five years. Now I have been a CHO for almost two years. I
enjoy my job but I have disadvantages. 1) part-time 2) The support for safety here is very
,very slow.
Nancy Deputy
My opinions only, not those of E.M.U.
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 13:31:34 -0500
From: "Thomas J. Shelley" <tjs1@CORNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: How to Convince?
In-Reply-To: <01bd2ff2$92631500$10c30298@hrr.www.adp.unc.edu>
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii"
>Trying to get Principal Investigators to believe in the current safety guidelines is a
challenging job.
Dear Colleagues--Amen! However, there are several trends I have noticed:
More and more younger faculty are more safety conscious. Many of them have been introduced
to OSHA/EPA/DOT along the way to becoming a faculty member and some of it has been
internalized.
Many graduate students have had safety training at their undergraduate institutions and
they carry this along with them to graduate school.
I have an increasing number of "My professor wants me to do this... is it safe?"
type of questions every year. Some of these folks will be our future faculty members.
Many faculty have been trained in or have "rotated" through the industrial
sector where health and safety concerns are <italic>first.
</italic>These faculty members are generally well equipped to follow safety
guidelines (not always with a smile) and are aware for the need to be compliant with the
regs.
As an additional note, having an institutional health and safety policy that is issued
from and supported by top management is a key piece in my lab safety and compliance
programs. It is the "big stick" that is very useful in getting to those
individuals that are resistant to change.
From my vantage point, the CHO is as much of a practicing social scientist working on
culture change as she or he is a safety expert. Many of the tools used by the social
activist are as useful (perhaps more so) as books of regulations and safety practice.
My $.02. Tom Shelley
***********************************************************
Tom Shelley, Chemical Hygiene Officer, Cornell University,
Department of Environmental Health and Safety, 125 Humphreys Service
Building,
Ithaca, NY 14853. (607) 255-4288 tjs1@cornell.edu
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 13:47:29 -0600
From: "Eric R. Jeppesen" <jeppesen@EAGLE.CC.UKANS.EDU>
Subject: Hello
Hello,
My name is Eric R. Jeppesen. I'm the Laboratory Safety Specialist
for the University of Kansas. My degree is in Health Physics. I have about three years
experience in safety. I look forward to hearing from other lab oriented people.
Eric R. Jeppesen
jeppesen@eagle.cc.ukans.edu
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 15:36:34 -0500
From: Janeen LaPierre <JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU>
Subject: INTRO
Content-Type: text/plain
Hello all. I am Janeen Lapierre, Lab Coordinator - Chemical Hygiene Officer for the
College of Osteopathic Medicine at the University of New England in Biddeford, Maine. We
are a relatively small school going through a painful growth spurt currently.
I have been a CHO for 5.5 years now here at UNE. My back ground is a B.A. in Biology with
a minor in Chemistry. I have worked in research, biotech, industry and academia.
I look forward to sharing ideas with you all and picking up pearls of wisdom from those of
you who have fought the good fight for a longer time than myself.
I too would like to thank Jim for getting this project underway!
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 15:27:34 -0600
From: Debi Sharpe <sharpdc@MAIL.AUBURN.EDU>
Subject: introduction
My name is Dedra Sharpe. I'm the University Safety Officer for Auburn University in Auburn
Alabama. I have a B.S. in biology and have worked in the environmental and safety field
for over 10 yrs. in industry. I have been at AU for 1 1/2 yrs. I recently became the CHO
after I wrote a CPH.
We have approx 300 labs with over 400 fume hoods. I conduct lab safety training each
quarter but it is not manditory. We would like to make it so. I am trying to bring the
University into the 21st century with regard to exposure control, hazard analysis, fire
protection, accident reporting, and virtually everything in 1910-29 CFR. The difficulty
has been changing the perception that there is no problem. Since we have no state OSHA
program we are exempt from the requirements (we are a state institution).
We have been very lucky historically. The labs have had several small fires and explosions
in the past where no one was seriously injured. I can read the writing on the wall but
convincing others has been very difficult. I am begining to bring the Chemistry dept
around but the Deans are very reluctant to dicipline, especially since some of the worst
labs are run by the professors who get the most funding (grants). Time will tell after I
train everyone to the CHP if it is enforced. I seriously doubt the voilators will have
their labs locked by not complying. Our risk management director understands the issues
(she's not from here and is young) but she is not likely to have much influence unless the
support is there from the top. I fully agree with the statement about older chemists not
understanding the safety issues like the younger ones. The problem is they are very poor
role models. Even the threat of lawsuits won't influence them (I've tried). They have
settled more than a few cases (one was for a hearing loss and they still didn't implement
a hearing conservation plan!!) I suppose they figure it's the cost of doing business. The
only thing I can figure is they haven't been hit hard enough, often enough. Industry was
never this difficult, you would think seemingly educated individuals could grasp these
concepts. I'm optimistic though (none of us would be in safety if we weren't) and I get
wonderful feedback after my training like, "why didn't anybody ever tell me this
before" when I explain why they can't use latex gloves in chemistry labs or why they
need to keep their fumehood sahes at 18. If I can tough it out until some of these guys
retire I might be able to make a difference.
I'm really glad to have this forum to discuss safety issues pertaining to the lab
environment exclusively. This is where most of us have the greatest risk.
P. S. How many of you have taken the CHO exam and how difficult was it? I'm working on my
CSP, CHO will be next!
Debra Sharpe
University Safety Officer
Auburn University
All thoughts are my own, no one else would be foolish enough to claim them.
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 12:11:09 -1000
Reply-To: Peter Batsakis <batsakis@hawaii.edu>
From: Peter Batsakis <batsakis@HAWAII.EDU>
Subject: Introduction
Aloha,
My name is Peter Batsakis and I'm the CHO for the University of
Hawaii. For the past twelve years I have been primarily involved in
environmental compliance. During the last several years I've also worked
in lab safety, first for a small environmental lab in Chicago and then at
Cornell University.
I've been working here at the University for two months. Besides
lab safety, I also investigate workers' comp claims and help our
industrial hygienist with her work.
It's been interesting to read the comments today about how to
inform the communities we work in about the importance of safety. I've
been assigned to see how we could go about doing that here at UH. What I
have been looking into is how Chemical Safety Committees work at other
institutions. We have Radiation, Biological and Diving Safety Committees
here and they work well. Those committees, however, are mandated by law.
No such law exists for Chemical Safety. What I would like to know is
whether such committees have been effective in the past in helping to
regulate and encourage chemical safety at educational institutions. Any
information would be greatly appreciated.
Pete
Peter Batsakis
Chemical Hygiene Officer
University of Hawaii at Manoa
2040 East-West Road, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
Phone: (808) 956-3201 FAX: (808) 956-3205
E-mail: batsakis@hawaii.edu
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 15:20:22 +0000
Comments: Authenticated sender is <jimc@mail.ribi.com>
From: "James E. Campbell" <jimc@MAIL.RIBI.COM>
Subject: I'm Here Too
I guess I'd better jump on the band wagon and do my bio/intro as
well. I received a B.S. in pharmacy from Oregon State University and
subsequently worked in retail and hospital pharmacy for approximately
six years. I then went back to school and the University of Nevada,
Reno and earned a B.S. in Chemical Engineering. I then went to work
for Eli Lilly and Company in Lafayette, Indiana, where I was a
Technical Services Representative, supporting the manufacture of
agricultural chemicals for four years. For the last three years, I
have had the great pleasure of living in western Montana and working
for Ribi ImmunoChem Research, Inc. As the company is quite small
(approx. 100 people) I wear a lot of hats (process engineering,
hazardous materials handling, maintenance, facility
design/engineering, emergency response coordinator, equipment &
process validation and health and safety officer). I took over as
the health and safety officer just over a year ago. Up to that time
this was a two year term. But, since it fit well with my other
responsibilities and I couldn't see completing a lot of initiatives
in two years, I volunteered to take the job permanently.
The safety history here has been satisfactory, but essentially on
"maintenance mode". I have undertaken major revisions in the safety
policies (Safety Manual and Chemical Hygiene Plan) and would like to
establish a behavior based safety culture. The primary hindrance
that I see with implementing change is the high level of education
among our laboratory employees (heavy with PhDs) and thus the
attitude of "I know more about what I am working with than anybody,
so don't tell me what to do". Actually, the staff does not have that
rude of an approach, but the general attitude is there.
Looking forward to getting some good insight into lab safety from
this group.
Cheers,
James E. Campbell
Chemical Engineer
Ribi ImmunoChem Research, Inc.
553 Old Corvallis Rd.
Hamilton, MT. 54840
Phone 406-363-6214
Fax 406-363-6129
E-mail jimc@ribi.com
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 16:40:30 -0700
From: "Sonja G. Ringen" <Ringen@UWYO.EDU>
Subject: Howdy!
Salutations from the University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY. My name is
Sonja Ringen, Manager of Environmental Health and Safety, but also the
CHO for campus. We have approximately 400 labs on campus, about 70% are
used for research. Our departments cover engineering, chemistry,
molecular biology, veterinary research, geology, botany, and several
small labs at high altitudes (>10,000 ft) in observatories and
atmospheric research stations.
One of the most puzzling aspects to the job of chemical safety at this
campus also relates to attitude, as has already been expressed. I find
that the most resistance to the program comes out of the Chemistry Dept.
