I suggest 'strive to do their work in ways that minimize negative effects on the environment.'
Nothing is completely 'safe' but we can always minimize the risk or potential hazard.
I am posting this to the entire ListServe as well.To all - I am currently in contact with CEPA and it looks like I will be given an opportunity to speak about this at the CEPA open meeting (for those of you who aren't versed in ACS Speak - this is the Committee on Economic and Professional Affairs.)My person opinion is that it is too soon to bring this to Council Vote due to a number of actions that are currently occurring with regard to safety, and the overall value proposition for the ACS Strategic Plan.A number of these activities are likely to be concluded prior to year end, and we need to have more input on aspects of the Code as these activities work through the organization.I would like to have as much input as I can get prior to my meeting with CEPA to bring our concerns forward. If you have an opinion - please let me know.On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Frankie Wood-Black <fwoodblack90**At_Symbol_Here**gmail.com> wrote:FYI - this is coming before the Council in Philadelphia - as you can see it still needs some work. And given the activities that are occurring in Philadelphia, i.e. our poster session, as well our presentation to DAC, I am not sure that this is really ready for a vote.Please look it over and provide Bob and me with your comments.I am particularly concerned about the following change:Lines 64 - 68 - Chemical professionals should strive to do their work in ways that are safe for the environment. They have a responsibility to understand the total impact of their work, to recognize the constraints of limited resources, and to develop sustainable products and processes that protect the health, safety, and prosperity of future generations.
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post