=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 22:25:08 -0800
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Michael Ahler
Subject: Other Scarey Stories
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="Other"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
New Year Greetings to All,
The "Scarey Story" thread that was weaving recently reminded me of a
similar story I took part in a few years ago.
In the time before CHO's I and my supervisor were doing that kind of
work in and for the Chemistry Department here. It was a vacuum we
abhorred. In addition, from time to time the Chemistry Department would
get a call from outside the campus asking for lab safety advice.
Callers hoped the University's Chemistry Department might know which end
is up. So we would do a bit of "pro bono" advising to local hospitals
and high schools (mostly) in the area of safe chemical handling and
management and general lab safety. ( I really am trying to abbreviate
here.)
One day a young man called about a situation he had with the contents of
a business his recently deceased pharmacist-father had left behind. A
garage floor full of lab chemicals we saw. He asked do we want? We
said no. Thanks. But here is the name and number of a haz waste hauler
you can deal with. Fine.
Months later, during another "pro bono" San Luis Obispo High School, we
were asked to look at one more store room at the end of the hall.
There, still in boxes, was the answer to how the young pharmacy heir had
solved his excess chemical problem. I think I did a credible job of
keeping a straight face.
The high school eventually solved their excess chemical problem ( "Do we
want? No. Thanks.) through a county schools financed chemical cleanup -
many science departments at many schools. I think an earlier writer
to this list ( Mr. Hawkins from Acorn High School) mentioned such a
program. I think it's a good idea ( County-wide / State-wide Hazardous
waste pickup for K-12 schools). Most High Schools I know of don't have
the resources to finance such things independently.
Anecdotes like this and others I have seen on this list reinforce my
phobia for Gift Chemicals. Almost every chemical gift I have seen has
been a chemical dump - complete with unlabeled bottles and bottles
actually labeled "unknown".
I have other interesting Chemical Stories ( some Scarey) I am saving for
another time. This message is long enough already.
Maybe I'll do this from time to time.
Thanks for listening.
Michael Ahler, CHO
Risk Management
Cal Poly
San Luis Obispo, California
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 17:42:42 EST
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Labsafe@AOL.COM
Subject: NACHO Meeting in Hartford
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Hi NACHO Members,
Members interested in getting together for an informal dinner meeting in
conjunction with the NEW SAFETY (Winter Safety 99) meeting this coming week at
Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut should gather at the Alumni Lounge in
the Mather Campus Center at between 5:30 and 6:00 PM. We can decide where to
go for dinner and carpool from there.
So far, I've received about six rsvps.
I'll be staying at the Wellesley Inn on Roberts Street in East Hartford
starting tomorrow night. Cell Phone # 508-574-6264 .... jim
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 08:05:59 EST
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: stefan
Subject: Re: NACHO Meeting in Hartford
In-Reply-To: <89041264.368ff262@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
>Members interested in getting together for an informal dinner meeting in
>conjunction with the NEW SAFETY (Winter Safety 99) meeting this coming week at
>Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut should gather at the Alumni Lounge in
>the Mather Campus Center at between 5:30 and 6:00 PM. We can decide where to
>go for dinner and carpool from there.
>
******** What day- Wednesday? ******************
- Stefan Wawzyniecki
UConn
>
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 08:50:30 EST
Reply-To: "Karcz-ENV, Timothy"
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Karcz-ENV, Timothy"
Subject: Re: Formaldehyde substitute
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="915458959-MIME-Part-Dividor"
--915458959-MIME-Part-Dividor
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
See attached message.
--915458959-MIME-Part-Dividor
Content-type: application/octet-stream;
name="FORMALD2.FIX"
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="FORMALD2.FIX"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
--915458959-MIME-Part-Dividor--
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:16:37 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Janeen LaPierre
Subject: Re: Salary Range Info
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Nadine asked:
>>>
What I'm looking for are
salary ranges for Chemical Hygiene Officer (or Environmental Health & Safety
Specialist, etc.) positions at private schools comparable to ours -- with an
enrollment of 1500-2500 students, and an annual budget of $14.7-30.1
million.
******
Here at UNE, our Environmental Health and Safety Officer position starts at 30k. Chemical Hygiene Officers are paid an add on salary of 3k per year in addition to their full time jobs. Hope this helps, Janeen.
*****************
Janeen Lapierre, CHO
College of Osteopathic Medicine
University of New England
11 Hills Beach Road
Biddeford, ME 04005
E-Mail: JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU
Phone: (207) 283-0170 ext 2446
Opinions are mine and not those of UNE.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:27:49 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Janeen LaPierre
Subject: Re: Formaldehyde substitute
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
We have been trying to find an alternative for cadaver preservation in our gross anatomy lab. I have had several conversations with different schools and this seems to be a real problem. I would welcome more info on your product and would be interested in furthering this cause. If I can be of assistance give me a call. Janeen.
*****************
Janeen Lapierre, CHO
College of Osteopathic Medicine
University of New England
11 Hills Beach Road
Biddeford, ME 04005
E-Mail: JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU
Phone: (207) 283-0170 ext 2446
Opinions are mine and not those of UNE.
>>> Russ Phifer - 12/29/98 10:23 AM >>>
Can anyone give me an idea as to the current market for non-formaldehyde
biological/histological fixatives and preservatives?
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 09:37:58 -0600
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Donald E. Clark, Ph.D."
Subject: Something to Consider-Forwarded
Comments: To: safety@list.uvm.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Anyone interested in giving a much needed helping hand to these unfortunate
souls?
dec
>Subject: Something to Consider-Forwarded
>
>>
>>For those of you with any compassion, you will most certainly want to
>>read AND RESPOND to the message below, especially during this holiday
>>season.
>>Sincerely,
>>Mark English
>>MEMD@JUNO.COM
>>
>>Friends:
>>
>>Please consider donating a portion of your tithe to a new and critical
>>program,
>> "Adopt A Player"
>>
>>With the New Year approaching, please look into your heart to
>>help those in need. Hundreds of National Basketball Association
>>basketball players in our very own country are living at or just below
>>the seven-figure salary level (a national disgrace!). And, as if that
>>weren't bad
>>enough, they will be deprived of pay for several months--possibly a
>>whole year--as a result of the current lock-out situation. But now,
>>you can help!
>>
>>For only $20,835 a month, about $694.50 a day (that's less than the
>>cost of a large screen projection TV) you can help a basketball
>>player remain economically viable during his time of need. This
>>contribution by no means solves the problem (since it barely covers the
>>yearly league minimum), but it's a start!
>>
>>Almost $700 may not seem like a lot of money to you, but to a
>>basketball player it could mean the difference between a vacation
>>spent golfing in Florida or a Mediterranean cruise. For you, seven
>>hundred dollars is nothing more than a month's rent or mortgage
>>payment. But to an NBA basketball player, $700 will almost replace his
>>daily salary, earned by playing a boy's game and appearing publicly
>>in what amounts to underwear..
>>
>>Your commitment of less than $700 a day will enable a player to buy
>>that home entertainment center, trade in the year-old Lexus for a
>>new Ferrari, or enjoy a weekend in Rio.
>>
>>HOW WILL I KNOW I'M HELPING?
>>
>>Each month, you will receive a complete financial report on the
>>player you sponsor. Detailed information about his stocks, bonds,
>>401(k), real estate, and other investment holdings will be mailed to
>>your home. You'll also get information on how he plans to invest the
>>$5 million lump sum he will receive upon retirement.
>>
>>Plus upon signing up for this program, you will receive a photo of
>>the player (unsigned - for a signed photo, please include an
>>additional $250.00). Put the photo on your refrigerator to remind you
>>of other peoples' suffering.
>>
>>HOW WILL HE KNOW I'M HELPING?
>>
>>Your basketball player will be told that he has a SPECIAL FRIEND who
>>just wants to help in a time of need. Although the player won't know
>>your name, he will be able to make collect calls to your home via a
>>special operator just in case additional funds are needed for
>>unexpected expenses.
>>
>>YES, I WANT TO HELP!
>>
>>I would like to sponsor a striking NBA basketball player. My
>>preference is checked below:
>>
>>[ ] Starter
>>[ ] Reserve
>>[ ] Star (Higher cost)
>>[ ] Superstar (Much higher cost)
>>[ ] Entire team (Please call our 900 number to ask for the cost of a
>> specific team [Cheerleaders not included.])
>>[ ] I'll sponsor a player most in need. Please select one for me.
>>
>>Please charge the account listed below $694.50 per day for a reserve
>>player or starter for the duration of the strike. Please send me a
>>picture of the player I have sponsored, along with a team logo and my
>>very own NBA Players Association Relief Fund badge to wear proudly on my
>>lapel.
>>
>>Your Name: _______________________
>>Telephone Number: _______________________
>>Account Number: _______________________ Exp.Date:_______
>>[ ] MasterCard [ ] Visa [ ] American Express [ ] Discover
>>Signature: _______________________
>>
>>Mail completed form to NBA Players Association or call
>>1-900-2MUCH now to enroll by phone.
>>
>>Note: Sponsors are NOT permitted to contact the player they have
>>sponsored, either in person or by other means including, but not
>>limited to, telephone calls, letters, e-mail, or third parties. Keep
>>in mind that the basketball player you have sponsored will be much too
>>busy enjoying his free time, thanks to your generous donations.
>>
>>Contributions are not tax-deductible.
>>
>>
>>
>>--------- End forwarded message ----------
>>
>>___________________________________________________________________
>>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
>>or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>>
>>
>>
Donald E. Clark, PhD
Chemical and Biological Safety Officer
Environmental Health and Safety Department
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX 77843-4472
Phone (409)845-2132
FAX (409)845-1348
E-mail declark-sh@tamu.edu
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 09:59:41 -0600
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Jeff Rubin
Subject: Re: Something to Consider-Forwarded
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19990104093758.006abb00@ehsd.tamu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sign me up as the first kill-joy. I get enough unsolicited e-mail jokes
(generally multiple times) that I'm not really looking for any from the
list. If I'm in the minority here I'll just crawl back into my hole and
kick a dog or two.
Cheers,
JNR
Jeff Rubin, Asst. Dean for EHS
College of Natural Sciences G2500
W.C. Hogg Building
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78712-1199
(512) 471-6176 (O)
(512) 471-4998 (F)
jrubin@mail.utexas.edu
"The opinions of Dr. Rubin are not meant to offend anyone unless otherwise
specified."
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 11:12:34 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: Something to Consider-Forwarded
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I like a few jokes. I vote to keep them.
I can see that everyone may not, though.
"Everything is easy for the person who does not have to do it!"
Robert L. Burns
Group Leader, R&D
Specialty Chemicals Division
RUETGERS Organics Corporation
201 Struble Road
State College, PA 16801
phone 814-231-9214
fax 814-238-1567
email rburns@bigfoot.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Rubin
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 10:46
Subject: Re: Something to Consider-Forwarded
>Sign me up as the first kill-joy. I get enough unsolicited e-mail jokes
>(generally multiple times) that I'm not really looking for any from the
>list. If I'm in the minority here I'll just crawl back into my hole and
>kick a dog or two.
>
>Cheers,
>
>JNR
>
>
>Jeff Rubin, Asst. Dean for EHS
>College of Natural Sciences G2500
>W.C. Hogg Building
>University of Texas at Austin
>Austin, TX 78712-1199
>(512) 471-6176 (O)
>(512) 471-4998 (F)
>jrubin@mail.utexas.edu
>
>"The opinions of Dr. Rubin are not meant to offend anyone unless otherwise
>specified."
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:33:33 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Madelyn Miller
Subject: designated areas for PHSs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Greetings,
OK you Chemical Hygiene Officers, here a questions about the Lab.
Standard. (no jokes, no advertisements)
The Laboratory Standard (29 CFR 1910.1450 (e)(3)(viii), requires that
provisions be made for employee protection for work with particularly
hazardous substances. These include select carcinogens, reproductive
toxins, and acutely toxic substances. It also states that specific
consideration shall be given to the establishment of a designated area,
the use of containment devices, procedures for safe removal of
contaminated waste, and decontamination procedures.
How do you deal with designated areas for saccharine. And at what
quantity do you restrict mineral oil? The bigger question is how to
implement the PHS section of the CHP?