Do they think they already know all the hazards and can take the
greatest chances? Or do they feel that they haven't been struck down by
a major fire or explosion yet, so the risk isn't real? Or do they
resent having a former student tell them what to do? Actually, the
newer faculty arriving is more attentive to the program.
I'm looking forward to learning from the joint wisdom of this group of
participants.
Sonja Ringen, Manager
Environmental Health and Safety
University of Wyoming
Laramie, WY 82071-3413
ringen@uwyo.edu
>
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 19:08:05 EST
From: Jim Mudd <Vajlm@AOL.COM>
Subject: Introduction
My name is Jim Mudd and I manage the hazardous waste and hazardous material
programs for the FBI Laboratory in Washington, D.C. I am a Registered
Environmental Manager and Registered Chemical and Hazardous Materials Manager
through the National Registry of Environmental Professionals. I'm also
qualified as an RSO, so I also manage the radiation safety program when I
have time. I also manage to provide lab safety training to other Federal,
state and local crime labs as requested.
I have been working for the FBI Lab for almost 25 years. About 10 years ago
I switched from research in forensic serology to oversee the development of
quality assurance programs for forensic labs nation wide in DNA testing. As
part of that program, I begin to consolidate the lab safety program within the
FBI Lab and hired a small staff to assist. Over time, I begin to focus more
of my activities on hazardous waste management and chemical hygiene issues in
the lab.
The FBI Lab is a full service crime lab which employees about 700 people. Our
lab is divided into 5 sections: Scientific Analysis (DNA, materials analysis,
explosive residue, firearms, chemistry, hazardous material response),
Investigative Operations and Support (question document, photo, shoeprint and
related examinations), Latent Fingerprints, Special Projects (photo
processing, carpetner shops etc.), and Forensic Science Research and Training
(includes evidence response at crimescenes.). Our lab has the capability to
perform just about any analytical, biological, chemical process you can
imagine. We receive evidence from Federal, state and local law enforcement
agencies throughout the U.S. The forensic laboratory is a different kind of
laboratory animal. Not only does our lab and its personnel have to deal
with the normal chemical, biological and related lab safety issues, the
evidence we encounter may bring their own set of safety issues - both in the
lab and at the crimescene. Needless to say it's never dull here. I look
forward to following the discussions on the list and learning from other's
experience.
Jim Mudd
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 20:13:03 -0500
From: Rebecca Stricklin <RStricklin@AOL.COM>
Subject: hello from another new one on NACHO
Hello,
My name is Rebecca Stricklin. I am a high school chemistry teacher and
department chair. I am in a suburban high school outside Cincinnati, Ohio. We
currently have 16 science teachers, 6 of whom teach chemistry. Of those 6, 4
have taught chemistry less than 3 years and have had no safety training.
Those of us who have been teaching chemistry and those from the past were all
trained in safety in various times and places. THankfully, despite several
mishaps, we have never had a student seriously injured. With the new "group",
we have already had several mishaps and one student injured. Because of our
past track record, the administration does not always heed any safety advice
and will only do things that are required by law. I am looking for what is
required by law, advice and help for the new teachers, plus we all need to
know as much about safety as possible.
Rebecca Stricklin
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 19:56:44 -0600
From: Erik Talley <erik@CEHS.SIU.EDU>
Subject: Intro and 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
Content-Type: text/plain
My name is Erik Talley. I am Assistant Director of the Southern Illinois
University, Center for Environmental Health and Safety. I oversee
chemical waste, chemical safety, biological waste and biological safety
for the University.
It's nice to see a list started for chemical hygiene and related issues.
Speaking of which, I have a question for conversation or clarification.
I know this issue was brought up years ago and probably settled, but I
see new areas where chemicals are used every day and sometimes get
caught up in whether it falls under 1910.1450 or not. Specifically, for
1910.1450, how are you defining a laboratory (engaged in hazardous
chemical use)? I've read the standard and know about the exemptions,
specific definitions of laboratory, laboratory scale, etc. I'm
interested in anything you might call a lab (as per lab standard) that
we may not normally think of as a lab in a University environment. Most
of the time, I end up NOT considering questionable areas as labs, but
I'd be interested in what you think.
_____Parts of 1910.1450________________
(a) Scope and application. (1) This section shall apply to all employers
engaged in the laboratory use of hazardous chemicals as defined below.
"Laboratory" means a facility where the 'laboratory use of hazardous
chemicals' occurs. It is a workplace where relatively small quantities
of hazardous chemicals are used on a non-production basis.
"Laboratory scale" means work with substances in which the containers
used for reactions, transfers, and other handling of substances are
designed to be easily and safely manipulated by one person. 'Laboratory
scale' excludes those workplaces whose function is to produce commercial
quantities of materials.
"Laboratory use of hazardous chemicals" means handling or use of such
chemicals in which all of the following conditions are met:
(i) Chemical manipulations are carried out on a "laboratory scale";
(ii) Multiple chemical procedures or chemicals are used;
(iii) The procedures involved are not part of a production process, nor
in any way simulate a production process; and
(iv) "Protective laboratory practices and equipment" are available and
in common use to minimize the potential for employee exposure to
hazardous chemicals.
Thanks,
Erik
Erik Talley, Assistant Director
Center for Environmental Health & Safety
Southern Illinois University
erik@cehs.siu.edu
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 15:39:56 +1300
From: Nigel McCarter <n.mccarter@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject: Introduction
Hi,
I run a company in New Zealand (other side of the world from most of you)
specialising in science safety working mainly with Crown Research
Institutes (Government) and univesities.
In previous careers I was a fisheries scientist for National Institute for
Water and Atmospheric Research.
Nigel McCarter
Safety Management and Information Services Ltd
Box 4096 Hamilton
Phone 64 7 856 6004 Fax 64 858 2689
Mobile 025 274 8560
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 13:38:04 +1100
From: Geoff Roberts <groberts@MIRA.NET>
Subject: Introduction
G'day
My name is Geoff Roberts and I've been a practising chemist in industries
around Melbourne, Australia, for more years than I care to remember -
something near 40 years! I have a BSc in chemistry and am a Fellow of the
Royal Australian Chemical Institute - a very "British" form of peer review.
About half my career has been in management of chemical and process
industries and the other half running a small consulting practice. As
consulting chemists we aim our services mainly at small (less than 100
employees) manufacturing companies that work with chemicals but our client
list also includes people like importers who handle chemicals, insurance
companies and the occasional super-large multi-national. We cover a fairly
general range of consulting work such as development, problem solving,
environmental controls, documentation and negotiation tasks including
assisting in legal matters and disputes. However, in recent years more of
our time has been directed to workplace health and safety involving
chemicals. While that work tends toward workplace safety on the factory
floor with a fairly "hands on" approach (and I subscribe to Ralph Stuart's
Safety List and John DeLaHunt's Hazmat List), many of our clients have
small laboratory facilities. I also have an active interest in lab safety,
particularly teaching laboratories, through my committee membership of the
Victorian state branch of our chemical institute.
I started my career working for Monsanto as a supervisor on plants
manufacturing various organic chemicals. On looking back forty years I am
amazed how advanced our safety program was in those far-away days, with
performance measurement, procedure manuals, employee/management works
safety council, plant safety committees, clearance certificates, lock-out
procedures, pipeline blanking and the lot. I moved on to manage electric
furnaces making yellow phosphorus and other plants using phosphorus for
Albright and Wilson. Nothing sharpens the mind about safety like pumping
molten yellow phosphorus around the place! Then it was a period at a Union
Carbide polyethylene plant in Torrence, California, (where there was also a
liquid hydrogen plant, shipping its product in road tankers to the Pacific
Missile Range) and back to Australia as Carbide's plastics division
manufacturing superintendent. Petrochemical plants, particularly those
using very high pressure, are also rather inclined to focus one on the need
to think about safety. A few years were then spent as head of research and
development for the Petersville Group of food companies that, at the time
was the largest food manufacturing and processing company in Australia.
But, sadly, in recent years the group has been broken up with bits sold off
to overseas owners and is no longer the Australian-owned industry leader
that we had built up twenty-five years ago. After Petersville, I started
my consulting practice and, having managed to feed the family for over
twenty years, must be doing something right in that field.
Geoff
Geoffrey W. Roberts, FRACI
Scientific Testing & Applied Technical Services Pty. Ltd.
Consulting Chemists
230 North Road, Brighton, Vic., 3187, Australia
Phone +613 9596 3257 Fax +613 9596 6985
groberts@mira.net
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 22:10:15 -0700
Reply-To: garyaw@worldnet.att.net
From: "Gary A. Wright" <garyaw@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: More Intros
Hey NACHOs!
Greetings from beautiful Albuquerque, New Mexico! First of all, thanks to
Jim.
My name is Gary A. Wright, I have a BS in Industrial Technology from SIU
(Go Saluki's) and am presently working on my Master's in Industrial safety
Management from Central Missouri State. I served seven years in the US Air
Force as a Bioenvrionmental Engineering Technician (OSHA & EPA- type work).
I am presently in the New Mexico Air National Guard as the Public Health
tech. I worked as an IH tech at Sandia National Labs (SNL) for
two-and-a-half years before getting "the Boot" (they called it
downsizing!). I then started working for a small company that has several
contracts with SNL (I never left). One of those contracts is the Local
Exhaust Ventilation (LEV) Program, which brings me to you folks. We have
to certify ~1500 LEV systems annually, many of which are laboratory fume
hoods. Wanting to tap in to my experience, my company asked me to
start/run a safety program. It should be fun and challenging!
