Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:57:41 EST
Reply-To: ACTSNYC**At_Symbol_Here**CS.COM
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: ACTSNYC**At_Symbol_Here**CS.COM
Subject: Re: Visorgogs
Comments: To: Labsafe**At_Symbol_Here**
Hmmmmm.   Who do you think is on the Z87.1 committee?   Some of them are the
very manufacturers you want the committee to prevail upon!  And this is
something they don't want to do.  It isn't that they haven't thought of it.  They
obviously know this would be easy for consumers and they are not interested in
providing it.

Read the list of committee members at the beginning of the standard.

Monona Rossol - (been around a LONG TIME, and sit on many standard setting
committees.  Usually I am the only consumer oriented person in the room.)

In a message dated 11/9/04 8:14:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, Labsafe**At_Symbol_Here**
> Depending on how strongly you feel about this, you might want to share your
> thoughts (and mine) with the Z-87.1 committee at ASSE in Skokie, IL.   ...
> Jim
> PS.  No one is suggesting that there is no labeling.  The solution is
> simple.  The Z-87.1 committee should ask the manufacturer to put a letter (from the
> selection chart) after the numbers to indicate which type of device it is.
> An elegant solution (if I do say so myself)!

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.