About This Archive | DCHAS-L 2023 Index | DCHAS-L Yearly Index | DCHAS-L Home Page
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] New Article
Date: Jul 30, 2023 16:40 UTC
Author: Ralph Stuart <ralph**At_Symbol_Here**RSTUARTCIH.ORG>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] New Article
Date: Jul 30, 2023 23:22 UTC
Author: pzavon**At_Symbol_Here**ROCHESTER.RR.COM
From: Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] New Article
Date: Jul 30, 2023 22:21 UTC
Reply-To: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU>
Message-ID: <1831103451.3983186.1690755664083**At_Symbol_Here**mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <004501d9c2f6$d7466b00$85d34100$@verizon.net>
I accept your comments but I would argue that these products are relatively unlikely to end up in a laboratory covered by NFPA 45 which was the content of the article. They may end up in a classroom that someone calls a “laboratory” or an “art laboratory” but they won’t meet the intent (nor possibly even the definition) of NFPA 45 laboratories. So I think we are discussing apples and oranges. (Although it is always fun to do so with you!) I understand (at least intellectually) your issues but not what I was discussing.
I would note in a totally different view, that if you can’t get enough adequate safety information on a product (like from the two guys in the garage which BTW is not totally uncommon in my rarified world of research where we would continually get stuff from one person in an academic institution who made it up special) then you either need to get the info somehow (I understand that may prove impossible) or assume the stuff is the highest potential hazard (using some degree of credible analysis).
And I feel the issue you are really raising is independent of whether you use the NFPA/ICC liquid classification of the GHS system. As always, we can agree to disagree but still enjoy the conversation.
Richard Palluzi
BE(ChE), ME(ChE), PE, CSP,FAIChE
Pilot plant and laboratory consulting, safety, design, reviews, and training
www.linkedin.com/in/richardppalluzillc/
Richard P Palluzi LLC
72 Summit Drive
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
rpalluzi**At_Symbol_Here**verizon.net
908-285-3782
From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU> On Behalf Of Monona Rossol
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2023 10:42 AM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] New Article
Easy for lab chemicals, not easy for products that are mixtures like paint, paint thinners and strippers, special effects chemicals, A/B component resin and foam products, dyes and pigments in suspension, etc., that often have gaps in Section 9 such as the FP and BP needed to classify the products under NFPA for transport. So if we have a shop or production that is going to move to another location, we are not going to have an easy time of it. And we've had people just squirrelling stuff away in their trucks and hoping nothing goes wrong because there really isn't another timely option.
And some of our manufacturers for special products for film, TV, and Theater are essentially two guys in a garage, so don't tell me to call the manufacturer for the answer.
You live in the rarified atmosphere of labs and chemists. There is a bigger world out there with gzillions of products for which it is not possible to assign an NFPA rating from the SDS.
Monona
On Saturday, July 29, 2023 at 08:59:45 AM EDT, Richard Palluzi <000006c59248530b-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**lists.princeton.edu> wrote:
NFPA and the ICC have both taken the stance that the current classifications are not going to be revised in the near future. So any individual committee cannot take a different approach.
Part of the problem is that the GHS classification and the NFPA classification do not align very well individually (although good overall). The other is that GHS was developed primarily for transportation while the others were for life safety and building safety. So I think that folks are going to need to read the SDS (not a bad idea in itself) and figure out the material classifications. Many (although far from all) SDS’s still show this classification as well.
While it may not be ideal as in trivial it is certainly not hard to do.
Richard Palluzi
BE(ChE), ME(ChE), PE, CSP,FAIChE
Pilot plant and laboratory consulting, safety, design, reviews, and training
www.linkedin.com/in/richardppalluzillc/
Richard P Palluzi LLC
72 Summit Drive
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
rpalluzi**At_Symbol_Here**verizon.net
908-285-3782
From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU> On Behalf Of Monona Rossol
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2023 5:01 PM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] New Article
Nice, thanks Richard. But the SDSs all use the GHS flammability categories rather than the NFPA classes of flammability. So it is going to be difficult for people to figure this out. When they get in a new flammable solvent or product, they are going to have to look at Section 9 for the BP and FP and figure out the NFPA category themselves. And it makes it especially difficult for solvent and product mixtures used in workplaces like mine where we don't always have all the physical data for the mixture.
The good thing is that in both the NFPA and the GHS categories, the lower the number, the more flammable and hazardous. If only NFPA could have held that same thought for their diamond flammability ratings which mysteriously go in the opposite direction. 0 won't even burn, 1 is a FP above 200 o F etc. Dumb. Same for the toxicity.
Students were always confused, so I was so happy with the GHS ratings where the lower the number the worse the hazard for all categories.
I think it's time for NFPA to take a whack at a 45-standard using the GHS flammability categories.
Monona
On Friday, July 28, 2023 at 03:44:59 PM EDT, Richard Palluzi <000006c59248530b-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**lists.princeton.edu> wrote:
Some of the membership may be interested in my latest article.
Do I Need To Space My Chemicals Out In A Laboratory To Be In Compliance With NFPA 45?,
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/do-i-need-space-my-chemicals-out-laboratory-nfpa-45-richard-palluzi
Thank you.
Richard Palluzi
BE(ChE), ME(ChE), PE, CSP,FAIChE
Pilot plant and laboratory consulting, safety, design, reviews, and training
www.linkedin.com/in/richardppalluzillc/
Richard P Palluzi LLC
72 Summit Drive
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
rpalluzi**At_Symbol_Here**verizon.net
908-285-3782
--- For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
--- For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
--- For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
--- For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
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 secretary**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org.
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.