Best wishes to you all and I hope to be learning a lot!
Adios!
Gary A. Wright
Safety Director, Kirk Air Co, Inc.
========================================================================
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 21:13:48 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Self Introduction
Joan de Vastey wrote....
I expect that I'll be somewhat of a lurker on this list.
Lurkers are definately welcome!
At the same time, this will hopefully be more than a discussion list.
It's the beginning of a new professional organization, The National
Association of Chemical Hygiene Officers. Both members (CHO's)
and affiliate member (non-CHO's interested in lab safety) will need
to help shape the future.
My experience in the American Chemical Society (National, Northeastern
Section, and Division of Chemical Health and Safety) has been that it's
a relatively small percentage of the members (1-5%) who are active in
the organization.
I hope those NACHO members and affiliate members who choose to be
less active will make it clear what they would like from their Association.
.... jim
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 06:02:34 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Welcome
Hello NACHO members,
Wayne Wood shared some information about his upcoming
course at the Pittsburgh Conference.
I hope others will follow his lead and post course offerings with
registration information and costs. There's a tremendous need
for more safety training opportunities. Thanks Wayne.
And, folks working in labs need effective protective equipment,
protective facilities and resources (software, internet, books,
videos, audio programs, etc). Please share information about your
favorites.
I'm inclined to want a parnership with vendors. How can vendors be
effectively included in NACHO?
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 08:19:53 EST
From: Wayne Wood <wayne@PHYRES.LAN.MCGILL.CA>
Organization: McGill University
Subject: Videos
Jim Kaufman wrote:
> And, folks working in labs need effective protective equipment,
> protective facilities and resources (software, internet, books,
> videos, audio programs, etc). Please share information about your
> favorites.
Some of my favourite safety videos are listed in our video collection
at:
http://www.mcgill.ca/eso/videotap.htm
Included in the list are about 10 lab safety titles, my clear favourite
being Practising Safe Science, produced by the Howard Hughes Medical
Institute.
Wayne Wood
McGill University
Montreal
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 08:40:20 -0400
From: Heather Ratcliffe <heather_ratcliffe@UNC.EDU>
Subject: Re: chemistry will listen if...
How did we get our chemistry dept to straighten-up??
We visit them often!! Most of the time the big PIs are not in there labs
so who do you befriend...the students...the people who are in there
daily...you start a relationship of " Hey, I care about your safety" and
then you educate...believe it or not it worked!!
and during our last epa inspection they visited the chemistry and pharmacy
depts (also a big waste generator) and we passed only 1 cite. (:
-----Original Message-----
From: Sonja G. Ringen <Ringen@UWYO.EDU>
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU <LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU>
Date: Monday, February 02, 1998 7:58 PM
Subject: Howdy!
> Salutations from the University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY. My name
is
>Sonja Ringen, Manager of Environmental Health and Safety, but also the
>CHO for campus. We have approximately 400 labs on campus, about 70% are
>used for research. Our departments cover engineering, chemistry,
>molecular biology, veterinary research, geology, botany, and several
>small labs at high altitudes (>10,000 ft) in observatories and
>atmospheric research stations.
> One of the most puzzling aspects to the job of chemical safety at
this
>campus also relates to attitude, as has already been expressed. I find
>that the most resistance to the program comes out of the Chemistry Dept.
> Do they think they already know all the hazards and can take the
>greatest chances? Or do they feel that they haven't been struck down by
>a major fire or explosion yet, so the risk isn't real? Or do they
>resent having a former student tell them what to do? Actually, the
>newer faculty arriving is more attentive to the program.
> I'm looking forward to learning from the joint wisdom of this group
of
>participants.
>
>Sonja Ringen, Manager
>Environmental Health and Safety
>University of Wyoming
>Laramie, WY 82071-3413
>ringen@uwyo.edu
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 09:03:44 -0400
From: Heather Ratcliffe <heather_ratcliffe@UNC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Videos
hey we use the howard hughes video in our lab std training as well
the end of the video where all the mishaps take place, wakes everyone up (:
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Wood <wayne@PHYRES.LAN.MCGILL.CA>
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU <LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU>
Date: Tuesday, February 03, 1998 9:32 AM
Subject: Videos
Jim Kaufman wrote:
> And, folks working in labs need effective protective equipment,
> protective facilities and resources (software, internet, books,
> videos, audio programs, etc). Please share information about your
> favorites.
Some of my favourite safety videos are listed in our video collection
at:
http://www.mcgill.ca/eso/videotap.htm
Included in the list are about 10 lab safety titles, my clear favourite
being Practising Safe Science, produced by the Howard Hughes Medical
Institute.
Wayne Wood
McGill University
Montreal
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 09:39:17 -0500
From: Dewey Williams <williams@UNCCVM.UNCC.EDU>
Subject: Introduction
Hello Everyone,
I am Dewey Williams, Lab Manager for the Chemistry Department at
UNC-Charlotte. My background consists of a BS in Biology/Chemistry, 5
years as QC/Analytical technician, 5 years as a hospital lab tech and 8
years in my present position.
Safety duties include training (stockroom assistants, TA's and lab
assistants), giving a safety lecture to graduate and undergrad researchers,
documenting and collecting hazardous waste from teaching and research labs
and generally pointing out when our research labs are on the verge of
melt-down. I also maintain our chemical inventory database, MSDS's and
provide chemical/lab safety information to students and faculty.
I am also working with our Safety Dept and a faculty member to develop a
research lab self-audit procedure, a lab safety web page and numerous other
projects.
Thanks Jim, for giving us this opportunity!
Dewey Williams - Lab Manager
mailto:williams@email.uncc.edu
UNC-Charlotte Chemistry Dept. http://www.chem.uncc.edu
"These are my ideas and no one else will claim them."
"If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the precipitate"
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 10:06:06 -0500
Reply-To: deputyn@emu.edu
Comments: Authenticated sender is <deputyn@inserv1.emu.edu>
From: Nancy Deputy <deputyn@EMU.EDU>
Organization: Eastern Mennonite University
Subject: Re: chemistry will listen if...
In-Reply-To: <01bd30a0$e37d9240$10c30298@hrr.www.adp.unc.edu>
That sounds good but I tried to point out safety concerns to a
student. He was wearing sandals and shorts without any safety
glasses alone in a lab. Well, you think I commited a crime. Now the
professors tell me that I am not allowed to approach any students but
come directly to them. Half the time I can't find them and I don't
want to become the police. Any suggestions?
If the problem is bad I do document it.
Nancy
opinions of my own not E.M.U's.
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 10:15:12 -0500
From: Janeen LaPierre <JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU>
Subject: Intro and 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable? -Reply
Content-Type: text/plain
Hi Eric.
I was wondering what you consider questionable. If folks are working with small quantities
of chems, I call it a lab.
I will say that we had faculty who wanted to store chems in their office. We have stopped
that practice and moved all chems to storage rooms or labs.
I would be happy to address more specific areas if you give me an example. Janeen
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 08:17:54 -0700
From: John DeLaHunt <jdelahunt@CC.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject: Re: chemistry will listen if...
>That sounds good but I tried to point out safety concerns to a
>student. He was wearing sandals and shorts without any safety
>glasses alone in a lab. Well, you think I commited a crime. Now the
>professors tell me that I am not allowed to approach any students but
>come directly to them. Half the time I can't find them and I don't
>want to become the police. Any suggestions?
>If the problem is bad I do document it.
A "safety police" mentality is a key mindset to avoid. Faculty (despite my
past musigs to the contrary) are reasonable adults and are capable of making
reasoned decisions when presented with all the facts.
Some of the key facts they may be missing are: every employee of the
institution has a personal and institutional obligation to ensure that every
aspect of a student's college career is as free from recognized risk of harm
as they (the employees) can reasonably make it; that failure to do the above
puts the institution at risk; that the institution takes seriously the risk
that faculty expose it to; and that there exist external standards which,
albeit vaguely, define reasonable for the sake of the above discussion points.
If the faculty have these concepts in hand (preferably from legal council),
they may recognize that they, in fact, are to be the "safety police" for
thier labs, not you or I.
Personally, I don't like seeing students in shorts and sandles in lab, but I
allow the faculty lab supervisor to be in charge. If someone gets hurt by
something I cannot control, I don't want to on the list of defendants (even
though I probably will be, as CHO/EHS).
John
John DeLaHunt, EHS & RSO * 1125 Glen Avenue *
*The Colorado College * Colorado Springs, CO 80905*
*jdelahunt@cc.colorado.edu* VOX: (719)389-6678 *
* Owner: * FAX: (719)389-6981 *
*hazmat-l@cc.colorado.edu * *
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 08:32:51 -0700
Reply-To: terrie@cc.usu.edu
From: Terrie Wierenga <terrie@CC.USU.EDU>
Organization: USDA-ARS PPRL
Subject: greetings & lab definition
Hi!
My name is Terrie Wierenga, and I serve as CDSO (collateral duty safety
officer) at the USDA-ARS research location in Logan, Utah. We have three
research labs here with 55 full-time and close to 100 part-time
employees (Poisonous Plant Research, Forage & Range Research, and Bee
Biology). I'm also the CHO, LRPO (radiation officer), and HVAC
maintenance person in addition to my 'real' job in research. Government
labs had their own safety programs for a number of years before we came
under the jurisdiction of OSHA. Since 1991, we follow Utah and federal
OSHA unless our guidelines are more stringent.
