From:
Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject:
Re: [DCHAS-L] Chemical Safety headlines (10 articles)
Date:
May 5, 2020 14:05 UTC
Reply-To:
Monona Rossol
In-Reply-To:
Re: [DCHAS-L] Chemical Safety headlines (10 articles)
But my evil mind sees a lot more wrong with that. It's technically against the law. The Fire Department should be upholding the laws even when they disagree with them. At home it is OK to play around like this, but to use an unregistered DIY disinfectant to protect others is against the law.
And since it is not legal, suppose one of the fire fighters or a person working in the fire houses get the virus and claims the reason was that the disinfectant was ineffective. Or they claim the spray caused some other harm to them such as allergy or asthma. Ordinarily, they couldn't sue the employer. But in this case they can sue under Product Liability because the employer is both the user and the manufacturer of this illegal product. Even in Tort Reform Texas that would probably go.
And I would extend the possible actions to people who imitate the Fire Department's product due to that article.
Being competent to "behave" around chemicals still does not give one the right to break the law and invent your own product on site and expose others to it.
Monona
-----Original Message-----
From: Yaritza Brinker <YBrinker**At_Symbol_Here**FELE.COM>
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU
Sent: Tue, May 5, 2020 9:23 am
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Chemical Safety headlines (10 articles)
The Hazmat team in my area has field analysis capabilities for chemicals. It is quite possible the guys in TX do too. If they figured out how to make the stuff, they can likely figure out how to use their field equipment to measure the
concentration of their bleach. Also, it's the HAZMAT team. If any firefighter knows how to behave around chemicals, it's that bunch.
This doesn't necessarily take away the concern regarding the general population who might try to imitate them.
Thank you,
Yaritza Brinker
260.827.5402
From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU>
On Behalf Of Monona Rossol
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 2:24 PM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Chemical Safety headlines (10 articles)
John, Clearly that's how they are thinking at Station 11 in Waco, TX. But how about the concentration? It's got to be strong enough as well. How
about an SDS? How about EPA registration? And that means demonstrating scientifically that it is both safe to use as directed, and effective for the purpose intended. So the more I think the more I feel a the firefighters should stick to their fire stuff.
We just had a big issue in museums with people using asphyxiant gases and toxic chemicals to mix up their own pesticides to protect museum
artifacts. Turns out that's just plain not legal to do without registration. In the museums, the down side is damage to an artifact. But for EMS responding fire fighters, the down side could be sickness or even death.
If anyone out there knows of a reason I'm wrong, sing out.