Our first step here has been to get the labs to identify their PHSs (no
easy feat). We use the definition from Prudent Practices for acute
toxic substances:
?Chemicals with an oral LD50 in rats <50mg/kg
?Chemicals with a skin contact LD50 in rabbits <200mg/kg
?Chemicals with an inhalation LC50 in rats <200ppm/per hour
Select carcinogens are easier, the "known" human carcinogens but I
recently had a person who declared pregnancy. The definition of
reproductive toxin is soooo broad. Chemicals which affect the
reproductive capabilities including causing chromosomal damage
(mutations) and effects on fetuses (teratogenesis). How do you give
advice to your labs?
----------------------
Madelyn Miller
Chemical Hygiene Officer, CCHO
Environmental Health & Safety
Carnegie Mellon University
mmiller@andrew.cmu.edu
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 13:08:26 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: designated areas for PHSs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
WE use prudent practices definitions for PHS too. When we work with one of
them, we designate the lab and hood where the work is being done and post
accordingly. Then monitor that area or the person doing the work.
The last one we had was formaldehyde, and that's what we did. The monitor
found none at any time, except it picked up acetone as formaldehyde when he
washed dishes!
"Everything is easy for the person who does not have to do it!"
Robert L. Burns
Group Leader, R&D
Specialty Chemicals Division
RUETGERS Organics Corporation
201 Struble Road
State College, PA 16801
phone 814-231-9214
fax 814-238-1567
email rburns@bigfoot.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Madelyn Miller
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:35
Subject: designated areas for PHSs
>Greetings,
>OK you Chemical Hygiene Officers, here a questions about the Lab.
>Standard. (no jokes, no advertisements)
>
>The Laboratory Standard (29 CFR 1910.1450 (e)(3)(viii), requires that
>provisions be made for employee protection for work with particularly
>hazardous substances. These include select carcinogens, reproductive
>toxins, and acutely toxic substances. It also states that specific
>consideration shall be given to the establishment of a designated area,
>the use of containment devices, procedures for safe removal of
>contaminated waste, and decontamination procedures.
>
>How do you deal with designated areas for saccharine. And at what
>quantity do you restrict mineral oil? The bigger question is how to
>implement the PHS section of the CHP?
>
>Our first step here has been to get the labs to identify their PHSs (no
>easy feat). We use the definition from Prudent Practices for acute
>toxic substances:
> ?Chemicals with an oral LD50 in rats <50mg/kg
>?Chemicals with a skin contact LD50 in rabbits <200mg/kg
>?Chemicals with an inhalation LC50 in rats <200ppm/per hour
>
>Select carcinogens are easier, the "known" human carcinogens but I
>recently had a person who declared pregnancy. The definition of
>reproductive toxin is soooo broad. Chemicals which affect the
>reproductive capabilities including causing chromosomal damage
>(mutations) and effects on fetuses (teratogenesis). How do you give
>advice to your labs?
>
>----------------------
>Madelyn Miller
>Chemical Hygiene Officer, CCHO
>Environmental Health & Safety
>Carnegie Mellon University
>mmiller@andrew.cmu.edu
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 13:24:45 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mary Ann Solstad
Subject: Re: designated areas for PHSs
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
At 12:33 PM 1/4/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Greetings,
>OK you Chemical Hygiene Officers, here a questions about the Lab.
>Standard. (no jokes, no advertisements)
>
>The Laboratory Standard (29 CFR 1910.1450 (e)(3)(viii), requires that
>provisions be made for employee protection for work with particularly
>hazardous substances. These include select carcinogens, reproductive
>toxins, and acutely toxic substances. It also states that specific
>consideration shall be given to the establishment of a designated area,
>the use of containment devices, procedures for safe removal of
>contaminated waste, and decontamination procedures.
>
>How do you deal with designated areas for saccharine. And at what
>quantity do you restrict mineral oil? The bigger question is how to
>implement the PHS section of the CHP?
>
>Our first step here has been to get the labs to identify their PHSs (no
>easy feat). We use the definition from Prudent Practices for acute
>toxic substances:
> ?Chemicals with an oral LD50 in rats <50mg/kg
>?Chemicals with a skin contact LD50 in rabbits <200mg/kg
>?Chemicals with an inhalation LC50 in rats <200ppm/per hour
>
>Select carcinogens are easier, the "known" human carcinogens but I
>recently had a person who declared pregnancy. The definition of
>reproductive toxin is soooo broad. Chemicals which affect the
>reproductive capabilities including causing chromosomal damage
>(mutations) and effects on fetuses (teratogenesis). How do you give
>advice to your labs?
>
>----------------------
>Madelyn Miller
>Chemical Hygiene Officer, CCHO
>Environmental Health & Safety
>Carnegie Mellon University
>mmiller@andrew.cmu.edu
>
Madelyn,
Depends on mood of your inspecting OSHA officer, or maybe phases of the
moon. But use a dose of common sense. Store the saccharine with the
coffee supplies (g). The mineral oil with medicinals (for constipation).
I'm reaching here beyond regs I have actually read, but machine oils, mixed
in with a whole bunch of other junk, including bacteria, and dispersed in a
finally divided spray, is a suspect carcinogen. Since I doubt you have
your oil in such a form, ignore it. If a chemist is asked to adhere to
foolish interpretations of regs, they will tend to ignore them, and more
reasonable regulations also.
Mary Ann
Mary Ann Solstad, CIH 4 A's of Safety
SOLSTAD Health & Safety Evaluations Attitude
16 Pequot Rd, Marblehead, MA 01945 Awareness
781-631-4748 tel, 781-631-1832 FAX Automatic Application
Authority
Past DivCHAS Chair, ACS
msolstad@mediaone.net
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 13:44:58 EST
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Labsafe@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: NACHO Meeting in Hartford
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Good Point Stephan ...
The day of the NACHO meeting is Wednesday January 6th. Let meet from 5:30 to
6:30 in the Alumni Lounge of Mather Center at Trinity to decide where to go
for dinner. ... Jim
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:46:34 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Helen B. Gerhard"
Subject: Hood
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi All:
I know that this has been addressed before but what are the airflow
requirements for laboratory fume hood?
I've got the ACGIH information from my lab safety info received in Jim's
class. However, someone has borrowed my 29 CFR so looking up any
regulations is difficult at this time. Can someone help?
Thanks!
Helen
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 14:44:40 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Daniel Hurley
Subject: Re: designated areas for PHSs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I think the first task is to determine what substances by name are PHS's.
Then look at the exposure potentials and then regulate those chemicals
which pose a hazard. We have the same problem with things like saccharin
and estrogen. For the chemicals that are border line but on a list we are
going to work with our chemical safety committee to deregulate those
chemical with little hazard potential. Consider not only the health hazard
but the exposure potential.
Madelyn Miller wrote:
> Greetings,
> OK you Chemical Hygiene Officers, here a questions about the Lab.
> Standard. (no jokes, no advertisements)
>
> The Laboratory Standard (29 CFR 1910.1450 (e)(3)(viii), requires that
> provisions be made for employee protection for work with particularly
> hazardous substances. These include select carcinogens, reproductive
> toxins, and acutely toxic substances. It also states that specific
> consideration shall be given to the establishment of a designated area,
> the use of containment devices, procedures for safe removal of
> contaminated waste, and decontamination procedures.
>
> How do you deal with designated areas for saccharine. And at what
> quantity do you restrict mineral oil? The bigger question is how to
> implement the PHS section of the CHP?
>
> Our first step here has been to get the labs to identify their PHSs (no
> easy feat). We use the definition from Prudent Practices for acute
> toxic substances:
> ?Chemicals with an oral LD50 in rats <50mg/kg
> ?Chemicals with a skin contact LD50 in rabbits <200mg/kg
> ?Chemicals with an inhalation LC50 in rats <200ppm/per hour
>
> Select carcinogens are easier, the "known" human carcinogens but I
> recently had a person who declared pregnancy. The definition of
> reproductive toxin is soooo broad. Chemicals which affect the
> reproductive capabilities including causing chromosomal damage
> (mutations) and effects on fetuses (teratogenesis). How do you give
> advice to your labs?
>
> ----------------------
> Madelyn Miller
> Chemical Hygiene Officer, CCHO
> Environmental Health & Safety
> Carnegie Mellon University
> mmiller@andrew.cmu.edu
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 02:05:04 -0600
Reply-To: jameel@sage.nrri.umn.edu
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: John Ameel
Subject: Re: designated areas for PHSs
In-Reply-To: <36911A28.7369E963@wfubmc.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
I have checked the previous messages for a definition of "PHS" and
have been unable to find it. Would someone out there demystify
the acronym? Thanks.
> I think the first task is to determine what substances by name are PHS's.
> Then look at the exposure potentials and then regulate those chemicals......
>
John Ameel (jameel@sage.nrri.umn.edu) Phone: 218-720-4313
Natural Resources Research Institute Fax: 218-720-9412
5013 Miller Trunk Highway
Duluth, MN 55811
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 15:02:19 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: Hood
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Helen,
Prudent Practices says "the recommended face velocity is between 80 and 100
feet per minute" on page 178.
Bob
"Everything is easy for the person who does not have to do it!"
Robert L. Burns
Group Leader, R&D
Specialty Chemicals Division
RUETGERS Organics Corporation
201 Struble Road
State College, PA 16801
phone 814-231-9214
fax 814-238-1567
email rburns@bigfoot.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Helen B. Gerhard
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 14:51
Subject: Hood
>Hi All:
>
>I know that this has been addressed before but what are the airflow
>requirements for laboratory fume hood?
>
>I've got the ACGIH information from my lab safety info received in Jim's
>class. However, someone has borrowed my 29 CFR so looking up any
>regulations is difficult at this time. Can someone help?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Helen
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 15:16:18 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Madelyn Miller
Subject: Re: designated areas for PHSs
Comments: To: jameel@sage.nrri.umn.edu
In-Reply-To: <199901042001.OAA03497@sage.nrri.umn.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Greetings,
Here is the definition from our Chemical Hygiene Plan. (CHP)
4.2.1 "Particularly Hazard Substances" are defined as belonging to one
of three groups.
4.2.1.1 Select carcinogens, acutely toxic chemicals, reproductive
toxins and chemicals known to have undesirable biological effects.
(Refer to Appendix A for a partial list of select carcinogens and
acutely toxic chemicals.)
4.2.1.2 Chemicals for which reliable toxicity information is not
available, whether or not they are highly suspect because of their
similarity in chemical structure or function to known toxic agents.
4.2.1.3 Chemicals that are explosive or otherwise violently reactive
4.2.2 "Select carcinogens" are any substance which meets at least one
of the following criteria1:
4.2.2.1 Regulated by OSHA as a carcinogen or;
4.2.2.2 Listed under the category, "known to be carcinogens," in the
Annual Report on Carcinogens published by the National Toxicology
Program (NTP) or;
4.2.2.3 Listed under Group 1 ("carcinogenic to humans") by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer Monographs (IARC) or;
4.2.2.4 Listed in either Group 2A or 2B by IARC or under the category
"reasonably anticipated to be carcinogens " by NTP, and causes
statistically significant tumor incidence in experimental animals in
accordance with any of the following criteria:
?After inhalation exposure of 6-7 hours per day, 5 days per week, for a significant portion of a lifetime to dosages of less than 10 mg/m3
?After repeated skin application of less than 300 mg/kg of body weight, per week or
?After oral dosages of less than 50 mg/kg of body weight per day
4.2.3 Acute toxicity is the ability of a chemical to cause a harmful
effect after a single exposure. Parameters for assessing the risk of
acute toxicity of a chemical are its LD50 and LC50 values. Acutely
toxic chemicals meet the following criteria:
?Chemicals with an oral LD50 in rats <50mg/kg
?Chemicals with a skin contact LD50 in rabbits <200mg/kg
?Chemicals with an inhalation LC50 in rats <200ppm/per hour
4.2.3.1 Lethal Dose 50 (LD50 ) is defined as the amount of a chemical
that when ingested, injected, or applied to the skin of test animals
under controlled laboratory conditions will kill one-half (50%) of the
animals2.
4.2.3.2 Lethal Concentration 50 (LC50) is the concentration of the
chemical in air that will kill 50% of the test animals exposed to it.
4.2.3.3 Reproductive toxins are chemicals which affect the
reproductive capabilities including causing chromosomal damage
(mutations) and effects on fetuses (teratogenesis).
4.2.3.4 Designated areas are areas which may be used for work with
particularly hazardous substances. A designated area may be the entire
laboratory, an area of a laboratory, or a device such as a laboratory
hood or glove box.
