Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:10:25 -0700
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: Eric Clark <erclark**At_Symbol_Here**PH.LACOUNTY.GOV>
Subject: Re: Emergency Action Plan for science labs
Comments: To: Don Wanamaker
In-Reply-To: <2A30C986C0BD44A0A81AB9A0F2A0F58C**At_Symbol_Here**EML102>
Maybe you're right, Don.  These things all look like car batteries - and 
the USP chassis is called a "Battery Cabinet" and they're 12V DC devices 
containing lead and sulfuric acid, and I could probably use one to jump 
start my car if I had to (looks like a duck).  But the Fire Dept asked me 
to include the lead and sulfuric acid on the substance inventory, and I 
did because it was easier to add it to the list than to challenge them on 
Here's what they said, and it made sense to me:  Firefighters bring up 
that CR2K database on a laptop in the truck on the way out to a fire so 
the scene commander knows what they're up against when the arrive.  
Firefighters just don't just automatically run into burning buildings 
anymore, and when they do they want to know what's in there.  
And now that Monona said these things might flame up unexpectedly - but 
very rarely (geeesh!) ... well, it seems like reporting that material is 
an even better idea now.   

>>> Don Wanamaker  7/12/2010 10:49 AM >>>
Wouldn't the Uninterupted Power Supply as described be excluded from 
compliance with Community Right To Know requirements since the batteries 
consumer products and/or articles as defined by OSHA?  This question 
up often for quantities above certain thresholds and becomes very onerous 
the local jurisdiction also requires a Risk Management Plan if over 
threshold quantity.  If there's no risk to the community if one of 
batteries leaked, why not exclude it from CRTK reporting if, in fact, 
batteries meet either definition?
Don Wanamaker
Environmental Management, Ltd.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric Clark" 
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Emergency Action Plan for science labs

Most emergency power generators typically don't service the entire 
just the critical systems, and those are the ones with the red plugs or 
otherwise hard-wired into the building grid.  Even that might not 
for your needs, a typical emergency power generator requires 6 or 7 
before it actually restores power.  But as we all know, that kind of 
interruption can disrupt hundreds of sensitive automated laboratory 
that took hours to set up.  As Arnold would say:  Beeeg Problem (especially
if you have insufficient samples for re-runs!).
That's where the Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) comes in.  It's 
a bank of several dozen continually-charging car batteries that will 
sufficient continuous AC power for 10 - 15 seconds to ultra-critical 
until the emergency power generator kicks in.  And there are no moving 
parts.  There are lots of different kinds out there.  We happen to use 
Eaton Powerware 9390 - actually two of them, set up side by side.
One more thing about the UPS.  Don't forget to report the lead and 
acid on the annual Community Right To Know forms AND tell the local 
department about them and show them where they are!

Eric Clark, MS, CCHO, CHMM
Safety & Compliance Officer
Los Angeles County Public Health Laboratory

>>> "Schmidt-Nebril, Kathleen"  7/8/2010 5:34 PM 
My university recently was hit with a four day power outage due to 
storms.  Our science building is recently new and has a back up 
however none of the main lab instruments or equipment were backed up to 
Hoods, lights and ventilation were.  In the end we are looking at a 
insurance claim and are now trying to prepare  an action plan for each 
our labs in the event we go through something like this again.  I am the 
for the department and was asked to put this together.  Does anyone 
what OSHA standard, if any, I should be looking at for this?  They want 
incorporate a "what to do" list for example if none of the scientists 
around someone from maintenance could follow it to turn off sensitive 
equipment in our absence.  My thought on that is would we need to train 
document  anyone who might have to respond and use our action list?


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.