Our safety program has seen improvement in the last 7 years. If nothing
else, the documentation requirements have given our labs the push they
needed to get things organized! I have a location safety committee
consisting of representatives from all three labs to help guide and
improve our safety programs. In addition, we work closely with the Utah
State University safety personnel. All of my safety training has been
on-the-job. I have a major in Animal Science and minors in Chemistry and
Journalism from Iowa State University and have been working in research
labs for the last 18 years. Since becoming CDSO, I attend several
training courses each year, most of them the train-the-trainer type so
that when I return to Logan I can train our safety committee. I do have
a lot of support from the three research leaders here; in addition, all
but a couple of the employees strongly support the safety programs. It's
nice!
Our lab definition includes several of our field sites. Since my lab
studies poisonous plants, we often have 3 or 4 field research projects
going throughout the year from Oregon to New Mexico. We collect plant
and animal samples while in the field and sometimes do some basic
chemistry. The sheep camps we use become portable laboratories at those
times.
Although our location enjoyed an accident free year in 1997 (according
to the OSHA 200 log), there is still a lot of room for improvement. I
look forward to learning from the cumulative knowledge of the list
participants. Thanks for offering this forum!
Terrie
--
**Terrie Wierenga
USDA-ARS Poisonous Plant Research Lab, Logan, Utah
v: (435) 752-2941 f: (435) 753-5681
e: terrie@cc.usu.edu
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 08:39:59 -0700
From: John DeLaHunt <jdelahunt@CC.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject: Re: 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
>I know this issue was brought up years ago and probably settled, but I
>see new areas where chemicals are used every day and sometimes get
>caught up in whether it falls under 1910.1450 or not. Specifically, for
>1910.1450, how are you defining a laboratory (engaged in hazardous
>chemical use)? I've read the standard and know about the exemptions,
>specific definitions of laboratory, laboratory scale, etc. I'm
>interested in anything you might call a lab (as per lab standard) that
>we may not normally think of as a lab in a University environment. Most
>of the time, I end up NOT considering questionable areas as labs, but
>I'd be interested in what you think.
Right now, I call labs in Chem, Bio, Physics, one in Geo, one in Psych, one
in the Health Center and EH&S "labs" under 1450. I'm inclined to redefine
that to exclude facilities where chemicals are used as the means, not the
ends. That would cut my list to Chem, about a third of Bio, one in Geo and
EH&S. The rest I would put under 1200.
I haven't fully thought out this move, but I think the increased burden in
MSDS collection and retention might, in and of itself, make it a wash.
Any thoughts?
John DeLaHunt, EHS & RSO * 1125 Glen Avenue *
*The Colorado College * Colorado Springs, CO 80905*
*jdelahunt@cc.colorado.edu* VOX: (719)389-6678 *
* Owner: * FAX: (719)389-6981 *
*hazmat-l@cc.colorado.edu * *
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 13:27:36 -0400
From: Heather Ratcliffe <heather_ratcliffe@UNC.EDU>
Subject: Re: 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
We have "labs" that are actually shops if you follow the definition of what
a lab is in 1910.1450, and thats exactly what we do with them
> apply the haz. com. std.
hey they need safety regs too
-----Original Message-----
From: John DeLaHunt <jdelahunt@CC.COLORADO.EDU>
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU <LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU>
Date: Tuesday, February 03, 1998 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
>>I know this issue was brought up years ago and probably settled, but I
>>see new areas where chemicals are used every day and sometimes get
>>caught up in whether it falls under 1910.1450 or not. Specifically, for
>>1910.1450, how are you defining a laboratory (engaged in hazardous
>>chemical use)? I've read the standard and know about the exemptions,
>>specific definitions of laboratory, laboratory scale, etc. I'm
>>interested in anything you might call a lab (as per lab standard) that
>>we may not normally think of as a lab in a University environment. Most
>>of the time, I end up NOT considering questionable areas as labs, but
>>I'd be interested in what you think.
>
>Right now, I call labs in Chem, Bio, Physics, one in Geo, one in Psych, one
>in the Health Center and EH&S "labs" under 1450. I'm inclined to
redefine
>that to exclude facilities where chemicals are used as the means, not the
>ends. That would cut my list to Chem, about a third of Bio, one in Geo and
>EH&S. The rest I would put under 1200.
>
>I haven't fully thought out this move, but I think the increased burden in
>MSDS collection and retention might, in and of itself, make it a wash.
>
>Any thoughts?
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 06:59:47 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Thank You
I want to thank all of you have decided to Join NACHO.
Chemical Hygiene Officers (Advisors, my preference) and
others interested in lab safety need a place to meet and
colleagues with whom to converse/share/crab/complain/ect.
(Maybe even have a virtual coke/pepsi/beer)
I also want everyone to know that Erik Talley at SIU is the
person who made it happen. EriK was the one who stepped
forward when I asked "how do I start this thing" and said
"I'll set it up here on our system". Thanks Erik.
... jim
========================================================================
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 07:32:14 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: CHO Certification
Heather asked about CHO Certification.
The National Registry in Clinical Chemistry (NRCC) has
with the help of the ACS Division of Chemical health and
Safety developed a CHO Certification EXAM.
Gilbert Smith is the Executive Director of NRCC. Their
email address for more information is NRCC6@aol.com
George Wahl, Russ Phifer and I developed a prep
course for the exam. The course is called "How to Be an
Effective Chemical Hygiene Offices". The course is offered
in two formats (one or two-day) at ACS, New Safety, and
LS&EM meetings.
The '98 dates for the course are ...
March 28 in Dallas, Texas
June 25 in Raleigh-Durham, NC
August 22 in Boston, MA
For more information about the certification prep course, contact
Russ Phifer at envasset@juno.com
... jim
========================================================================
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 19:19:51 +1100
From: Geoff Roberts <groberts@MIRA.NET>
Subject: Predicting Explosive Chemicals
I have come across, in an old lab manual, a copy of an article "I didn't
Know It Was Loaded!". By-line is "H. K. Livingston, Guest Editor,
Department of Chemistry, Wayne State University, Detroit." On the copy
that I have there is no indication of the journal or date of publication.
The article is about being cautious of the possibility of explosions based
on the atomic grouping in the molecular structure of compounds that might
be used in lab experiments.
I am anxious to find where and when this article was published. Probably
it is at least ten years ago. Can anyone help me?
Thanks
Geoff Roberts.
Geoffrey W. Roberts, FRACI
Scientific Testing & Applied Technical Services Pty. Ltd.
Consulting Chemists
230 North Road, Brighton, Vic., 3187, Australia
Phone +613 9596 3257 Fax +613 9596 6985
groberts@mira.net
========================================================================
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 09:28:56 -0500
From: Diana Harding <DHARDING@MAIL.NYSED.GOV>
Subject: A lurker's intro -Forwarded -Forwarded
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 1998 15:05:51 -0500
From: Diana Harding <DHARDING@MAIL.NYSED.GOV>
To: dharding@MAIL.NYSED.GOV
Subject: A lurker's intro -Forwarded
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 1998 10:38:14 -0500
From: Diana Harding <DHARDING@MAIL.NYSED.GOV>
To: safety-l@siu.edu
Subject: A lurker's intro
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi,
I'm Diana Harding, an Associate in Science with the New York State
Education Department. I have a BS in Chemistry and an MS in Special
Education. I have taught in the public school system, served as a trainer
in school staff development, and currently am one of two associates in
science education (we used to have 6-7 associates). Our
responsibilities include assessment, content, safety issues, teacher
award programs, etc.
I attended Jim's safety workshop back in 1984 (I think). If there was one
thing I remember, it was that the instructor is ultimately responsible and
most likely liable for injury.
It seems that not much has changed in the lab (college or industry) since
I was there in the 60s. I am happy to communicate with all of you and to
share information. In New York we have been spreading the news about
a safe high school lab environment; currently we are nearing the end of
the development of a guideline for safe chemical storage. But we too
need much more work in the area of safety.
========================================================================
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 09:43:45 EST
From: Wayne Wood <wayne@PHYRES.LAN.MCGILL.CA>
Organization: McGill University
Subject: Re: Predicting Explosive Chemicals
Geoff Roberts asked:
> I have come across, in an old lab manual, a copy of an article "I didn't
> Know It Was Loaded!". By-line is "H. K. Livingston, Guest Editor,
> Department of Chemistry, Wayne State University, Detroit." On the copy
> that I have there is no indication of the journal or date of publication.
>
> The article is about being cautious of the possibility of explosions based
> on the atomic grouping in the molecular structure of compounds that might
> be used in lab experiments.
>
> I am anxious to find where and when this article was published. Probably
> it is at least ten years ago. Can anyone help me?
I am fairly certain the article was originally published in the
Journal of Chemical Education, early 80's I think. It includes a
table of potentially expolsive functional groupings.
Wayne Wood
McGill University
Montreal
========================================================================
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 07:18:07 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Videos
In a message dated 98-02-03 08:24:32 EST, Wayne Wood wrote:
<< Included in the list are about 10 lab safety titles, my clear favourite
being Practising Safe Science, produced by the Howard Hughes Medical
Institute. >>
The Howard Hughes series is available for free. Call W. Emmett
Barkley at 1-800-424-9924. ...jak
========================================================================
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 07:18:05 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Intro and 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
Erik Talley wrote: I'm interested in anything you might call a lab
(as per lab standard) that we may not normally think of as a lab
in a University environment.