----------------------
Madelyn Miller
Chemical Hygiene Officer, CCHO
Environmental Health & Safety
Carnegie Mellon University
mmiller@andrew.cmu.edu
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 13:14:02 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Helen B. Gerhard"
Subject: Re: Hood
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Other than the "non-mandatory" Appendix A to 1910.1450 C.4.b and h where
in the CFR regs does it show the need to inspect hoods for proper
functioning. I know it's in the regs somewhere but the books aren't on my
desk!
Thanks!
Helen
-----Original Message-----
From: Helen B. Gerhard
Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:47 PM
To: 'LABSAFETY-L Discussion List'
Subject: Hood
Hi All:
I know that this has been addressed before but what are the airflow
requirements for laboratory fume hood?
I've got the ACGIH information from my lab safety info received in
Jim's class. However, someone has borrowed my 29 CFR so looking up any
regulations is difficult at this time. Can someone help?
Thanks!
Helen
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 15:39:04 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: Hood
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
1910.1450.d.iii says the CHP shall include " a requirement that fume hoods
and .... are functioning properly and specific measures measures that shall
be taken to ensure proper and adequate performance of such equipment"
IN the Appendix A, there are no specific numbers given.
Bob
"Everything is easy for the person who does not have to do it!"
Robert L. Burns
Group Leader, R&D
Specialty Chemicals Division
RUETGERS Organics Corporation
201 Struble Road
State College, PA 16801
phone 814-231-9214
fax 814-238-1567
email rburns@bigfoot.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Helen B. Gerhard
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 15:18
Subject: Re: Hood
>Other than the "non-mandatory" Appendix A to 1910.1450 C.4.b and h where
>in the CFR regs does it show the need to inspect hoods for proper
>functioning. I know it's in the regs somewhere but the books aren't on my
>desk!
>
>Thanks!
>
>Helen
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Helen B. Gerhard
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:47 PM
> To: 'LABSAFETY-L Discussion List'
> Subject: Hood
>
> Hi All:
>
> I know that this has been addressed before but what are the airflow
>requirements for laboratory fume hood?
>
> I've got the ACGIH information from my lab safety info received in
>Jim's class. However, someone has borrowed my 29 CFR so looking up any
>regulations is difficult at this time. Can someone help?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Helen
>
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 14:31:28 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Greene, Ben"
Subject: Re: Hood
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Appendix A (E)(3)(c) recommends a fume hood "face velocity of at least
60 linear feet per minute" for "Work with Chemicals of Moderate Chronic
or High Acute Toxicity".
My interpretation only.
Ben Greene, Ph.D
AlliedSignal
Las Cruces, NM 88004
505-524-5761
> ----------
> From: Bob Burns[SMTP:rburns@BIGFOOT.COM]
> Reply To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 1:39 PM
> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
> Subject: Re: Hood
>
> 1910.1450.d.iii says the CHP shall include " a requirement that fume
> hoods
> and .... are functioning properly and specific measures measures that
> shall
> be taken to ensure proper and adequate performance of such equipment"
>
> IN the Appendix A, there are no specific numbers given.
>
> Bob
>
> "Everything is easy for the person who does not have to do it!"
>
> Robert L. Burns
> Group Leader, R&D
> Specialty Chemicals Division
> RUETGERS Organics Corporation
> 201 Struble Road
> State College, PA 16801
> phone 814-231-9214
> fax 814-238-1567
> email rburns@bigfoot.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Helen B. Gerhard
> To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
> Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 15:18
> Subject: Re: Hood
>
>
> >Other than the "non-mandatory" Appendix A to 1910.1450 C.4.b and h
> where
> >in the CFR regs does it show the need to inspect hoods for proper
> >functioning. I know it's in the regs somewhere but the books aren't
> on my
> >desk!
> >
> >Thanks!
> >
> >Helen
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Helen B. Gerhard
> > Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:47 PM
> > To: 'LABSAFETY-L Discussion List'
> > Subject: Hood
> >
> > Hi All:
> >
> > I know that this has been addressed before but what are the
> airflow
> >requirements for laboratory fume hood?
> >
> > I've got the ACGIH information from my lab safety info
> received in
> >Jim's class. However, someone has borrowed my 29 CFR so looking up
> any
> >regulations is difficult at this time. Can someone help?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Helen
> >
> >
> >
>
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 16:55:18 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Nick Pinizzotto
Subject: designated areas for PHSs
Comments: To: mmiller@ANDREW.CMU.EDU
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I think it needs to be a decision that each institution makes for themselves.
Nothing the Federal Government does is specific. Therefore we're left to
grapple once again on a definition.
We here have a list of PHSs, primarily carcinogens which researchers must
consult when filing grant forms. It's not an extensive list but it does get
the researchers thinking in the right frame of mind about proper containment,
proper PPE and Proper Disposal. If they use a chemical not on the list but
they judge it in their own minds to be a PHS, they will complete a form as
well.
I'm sure there'll be lots of discussion on this one but these are just one
person's thoughts.
Nick Pinizzotto
Environmental Health Officer
Dept. Environmental Health & Safety
Thomas Jefferson University
nick.pinizzotto@mail.tju.edu
215-503-5853
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 16:21:50 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bill Schultz
Subject: Re[2]: Hood
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
There is no requirement to inspect chemical fume hoods in the CFRs' that I am
aware of.
The only citations in the CFRs' concerning chemical fume hoods, that I am aware
of, are in the regulations for the 13 carcinogens. These citations do not list
a requirement for fume hood certification but require a face velocity of 150
feet per minute (fpm).
Chemical fume hood manufactures, the American Chemical Society and Prudent
Practices all state clearly that face velocities approaching or exceeding 150
fpm should not be used. The hoods are not designed for velocities this high
and they can cause turbulence that can bring the fumes out of the hood and into
the operators breathing zone.
Prudent Practices has a good recommendation for fume hood face velocity on page
178, Section 8.C.2. Our standard for hood velocity is a paraphrasing of their
recommendation. We aim for 100 fpm but allow a variance of 20% either way
making 80-120 fpm acceptable.
Our frequency of testing or "field certification" is every six months based on
Department of Defense regulations. Testing on a six month basis is also the
recommendation of The American Chemical Society in "Safety In Academic
Chemistry Laboratories", page 48 Fume Hoods.
Hope this helps.
Bill Schultz
USAMRIID
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Hood
Author: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List at Internet-Mail
Date: 1/4/99 1:14 PM
Other than the "non-mandatory" Appendix A to 1910.1450 C.4.b and h where
in the CFR regs does it show the need to inspect hoods for proper
functioning. I know it's in the regs somewhere but the books aren't on my
desk!
Thanks!
Helen
-----Original Message-----
From: Helen B. Gerhard
Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:47 PM
To: 'LABSAFETY-L Discussion List'
Subject: Hood
Hi All:
I know that this has been addressed before but what are the airflow
requirements for laboratory fume hood?
I've got the ACGIH information from my lab safety info received in
Jim's class. However, someone has borrowed my 29 CFR so looking up any
regulations is difficult at this time. Can someone help?
Thanks!
Helen
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 06:39:52 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Greene, Ben"
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Hood
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
There is a very useful concensus standard on laboratory ventilation
including fume hood performance criteria in "American National Standard
for Laboratory Ventilation" ANSI/AIHA Z-9.5 (1992). Section 5.7 (Face
velocities) states "Each hood shall maintain an average face velocity of
80-120 fpm with no face velocity measurement more than plus or minus 20%
of the average". This is consistent with the Prudent Practices'
recommendations stated by Bill Schultz.
Ben Greene, Ph.D
AlliedSignal
Las Cruces, NM 88004
505-524-5761
> ----------
> From: Bill Schultz[SMTP:william_schultz@DETRICK.ARMY.MIL]
> Reply To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 2:21 PM
> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
> Subject: Re[2]: Hood
>
> There is no requirement to inspect chemical fume hoods in the CFRs'
> that I am
> aware of.
>
> The only citations in the CFRs' concerning chemical fume hoods, that
> I am aware
> of, are in the regulations for the 13 carcinogens. These citations
> do not list
> a requirement for fume hood certification but require a face velocity
> of 150
> feet per minute (fpm).
>
> Chemical fume hood manufactures, the American Chemical Society and
> Prudent
> Practices all state clearly that face velocities approaching or
> exceeding 150
> fpm should not be used. The hoods are not designed for velocities
> this high
> and they can cause turbulence that can bring the fumes out of the
> hood and into
> the operators breathing zone.
>
> Prudent Practices has a good recommendation for fume hood face
> velocity on page
> 178, Section 8.C.2. Our standard for hood velocity is a paraphrasing
> of their
> recommendation. We aim for 100 fpm but allow a variance of 20%
> either way
> making 80-120 fpm acceptable.
>
> Our frequency of testing or "field certification" is every six months
> based on
> Department of Defense regulations. Testing on a six month basis is
> also the
> recommendation of The American Chemical Society in "Safety In
> Academic
> Chemistry Laboratories", page 48 Fume Hoods.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Bill Schultz
> USAMRIID
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
> _________________________________
> Subject: Re: Hood
> Author: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List at
> Internet-Mail
> Date: 1/4/99 1:14 PM
>
>
> Other than the "non-mandatory" Appendix A to 1910.1450 C.4.b and h
> where
> in the CFR regs does it show the need to inspect hoods for proper
> functioning. I know it's in the regs somewhere but the books aren't
> on my
> desk!
>
> Thanks!
>
> Helen
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Helen B. Gerhard
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:47 PM
> To: 'LABSAFETY-L Discussion List'
> Subject: Hood
>
> Hi All:
>
> I know that this has been addressed before but what are the
> airflow
> requirements for laboratory fume hood?
>
> I've got the ACGIH information from my lab safety info
> received in
> Jim's class. However, someone has borrowed my 29 CFR so looking up
> any
> regulations is difficult at this time. Can someone help?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Helen
>
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:15:38 -0600
Reply-To: "swiki@bihs.net"
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Swiki A. Anderson"
Organization: Swiki Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Subject: Commercialism on the web -OR- web etiquette -OR-
Vendor-engineering education -OR- attempts to help
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear Colleague...
Clearly I have offend some with my posting of information pointing to
information on our web page at
http://www.saai-svc.com/engineer/html/tech-notes.htm; if my attempts to
share knowledge with you offend you, I am truly sorry. If I can eliminate
one potential health hazard in a lab or, better yet, keep one individual
from incurring a health problem, then the time and effort I have spent in
generating responses like this will have been worth it and I will gladly
continue to take the "heat".
Mary Ann Solstad, CIH indicated something to the effect that the
ventilation in her college laboratory was bad and that she and all her
class mates have survived, "The bad old days weren't that dreadful". While
I am glad about Mary Ann's survival, she and others like her ought to read,
learn and understand that others have not been so lucky. For example see
"Nightmare in Building 503" September, by Jonathan Eng, Chicago Magazine,
1998 at http://www.chicagomag.com/chicagomag/text/features/amoco/0998c.htm.
You might also note that this is a Phoenix Controls job, and while the
folks at Phoenix do a superior job of marketing, what if there are some
latent defects associated with this system that you do not understand and
may not know about? Have you instrumented laboratory air flow control
systems available from various vendors and determined by repeatable metered
results containment performance available with each? I have. And next, I
call attention to "When Science Isn't Good Enough" by John Hubner, West
Magazine, concerning the chronic ventilation health problems that have
occurred at the IBM San Hose Plastics lab. Of eight individuals who were
co-workers in this exciting place in the late 1970s, only one remains alive
and he lives in fear that cancer will also claim him.
Jim Morris at the Houston Chronicle has written extensively about
ventilation in the work place and cancer resulting from it. Accessing
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/special/vinyl/stories.html will
bring you to the index of most of his articles in his series entitled "In
Strictest Confidence" which deals with workplace ventilation problems and
the fact that industry knew they were harming employees in some cases. Can
I challenge Mary Ann, Robert Burns and other like these folks to become
informed about Morris' extensive investigative efforts? I especially
suggest you read Morris' Sunday, December 20, 1998, article "Sickening
Results"; check this at
http://www.chron.com/content/story.html/page1/162714. It deals with
laboratories and resulting health problems. Is dilution versus containment
ventilation a problem? Ask Michelle Pigott who is quoted in Morris'
"Sickening Result" article. Could a properly engineered and functioning
containment ventilation system in her lab prevented injury to her son,
Dalton? I suspect she would think so. I also suggest your review or
Morris' "Slipshod practices frequently observed in college laboratories" at
the same websight and also published December 20th. If you have trouble
locating these Morris' articles, I try accessing them and other similar
articles on the net via a link set up for your convenience from our
WebPages at http://www.saai-svc.com/engineer/html/tech-notes.htm.
