From:
Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject:
Re: [DCHAS-L] OSHA materials on Karen Wetterhahn's mercury exposure
Date:
Mar 22, 2022 14:58 UTC
Reply-To:
Monona Rossol
In-Reply-To:
Re: [DCHAS-L] OSHA materials on Karen Wetterhahn's mercury exposure
If that's true, I will pay for the documentation that Sigma said that on their MSDS at this time. Because in 1996, I didn't see any MSDSs that said much more than gloves should be used without specifying which gloves. And that's why the training on ASTM F739 tests was so important in the 90s. You really HAD to go to the glove manufacturers who had the only information on which of their gloves worked for what.
And yes, two of the six citations Dartmouth got were for the lab standard and the other four were two each for 132 and 138 PPE rules. One of those was for training.
Monona
-----Original Message-----
From: Wright, James <James.Wright**At_Symbol_Here**nrel.gov>
To: Monona Rossol <actsnyc**At_Symbol_Here**cs.com>; DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU>
Sent: Tue, Mar 22, 2022 10:44 am
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] OSHA materials on Karen Wetterhahn's mercury exposure
I attended regional CSHEMA presentation from Michael Blayney in 2015 and I recall the Sigma MSDS Dr. Wetterhahn consulted indicated latex gloves were appropriate. Also, if I remember correctly
the chemical was actually synthesized for Sigma by a subcontractor in his garage that used Silvershield but his glove selection was not noted until after the incident. The earliest MSDS I can find is from Acros Revision #4 in 2005, so I don't have any way
to confirm what glove the MSDS suggested.
Also, if you look at the OSHA inspection, Dartmouth did receive a citation against their CHP not being capable of protecting employees from health hazards. OSHA also cited the failure of
training under the PPE instead of Lab Standard training.
--
Jim Wright
(he, him, his)
Chemical Safety and Biosafety Program Lead| ESH&Q
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
15013 Denver West Parkway | Golden, CO 80401
303-384-6647 | M: 720-695-0791
From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU> on behalf of Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:54:17 PM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] OSHA materials on Karen Wetterhahn's mercury exposure
CAUTION:
This email originated from outside of NREL. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
That document is the same as I remember it. And the lines the burnt my cork were these:
"In 1996, while preparing an experiment that involved the use of dimethyl
mercury, Professor Wetterhahn spilled a few drops of the compound on her gloved hand. Though the latex gloves she was wearing were believed to be protective, they proved to be inadequate in preventing exposure to this potent form of mercury. Unknown to Professor
Wetterhahn, the toxin passed through the glove and was absorbed into her system."
in 1996 I had been regularly teaching and training on gloves for years using the ASTM break through time charts. And Kimberly Clark also had information on their
website at that time about the examining gloves not being protective against chemicals. I was training workers in the art and entertainment industries. She was in the chemistry department at Dartmouth for gosh sakes. Where was their training program for
not only faculty, but students? How dare they say it the gloves "were believed to be protective?" By whom? And why? It should have been clearly stated that Dartmouth's OSHA Lab Standard training was defective, and it was their faulty she didn't know.
