From: Monona Rossol <actsnyc**At_Symbol_Here**>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Basic Laboratory Skills
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 17:20:21 -0400
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: 8D14E51ED48A0AC-1B0C-677B3**At_Symbol_Here**
In-Reply-To <009801cf7f98$e4d20780$ae761680$**At_Symbol_Here**>

Peter, I couldn't agree more.  MSDSs were developed as part of the hazard communication standard for protection of workers.  There is information there like the NFPA diamonds that are helpful for responders, but the primary aim is for workers, their representatives, and for occupational physicians treating workers with exposure problems.
The SDSs are only different because they are patterned after the Globally Harmonized System of Safety Data Sheets developed by the UN and adopted in 2006 by the EU and now by most other industrialized countries.  The US has to switch to this system or we can no longer export to most other countries who demand this SDS.  The EU won't accept MSDSs for imports after 2015.
OSHA never is able to institute new or significantly amended regulations.  But industry will not contest this change because we are left with no choice.
Monona Rossol, M.S., M.F.A., Industrial Hygienist
President:  Arts, Crafts & Theater Safety, Inc.
Safety Officer: Local USA829, IATSE
181 Thompson St., #23
New York, NY 10012     212-777-0062

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Zavon <pzavon**At_Symbol_Here**ROCHESTER.RR.COM>
Sent: Tue, Jun 3, 2014 10:33 pm
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Basic Laboratory Skills

On Monday, June 02, 2014 Monique Wilhelm said to the DCHAS-L Discussion List, in 

>Previously, they would teach them MSDSs, but local industry doesn=E2=80™t care about 
>and want more of the others for lab workers, which makes sense as the MSDSs are 
written for responders.) 
>to determine chemical hazards and signs of exposure-

Any SDS (MSDS) that is written primarily for responders is improperly written.  
Now, many will agree that a good many SDS are improperly written, and some parts 
of the SDS are for first responders, but that is no reason to throw them out 
entirely as a lab tool.

The SDS is the second major source of information about the material they 
describe, after the label on the bottle.  It should have information that can be 
applied to preparation for use and prevention of excessive exposure, as well as 
thoughts about what can go wrong and how to deal with that before the first 
responders arrive.  It won't have everything, but students should understand how 
these documents are structured and how to extract useful information from them, 
as well as how to recognize the ones that are junk. (I hope the fraction that is 
junk will be reduced as Hazcom 2012 comes further into effect.)

If your local industries really don't care about SDSs, then they have only one 
or two hazardous materials and are sharing information with their employees in 
some other way, or they are misguided and possibly headed for a bureaucratic 
fall with OSHA.

Peter Zavon, CIH
Penfield, NY


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.