Clicking on "LINKS...." will bring you to a listing of all of Morris's
plus many other articles by others dealing with fire and exposure hazard
that someone has experienced.
In my own family, I have had one uncle, an insulator, die of asbestosis
and another uncle who worked in a chemical plant where 1,3-butadiene was
produced die from pancreatic cancer. My father worked in this same
chemical plant as did I for a two year period, including some time in the
two plant laboratories. The labs in this plant were built in the 1940
W.W.II era on the basis of an expected useful life of 5 years. They still
remain in use today and have enjoyed little upgrade. At last count 19
people in "Gas Lab" in this plant have died of cancer, with about 80% of
them from pancreatic cancer; only two of them had ever smoked. Concerning
the Gas Lab, I am especially reminded of one of the supervisors that I
worked for, a friend, that I visited with several years after I entered the
consulting engineering business, about 1986. When I ask him about the
ventilation system in this laboratory that was blatantly bad and obvious
so, at least to me, and his response was something like, "Hell, I've worked
here for 20 years and I don't have cancer!" Sad thing was that when I
visited this plant again about four years later and ask about Jim Hutto,
one of the technicians told me, "Didn't you know? He died of cancer last
year." This plant is located in Jefferson County, Texas, a place once
touted as the oil refining center of the world. Cancer per capita is
higher in this county than anywhere else in the USA. Would retrofit of the
lab air systems to satisfy a containment ventilation goal in lieu of the
dilution ventilation system have made a difference? I don't know. But
believe me, it sure would have helped to reduce if not eliminate the
problem.
Now the question of why bother to why try to communicate one's findings or
the finding of others that have gone before us? Why spend the time and
effort in publication and defend your ideas from internet "nazis" or other
forms of informational/media purest zealot? I suppose it is because I
really do care about others, especially the working stiff who is typically
an hourly employee, who may spend his working life in a laboratory,
trusting in his management to protect him from exposure problems, only to
learn when he is about 50 years old that he has a malignancy that has only
one ultimate cure, despite the radiation treatment or chemotherapy.
It is, however, disappointing when someone lambaste you for trying to
point out to them dilution versus containment ventilation faults,
especially when you are parroting what much wiser men have learned and
published some 50 years ago that present decision makers dictating
ventilation system design failed to recognized, don't know about and won't
look into because they are protecting their egos and turf. We can do
better. We have got to do better. We desperately need our chemical
industry in this country. It has to grow and expand. However, by the same
token we must make the laboratories and other work place safer, especially
via cost effective engineered solutions. In the meantime, I continued to
be amazed by the reluctance of some employers to even consider changes that
can only help, especially when we have a documented history and positive
proof of enhancement?
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 11:10:29 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Janeen LaPierre
Subject: Re: Commercialism on the web -OR- web etiquette
-OR-Vendor-engineering education -OR- attempts to help
Comments: To: swiki@bihs.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I, for one, thank you for taking the time to pull all these articles together and point me in their direction. Air Quality issues are the single largest complaint type I deal with as a CHO. Profs may not realize they are working with a potentially explosive compound but they know they have a problem when the smell or recurrent sinusitis catches them by the nose.
The thing is, we need air to live. Breathing is not an option. Our lungs and bodies are marvelous at protecting us from many hidden hazards in our every day lives, but they have limits. I am a firm believer in removing as many hazards in my life as I can. God knows there are enough out there that I do not know about and can not control. If working in a hood removes a few of these hazards, then you can bet I do. Further, I feel it my moral obligation to look out for those working with me, around me, and in labs that I have responsibility for. There is so much more to what we do than to simply look at the regs and the numbers. They are important tools in our evaluations and decision making, but not the only ones.
I always ask myself, Is this the most PRUDENT way to do this? Would I do this task myself or allow someone I love to do it? Safety has to be PERSONAL. I think that can make us feel uncomfortable sometimes but we should not ignore it.
Keep the info coming. Keep the commercials coming. Some of my easiest solutions to tough problems we found in the junk mail adds filling my snail mail box.
For what its worth, Janeen.
*****************
Janeen Lapierre, CHO
College of Osteopathic Medicine
University of New England
11 Hills Beach Road
Biddeford, ME 04005
E-Mail: JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU
Phone: (207) 283-0170 ext 2446
Opinions are mine and not those of UNE.
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:04:28 -0800
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: James Kapin
Subject: Lab Safety Employment Opportunity
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Colleagues, we will be accepting applications for the job below for the
next three weeks. Please pass this on to anyone who might be interested.
All application materials need to go to UCSD HR (not to me), complete info
at Thanks, Jim
116270-Y
EH&S SPECIALIST I
Environment, Health and Safety
Filing Deadline: 1/22/99
$41,900-$52,300/yr.
100% Career
As a member of the Research Safety Team the incumbent will support the
research community at UCSD and facilitate safe and healthy research
activities. Evaluate health and safety hazards in laboratories and support
facilities according to environmental, health and safety principles and
legal requirements. Work with laboratory staff to correct deficiencies.
Develop laboratory safety training for a variety of audiences, including
faculty, staff, and students, and incumbent presents training in a variety
of settings to individuals and groups. Develop written materials, policies,
and procedures to support the laboratory safety program, contribute to the
UCSD Laboratory Safety Guide, and to the UCSD Laboratory Safety Web page.
Support other chemical safety and research safety programs including the
UCSD Hazard Communication, carcinogen registration, controlled substances,
and emergency response. Provide advice and consultation on chemical safety
to non-lab facilities and assists the Campus Chemical Safety Officer on
special projects.
REQUIREMENTS: Demonstrated knowledge and experience in the identification
and evaluation of health and safety hazards in research laboratories.
Demonstrated knowledge of current legal requirements, guidelines, and
prudent practices applying to health and safety issues. Applied knowledge
of chemical toxicology and properties, and of the principles of chemical
storage, use and disposal. Demonstrated experience in design and
performance of effective laboratory surveys, and ability to evaluate the
results of such surveys and communicate findings in an effective, positive
manner. Communication skills necessary to impart health and safety
information to workers of differing backgrounds. Skills and knowledge to
organize, present, and evaluate classes, seminars, and training sessions on
health and safety topics. Demonstrated ability to use word processing,
spreadsheet, database and other software to analyze data and prepare
professional documents and training materials, including web pages. Ability
to organize and schedule tasks to complete projects effectively and
efficiently. Demonstrated strong ability to communicate effectively, both
orally and in writing. Knowledge in the selection and use of personal
protective equipment including, but not limited to, respirators, gloves and
protective clothing. Ability and willingness to respond to hazardous
materials spills and incidents as part of the UCSD emergency response team.
Ability to pass pulmonary function test, be fit-tested and wear an air
purifying respirator and a self-contained breathing apparatus.
Jim Kapin
UCSD Chemical Safety Officer
Mail Code 0920
9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla CA 92093
(619)534-2823 fax (619)534-7982
mailto:jkapin@ucsd.edu
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 10:09:49 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Sharyn Bake
Subject: Re: Lab Safety Employment Opportunity
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Gary, here is a great job in a great location. The salary is not too bad.
Check it out!
Sharyn
> ----------
> From: James Kapin
> Reply To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 1999 10:04 AM
> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
> Subject: Lab Safety Employment Opportunity
>
> Colleagues, we will be accepting applications for the job below for the
> next three weeks. Please pass this on to anyone who might be interested.
> All application materials need to go to UCSD HR (not to me), complete info
> at Thanks, Jim
>
>
> 116270-Y
> EH&S SPECIALIST I
> Environment, Health and Safety
> Filing Deadline: 1/22/99
> $41,900-$52,300/yr.
> 100% Career
>
> As a member of the Research Safety Team the incumbent will support the
> research community at UCSD and facilitate safe and healthy research
> activities. Evaluate health and safety hazards in laboratories and support
> facilities according to environmental, health and safety principles and
> legal requirements. Work with laboratory staff to correct deficiencies.
> Develop laboratory safety training for a variety of audiences, including
> faculty, staff, and students, and incumbent presents training in a variety
> of settings to individuals and groups. Develop written materials,
> policies,
> and procedures to support the laboratory safety program, contribute to
> the
> UCSD Laboratory Safety Guide, and to the UCSD Laboratory Safety Web page.
> Support other chemical safety and research safety programs including the
> UCSD Hazard Communication, carcinogen registration, controlled substances,
> and emergency response. Provide advice and consultation on chemical safety
> to non-lab facilities and assists the Campus Chemical Safety Officer on
> special projects.
>
> REQUIREMENTS: Demonstrated knowledge and experience in the identification
> and evaluation of health and safety hazards in research laboratories.
> Demonstrated knowledge of current legal requirements, guidelines, and
> prudent practices applying to health and safety issues. Applied knowledge
> of chemical toxicology and properties, and of the principles of chemical
> storage, use and disposal. Demonstrated experience in design and
> performance of effective laboratory surveys, and ability to evaluate the
> results of such surveys and communicate findings in an effective, positive
> manner. Communication skills necessary to impart health and safety
> information to workers of differing backgrounds. Skills and knowledge to
> organize, present, and evaluate classes, seminars, and training sessions
> on
> health and safety topics. Demonstrated ability to use word processing,
> spreadsheet, database and other software to analyze data and prepare
> professional documents and training materials, including web pages.
> Ability
> to organize and schedule tasks to complete projects effectively and
> efficiently. Demonstrated strong ability to communicate effectively, both
> orally and in writing. Knowledge in the selection and use of personal
> protective equipment including, but not limited to, respirators, gloves
> and
> protective clothing. Ability and willingness to respond to hazardous
> materials spills and incidents as part of the UCSD emergency response
> team.
> Ability to pass pulmonary function test, be fit-tested and wear an air
> purifying respirator and a self-contained breathing apparatus.
>
>
>
>
> Jim Kapin
> UCSD Chemical Safety Officer
> Mail Code 0920
> 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla CA 92093
> (619)534-2823 fax (619)534-7982
> mailto:jkapin@ucsd.edu
>
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 11:42:53 -0800
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Neal Langerman
Subject: COMMERCIAL: Revised Web Site
Comments: To: hs-canada@ccohs.ca, SAFETY@LIST.UVM.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have revised the web site for Advanced Chemical Safety and have published
the 1999 training schedule. I have also posted new information on our
regulatory compliance documents.
Neal
*************************************************************
NEAL LANGERMAN chemsaf@ix.netcom.com
ADVANCED CHEMICAL SAFETY
8909 Complex Drive
San Diego CA 92123-1418
619 874 5577 (phone) 619 874 8239 (FAX)
619 990 4908 (cellular)
visit our homepage: http://www.chemical-safety.com
*************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:09:01 -0600
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Scott M. Davis"
Subject: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi folks!
We are considering the installation of a liquid nitrogen bulk storage tank.
It is my experience that these are quite common at Universities. Besides
the obvious hazards associated with ice build-up, and severe frostbite from
improper handling of LN2, is anyone aware of any unique hazards from these
units.
Many Thanx,
Scott Davis, CIH
UNC Charlotte Safety Office
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 16:15:40 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'd put a good strong chain link fence around it. You don't want someone to
take some out some dark night and get injured.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott M. Davis
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 16:10
Subject: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
>Hi folks!
>We are considering the installation of a liquid nitrogen bulk storage tank.
>It is my experience that these are quite common at Universities. Besides
>the obvious hazards associated with ice build-up, and severe frostbite from
>improper handling of LN2, is anyone aware of any unique hazards from these
>units.
>Many Thanx,
>Scott Davis, CIH
>UNC Charlotte Safety Office
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 16:38:19 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mark Yanchisin
Subject: Alternative for dichloro dimethyl silane
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Happy New Year to all!!
Does anyone know of anything that could be used as an alternative for using
dichloro dimethyl silane diluted with ETOH for use as a silicone coating for
glassware? This glass is used for protein synthesis and gel work.
Thanks!!
Mark Yanchisin
Coordinator for Clinical and Lab Safety
Programs
University of Florida Env. Health and Safety
PO Box 112190
Gainesville, FL 32611-2190
352-846-2550 (T)
352-392-7386 (F)
Mark@ehs.ufl.edu
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:49:27 -0600
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Peter Priniski
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Please consider the following.
