What Have We Learned & Where Are We Going: Post-Settlement in the University of California
Organizers: D. Decker, J. Palmer
Organizers: D. Decker, J. Palmer
At the Spring, 2017 ACS national meeting, the Divisions of Chemical Information and Chemical Health and Safety co-sponsored a program on Information Flow in Environmental Health and Safety. The symposia presented a variety of use cases for chemical information tools that range from lab-specific to very general. Links to the PDF versions of the presentations are provided below.
Technical presentations from the March, 2017 national American Chemical Safety meeting.
At the Spring, 2017 ACS national meeting, CHAS members Ralph Stuart and Sammye Sigmann made presentations in the Division of Chemical Education technical program on topics related to undergraduate research safety. Sammye’s presentation was entitled:
Integrating Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment into Course-based Undergraduate Research (CURE)
Ralph’s (which Sammye co-authored) was entitled:
Providing laboratory safety education to REU audiences.
In addition, they co-authored a poster for Sci Mix. An overview of the poster and a link to it are provided below.
In 2016, the ACS Division of Chemical Education (CHED) updated their “Safety Guidelines for Chemical Demonstrations”. The Guidelines are available at the CHED web site. Look at DCHAS web site to see how these guidelines align with the “5 Key Questions”.
This poster provides a quick overview of the five key safety questions that anyone planning chemical demonstrations or experiments should ask and answer prior to work. It is also important to be aware that local jurisdictions may require more extensive planning for some demonstrations and so for everyone’s safety – check with the local Fire Department for help with planning your demonstration.
The Five Key Questions are:
Sigmann, S.; Stuart, R.
Assessing Risk: Five Key Questions for Safe Research and Demos. inChemistry Magazine, 2016, September/October, 6-9.
The Editor’s Spotlight for the March / April 2017 issue of the Journal of Chemical Health and Safety is shining on:
An exposure assessment of desktop 3D printing by Tracy L. Zontek, Burton R. Ogle, John T. Jankovic, and Scott M. Hollenbeck
A preliminary hazard analysis of 3D printing included process monitoring in two working environments; a small well ventilated materials development laboratory with a Makerbot printer (polylactic acid filament) and a poorly ventilated lab, home-like in terms of room size and ventilation with a Da Vinci XYZ printer (acrylonitrile- butadiene-styrene).
Particle number, size and mass concentration were measured within the printer enclosures, breathing zone, and room simultaneously. Number concentrations were elevated above background typically in the 103 – 105 particles/cm3 range. During printing >99% of the aerosol number concentration was within the ultrafine particulate (UFP) and nanoscale size range. Condensed aerosol emissions from the Da Vinci XYZ printer was examined by Fourier infra-red spectroscopy and suggested isocyanic acid and n-decane as two possible chemical components. Light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy with energy dispersive analysis by X-ray identified individual and aggregated particles highly suggestive of combustion, accompanied by a variety of metallic elements.
Adverse health effects associated with 3D printing related to chemical vapor off-gassing in well ventilated space appears to be low. At this point the significance of ultrafine particle emission is under growing suspicion in its relationship to inflammatory, pulmonary, and cardiovascular effects. Preliminary recommendations for particulate control developed from this analysis are based on good industrial hygiene practice rather than compelling adverse health effects.
You can download the complete article here. An exposure assessment of desktop 3D printing
On January 31 in Boston, EPA headquarters staff gave a 6 hour presentation on the new RCRA generator requirements promulgated last November with specific emphasis on how these changes might impact laboratory waste generators. The staff acknowledged that there were specific issues raised by these changes that might have different impacts on laboratory settings compared to other generators. For example, their presentation indicates that the average RCRA hazardous waste generator has between 1 and 5 waste streams that they typically generate.
Attendees at this meeting were from around the country and had many questions about how these rule changes would be applied in the laboratory setting. The answers to many of these questions will depend on how specific states choose to implement and enforce these changes.
A pdf version of the powerpoint file (169 slides) for this presentation can be downloaded here. The symposium was recorded; contact Ralph Stuart at firstname.lastname@example.org for more information about accessing this information.
At the September CSHEMA regional meeting, three DCHAS members (Gail Hall of Boston College, Zehra Schneider-Graham of the University of Massachusetts Boston, and Ralph Stuart of Keene State College) participated in a panel discussion about how Environmental Health and Safety Departments can best support laboratory safety culture through their safety training efforts. The presentations discussed the challenge of developing training programs that reflected the institutional culture while also addressing regulatory requirements.
Three key lessons from the Lab-XL project with the EPA were highlighted:
In addition to describing approaches to this issue in the undergraduate and graduate laboratory settings, the panel presented the results of a DCHAS/CSHEMA survey of safety education efforts. PDF versions of the presentations and the survey results are provided here:
Developing Safety Culture Education at a PUI Campus, Ralph Stuart
Survey on Lab Safety Culture Education on Campus, Zehra Schneider-Graham
Safety Culture Education Survey Results Data (in PDF) (if you are interested in these data in Excel format for further exploration, contact Ralph Stuart at email@example.com).
Also note this related article from the Journal of Chemical Education on Using the Universal Design for Learning Approach in Science Laboratories To Minimize Student Stress
The links below provide access to risk assessment presentations and tools for teaching laboratories and chemistry demonstrations presented at the 2016 Biennial Conference on Chemical Education (BCCE). The presentations were made by Ralph Stuart of Keene State College and Sammye Sigmann of Appalachian State University. These documents are still in development and they would appreciate questions and comments about ways to improve them.
Samuella B. Sigmann, NRCC-CHO Appalachian State University
Irene Cesa Flinn Scientific (ret.) and
Monique Wilham University of Michigan – Flint
Presentation: Chemical Demonstrations: Assessing Hazard and Risk