JAK: Some institutions are including their Arts departments and
Photography.
========================================================================
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 21:47:03 -0600
From: Erik Talley <erik@CEHS.SIU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Intro and 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
Content-Type: text/plain
Actually, those are the two we are questioning. We just visited the
Cinema and Photography department for a general evaluation. Most
developing situations fall under 1910.1200 in my opinion, but it's hard
to say on some of the research photography folks.
Erik
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Kaufman [mailto:Labsafe@AOL.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 1998 6:18 AM
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: Re: Intro and 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
Erik Talley wrote: I'm interested in anything you might call a lab
(as per lab standard) that we may not normally think of as a lab
in a University environment.
JAK: Some institutions are including their Arts departments and
Photography.
========================================================================
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 21:06:41 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Fwd: safety goggles
>I have a question about goggles/safety glasses. As we all know, students
>hate to wear the safety goggles. Eventhough they are the safest, has
>anyone successfully replaced them with safety glasses.
>
>I am thinking about replacing the goggles with safety glasses from Uvex. I
>was considering using the Provision and Patriot models.
>
>In our current set up, the students purchase the goggles along with
>textbooks. The safety glasses would be not cost much more.
>
>However, I have a concern about safety. Does anyone have any experience
>with safety glasses in undergrad labs? I know students would be more
>comfortable with glasses than with the goggles, but do they afford enough
>protection?
>
>Any info would be appreciated, especially dealing with the safety issue.
>
>thanks,
>eric
>
>Eric Woller
>Chemistry Instructor
>Bethany Lutheran College
>734 Marsh St.
>Mankato, MN 56001
>(507)386-5343
Hi
I'm not at an American school so our legal position is not equival. I
recall an extensive discussion on this list around 1995: I do not know if
there is an archive.
Our Department ask for safety glasses (historical practice here determined
by the Department Admin). We still experience complaints from students
about having to wear them. The major problem is such glasses might not
offer adequate protection against chemical splashes. In one case here, a
student was splashed in the face with a small amount of a halogen in
dichloromethane; a small amount dripped down the forehead towards the eyes;
I do not think this could have happened with goggles. The student suffered
no injury, but I believe this to be just luck.
My only exposure to American legal practices is from sensational news
items, but such a change seems rather risky.
Norman
Norman.Gee@ualberta.ca
http://www.acpo.on.ca/acpa/index.htm
http://www.chem.ualberta.ca/~ngee/Chem10XLabs.html
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 08:18:05 -0500
From: "Benedict, Kathryn" <BENEDIK@WOLF.RESEARCH.AA.WL.COM>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
Content-Type: text/plain
Safety glasses vs. goggles in the labs.
My personal experience is that goggles are always the best protection in
labs. I was priming an HPLC pump with chloroform a few years back and
had solvent splash up under my safety glasses and into my eyes. It made
quite an impression on me and goggles have been my personal eye
protection of choice ever since.
a slight digression ...........
We did a little experiment in one of our labs a few weeks ago that may
be of value to you in your laboratory setting. I obtained half a dozen
cow eyeballs from a local slaughterhouse and had some of our chemists
perform an experiment where they dripped sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid
(conc. and dilute), acetone, and trichloroacetic acid on the eye tissue
to see what type of damage was done and how rapid it was.
Tissue damage from trichloroacetic acid was the worst and the most
rapid, the other reagents did visible damage within 30 seconds or less.
We also tried rinsing them off as rapidly as possible ( to simulate the
effect of using an eyewash ) and the damage was stopped at that point,
but it was obvious that the best way to go is to keep things out of your
eyes in the first place.
This generated lots of discussion from the scientists, and really helped
raise awareness levels about eye protection. I think a five minute
session like this at the start of your lab session with reagents you
commonly use may be of more value than a lecture.
Kathy Benedict
benedik@aa.wl.com
Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
313.996.7516
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 09:14:45 -0500
From: Winnie Sell - Chemistry <sell@HAL.MUHLBERG.EDU>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
In-Reply-To: <AD5FC3253459D1118E0300805FBBC4366A78CB@redfox.research.aa.wl.com> from
"Benedict, Kathryn" at Feb 5,
98 08:18:05 am
Nothing but goggles here.
We have a faculty member who puts on a pair of safety glasses in his
first organic lab session and gets someone to squirt water on his
forehead with a wash bottle. After he's done wiping his eyes with a
handerchief he asks if there are any questions.
Winnie Sell
Muhlenberg College
sell@muhlberg.edu
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 09:41:29 -0500
From: Janeen LaPierre <JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU>
Subject: Re: safety goggles -Reply
Content-Type: text/plain
In chem labs we insist on goggles. Eye injuries are the easiest to prevent. If liquids are
in use goggles are the only true protection. Chem labs just have too many liquid hazards
to use anything else. In Maine there is a law on the books that require students to use
goggles in the chem lab. That helps our case.
In bio labs, we do use safety glasses. We use PPE that students will see in the medical
field in regard to blood born paths. The hazards are less severe by and large in the bio
lab because we have reviewed labs and removed the more hazardous chems and replaced them
with safer alternatives.
I do not believe you can safely use glasses in chem lab. Just review the MSDS's for some
of the chems they use and you will see that goggles are specified.
To address the comfort issue, we use the UVEX Stealth goggle. It comes in two sizes and
seems to be much better received by students and faculty alike. I find them much more
wearable.
For what its worth, Janeen
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 08:01:22 -0700
From: John DeLaHunt <jdelahunt@CC.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Intro and 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
>Erik Talley wrote: I'm interested in anything you might call a lab
>(as per lab standard) that we may not normally think of as a lab
>in a University environment.
>
>JAK: Some institutions are including their Arts departments and
>Photography.
OSHA Region VIII made it clear to Colorado College that art programs are
"production," and the process operators therein typically lack the research
skills (let alone desire, usually) needed to find their own hazard information.
They specifically instructed us to approach art, photo and arts & crafts
(jewelry, pottery, & fabic) as hazcom operations, and cover them under
1910.1200.
For what that's worth.
John
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 10:35:50 -0500
From: "Thomas J. Shelley" <tjs1@CORNELL.EDU>
Subject: Introduction
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii"
<fontfamily><param>Times</param><bigger>Dear Colleagues--I am the
CHO
for Cornell University. I attended Bowling Green University in Ohio
(more years ago than I care to think about now) and spent most of my
working career as an analytical chemist in various industrial settings.
I have been with Cornell University EH&S for eight years and in the
CHO position for two and one-half years. I sort of fell into the EH&S
field when I couldn't find a "real job" as a chemist and took a
temporary position with Cornell EH&S until I could find a "real job."
I soon found that I thoroughly enjoyed the lab safety work I was doing
as it combined my long standing interest in chemistry with the role of
"social activist" which I have also found rewarding (in a former
lifetime). Now here I am eight years later plugging away at Lab
Standard implementation. Cornell has a substantial research program
with approximately 3,800 laboratory rooms in 85 buildings and about
5,500 line staff laboratory workers. The task ahead of me is daunting
at times, but generally very rewarding. I especially enjoy working
with our graduate students, many of whom are much more concerned about
their safety than their supervisors (faculty in most cases). I have
previously prepared a piece on my role as CHO, which is appended
below.
Congratualtions to Jim for initializing this new list. I look forward
to inspired dialogs with my fellow CHOs. Tom Shelley
*******************************************
The Role of the Chemical Hygiene Officer
The Chemical Hygiene Officer (CHO) is charged by the OSHA Laboratory
Standard
(29 CFR 1910.1450(b)) with "....the development and implementation of
the Chemical Hygiene Plan." Different organizations have taken
different approaches to developing the position of Chemical Hygiene
Officer. These range from a full-time CIH/CHMM to a part-time lab
supervisor, depending upon the requirements of the organization. Some
organizations have a central CHO and others have several or many CHOs
each representing a separate unit of the organization. The only
provision in the Standard stating who may be a CHO is that the
individual must be "...qualified by training or experience." Many
articles have been written in trade journals and safety publications,
including entire books, on how to develop the position of CHO and how
to write and implement a Chemical Hygiene Plan. The following is not
an attempt to summarize the overall role of a CHP, since that varies
enormously from organization to organization depending upon the
chemicals in use, size of the organization and many other factors.
Rather it is a "day in the life" thumbnail sketch of the activities of
the CHO at a large research university. (The list also happens to
approximate my job description!)