Not only do you need to consider ice build-up, but water condensation as
well...possible slip hazard. Aslo, consider adiquate ventilation at the use
points. Be aware that valves often can "freeze up" making it difficult to
close when needed.
Good luck.
Pete
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott M. Davis [SMTP:smdavis@EMAIL.UNCC.EDU]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 15:09
> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
> Subject: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
>
> Hi folks!
> We are considering the installation of a liquid nitrogen bulk storage
> tank.
> It is my experience that these are quite common at Universities. Besides
> the obvious hazards associated with ice build-up, and severe frostbite
> from
> improper handling of LN2, is anyone aware of any unique hazards from these
> units.
> Many Thanx,
> Scott Davis, CIH
> UNC Charlotte Safety Office
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 04:07:52 -0600
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mark Smith
Subject: Toxicity Data
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Is anyone familiar with the explanation of why an LD50 for "Skin, Rabbit"
would be lower than the "Oral, Rat"? Case in point below
(2-cyclohexen-1-one)
Is this common or unusual?
LD50/LC50:
CAS# 930-68-7: Inhalation, rat: LC50 =250 ppm/4H;
Oral, rat: LD50 = 220 mg/kg; Skin, rabbit: LD50 = 70 mg/kg.
ms
***************************************
MARK SMITH
HENDRIX COLLEGE CHEMISTRY
LABORATORY COORDINATOR
CHEMICAL HYGIENE OFFICER NRCC-CHO
***************************************
1600 Washington Ave
Conway, AR 72032
501-450-3812
Fax : 501-450-3829
***************************************
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 13:36:42 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Teresa Robertson
Organization: CSU Bakersfield
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
Comments: cc: trobertson@csubak.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu,.internet writes:
>Is anyone familiar with the explanation of why an LD50 for "Skin,
>Rabbit"
>would be lower than the "Oral, Rat"? Case in point below
>(2-cyclohexen-1-one)
>Is this common or unusual?
Mark,
I don't have a good answer to your question, but an interesting related
reference. I wish I had a more recent edition, but in "The Toxic
Substances List, 1973 Edition" by NIOSH, Table One is called "Limiting
Dosages Differentiating Toxic and Non-Toxic Substances According to
Route of Administration to Experimental Animals of a Maximum Single
(Acute) Dose Causing Death".
The rows in the table list different species. The columns list
different routes of administration. The body of the table lists LD50
data. Oral rat data is common and many of us use 500 mg/kg and less to
define toxicity, but what about, for instance, IPR-Qal
(Intraperitoneal-Quail)? According to the chart, a substance is toxic
if the IPR-Qal is less than or equal to 20,000 mg/kg.
(P.S. the number they give for oral rat is 5,000 mg/kg, so I'd say
these numbers are for "moderate toxicity")
Teresa
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 17:48:37 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Dr. Linda A. Swihart"
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
In-Reply-To: <199901062109.PAA66224@saluki-mailsmtp.siu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>We are considering the installation of a liquid nitrogen bulk storage tank.
>It is my experience that these are quite common at Universities. Besides
>the obvious hazards associated with ice build-up, and severe frostbite from
>improper handling of LN2, is anyone aware of any unique hazards from these
>units.
We have a go-round every once in a while with grad students and post docs
who fill a small Dewar (the sort without handles) and carry it, open,
through the hallway. Or up the passenger elevator.
I recently saw a fellow with five large books in his left arm, a cup of
coffee in his left hand, and a 1-litre Dewar in his right hand trying to
open his lab door from the hallway side. He was holding the Dewar up high,
some instinct saying to keep it out of the way I guess, while bending down
and to the left to try to operate the door handle with a couple available
left-hand fingers. I thought he was going to pour it into his right ear.....
The party line on in-building transportation here is to
-- use a Dewar with a handle or use a secondary carrier with handle
-- have open-mouth Dewar corked (it's *not* a seal but it helps a bit
against splashing)
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 16:25:46 +1300
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Tony Haggerty
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mark,
Have a look at the units. Inhalation is ppm/4hr, whilst oral is mg/kg of
body weight, something like daily over 14 days, so they are not really
comparable. Also note that the inhalation dose is referred to as the LC 50
whereas the oral dose is the LD 50.
Substances can also be of varying toxicity according to their route of
entry. So a substance which is highly toxic by ingestion may be less so by
absorption.
Here is an interesting example I came across while checking victims of a
Magnesium fire. The product of combustion is Magnesium Oxide, commonly
given to infants as an antacid. i.e. virtually non toxic by ingestion so I
was not unduly concerned until I read that on inhalation it is quite toxic
and liable to induce a condition known as "Metal Fume Fever".
When looking at toxicology you must compare like with like, then assess the
most likely route of entry and then always remember what an epidemiologist
here called the "Canaries of Society". i.e. Those people who are sensitive
to minute amounts of a substance. This is often called an allergy but is in
fact a toxic reaction.
Hope this helps your understanding.
Regards
Tony
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 00:59:28 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mary Ann Solstad
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Not that unusual. Different routes and different species each have their
little, or sometimes big, idiosyncrasies. Sometimes a mouse has keeled
over dead, and a rat been unaffected. In one famous poisoning in the 30's
people were partially paralyzed, calves and chickens had another reaction
(they died I think) and your usual lab animal was unaffected. Public
Health Service wrote an extensive monograph on it. Go figure. Dig it
out--it's a good read. Starts with tri-ortho--. That's your only clue.
Mary Ann
At 04:07 AM 1/7/99 -0600, you wrote:
>Is anyone familiar with the explanation of why an LD50 for "Skin, Rabbit"
>would be lower than the "Oral, Rat"? Case in point below
>(2-cyclohexen-1-one)
>Is this common or unusual?
>
>LD50/LC50:
> CAS# 930-68-7: Inhalation, rat: LC50 =250 ppm/4H;
> Oral, rat: LD50 = 220 mg/kg; Skin, rabbit: LD50 = 70 mg/kg.
>
>
>
>***************************************
> MARK SMITH
> HENDRIX COLLEGE CHEMISTRY
> LABORATORY COORDINATOR
> CHEMICAL HYGIENE OFFICER NRCC-CHO
>***************************************
> 1600 Washington Ave
> Conway, AR 72032
> 501-450-3812
> Fax : 501-450-3829
>***************************************
>
Mary Ann Solstad, CIH 4 A's of Safety
SOLSTAD Health & Safety Evaluations Attitude
16 Pequot Rd, Marblehead, MA 01945 Awareness
781-631-4748 tel, 781-631-1832 FAX Automatic Application
Authority
Past DivCHAS Chair, ACS
msolstad@mediaone.net
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 01:06:41 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mary Ann Solstad
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
In-Reply-To: <009901be39ed$6b2d0ee0$bfcffea9@j623hqv7a394>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Just an aside. Metal fume fever is a self-limiting fever and aches that is
usually over in 24 hours after exposure to fumes from welding galvanized
iron. I asked the 3 welders at a firm I advise--they knew about it, but
had never had it. Said they had never heard of it's being serious.
Mary Ann
>
>Here is an interesting example I came across while checking victims of a
>Magnesium fire. The product of combustion is Magnesium Oxide, commonly
>given to infants as an antacid. i.e. virtually non toxic by ingestion so I
>was not unduly concerned until I read that on inhalation it is quite toxic
>and liable to induce a condition known as "Metal Fume Fever".
>
>When looking at toxicology you must compare like with like, then assess the
>most likely route of entry and then always remember what an epidemiologist
>here called the "Canaries of Society". i.e. Those people who are sensitive
>to minute amounts of a substance. This is often called an allergy but is in
>fact a toxic reaction.
>
>Hope this helps your understanding.
>Regards
>Tony
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 19:03:24 +1300
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Peter Robinson
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BE3A70.67A88C80"
------ =_NextPart_000_01BE3A70.67A88C80
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Kia Ora All
Other possible hazards to those already discussed.
1. Implosion of Dewars used to transport LN2 in-house. I have used a =
couple of options - tape around the outside of the container to further =
help contain any flying glass (when I was a student MANY years ago, we =
used replacement Dewar inners, taped, with no outer cover to save money =
- impressive when they implode, but we never had any cuts. T'wouldn't =
be allowed nowadays)
2. If the bleed vent from the main cylinder should ice up, there could =
be a pressure buildup.
3. I have also used small polystyrene containers to hold LN2. Cheap, =
works OK though inside can become brittle. Loss of LN2 can be high. =
May be safer than glass Dewars?
I have not been able to find any classification for "Cryogenic Liquids" =
in any of the hazard classification systems I have looked at (NZ, =
Australia, US, Europe). I think a classification is needed, along with =
appropriate signage, etc, and I made submissions to a recent Govt =
commission in NZ about this - hasn't been acted on.
Anyone got any thoughts on this - how can we get a classification put in =
place? The stuff is certainly hazardous! We get liq Ar delivered by =
tanker, and this does not have any signage which would be of use if it =
was involved in a crash.
Peter Robinson PhD FNZIC
Environmental Division Manager
Hill Laboratories, Private Bag 3205, Hamilton, NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 7 858 2000 Fax: +64 7 858 2001
Email: peter@hill-labs.co.nz
----------
From: Scott M. Davis
Sent: Thursday, 7 January 1999 10:09 am
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
Hi folks!
We are considering the installation of a liquid nitrogen bulk storage =
tank.
It is my experience that these are quite common at Universities. =
Besides
the obvious hazards associated with ice build-up, and severe frostbite =
from
improper handling of LN2, is anyone aware of any unique hazards from =
these
units.
Many Thanx,
Scott Davis, CIH
UNC Charlotte Safety Office
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 20:56:21 +1300
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Tony Haggerty
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Teina Katou Katoa Peter,
I think it's the United Nations that classifies gases according to their
states. i.e. Permanent, Liquified, Dissolved and Cryogenic and then
classifies them for transportation as Flammable, Non-flammable and Toxic.
I'm away from the office for a while but I will check when I get back.
Haere Ra
Tony
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 21:00:51 +1300
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Tony Haggerty
Subject: Metal Fume Fever
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thanks Mary Ann
All my information is text book but my original source was NIOSH which I
recall as being quite cautious about it and I've just checked the OSHA site
and it talks about lung damage. Perhaps your guys have been lucky or the
worst is yet to come.
I am of course referring to Magnesium Oxide as the cause. Other Oxides such
as Zinc from galvanising may not be as bad.
Cheers
Tony
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 08:37:50 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Julie O'Brien
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>1. Implosion of Dewars used to transport LN2 in-house. I have used a
couple of options - tape around the outside of the container to further help
contain any flying glass (when I was a student MANY years ago, we used
replacement Dewar inners, taped, with no outer cover to save money -
impressive when they implode, but we never had any cuts. T'wouldn't be
allowed nowadays)
There are special Dewars available for storage and transportation of
cryogenics in-house that are much more appropriate than the ones you are
referring to; the Dewars come in sizes as small as 1 L and as large as 20 or
30 L. The glass containers are really only supposed to be used when the
cryogenic is in use (such as to cool a cold trap).
>3. I have also used small polystyrene containers to hold LN2. Cheap,
works OK though inside can become brittle. Loss of LN2 can be high. May be
safer than glass Dewars?
I would think that polystyrene would get so brittle that any significant
handling of the container would cause it to break. How small are the containers?
We have replaced most of our glass dewars with metal ones. They do not
implode and last much longer than the glass ones. They are available from
Cole Parmer. (p.503 in 97-98 Catalog)
Julie O'Brien
Chemist
PCR, Inc.
PO Box 1466
Gainesville, FL 32602
352-376-8246 ext. 232
Fax 352-373-7503
afn35210@afn.org
Education/Exhibits Committee Volunteer
EXPO The Children's Museum of Gainesville
PO Box 5951
Gainesville, FL 32627
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 08:33:32 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Wes Kolar
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
In-Reply-To: <199901062109.PAA66224@saluki-mailsmtp.siu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Nitrogen does not support respiration. LN2 should therefore
be stored in a fairly well ventilated area.
At 03:09 PM 1/6/99 -0600, you wrote:
>Hi folks!
>We are considering the installation of a liquid nitrogen bulk storage tank.
>It is my experience that these are quite common at Universities. Besides
>the obvious hazards associated with ice build-up, and severe frostbite from
>improper handling of LN2, is anyone aware of any unique hazards from these
>units.
