Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:59:57 -0500
Reply-To: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: List Moderator <ecgrants**At_Symbol_Here**UVM.EDU>
Subject: 4 more on MSDS's and DOT

From: david.iacovone**At_Symbol_Here**
Date: January 15, 2010 2:48:08 PM EST
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] DOT information from MSDSs

It has been my experience, speaking as someone with a hazardous 
materials and hazardous waste response background, that whether or not 
it requires DOT placarding is dependent upon volume.  Many MSDSs are 
deficient in this area because some are materials that are usually 
shipped in small quantities.  The DOT guidebook and IATA regs are better 
sources for shipping info.  Also, Russ is correct in this instance.  
Don't rely upon MSDSs for shipping requirements.  It has also been my 
experience that manufacturer's don't always tell you everything, 
especially in the case of trade name products, unless pressed in 
emergency situations.

From: "Phil Anderson" 
Date: January 15, 2010 2:33:19 PM EST
Subject: RE: [DCHAS-L] DOT information from MSDSs

As someone who must write MSDS's (as well as do a million other things) 
I note your overall displeasure with the MSDS situation.
The MSDS is/was meant to provide safety information for the persons who 
handle a chemical, or chemical mixture.  Any use of it for other duties 
is an extention of the MSDS beyond where it was originally intended.  
There are several layers of data that I must absorb and distill and 
otherwise get into the computer before I can get it to spit out an MSD. 

If the MSDS were to be a complete manual for the handling of a chemical, 
this would not be enough, but it isn't (probably a Master's or Ph.D may 
be adequate, but also not likely).  What an MSDS is, is a snapshot of 
the data and the material.  It is limited to the available data, and it 
is always changing.  The problems arise when the data is conflicted or 
old data is viewed with the same "rose colored glasses" that modern 
researchers seem to enjoy. 
Our task, should we be foolish enough to accept it is to be chemists, 
physicians, etc.  The best thing we can do is to buy our materials 
(either the rarities found in acedemia or the 5000 gallon tank trucks 
found in industrial use) from the people who provide adequate MSDS's.  
Look before leaping!  And when we turn down a supplier for this reason, 
tell him!  Most chemical suppliers in this country are honest, but 
generally overworked.  If something is wrong on his MSDS that causes him 
to lose sales, most will fix it, IF he is aware of the discrepancy!
Some of the data desired may not be reasonably provided on a brief MSDS. 
 Some of it may be too new or too unproven (or even wrong) to be 
included.  Remember- these things are NOT peer reviewed papers on the 
safety that one may want.  But the writers, in general, should be 
A reason that I only last year started to include DOT provisions on the 
MSDS I write, is in anticipation of the adoption of some sort of 15 part 
format when the US Congress permits it as I am going to retire, probably 
before this becomes a final regulation.  The DOT changes their shipping 
class breakdowns every so often, which is why I did not include them 
before.  I just hope that DOT does not change something that affects the 
classing I use now.  (As they did about 20+ years ago, when they changed 
the flash point for Combustible/Flammable from 100 F. to 140F.)
Had to "rant", sorry! 
Phil Anderson
Technical Director
Aqua  Science, Inc.
From: "Larry D. McLouth" 
Date: January 15, 2010 12:40:19 PM EST
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] MSDS source?

Hi Katherine,

Visit the MSDS HyperGlossary...(use Google search).  This has a bunch of 
free MSDS sites and links to other safety related items, including OSHA 
regs and proposed standards.  I believe this is hosted by the Safety 
Emporium which sells lab and safety supplies.

You may be interested in the FAQs - there you'll find a lot of info 
about MSDSs, the regulatory drives and OSHA interpretations.

Good Luck!


From: harsimran kaur 
Date: January 15, 2010 12:33:00 PM EST
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] MSDS source?

In college for chem lab, we were told to use SRI  Hazard MSDS Index and 
I have been using the same ever since. Here's the link:

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.