Maintain a current understanding of all OSHA (and some EPA/DOT)
regulations relevant to current lab operations
Maintain and manage distribution of the Chemical
Hygiene Plan (CHP)
Facilitate implementation of the CHP campus wide
Develop and maintain the central Chemical Hygiene Committee (CHC)
Manage the fume hood testing program (supervise tester)
Prior approval of fume hood/BSC purchases
Educate, train, support departmental safety reps (DSR)
Manage mail distribution list (DSR-L)
Regular educational postings to DSR-L
Training on "how to" be a safety rep
Prepare materials for lab audit program
and train DSRs/committees to do audits
Facilitate the development of standard operating
procedures (SOPs)
Attend safety meeting with DSRs
Supply with information on issues of compliance
Work in the field to solve problems faced by DSRs
Facilitate formation of departmental safety committees
Similar details as for DSR above
Review the specific research use of chemicals; protocols experimental
setups
Maintain PIH prior approval program; push for expansion of this
program to other
highly hazardous materials
Design review of proposed research facilities both new facilities and
renovations
(with Facilities Engineering and Building Inspectors)
Review lab accidents
Prepare and conduct Training:
Compliance based general programs to train employees
in the provisions of the CHP,
Prepare and present specialized trainings and related
materials for specific highly hazardous chemicals:
Vinyl Chloride
Ethylene Oxide
Hydrofluoric Acid
Prepare and present training for other sectors of the
campus work force not affected by Lab Standard
(such as "Lab Hazards for Non-Lab Workers")
Participate in developing Web pages as required
Generally facilitate the implementation of the "Health and
Safety Plan"
"Other duties as assigned." (often much more than the 5% it is
designated to be)
********************************************************
Tom Shelley, Chemical Hygiene Officer, Cornell University,
Department of Environmental Health and Safety, 125 Humphreys Service
Building,
Ithaca, NY 14853. (607) 255-4288 tjs1@cornell.edu
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 10:39:35 -0600
From: mathiason dennis <mathias@MHD1.MOORHEAD.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Intro and 1910.1450 or 1910.1200 applicable?
In-Reply-To: <22612d8b.34d85c80@aol.com>
I agree with JAK concerning art and photography. What we found when we
investigated these areas is that in some cases the posed risk was far
greater than you would expect to find in a chemistry lab. As an example: A
4 ft X 4 ft X 6 inch deep tub(heated) placed in a standard 4 ft lab fume
hood. The tub is half full with conc nitric acid. It is used by students
doing etching work. For those of you that have already done the math( and
found that the hood probably is not large enough and not designed for this
type of routine daily operation) consider the nature of hot nitric acid.
The safety margin is veneer thick!!! At this point I don't think it is
approriate to concern yourself with the question Is it 1450 or a 1200
issue? In MN it is definitely an Employee Right to Know Issue. (Similar
to HAZCOM) Incidentally -- I shut the operation down. We then replaced it
with a far safer etching process.
We define a lab based on function, not location. Thus the prof doing
experiments in the park would also be expected to address hazards,
determine risk, and provide appropriate "engineering controls" and PPE.
No longer does the prof look at the Chem Hygiene doc as an instrument for
identifying behavior in the traditional lab setting
ACS essentially has endorsed this position when suggesting that
individuals providing chem demos in schools, malls, etc. provide safety
goggles, and address the appropriate safety concerns.
As a last thought : If you have not visited with the arts and photog
people _ take the opportunity. It may be a real" eye opener". Norm
Steare, a safety consultant who had done many institutional audits, felt
that the worst violations of lab practice on a campus would be found in
the art labs. They do some very interesting chemistry.
Dennis R.Mathiason, Director, Department of Environmental Hlth & Safety
Moorhead State University, Moorhead,MN 56563
email: mathias@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu Fax 218-236-2882 Ph 218-287-5056
On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, Jim Kaufman wrote:
> Erik Talley wrote: I'm interested in anything you might call a lab
> (as per lab standard) that we may not normally think of as a lab
> in a University environment.
>
> JAK: Some institutions are including their Arts departments and
> Photography.
>
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 12:47:48 -0500
From: "DAVID L. PERRAM" <dlperram@MTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Fwd: safety goggles
We use the Uvex Astrospec type of glasses in nearly all situations for this
very reason. We only use goggles when pure chemical transfers are being
perfromed, aerosols/splashes are a risk, or flying objects may occur. You
may need to designate areas of the laboratory where goggles must be worn.
At 09:06 PM 2/4/98 EST, you wrote:
>Content-ID: <0_886644402@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1>
>>
>Content-ID: <0_886644402@inet_out.mail.aol.com.2>
>Content-type: message/rfc822
>>Content-disposition: inline
>
>Return-Path: <CHEMLAB_L@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU>
>Received: from relay16.mail.aol.com (relay16.mail.aol.com [172.31.106.72]) by
> air28.mail.aol.com (v38.1) with SMTP; Wed, 04 Feb 1998 17:12:56 -0500
>Received: from VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU (VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU [199.17.176.1])
> by relay16.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
> with SMTP id RAA11192;
> Wed, 4 Feb 1998 17:12:23 -0500 (EST)
>Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 17:12:23 -0500 (EST)
>Received: from 199.17.181.3 ([199.17.181.3]) by VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU with
> SMTP;
> Wed, 4 Feb 1998 16:06:33 -0600
>Message-Id: <v03102807b0fe2c43b2b7@[129.128.2.122]>
>From: Norman Gee <Norman.Gee@ualberta.ca>
>Subject: Re: safety goggles
>To: CHEMLAB_L@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
>Precedence: Bulk
>X-Listserver: ListSTAR v1.1 by StarNine Technologies, a Quarterdeck Company
>Reply-To: CHEMLAB_L@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
>Errors-To: GMCHEM@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
>>>>
>>I have a question about goggles/safety glasses. As we all know, students
>>hate to wear the safety goggles. Eventhough they are the safest, has
>>anyone successfully replaced them with safety glasses.
>>
>>I am thinking about replacing the goggles with safety glasses from Uvex. I
>>was considering using the Provision and Patriot models.
>>
>>In our current set up, the students purchase the goggles along with
>>textbooks. The safety glasses would be not cost much more.
>>
>>However, I have a concern about safety. Does anyone have any experience
>>with safety glasses in undergrad labs? I know students would be more
>>comfortable with glasses than with the goggles, but do they afford enough
>>protection?
>>
>>Any info would be appreciated, especially dealing with the safety issue.
>>
>>thanks,
>>eric
>>
>>Eric Woller
>>Chemistry Instructor
>>Bethany Lutheran College
>>734 Marsh St.
>>Mankato, MN 56001
>>(507)386-5343
>
>Hi
>I'm not at an American school so our legal position is not equival. I
>recall an extensive discussion on this list around 1995: I do not know if
>there is an archive.
>
>Our Department ask for safety glasses (historical practice here determined
>by the Department Admin). We still experience complaints from students
>about having to wear them. The major problem is such glasses might not
>offer adequate protection against chemical splashes. In one case here, a
>student was splashed in the face with a small amount of a halogen in
>dichloromethane; a small amount dripped down the forehead towards the eyes;
>I do not think this could have happened with goggles. The student suffered
>no injury, but I believe this to be just luck.
>
>My only exposure to American legal practices is from sensational news
>items, but such a change seems rather risky.
>
>
>Norman
>
>Norman.Gee@ualberta.ca
>http://www.acpo.on.ca/acpa/index.htm
>http://www.chem.ualberta.ca/~ngee/Chem10XLabs.html
>
>
>
>
David L. Perram
Research Scientist II
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Michigan Technological University
1400 Townsend Dr.
Houghton, MI 49931
Phone (906) 487-2713
Fax (906) 487-3292
Secretary Phone (906) 487-2098
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 11:03:31 -0500
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List <LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU>
From: "Benedict, Kathryn" <BENEDIK@WOLF.RESEARCH.AA.WL.COM>
Subject: GOGGLES
Content-Type: text/plain
Safety glasses vs. goggles in the labs.
My personal experience is that goggles are always the best protection in
labs. I was priming an HPLC pump with chloroform a few years back and
had solvent splash up under my safety glasses and into my eyes. It made
quite an impression on me and goggles have been my personal eye
protection of choice ever since.
a slight digression ...........
We did a little experiment in one of our labs a few weeks ago that may
be of value to you in your laboratory setting. I obtained half a dozen
cow eyeballs from a local slaughterhouse and had some of our chemists
perform an experiment where they dripped sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid
(conc. and dilute), acetone, and trichloroacetic acid on the eye tissue
to see what type of damage was done and how rapid it was.
Tissue damage from trichloroacetic acid was the worst and the most
rapid(IMMEDIATE VISUAL DAMAGE TO THE EYE ),
the other reagents did visible damage within 30 seconds or less.
We also tried rinsing them off as rapidly as possible ( to simulate the
effect of using an eyewash ) and the damage was stopped at that point,
but it was obvious that the best way to go is to keep things out of your
eyes in the first place.
This generated lots of discussion from the scientists, and really helped
raise awareness levels about eye protection. I think a five minute
session like this at the start of your lab session with reagents you
commonly use may be of more value than a lecture.
Kathy Benedict
benedik@aa.wl.com
Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
313.996.7516
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Kaufman [SMTP:Labsafe@AOL.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 1998 9:07 PM
> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
> Subject: Fwd: safety goggles
>
> << Message: Re: safety goggles >>
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:44:02 -0600
From: Erik Talley <erik@CEHS.SIU.EDU>
Subject: Re: GOGGLES
Content-Type: text/plain
The arguments for goggles all sound well and good but should it be
qualifies to state what types of situations call for goggles? How many
labs do you walk into and find people wearing goggles? I absolutely
agree goggles are better against splash protection than glasses and I
don't know of anyone that would disagree with that.
The two questions I have are:
1) what does the law say I have to do and then
2) what is prudent for me to wear
There clearly are advantages to wearing glasses over goggles or everyone
would be wearing goggles or nothing. When I wear goggles, I sometimes
feel LESS safe in some ways because of lowered visibility. Also, how
many people's goggles fog up even if they are vented. If you're working
around chemical vapors, should they be vented? My lab techs. are only
required to wear safety glasses (in most situations). They are trained
to properly use the ventilation hood sash and shields, if necessary. I
also only require my techs. picking up chemical waste to wear safety
glasses. It's all based on the situation and probability of exposure. If
they're transferring a 55G drum of corrosives, it's a different story.