>Many Thanx,
>Scott Davis, CIH
>UNC Charlotte Safety Office
>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Wes Kolar
Environmental Safety Specialist
University of Georgia
Environmental Safety Services
Athens, GA
30602
http://www.ps.uga.edu/ess/LaboratorySafetyOffice.html
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 08:03:50 -0600
Reply-To: "msturgeon@mriresearch.org"
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mike Sturgeon
Organization: MRI
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
Is anyone familiar with the explanation of why an LD50 for "Skin, Rabbit"
would be lower than the "Oral, Rat"? Case in point below
(2-cyclohexen-1-one)
Is this common or unusual?
LD50/LC50:
CAS# 930-68-7: Inhalation, rat: LC50 =250 ppm/4H;
Oral, rat: LD50 = 220 mg/kg; Skin, rabbit: LD50 = 70 mg/kg.
***************************************
MARK SMITH
HENDRIX COLLEGE CHEMISTRY
LABORATORY COORDINATOR
CHEMICAL HYGIENE OFFICER NRCC-CHO
***************************************
Mark-
Your posting hit my server at 4 a.m. Hope this isn't keeping you up at
night. Anyway, while I don't know why, if I were to speculate (which I
will), my guess is that it has something to do with the effect of digestive
fluids on the substance in question. Perhaps saliva/stomach acids/bile in
some way alter the substance or prevent uptake into the bloodstream/target
organ in a way that does not occur with skin contact. Just my guess before
coffee on a cold snowy morning.
Mike Sturgeon
Safety Officer
Midwest Research Institute
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:04:28 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Ron Angus
Subject: Toxicity data
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The question of why toxicity varies by route of exposure and method of
administration is as difficult as explaining why the data are different
between mamalian species given the same route of exposure and method of
administration. It helps to think in simple terms. Why is liquid water
relatively non-toxic when injected into the skin but deadly when breathed?
Part of the answer has to do with the body's protective mechanisms which
operate within specific "closed" systems. For instance, exposure by skin
may be slowed down by lipid layer impermeability so that the liver is not
overwhelmed by the assault, however, breathing the same stuff may send it
almost immediately into the blood stream where it knocks out the liver
quickly.
Most chemicals have different toxicity levels based on the route and method
of delivery. That's why all those tests are conducted (wouldn't life be
easy if the answers were all simple). The important thing to get out of
the data is the relative data relationships. If the stuff is nasty by skin
contact but not by breathing, gloves may solve the problem. If the
relationship is the opposite, you probably need a respirator but not
gloves. Or if you have two chemicals that will do the job and one has a
LC/LD50 lower than the other, it becomes your default choice.
For reading in this area I recommend highly the book by Dr. Alice Ottoboni,
The Dose Makes the Poison, it is a plain language guide to toxicology which
is very readible for the layperson.
Ron Angus
The University of Georgia
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:04:09 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Janeen LaPierre
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
As some have already alluded to, all species are not created equal. Even if you were comparing same routs of entry, the species may deal with the chemical differently on a metabolic level. Sometimes the metabolites of chemicals are the agents that cause adverse reactions, such as death, in the organism. I would say this case you give is very common. Good luck, Janeen.
*****************
Janeen Lapierre, CHO
College of Osteopathic Medicine
University of New England
11 Hills Beach Road
Biddeford, ME 04005
E-Mail: JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU
Phone: (207) 283-0170 ext 2446
Opinions are mine and not those of UNE.
>>> Mark Smith - 1/7/99 5:07 AM >>>
Is anyone familiar with the explanation of why an LD50 for "Skin, Rabbit"
would be lower than the "Oral, Rat"? Case in point below
(2-cyclohexen-1-one)
Is this common or unusual?
LD50/LC50:
CAS# 930-68-7: Inhalation, rat: LC50 =250 ppm/4H;
Oral, rat: LD50 = 220 mg/kg; Skin, rabbit: LD50 = 70 mg/kg.
ms
***************************************
MARK SMITH
HENDRIX COLLEGE CHEMISTRY
LABORATORY COORDINATOR
CHEMICAL HYGIENE OFFICER NRCC-CHO
***************************************
1600 Washington Ave
Conway, AR 72032
501-450-3812
Fax : 501-450-3829
***************************************
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:20:58 EDT
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Jennifer Reader
Organization: Environmental Health and Safety
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
The tank will also require inspection by your pressure vessel
inspector (ours is with the insurance company) and will require
a certificate of approval (at least in Ontario).
Jennifer Reader, B.S., M.S.P.H.
Hazardous Materials Safety Officer
Environmental Health and Safety
University of Guelph
Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1 Canada
519-824-4120 X3190 Fax 519-824-0364
e-Mail jennifer@ehs.uoguelph.ca
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:36:27 EST
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Labsafe@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 99-01-06 22:36:07 EST, you write:
<<
When looking at toxicology you must compare like with like, then assess the
most likely route of entry and then always remember what an epidemiologist
here called the "Canaries of Society". i.e. Those people who are sensitive
to minute amounts of a substance. This is often called an allergy but is in
fact a toxic reaction. >>
Isn't there a significant different between an allergic reaction and a
hypersensitive response? Jim Kaufman
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 08:38:48 -0600
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Hiram Patterson
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
Comments: To: Mary Ann Solstad
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mary Ann is referring to tri-ortho cresol phosphate (TOCP) which is (or
was?) used in hydraulic fluid. I know the Navy at one time used hydraulic
fluids containing it. I wonder if in this 30's incident that cooking oil
was contaminated with it.
Hiram Patterson
Safety Manager
Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas
----------
From: Mary Ann Solstad [SMTP:msolstad@MEDIAONE.NET]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 11:59 PM
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
Not that unusual. Different routes and different species each have
their
little, or sometimes big, idiosyncrasies. Sometimes a mouse has
keeled
over dead, and a rat been unaffected. In one famous poisoning in
the 30's
people were partially paralyzed, calves and chickens had another
reaction
(they died I think) and your usual lab animal was unaffected.
Public
Health Service wrote an extensive monograph on it. Go figure. Dig
it
out--it's a good read. Starts with tri-ortho--. That's your only
clue.
Mary Ann
At 04:07 AM 1/7/99 -0600, you wrote:
>Is anyone familiar with the explanation of why an LD50 for "Skin,
Rabbit"
>would be lower than the "Oral, Rat"? Case in point below
>(2-cyclohexen-1-one)
>Is this common or unusual?
>
>LD50/LC50:
> CAS# 930-68-7: Inhalation, rat: LC50 =250 ppm/4H;
> Oral, rat: LD50 = 220 mg/kg; Skin, rabbit: LD50 = 70 mg/kg.
>
>
>
>***************************************
> MARK SMITH
> HENDRIX COLLEGE CHEMISTRY
> LABORATORY COORDINATOR
> CHEMICAL HYGIENE OFFICER NRCC-CHO
>***************************************
> 1600 Washington Ave
> Conway, AR 72032
> 501-450-3812
> Fax : 501-450-3829
>***************************************
>
Mary Ann Solstad, CIH 4 A's of Safety
SOLSTAD Health & Safety Evaluations Attitude
16 Pequot Rd, Marblehead, MA 01945 Awareness
781-631-4748 tel, 781-631-1832 FAX Automatic Application
Authority
Past DivCHAS Chair, ACS
msolstad@mediaone.net
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 07:47:38 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Greene, Ben"
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Scott - if you are having bulk LN2 delivered by a vendor, make sure they
have the appropriate safety procedures for tanker to storage tank
transfers and that delivery/transfers are properly coordinated. Control
access to the area during transfers. Appropriate PPE, eye and face,
skin, and foot protection should be used. There are a number of sources
of gloves approved for cryogen handling. An oxygen meter with an
audible alarm and a two person system (minimum) should be used. Be real
careful when transfers are being performed when weather conditions
impair visibility. Safety shower/eye wash, as recommended by your
occupational physician should be close by; treatment of cryogenic burns
is not trivial; rubbing can cause severe tissue damage. Have emergency
procedures in place in case of cryogenic burns. Protect the storage
unit from damage by vehicles with appropriate access controls, such as
concrete posts. Make sure it is located such that, if a catostrophic
failure occurs, people nearby would not be frozen or asphyxiated. As
far as transfers from the tank, which typically involve smaller
quantities of LN2, make sure you have detailed procedures for
opening/closing valves and make this a buddy system operation where one
person in suitable PPE can assist if the person making a transfer has
problems. The risks involved here should never be underestimated. Some
of the list members discussed dewar handling; I prefer the metal dewars;
and never allow a dewar (or anything else you wouldn't want released) in
an elevator or otherwise inadequately ventilated area where people are
present.
My opinion only.
Ben Greene, Ph.D
AlliedSignal
Las Cruces, NM 88004
505-524-5761
> ----------
> From: Scott M. Davis[SMTP:smdavis@EMAIL.UNCC.EDU]
> Reply To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
> Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 2:09 PM
> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
> Subject: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
>
> Hi folks!
> We are considering the installation of a liquid nitrogen bulk storage
> tank.
> It is my experience that these are quite common at Universities.
> Besides
> the obvious hazards associated with ice build-up, and severe frostbite
> from
> improper handling of LN2, is anyone aware of any unique hazards from
> these
> units.
> Many Thanx,
> Scott Davis, CIH
> UNC Charlotte Safety Office
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 10:30:38 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Dorian McMillan
Subject: cyanide antidote kits
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Folks-
I'm looking into the possibility of buying a cyanide antidote kit for a lab
that will be using K cyanide. Any recommendations for vendors? Does
anyone know if the antidote must be administered by medical personnel, or
is it OK for non-medical personnel to give an antidote in an emergency
situation?
Thanks!
Dorian McMillan, Lab Manager
Department of Biology
College of Charleston
Charleston, SC 29424
McMillanD@CofC.edu
843-953-4847
*Opinions are my own, not my employer's*
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 10:41:37 -0500
Reply-To: "Dr. Henry"
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Henry Boyter Jr."
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Call your local emergency room, they will have the answers.
Dr. Henry Boyter, Jr. Ph.D. Chemist
The opinions of Dr. Boyter are provided for informational
purposes only and should not be used as advice. No
warranty or expression of professionalism is implied.
***************
-----Original Message-----
From: Dorian McMillan
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Date: Thursday, January 07, 1999 10:26 AM
Subject: cyanide antidote kits
Hi Folks-
I'm looking into the possibility of buying a cyanide antidote kit for a lab
that will be using K cyanide. Any recommendations for vendors? Does
anyone know if the antidote must be administered by medical personnel, or
is it OK for non-medical personnel to give an antidote in an emergency
situation?
Thanks!
Dorian McMillan, Lab Manager
Department of Biology
College of Charleston
Charleston, SC 29424
McMillanD@CofC.edu
843-953-4847
*Opinions are my own, not my employer's*
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 10:52:27 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Julie O'Brien
Subject: Re: Alternative for dichloro dimethyl silane
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Does anyone know of anything that could be used as an alternative for using
>dichloro dimethyl silane diluted with ETOH for use as a silicone coating for
>glassware? This glass is used for protein synthesis and gel work.
Mark,
When the students are "diluting" the chlorosilane with ethanol, a chemical
reaction occurs. The Cl is replaced with OH groups. Lancaster Synthesis
sells a silicon compound called Prosil 28 specifically for coating glassware
in applications such as yours. It should do the trick without the use of a
chlorosilane. Lancaster's phone # is 800-238-2324. (By the way, Prosil 28 is
more expensive than going the chlorosilane route.) If this material can't
work in your application, let me know because I have several other alternatives.
Julie O'Brien
Chemist
PCR, Inc.
PO Box 1466
Gainesville, FL 32602
352-376-8246 ext. 232
Fax 352-373-7503
afn35210@afn.org
Education/Exhibits Committee Volunteer
EXPO The Children's Museum of Gainesville
PO Box 5951
Gainesville, FL 32627
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 11:23:31 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Janeen LaPierre
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
*****************
Janeen Lapierre, CHO
College of Osteopathic Medicine
University of New England
11 Hills Beach Road
Biddeford, ME 04005
E-Mail: JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU
Phone: (207) 283-0170 ext 2446
Opinions are mine and not those of UNE.
