DCHAS-L Discussion List Archive
Previous by Date:
Subject: Re: Abbreviations
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 15:53:23 -0400
Author: Andrew Gross
|
|
Next by Date:
Subject: Re: Abbreviations
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 17:29:25 -0700
Author: Michael Cooper
|
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 15:54:49 -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: "Long, Don" <don.long**At_Symbol_Here**WGINT.COM>
Subject: Re: Abbreviations
In-Reply-To: A<4BB5DA49.1C4E.0091.0**At_Symbol_Here**ph.lacounty.gov>
Brings up another interesting point - labeling of containers. As one guy
pointed out, everyone in his lab may know what "128" is, but are we
labeling our containers IAW 29 CFR 1910.1200 (HazCom Standard)? The
whole point of labeling containers is to convey possible hazards. If we
use the same abbreviations that we are using in documents on our
containers, are we maintaining the spirit and intent of the standard ?
Don A. Long
STS, CAIH
Southwest Research Institute Laboratory
Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal Facility
PO Box 20130
White Hall, AR 71612
870-541-4930
-----Original Message-----
From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU]On Behalf Of
Eric Clark
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 1:50 PM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Abbreviations
Good point, Bradley. The firemen who inspected the lab recently wanted
an NFPA fire diamond with "0,0,0" on the 600-gallon DI water tank, I can
understand that. Of course they don't care about the DI wash bottles on
the bench (although they did notice the one that was labeled HIV - for
the lab section).
Our Chemical Hygiene Plan has a list of lab-specific acronyms and
abbreviations right up front. But that still doesn't really solve that
shorthand labeling problem we see from time to time. [But then everyone
in the lab seems to know what a container that's labeled "128" is,
right? (it's vesphene diluted down 1:128).] Thanks to this discussion
string, I'll be creating reagent-specific label templates for things we
make up all the time - like the profiled hazardous waste streams. It's
a complex field folks. (Hope you don't mind that I used a few undefined
acronyms.)
http://www.acronymslist.com/
Top Five:
Chemistry Acronyms (14383)
NASA Acronyms (8940)
Uncategorized Acronyms (5754)
Atmospheric Research Center Acronyms (4622)
Text Language Acronyms And Abbreviations (1855)
Eric Clark, MS, CCHO, CHMM
Safety & Compliance Officer
Los Angeles County Public Health Lab
>>> Bradley Harris 4/2/2010 8:15 AM >>>
Using Abbreviations should be dependent on several items, including
hazard levels, and the amount of chemical. For example, a small
container with non hazardous chemicals used in a small laboratory could
have an abbreviation. If there is a gallon, or 55 gallons of the same
chemical the container should have a full label.
teaching abbreviations in school seems to undermine the information
given from the full chemical name.
Brad
On Apr 1, 2010, at 9:20 PM, Alan Hall wrote:
> Use simple chemical formulas: NaCN, KCN, Ca2Cn2, etc, I won't argue:
use abbreviations that might kill somebody, BAD idea.
>
> Whoever has to walk into a HAZMAT incident doesn't have time to look
for a bunch of abbreviations. Lives may be on the line. The AHLS
Course stresses some of that. Those who have not worn Level A or Level
B might consider that others have and will continue to due so. Bad
labels, some of us might be invoked, whether needed or not.
>
> Alan
> ahalltoxic**At_Symbol_Here**msn.com
>
>
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 19:50:48 -0400
> From: JAKSAFETY**At_Symbol_Here**AOL.COM
> Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Abbreviations
> To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
>
> One of the major problems is going to be distinguishing TLAs from
FLAs. ... Jim
>
> **********************************
> James A. Kaufman, Ph.D.
> Kaufman & Associates
> 101 Oak Street, Wellesley, MA 02482
> 508-574-6264 Fax: 508-647-0062
> Res: 781-237-1335
>
>
>
>
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post