They have goggles, face shield and a lot of other PPE in that case.
Too many times, I have caught myself talking about the best PPE and not
necessarily the most prudent. It's easy for us to do. I always try to
qualify requirements as much as possible.
I am very interested in how often people find research lab personnel and
teaching lab personnel wearing appropriate goggles or glasses. I find
teaching labs are complying better than research. Any comments?
Thanks,
Erik
________________________________________
Erik Talley, Assistant Director
Center for Environmental Health & Safety
Southern Illinois University
erik@cehs.siu.edu
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 19:58:36 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Fwd: Question from Steve Anderson
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part0_886726716_boundary"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--part0_886726716_boundary
Content-ID: <0_886726716@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1>
If you think the idea of CPT (the ACS Committee on Professional
Training) dropping the class size requirement from its guidelines
is a good, bad, or indifferent idea, please let Cathy Nelson at
ACS hear from you. One voice.... one vote
..... jim
>Hi Steve,
>
>It's been quite a while (more than 15 years) since I worked with
>CPT on their guidelines. I would call 1-800-ACS-5558 and find
>out who the staff rep is to CPT and the name of the current chair
>to ask these questions.
>
>I sure hope it does not include the bench area! ... jim
>
Dear Jim:
Thanks for your prompt reply. In fact I did contact Cathy Nelson
at the ACS-CPT to pose the same questions. Her reply is given below. I'm
disappointed that the CPT is placing liability risks above the important
role of setting a general standard for chemistry departments to emulate.
I'd appreciate your insight on this or if you hear anything further.
Thanks again.
Steve Anderson
X-Sender: can98@wash24.acs.org
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998 13:26:59 -0500
To: Steve Anderson <andersos@uwwvax.uww.edu>
From: Cathy Nelson <can98@acs.org>
Subject: Re: Laboratory questions
Dear Steve,
The Committee has recently discussed the space recommendation that is
published in the 1992 guidelines. We researched the origin of this
statement including a check with California schools to see if they were
familiar with this standard. We did not find anyone who knew how this
recommendation was developed, and it will probably be dropped from the next
revision of the ACS guidelines. On space issues, the Committee defers to
the local and federal regulations that cover laboratory safety.
I am sorry that I cannot offer you any more advice on this, but liability
concerns have limited what CPT can say about the physical arrangements in
labs. The Committee only raises concerns if the department mentions
problems that interfere with the instructional and research activities of
the program.
--Cathy Nelson
At 04:19 PM 2/3/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Dear Cathy:
>
> In looking at ACS-CPT guidelines for laboratory space to accomodate
>students, they recommend 42 ASF/student for 2nd year lab courses and up and
>28 ASF/student for students in introductory courses. Is this ASF the floor
>space they need or does this include space they might encompass in partial
>use of the bench? An aisle width of 48" is also recommended for wheelchair
>students. Do you know how much the ASF would be? I would appreciate your
>input on this or relaying these questions to others who could address them.
>
> Thanks in advance for your help. Thanks also for sending us the
>recommendations letter from the CPT on our chemistry program. This will be
>a great help as we continue to seek program accreditation.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Steve Anderson
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:52:17 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
Comments: To: CHEMLAB_L@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
The federal citation for eye protection (which is law in New York
public and provate schools and colleges) is 29CFR1910.132.
========================================================================
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:52:22 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Fwd: safety goggles
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part0_886733542_boundary"
From: Marvin3809@AOL.COM
Subject: RE: Re: safety goggles
To: CHEMLAB_L@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
I was a School Board member in Tarrytown a few years ago, and I've kept the
School Law Handbook of the NY State School Board Association. My copy isn't
the latest edition, but it offers an answer to the question raised by Bob Mark
Paragraph 9:14 of the handbook says, "Section 409-a requires school boards to
arrange for and require, in accordance with Regulations of the Commissioner (8
NYCRR 141.10), that every student and teacher participating in certain
vocational, shop, and laboratory exercises, wear eye safety devices. This
requirement also extends to visitors to such courses."
I'm not sure, but I think "Section 409-a" refers to NY State education law.
> From: Markrv@SNYFARVA.CC.FARMINGDALE.EDU (Bob Mark)
> Reply-to: CHEMLAB_L@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
> To: CHEMLAB_L@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
>
> James A. Kaufman wrote:
> >Federal and State Law (in most states) require the use of
> >chemical splash goggles for protection against chemical
> >splash. Safety glasses would be inappropriate, illegal,
> >and exposing the instructor and institution to a possible
> >claim of negligence.
>
>
> I teach in New York State and have frequently been asked to cite the laws
> you mention above. I have had no luck in tracing them down. Can you
> furnish me with the citations?
>
> Bob Mark
> email: markrv@farmingdale.edu
>
========================================================================
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 09:51:32 -0500
From: Janeen LaPierre <JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU>
Subject: Re: GOGGLES -Reply
Content-Type: text/plain
I fully agree that compliance is an issue in regards to goggle use. I have found that
constant reminders and getting faculty on board with goggles helps immensely. Students
learn best by example. I have incorporated a video demonstrating effectiveness of various
forms of eye protection in my lab safety training for students. The video shows very
clearly what gives you the most protection. I have noticed that when bright folks are
given all the facts, they often make the choice we favored in the first place. The thing
is, when they draw the conclusion themselves, they are more apt to follow through.
From another perspective, I am a parent. When my son is at school, I fully expect his
teachers to look out for his physical safety. If I felt for a minute that they backed off
on a requirement because he didn't like it, thus resulting in an injury, I would hold them
fully accountable. The liability issue when dealing with students is far more troubling
than the letter of the OSHA law. What would you want your child to be using in a chem lab
packed with 20 other freshmen?
My humble opinion, Janeen.
========================================================================
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 12:50:08 -0600
From: Mark Smith <smithme@ALPHA.HENDRIX.EDU>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
>The federal citation for eye protection (which is law in New York
>public and provate schools and colleges) is 29CFR1910.132.
>
Dr. Kaufman,
Citing the following below (from the OSHA standard), would eye protection
(i.e. safety glasses) that provide appropriate protection (??) and are ANSI
approved be legal?
Is the debate simply a matter of what is "appropriate" in a given
laboratory situation? And, is the law any more specific about what ANSI Z87
glasses are not really appropriate for chemical splash protection?
Also, did you mean to refer to 29CFR1910.133? or 132?
****OSHA 29 CFR 1910.133 - Eye and face protection.
(a) General requirements. (1) Each affected employee shall use appropriate
eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying
particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids,
chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.
&
(b)(1)
Protective eye and face devices purchased after July 5, 1994 shall comply
with ANSI Z87.1-1989,
"American National Standard Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye
and Face Protection," which is incorporated by reference as specified in
Sec. 1910.6.
****Mark Smith
Hendrix College
Conway, AR
========================================================================
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 13:44:42 -0600
From: Harry Elston <helston@FGI.NET>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
Comments: To: smithme@ALPHA.HENDRIX.EDU
At 12:50 PM 2/6/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Dr. Kaufman,
>
>Citing the following below (from the OSHA standard), would eye protection
>(i.e. safety glasses) that provide appropriate protection (??) and are ANSI
>approved be legal?
>
>Is the debate simply a matter of what is "appropriate" in a given
>laboratory situation? And, is the law any more specific about what ANSI Z87
>glasses are not really appropriate for chemical splash protection?
>
>Also, did you mean to refer to 29CFR1910.133? or 132?
>
>****>OSHA 29 CFR 1910.133 - Eye and face protection.
>
>(a) General requirements. (1) Each affected employee shall use appropriate
>eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying
>particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids,
>chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.
>
>&
>
>(b)(1)
>
>Protective eye and face devices purchased after July 5, 1994 shall comply
>with ANSI Z87.1-1989,
>"American National Standard Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye
>and Face Protection," which is incorporated by reference as specified in
>Sec. 1910.6.
>****>
>Mark Smith
>Hendrix College
>Conway, AR
Mark,
Let me try to help here.
First, ANSI standards are not law, they are standards. Many OSHA
requlations (which are law) reference ANSI and NIOSH standards, which can,
in essence, give the standard the same uuumph as a law.
If you are going to protect your workers from chemical splashes, you need
goggles. Those goggles must meet the requirements of ANSI Z87, and the ones
that do it meet the Type G,H, or K and for severe exposure add type N. ALL
of these goggles are have either NO VENTILATON or INDIRECT VENTILATION. (A
face shield is "type N" protection.)
When you need to protect your workers from chemical splashes is left
completely to the employer. There is no hard and fast rule. Neither the
Laboratory Standard (29CFR1910.1450) nor the Eye protection standard tell
you WHEN you have to do it. Simply put, if an employee gets exposed and an
injury occurs, you weren't requiring enough. Here in this lab, our
Chemical Hygiene Plan stipulates when goggles have to be worn based on (1)
concentration, (2) evolution and (3) amount of liquid.
Hope that helps.
Harry Elston
Harry J. Elston, Ph.D.
Chemical Hygiene Officer
Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety
Opinions are mine, not my employer's, blah, blah, blah
"Payback's a bitch, Ivan"
-Cancer Man, X-Files.