>>> - 1/7/99 9:36 AM >>>
In a message dated 99-01-06 22:36:07 EST, you write:
<<
When looking at toxicology you must compare like with like, then assess the
most likely route of entry and then always remember what an epidemiologist
here called the "Canaries of Society". i.e. Those people who are sensitive
to minute amounts of a substance. This is often called an allergy but is in
fact a toxic reaction. >>
Isn't there a significant different between an allergic reaction and a
hypersensitive response? Jim Kaufman
The short answer is yes! Janeen
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:11:14 -0800
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mike hinz
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The slightly longer answer is; an allergic reaction, also known as a
sensitization reaction requires prior exposure to the causal agent or a
structurally similar substance. Subsequent exposure triggers an immune
response. Allergic responses do not typically exhibit the dose-response
curve seen with other toxic agents. A hypersensitivity, on the other hand,
may be thought of as an example of the low end of the dose-response curve.
Mike Hinz
Chemistry Dept.
Washington State University
At 11:23 AM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
>*****************
>Janeen Lapierre, CHO
>College of Osteopathic Medicine
>University of New England
>11 Hills Beach Road
>Biddeford, ME 04005
>
>E-Mail: JLaPierre@MAILBOX.UNE.EDU
>Phone: (207) 283-0170 ext 2446
>Opinions are mine and not those of UNE.
>
>>>> - 1/7/99 9:36 AM >>>
>In a message dated 99-01-06 22:36:07 EST, you write:
>
><<
> When looking at toxicology you must compare like with like, then assess the
> most likely route of entry and then always remember what an epidemiologist
> here called the "Canaries of Society". i.e. Those people who are sensitive
> to minute amounts of a substance. This is often called an allergy but is in
> fact a toxic reaction. >>
>
>Isn't there a significant different between an allergic reaction and a
>hypersensitive response? Jim Kaufman
>
>The short answer is yes! Janeen
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:43:41 -0800
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mike hinz
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
We offer amyl nitrite inhalants as an optional addition to the first aid
kits in those labs using cyanides.
First we checked with the emergency room of the hospital to verify that they
were prepared to handle cases of cyanide intoxication.
Next we got approval from campus medical personnel to use the amyl nitrite
as a first aid measure.
We get the inhalants through the hospital pharmacy.
We include information on first aid for cyanide exposure in our departmental
first aid and safety courses and provide a procedure card to be placed in
the first aid kit with the inhalants. Two important items on the procedure
card are -inform medical personnel of the intoxicating agent and -inform
them that amyl nitrite treatment was used.
Hope this is of help.
Mike Hinz
Chemistry Dept.
Washington State University
At 10:30 AM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi Folks-
>
>I'm looking into the possibility of buying a cyanide antidote kit for a lab
>that will be using K cyanide. Any recommendations for vendors? Does
>anyone know if the antidote must be administered by medical personnel, or
>is it OK for non-medical personnel to give an antidote in an emergency
>situation?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Dorian McMillan, Lab Manager
>Department of Biology
>College of Charleston
>Charleston, SC 29424
>McMillanD@CofC.edu
>843-953-4847
>
>*Opinions are my own, not my employer's*
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 11:34:31 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Helen B. Gerhard"
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
How much are amyl nitrate inhalants? One of the dangers listed on the MSDS
for Acetonitrile is cyanide poisoning. Would it be prudent to have these
inhalants where significant quantities of Acetonitrile are used? Do any
other companies using Acetonitrile have these inhalants?
Thanks!
Helen
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike hinz [SMTP:mhinz@WSU.EDU]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 10:44 AM
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
We offer amyl nitrite inhalants as an optional addition to the first
aid
kits in those labs using cyanides.
First we checked with the emergency room of the hospital to verify
that they
were prepared to handle cases of cyanide intoxication.
Next we got approval from campus medical personnel to use the amyl
nitrite
as a first aid measure.
We get the inhalants through the hospital pharmacy.
We include information on first aid for cyanide exposure in our
departmental
first aid and safety courses and provide a procedure card to be
placed in
the first aid kit with the inhalants. Two important items on the
procedure
card are -inform medical personnel of the intoxicating agent and
-inform
them that amyl nitrite treatment was used.
Hope this is of help.
Mike Hinz
Chemistry Dept.
Washington State University
At 10:30 AM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi Folks-
>
>I'm looking into the possibility of buying a cyanide antidote kit
for a lab
>that will be using K cyanide. Any recommendations for vendors?
Does
>anyone know if the antidote must be administered by medical
personnel, or
>is it OK for non-medical personnel to give an antidote in an
emergency
>situation?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Dorian McMillan, Lab Manager
>Department of Biology
>College of Charleston
>Charleston, SC 29424
>McMillanD@CofC.edu
>843-953-4847
>
>*Opinions are my own, not my employer's*
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 11:36:53 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Helen B. Gerhard"
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
One of the hazards listed on the MSDS is the possibility of oxygen build up
that can be ignited by a spark.
Thanks!
Helen
-----Original Message-----
From: Windows/ServerMail/Peter On Behalf Of Peter
Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 11:03 PM
To: 'LABSAFETY-L Discussion List'
Subject: RE: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
Kia Ora All
Other possible hazards to those already discussed.
1. Implosion of Dewars used to transport LN2 in-house. I
have used a couple of options - tape around the outside of the container to
further help contain any flying glass (when I was a student MANY years ago,
we used replacement Dewar inners, taped, with no outer cover to save money -
impressive when they implode, but we never had any cuts. T'wouldn't be
allowed nowadays)
2. If the bleed vent from the main cylinder should ice up,
there could be a pressure buildup.
3. I have also used small polystyrene containers to hold
LN2. Cheap, works OK though inside can become brittle. Loss of LN2 can be
high. May be safer than glass Dewars?
I have not been able to find any classification for
"Cryogenic Liquids" in any of the hazard classification systems I have
looked at (NZ, Australia, US, Europe). I think a classification is needed,
along with appropriate signage, etc, and I made submissions to a recent Govt
commission in NZ about this - hasn't been acted on.
Anyone got any thoughts on this - how can we get a
classification put in place? The stuff is certainly hazardous! We get liq
Ar delivered by tanker, and this does not have any signage which would be of
use if it was involved in a crash.
Peter Robinson PhD FNZIC
Environmental Division Manager
Hill Laboratories, Private Bag 3205, Hamilton, NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 7 858 2000 Fax: +64 7 858 2001
Email: peter@hill-labs.co.nz
----------
From: Scott M. Davis
Sent: Thursday, 7 January 1999 10:09 am
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
Hi folks!
We are considering the installation of a liquid
nitrogen bulk storage tank.
It is my experience that these are quite common at
Universities. Besides
the obvious hazards associated with ice build-up,
and severe frostbite from
improper handling of LN2, is anyone aware of any
unique hazards from these
units.
Many Thanx,
Scott Davis, CIH
UNC Charlotte Safety Office
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 11:22:18 -0800
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mike hinz
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The inhalants cost us about 30 cents apiece.
While it is possible to evolve HCN or CN- from acetonitrile, as in a fire or
some other violent decomposition scenario, (the same could be said for
burning plastics, for example), we have felt that the normal uses of ACN do
not have near the risk of CN intoxication associated with other cyanides
and have not routinely recommended the inhalants based on ACN use alone. Of
course any lab with any concern over cyanide intoxication is more than
welcome to stock the inhalants. We do not routinely stock the inhalants in
all kits because amyl nitrite is quite toxic in its own right and, (we don't
advertise this), has been known to be used to "get high" by various people
lacking in good sense.
Mike Hinz
Chemistry Dept.
Washington State University
At 11:34 AM 1/7/99 -0700, you wrote:
>How much are amyl nitrate inhalants? One of the dangers listed on the MSDS
>for Acetonitrile is cyanide poisoning. Would it be prudent to have these
>inhalants where significant quantities of Acetonitrile are used? Do any
>other companies using Acetonitrile have these inhalants?
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 11:08:46 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Teresa Robertson
Organization: CSU Bakersfield
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
Comments: cc: trobertson@csubak.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu,.internet writes:
>One of the hazards listed on the MSDS is the possibility of oxygen
>build up
>that can be ignited by a spark.
Let's expand and clarify that comment some - - - -
Flammability and Explosibility
Oxygen itself is nonflammable, but at concentrations
greater than 25% supports and vigorously accelerates the
combustion of flammable materials. Some materials
(including
metals) that are noncombustible in air will burn in the
presence
of oxygen.
Reactivity and Incompatibility
Oxygen is incompatible with combustible materials,
including many lubricants and elastomers. Oil, greases, and
other readily combustible substances should never be
allowed
to come in contact with O cylinders, valves, regulators,
and
fittings. Contact of liquid oxygen with many organic
substances
can lead to an explosion.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:35:59 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: "Wight, Hugh"
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Unfortunately most MSDSs for acetonitrile are misleading in their
omission of the hazards related to hepatic metabolism of acetonitrile
and other aliphatic nitriles and aliphatic thiocyantes into free
cyanide. Absorption of acetonitrile through the skin can cause a
delayed cyanosis that may occur shortly after exposure of several hours
later. The Department of Health and Human Services published a TSDR in
November 1991 related to cyanide toxicity that directly addresses this
hazard.
Any group that routinely uses these substances should strongly consider
having a cyanosis kit available (or their occupational health provider).
Hugh Wight
Manager of QA and Safety Officer
Aquila Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.
Framingham, MA
(508) 766-2733
hwight@aquilabio.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike hinz [SMTP:mhinz@WSU.EDU]
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 2:22 PM
> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
> Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
>
> The inhalants cost us about 30 cents apiece.
>
> While it is possible to evolve HCN or CN- from acetonitrile, as in a
> fire or
> some other violent decomposition scenario, (the same could be said for
> burning plastics, for example), we have felt that the normal uses of
> ACN do
> not have near the risk of CN intoxication associated with other
> cyanides
> and have not routinely recommended the inhalants based on ACN use
> alone. Of
> course any lab with any concern over cyanide intoxication is more than
> welcome to stock the inhalants. We do not routinely stock the
> inhalants in
> all kits because amyl nitrite is quite toxic in its own right and, (we
> don't
> advertise this), has been known to be used to "get high" by various
> people
> lacking in good sense.
>
> Mike Hinz
> Chemistry Dept.
> Washington State University
>
> At 11:34 AM 1/7/99 -0700, you wrote:
> >How much are amyl nitrate inhalants? One of the dangers listed on
> the MSDS
> >for Acetonitrile is cyanide poisoning. Would it be prudent to have
> these
> >inhalants where significant quantities of Acetonitrile are used? Do
> any
> >other companies using Acetonitrile have these inhalants?
> >
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:52:22 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
WE had them handy when we handled HCN, but I've never heard of them for
acetonitrile. I'd check with your medical consultant.
-----Original Message-----
From: Helen B. Gerhard
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Thursday, January 07, 1999 13:39
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
>How much are amyl nitrate inhalants? One of the dangers listed on the MSDS
>for Acetonitrile is cyanide poisoning. Would it be prudent to have these
>inhalants where significant quantities of Acetonitrile are used? Do any
>other companies using Acetonitrile have these inhalants?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Helen
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike hinz [SMTP:mhinz@WSU.EDU]
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 10:44 AM
> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
> Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
>
> We offer amyl nitrite inhalants as an optional addition to the
first
>aid
> kits in those labs using cyanides.
>
> First we checked with the emergency room of the hospital to verify
>that they
> were prepared to handle cases of cyanide intoxication.
>
> Next we got approval from campus medical personnel to use the amyl
>nitrite
> as a first aid measure.
>
> We get the inhalants through the hospital pharmacy.
>
> We include information on first aid for cyanide exposure in our
>departmental
> first aid and safety courses and provide a procedure card to be
>placed in
> the first aid kit with the inhalants. Two important items on the
>procedure
> card are -inform medical personnel of the intoxicating agent and
>-inform
> them that amyl nitrite treatment was used.
>
> Hope this is of help.
>
> Mike Hinz
> Chemistry Dept.
> Washington State University
>
> At 10:30 AM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hi Folks-
> >
> >I'm looking into the possibility of buying a cyanide antidote kit
>for a lab
> >that will be using K cyanide. Any recommendations for vendors?
>Does
> >anyone know if the antidote must be administered by medical
>personnel, or
> >is it OK for non-medical personnel to give an antidote in an
>emergency
> >situation?
> >
> >Thanks!
> >
> >Dorian McMillan, Lab Manager
> >Department of Biology
> >College of Charleston
> >Charleston, SC 29424
> >McMillanD@CofC.edu
> >843-953-4847
> >
> >*Opinions are my own, not my employer's*
> >
> >
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:54:08 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Right! Wasn't there something about using them for better sex?
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike hinz
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Thursday, January 07, 1999 14:23
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
>The inhalants cost us about 30 cents apiece.
