From: NEAL LANGERMAN <neal**At_Symbol_Here**>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] GHS query-markers
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:00:09 -0800
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: 014001d00444$307bc790$917356b0$**At_Symbol_Here**
In-Reply-To <8D1D2529D775F60-81C-454EC**At_Symbol_Here**>

Monona -

Don't repeal it - it is a cash cow for consultants. The definition of who qualifies effectively insures the individual against E&O claims; love it.


However, I got out of certifying when the "certification farms" came into existence. Michael's, Art Barn, etc love those companies and certainly keep them in business!






The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.


ACSafety has a new address:



PO Box 152329


011(619) 990-4908 (phone, 24/7)


We no longer support FAX.


 Please contact me before sending any packages or courier delivery.  The address for those items is:

5340 Caminito Cachorro

San Diego CA 92105



From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU] On Behalf Of Monona Rossol
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] GHS query-markers


Oh dang.  I was one of the idiot activists that helped to get ASTM D-4236 into the Federal Hazardous Substances Act for art materials.  And I have now called for it's repeal.  It is worse than nothing they way it has been interpreted by the toxicologists who are paid either directly or indirectly by the manufacturers to certify products as nontoxic or safe.


Anyone interested in why they should NEVER believe an art material label can contact me off the forum and I'll pdf detailed information about this dumb law.




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: Jeffrey Lewin <jclewin**At_Symbol_Here**MTU.EDU>
Sent: Wed, Nov 19, 2014 3:40 pm
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] GHS query-markers

From the MSDS:


"NewellRubbermaid, Inc (Sanford L.P.) is a member of The Art and Creative Materials Institute, Inc. This product is certified by the Institute to

be labeled in accordance with the voluntary chronic hazard labeling standard ASTM D-4236 and is labeled with the AP Non Toxic Seal.

Products bearing the AP Approved Product Seal of The Art and Creative Materials Institute, Inc. are certified in a program of toxicological

evaluation by a medical expert, subject to review by the Institute Toxicology Advisory Board, to contain no materials in sufficient quantities to be

toxic or injurious to humans, or to cause acute toxicity or chronic health problems [bold my emphasis]."


So would that put it in the category of "non-hazardous" and not fall under the guidelines:


From Jeff Tenny's quote: 


"Employees who are required to work with hazardous chemicals [Bold, my emphasis] in a manner that results in a duration and frequency of exposure greater than what a normal consumer would experience have a right to know about the properties of those hazardous chemicals."


The original MSDS:





On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Jeff Tenney <Jeff.Tenney**At_Symbol_Here**> wrote:

Depends on use. Under Hazcom:


Do you need to keep MSDSs for commercial products such as "Windex" and "White-Out"?


OSHA does not require that MSDSs be provided to purchasers of household consumer products when the products are used in the workplace in the same manner that a consumer would use them, i.e.; where the duration and frequency of use (and therefore exposure) is not greater than what the typical consumer would experience. This exemption in OSHA's regulation is based, however, not upon the chemical manufacturer's intended use of his product, but upon how it actually is used in the workplace. Employees who are required to work with hazardous chemicals in a manner that results in a duration and frequency of exposure greater than what a normal consumer would experience have a right to know about the properties of those hazardous chemicals.


Reference Interpretation and Compliance Letters:

=E2- Provision of MSDSs for consumer products used in the workplace. [1/9/90]

=E2- Applicability of the HCS to office workers and copy machine operators. [3/31/89]

=E2- Application of the HCS MSDS requirements to distributors selling hazardous chemicals to consumers and employers. [5/16/90]






From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU] On Behalf Of George D. McCallion
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 2:12 PM
Subject: [DCHAS-L] GHS query-markers


Dear DCHAS Staff,


Would any members know if, in fact, that markers (i.e., Sharpies) are classified under the GHS system?


If yes/no, can a reference be provided?


Thank you in advance.



George D. McCallion
124 Magnolia Court
Collegeville, PA 19426
Voice: 610.888.2436
Email: medchem**At_Symbol_Here**
"If you fail to plan, then you plan to fail"



Jeff Lewin

Departmental Laboratory Supervisor

Biological Sciences

Michigan Technological University

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.