========================================================================
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 14:18:27 -0600
From: Erik Talley <erik@CEHS.SIU.EDU>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
Content-Type: text/plain
Exactly. It would be very easy for us to say everyone must wear goggles.
It is the safest, but is it the most prudent all the time? If we aren't
practical (within regulatory guidelines) people will stop listening to
us altogether.
Erik
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Elston [mailto:helston@FGI.NET]
Sent: Friday, February 06, 1998 1:45 PM
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: Re: safety goggles
At 12:50 PM 2/6/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Dr. Kaufman,
>
>Citing the following below (from the OSHA standard), would eye
protection
>(i.e. safety glasses) that provide appropriate protection (??) and are
ANSI approved be legal?
>
>Is the debate simply a matter of what is "appropriate" in a given
>laboratory situation? And, is the law any more specific about what ANSI
Z87 glasses are not really appropriate for chemical splash protection?
>
>Also, did you mean to refer to 29CFR1910.133? or 132?
>
>****>OSHA 29 CFR 1910.133 - Eye and face protection.
>
>(a) General requirements. (1) Each affected employee shall use
appropriate
>eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying
>particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids,
>chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.
>
>&
>
>(b)(1)
>
>Protective eye and face devices purchased after July 5, 1994 shall
comply
>with ANSI Z87.1-1989,
>"American National Standard Practice for Occupational and Educational
Eye
>and Face Protection," which is incorporated by reference as specified
in
>Sec. 1910.6.
>****>
>Mark Smith
>Hendrix College
>Conway, AR
Mark,
Let me try to help here.
First, ANSI standards are not law, they are standards. Many OSHA
requlations (which are law) reference ANSI and NIOSH standards, which
can, in essence, give the standard the same uuumph as a law.
If you are going to protect your workers from chemical splashes, you
need goggles. Those goggles must meet the requirements of ANSI Z87, and the
ones that do it meet the Type G,H, or K and for severe exposure add type N.
ALL of these goggles are have either NO VENTILATON or INDIRECT VENTILATION.
(A face shield is "type N" protection.)
When you need to protect your workers from chemical splashes is left
completely to the employer. There is no hard and fast rule. Neither
the Laboratory Standard (29CFR1910.1450) nor the Eye protection standard
tell you WHEN you have to do it. Simply put, if an employee gets exposed and
an injury occurs, you weren't requiring enough. Here in this lab, our
Chemical Hygiene Plan stipulates when goggles have to be worn based on
(1)
concentration, (2) evolution and (3) amount of liquid.
Hope that helps.
Harry Elston
Harry J. Elston, Ph.D.
Chemical Hygiene Officer
Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety
Opinions are mine, not my employer's, blah, blah, blah
"Payback's a bitch, Ivan"
-Cancer Man, X-Files.
________________________________________
Erik Talley, Assistant Director
Center for Environmental Health & Safety
Southern Illinois University
erik@cehs.siu.edu
========================================================================
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 17:21:06 -0700
From: John Delahunt <Jdelahunt@CC.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
Content-type: text/plain
The selection criteria for eye protection in 1910.133 are essentially
identical to the ANSI standard. Additionally, the ANSI standard will be
considered, in addition to the OSHA standard, as the standard of
reasonable care. Both of these (ANSI and OSHA) make it clear that
indirectly vented goggles are appropriate for chemical use.
Forgive the formatting -- our mailserver took a dive and I'm on a
different system.
John
> ----------
> From: Mark Smith[SMTP:smithme@ALPHA.HENDRIX.EDU]
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 1998 11:50 AM
> To: jdelahunt@cc.colorado.edu
> Subject: Re: safety goggles
>
> >The federal citation for eye protection (which is law in New York
> >public and provate schools and colleges) is 29CFR1910.132.
> >
> > ***************************************************> > James A. Kaufman,
President
> > The Laboratory Safety Workshop
> > 192 Worcester Road, Natick, MA 01760
> > 508-647-1900 Fax: 508-647-0062 LabSafe@aol.com
> > Safety in Science Education
> >
>
>
> Dr. Kaufman,
>
> Citing the following below (from the OSHA standard), would eye
> protection
> (i.e. safety glasses) that provide appropriate protection (??) and are
> ANSI
> approved be legal?
>
> Is the debate simply a matter of what is "appropriate" in a given
> laboratory situation? And, is the law any more specific about what
> ANSI Z87
> glasses are not really appropriate for chemical splash protection?
>
> Also, did you mean to refer to 29CFR1910.133? or 132?
>
> ****> OSHA 29 CFR 1910.133 - Eye and face
> protection.
>
> (a) General requirements. (1) Each affected employee shall use
> appropriate
> eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying
> particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids,
> chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.
>
> &
>
> (b)(1)
>
> Protective eye and face devices purchased after July 5, 1994 shall
> comply
> with ANSI Z87.1-1989,
> "American National Standard Practice for Occupational and Educational
> Eye
> and Face Protection," which is incorporated by reference as specified
> in
> Sec. 1910.6.
> ****>
> Mark Smith
> Hendrix College
> Conway, AR
>
========================================================================
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 07:00:07 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: More on Goggles
Robert Latsch wrote recently....
While I do not disagree with Mr. Kaufman about goggles being prefered
ofver glasses. I must disagree with the statement that State(Most) and
Federal Laws require safety goggles over safety glasses. Most laws I am
familiar with require that the supervisor to assess the risk of the task
invovled and determine the appropiate ppe to use. I would not make a
blanket statement mandating goggles only. I would say use them where thaey
are the best protection available.
JAK: The federal law on eye protection (29CFR1910.132) cites the
ANSI Z-87.1 standard with respect to the devices to be used for protection
of the eyes and face. The ANSI standard specifys chemical splash goggles
for chemical splash protection.
On this basis, I believe that chemical splash goggles are required by
Federal Law for chemical splash protection.
========================================================================
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 07:00:09 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: GOGGLES
In a message dated 98-02-05 23:27:20 EST, Erik Talley wrote:
<< The two questions I have are:
1) what does the law say I have to do and then
2) what is prudent for me to wear >>
JAK: I would add a third question. ... What types of eye
protection are available?
I don't disagree that ANSI approved safety glasses with side shields
are good protection. As a minimum, they should be worn almost
all the time in the lab. You never know when a beaker will break
and glass fragments will go where they please.
In most undergraduate labs, you have only one type. In this case,
since chemical splash conditions are usually present at some point
during the semester, the law and prudence leads to chemical splash
goggle.
I you can afford to have safety glasses with side shields, chemical
splash goggles, and face shields available, then by all means, wear
the appropriate device at the appropriate time. (Remembering that
face shield are in addition to, not instead of, either safety glasses with
side shields or chemical splash goggles).
========================================================================
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 09:34:18 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
Comments: To: CHEMLAB_L@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
In a message dated 98-02-06 09:42:49 EST, Rober Latsch wrote:
<< from your (JAK) citation it would appear that Safety glasses are th only
eye protection that is appropiate in a laboratory environment. Where do
face shields fit in or do they? >>
JAK: They fit over either safety glasses with side shields or the appropriate
type of safety goggles (impact or splash) to protect the rest of your face
and throat. This is the ANSI Z-87.1 recommendation which OSHA and
most states have adopted as law.
============================================================
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 09:34:23 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: safety goggles
In a message dated 98-02-06 14:07:09 EST, Mark Smith wrote:
<< Citing the following below (from the OSHA standard), would eye protection
(i.e. safety glasses) that provide appropriate protection (??) and are ANSI
approved be legal?
Is the debate simply a matter of what is "appropriate" in a given
laboratory situation? And, is the law any more specific about what ANSI Z87
glasses are not really appropriate for chemical splash protection?
Also, did you mean to refer to 29CFR1910.133? or 132?
>>
JAK: Mark is correct about the citation number. I should have written
133. 132 is the general personal protection standard that requires almost
all employers to do a workplace hazard assessment to determine what PPE
is needed, provide the PPE, train employees to use the PPE, and then
requre the use of the PPE.
the ANSI Z-87.1 does two things. (1) It provides the specifications that
the devices need to meet to satisfy the standard. If the manufacturer makes
the device up to the specifications, the manufacturer is entitled to mark the
device as meeting the standard. (2) It indicates which device is appropriate
for which circumatance. In the case of chemical splash, the ANSI standard
say use chemical splash goggles (not safety glasses with side shields).
The law (OSHA) say do what ANSI says.
============================================================
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 18:40:13 EST
From: Jim Kaufman <Labsafe@AOL.COM>
Subject: Fwd: Question from Steve Anderson
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part0_886981214_boundary"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--part0_886981214_boundary
Content-ID: <0_886981214@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1>
--part0_886981214_boundary
Content-ID: <0_886981214@inet_out.mail.aol.com.2>
Content-type: message/rfc822
Content-disposition: inline
Return-Path: <cmtoback@ix.netcom.com>
Received: from relay13.mail.aol.com (relay13.mail.aol.com [172.31.109.13]) by
air15.mail.aol.com (v38.1) with SMTP; Sun, 08 Feb 1998 13:35:00 -0500
Received: from dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.7])
by relay13.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id NAA04162 for <Labsafe@AOL.COM>;
Sun, 8 Feb 1998 13:33:48 -0500 (EST)
From: cmtoback@ix.netcom.com
Received: (from smap@localhost)
by dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4)