>
>While it is possible to evolve HCN or CN- from acetonitrile, as in a fire
or
>some other violent decomposition scenario, (the same could be said for
>burning plastics, for example), we have felt that the normal uses of ACN do
>not have near the risk of CN intoxication associated with other cyanides
>and have not routinely recommended the inhalants based on ACN use alone.
Of
>course any lab with any concern over cyanide intoxication is more than
>welcome to stock the inhalants. We do not routinely stock the inhalants in
>all kits because amyl nitrite is quite toxic in its own right and, (we
don't
>advertise this), has been known to be used to "get high" by various people
>lacking in good sense.
>
>Mike Hinz
>Chemistry Dept.
>Washington State University
>
> At 11:34 AM 1/7/99 -0700, you wrote:
>>How much are amyl nitrate inhalants? One of the dangers listed on the
MSDS
>>for Acetonitrile is cyanide poisoning. Would it be prudent to have these
>>inhalants where significant quantities of Acetonitrile are used? Do any
>>other companies using Acetonitrile have these inhalants?
>>
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:56:10 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
And the O2 builds up in liq. N2 because the air condenses and N2 evaporates,
leading to high O2?
-----Original Message-----
From: Teresa Robertson
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Thursday, January 07, 1999 15:10
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
>LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu,.internet writes:
>>One of the hazards listed on the MSDS is the possibility of oxygen
>>build up
>>that can be ignited by a spark.
>
>Let's expand and clarify that comment some - - - -
>
>
>Flammability and Explosibility
>
> Oxygen itself is nonflammable, but at concentrations
> greater than 25% supports and vigorously accelerates the
> combustion of flammable materials. Some materials
>(including
> metals) that are noncombustible in air will burn in the
>presence
> of oxygen.
>
> Reactivity and Incompatibility
>
> Oxygen is incompatible with combustible materials,
> including many lubricants and elastomers. Oil, greases, and
> other readily combustible substances should never be
>allowed
> to come in contact with O cylinders, valves, regulators,
>and
> fittings. Contact of liquid oxygen with many organic
>substances
> can lead to an explosion.
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:57:53 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bob Burns
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'd refer to the health provider. A CHO certificate does Not authorize us
to practice medicine.
-----Original Message-----
From: Wight, Hugh
To: LABSAFETY-L@siu.edu
Date: Thursday, January 07, 1999 15:38
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
>Unfortunately most MSDSs for acetonitrile are misleading in their
>omission of the hazards related to hepatic metabolism of acetonitrile
>and other aliphatic nitriles and aliphatic thiocyantes into free
>cyanide. Absorption of acetonitrile through the skin can cause a
>delayed cyanosis that may occur shortly after exposure of several hours
>later. The Department of Health and Human Services published a TSDR in
>November 1991 related to cyanide toxicity that directly addresses this
>hazard.
>
>Any group that routinely uses these substances should strongly consider
>having a cyanosis kit available (or their occupational health provider).
>
>Hugh Wight
>Manager of QA and Safety Officer
>Aquila Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.
>Framingham, MA
>(508) 766-2733
>hwight@aquilabio.com
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mike hinz [SMTP:mhinz@WSU.EDU]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 2:22 PM
>> To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
>> Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
>>
>> The inhalants cost us about 30 cents apiece.
>>
>> While it is possible to evolve HCN or CN- from acetonitrile, as in a
>> fire or
>> some other violent decomposition scenario, (the same could be said for
>> burning plastics, for example), we have felt that the normal uses of
>> ACN do
>> not have near the risk of CN intoxication associated with other
>> cyanides
>> and have not routinely recommended the inhalants based on ACN use
>> alone. Of
>> course any lab with any concern over cyanide intoxication is more than
>> welcome to stock the inhalants. We do not routinely stock the
>> inhalants in
>> all kits because amyl nitrite is quite toxic in its own right and, (we
>> don't
>> advertise this), has been known to be used to "get high" by various
>> people
>> lacking in good sense.
>>
>> Mike Hinz
>> Chemistry Dept.
>> Washington State University
>>
>> At 11:34 AM 1/7/99 -0700, you wrote:
>> >How much are amyl nitrate inhalants? One of the dangers listed on
>> the MSDS
>> >for Acetonitrile is cyanide poisoning. Would it be prudent to have
>> these
>> >inhalants where significant quantities of Acetonitrile are used? Do
>> any
>> >other companies using Acetonitrile have these inhalants?
>> >
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 16:03:26 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Don Abramowitz
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>One of the hazards listed on the MSDS is the possibility of oxygen
>>build up that can be ignited by a spark...
A mechanism I know of for oxygen build-up is the condensation of oxygen
from the air to liquid form in the presence of the big chill from the
nitrogen. It's a worry with liquid nitrogen-filled cold traps used to
capture solvents from vacuum lines and the like. Can get an interesting
mix of solvent and oxygen that way.
Does anyone know of any other context where oxygen build-up occurs with
liquid nitrogen, or for that matter, of a way to prevent the formation of
liquid oxygen in the above traps?
thanks,
Don
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Donald Abramowitz, CIH
Occupational and Environmental Safety Officer
Bryn Mawr College | Swarthmore College
101 N. Merion Avenue | 500 College Avenue
Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 | Swarthmore PA 19081
Telephone: (610) 526-5166 | (610) 328-8564
Fax: (610) 526-7499 | (610) 328-7837
e-mail: dabramo1@swarthmore.edu
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 13:30:56 -0800
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Mike hinz
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Because oxygen condenses at a higher temperature than nitrogen one can
selectively pull oxygen out of the air. LOX has been found to drip off of
pipes used to transport LN2 so, for example, LOX may drip onto asphalt on a
hot day placing a lot of oxidizer next to a fuel.
The key to using cold traps is to use dry ice/acetone or whatever as
long as you stay above the condensation temp for O2.
Mike Hinz
Chemistry Dept.
Washington State University
At 04:03 PM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>>One of the hazards listed on the MSDS is the possibility of oxygen
>>>build up that can be ignited by a spark...
>
>A mechanism I know of for oxygen build-up is the condensation of oxygen
>from the air to liquid form in the presence of the big chill from the
>nitrogen. It's a worry with liquid nitrogen-filled cold traps used to
>capture solvents from vacuum lines and the like. Can get an interesting
>mix of solvent and oxygen that way.
>
>Does anyone know of any other context where oxygen build-up occurs with
>liquid nitrogen, or for that matter, of a way to prevent the formation of
>liquid oxygen in the above traps?
>
> thanks,
> Don
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Donald Abramowitz, CIH
> Occupational and Environmental Safety Officer
>
> Bryn Mawr College | Swarthmore College
> 101 N. Merion Avenue | 500 College Avenue
> Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 | Swarthmore PA 19081
>
>Telephone: (610) 526-5166 | (610) 328-8564
>Fax: (610) 526-7499 | (610) 328-7837
>e-mail: dabramo1@swarthmore.edu
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 13:51:09 -0800
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Ray Campbell
Subject: Re: Liquid Nitrogen Storage
In-Reply-To: <199901072130.NAA09822@cheetah.it.wsu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You will also get a very rapid and interesting reaction if you drop an
object on the asphalt.
Ray Campbell REA CCHO
310-257-1080
At 01:30 PM 1/7/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Because oxygen condenses at a higher temperature than nitrogen one can
>selectively pull oxygen out of the air. LOX has been found to drip off of
>pipes used to transport LN2 so, for example, LOX may drip onto asphalt on a
>hot day placing a lot of oxidizer next to a fuel.
> The key to using cold traps is to use dry ice/acetone or whatever as
>long as you stay above the condensation temp for O2.
>
>Mike Hinz
>Chemistry Dept.
>Washington State University
>
>At 04:03 PM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>>>One of the hazards listed on the MSDS is the possibility of oxygen
>>>>build up that can be ignited by a spark...
>>
>>A mechanism I know of for oxygen build-up is the condensation of oxygen
>>from the air to liquid form in the presence of the big chill from the
>>nitrogen. It's a worry with liquid nitrogen-filled cold traps used to
>>capture solvents from vacuum lines and the like. Can get an interesting
>>mix of solvent and oxygen that way.
>>
>>Does anyone know of any other context where oxygen build-up occurs with
>>liquid nitrogen, or for that matter, of a way to prevent the formation of
>>liquid oxygen in the above traps?
>>
>> thanks,
>> Don
>>
>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> Donald Abramowitz, CIH
>> Occupational and Environmental Safety Officer
>>
>> Bryn Mawr College | Swarthmore College
>> 101 N. Merion Avenue | 500 College Avenue
>> Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 | Swarthmore PA 19081
>>
>>Telephone: (610) 526-5166 | (610) 328-8564
>>Fax: (610) 526-7499 | (610) 328-7837
>>e-mail: dabramo1@swarthmore.edu
>>
>>
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 10:41:54 +1300
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Tony Haggerty
Subject: Re: Toxicity Data
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'm no biochemist Jim but the end result can be fatal. All poisons kill by
different mechanisms and my point is that the different sensitivities need
to be borne in mind.
You could say that LD 50s are of no value at all if you are a "canary"
Cheers
Tony
PS Can someone tell me why the question on the safety of bulk storage in
10,000 litre tanks of Nitrogen has come down to how to carry a Dewar Flask??
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:52:56 -0600
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Hiram Patterson
Subject: Cyanide Antidote Lists
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I have a question regarding the effectiveness of amyl nitrate for treating
cyanide poisoning. In my early military years, in order to treat soldiers
exposed to blood agents, you broke open ampoules of amyl nitrate and placed
them inside the soldier's gas mask. However this is now discontinued. This
were either safety concerns or else it was ineffective treatment. Any ideas
of effectiveness amyl nitrate in the cyanide treatment kits?
Hiram Patterson
Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:40:15 -0500
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
From: Bill Schultz
Subject: Re[2]: cyanide antidote kits
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I think this issue of antidote availability and use is heading towards some
dangerous ground. Is administering and antidote first aid or does it
constitute medical treatment? Is there any harm that can be caused by
administering the antidote?
With the speed of response to most emergency situations by trained paramedics,
who usually have radio contact with a hospital emergency room, I feel the use
of antidotes should be strictly a medical decision.
A synonym for Acetonitrile is Methyl Cyanide. I was involved in the clean up
of an acetonitrile spill (approximately 1 gallon) in a laboratory. One of the
concerns of the paramedics on scene was that cyanide poisoning is a possible
effect of exposure that may not show up for six to eight hours. For this
reason the scene commander would not let any of the personnel who were
potentially exposed leave the scene without clearance from a physician.
Bill Schultz
USAMRIID
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
Author: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List at Internet-Mail
Date: 1/7/99 11:34 AM
How much are amyl nitrate inhalants? One of the dangers listed on the MSDS
for Acetonitrile is cyanide poisoning. Would it be prudent to have these
inhalants where significant quantities of Acetonitrile are used? Do any
other companies using Acetonitrile have these inhalants?
Thanks!
Helen
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike hinz [SMTP:mhinz@WSU.EDU]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 10:44 AM
To: LABSAFETY-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: Re: cyanide antidote kits
We offer amyl nitrite inhalants as an optional addition to the first
aid
kits in those labs using cyanides.
First we checked with the emergency room of the hospital to verify
that they
were prepared to handle cases of cyanide intoxication.
Next we got approval from campus medical personnel to use the amyl
nitrite
as a first aid measure.
We get the inhalants through the hospital pharmacy.
We include information on first aid for cyanide exposure in our
departmental
first aid and safety courses and provide a procedure card to be
placed in
the first aid kit with the inhalants. Two important items on the
procedure
card are -inform medical personnel of the intoxicating agent and
-inform
them that amyl nitrite treatment was used.
Hope this is of help.
Mike Hinz
Chemistry Dept.
Washington State University
At 10:30 AM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi Folks-
>
>I'm looking into the possibility of buying a cyanide antidote kit
for a lab
>that will be using K cyanide. Any recommendations for vendors?
Does
>anyone know if the antidote must be administered by medical
personnel, or
>is it OK for non-medical personnel to give an antidote in an
emergency
>situation?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Dorian McMillan, Lab Manager
>Department of Biology
>College of Charleston
>Charleston, SC 29424
>McMillanD@CofC.edu
>843-953-4847
>
>*Opinions are my own, not my employer's*
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 13:31:27 -0700
Reply-To: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List
Sender: LABSAFETY-L Discussion List |