From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU> On Behalf Of Daniel Kuespert
Sent: Friday, July 8, 2022 05:43
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Chemical Safety headlines (12 articles)

On Jul 8, 2022, at 06:03, Ralph Stuart <membership**At_Symbol_Here**DCHAS.ORG> wrote:

US EPA FINDS NEW RISKS FOR 3 SOLVENTS: METHYLENE CHLORIDE, N-METHYLPYRROLIDONE (NMP), AND PERCHLOROETHYLENE
...
The changes include no longer assuming workers wear personal protective equipment. For each of the three solvents, eliminating that assumption resulted in a slight increase in the number of uses with unreasonable risks. …

While I certainly follow the justification for assuming workers don't wear PPE, since many times they don't, and PPE is supposed to be a last-ditch protection, I do wonder how many uses of chemicals in the lab would be judged "unreasonable risks," given that there is little to protect many researchers from the chemicals they're working with other than the fume hood (if they use it correctly) and their gloves/lab coat.

Because it's so hard to find a good glove for NMP, I try to discourage its use whenever I can. I probably should do so for CH2Cl2, as I recall (without looking at a compatibility chart) that it goes through nitrile gloves, particularly exam gloves, pretty quickly. 

Is it even possible to reduce that risk in the lab, practically speaking? Granted, researchers are using less dichloromethane or whatever than someone removing graffiti from an overpass, so the supply-side of the risk is reduced, but I don't really see an inherent way to reduce the risk due to use conditions in a lab without going to exotic solutions like remote manipulators (waldos).

Regards,

Dan