.
edited by
MALCOLM M. RENFREW University of Idaho MOSCOW, ldaho 83843
A Chemical Laboratory Safety Audit
Arthur R. Reich and L. E. Harris University of California, San Francisco Office of Environmental Health & Safety San Francisco, CA 94 143 Safety conditions in many university chemical laboratories are deplorable because many administrators are unfamiliar with current health and safety regulations. Some administrators do not realize the magnitude of the problem. OSHA inspections and fire inspections are being made on a number of campuses resulting in unexpectedly large expenditures. These expenditures result in embarrassment to college officials since safety is expected to be a management function. Clearly, compliance with fire and safety regulations must he planned for in newly constructed and existing facilities. To quantify the level of budgeting required to achieve compliance with fire and safety regulations, an overall picture of the fire and safety conditions on campus must be developed. To accomplish this task quickly and inexpensively, student inspectors, funded under a work-study program, can be trained in about two weeks to perform laboratory safety inspections. An inspection form was developed for inspection of laboratories. A list and classification of chemicals of concern to a chemical safety committee and an environmental checklist can be used. The inspectors are not expected toachieve eompliance. The results of the inspection are given to the appropriate university officials, department chairpersons, and research directors. To gain an integrated picture of the inspection results, a grid is used (reproduced beluw). I t is used to quantitate and locate such physical facilities as: Fume hoods, eyewash fountains, deluge showers, flammable storage cabinets, ete. By comparing these columns with columns indicating fire and safety violations the need for additional facilities can be shown. In some instances the need for chemical storage area expansion becomes obvious. The audit is also useful in locating the storage and use of highly toxic, carcinogenic, and hazardous chemicals and gases. While the inspection form does not presume to cover all OSHA regulations and fire standards, it does identify the most serious hazards. This information is useful for the development of administrative approaches and budgeting. The information is
amenable t o computer storage for use by administrators t o evaluate behavioral improvements. We plan to conduct the audit annually because it has hecome obvious to us that many hazardous conditions arise from new construction, changing research demands for chemicals and technologies, and new legislation.
Explanation of Chemical Laboratory Safety Audit ( 1 ) Hazardous Chemicals Groups I, 11, and I11 chemicals can be de-
fined by local chemical safety committees. Legislated (OSHA) chemical carcinogens are olaced in Grouo I and must be identified. It
cals. The tentative cancer-causing substance list recently released by the Department of Labor-OSHA can he used as a wide. Group 111 chemicals are non-carcinogenic but high& toxic or dangerous chemicals. Indicate a plus (+) in these three columns if any of the chemicals are used in the laboratory. (Continued on page A372j
Volume 56, Number 12, December 1979 / A371
Safety
...
( 2 ) Fume Hood The first two columns should be marked plus (+) or minus (-1 to indicate availability and presence of an inspection sticker far recording face velocity certification. The remaining columns are hood deficiencieswhich should be indicated by marking a n X. Comparison with the hazardous chemical columns may identify theneed for a fume h a d . Local reg&tions regarding chemical fume hoods should be checked. 150 ftlmin average face velocitv is rewired bv OSHA far legislated c h r m m l imrinqena. Smne states [for rxamplr. Calfirrrm, require l(kl fl min average fact vrlorlty with n mmimum d 70 fl min face velocity a t any point measured. The unacceptable practice of removing distribution panels and sashes disrupts the face velocitv desiened for. Imoroner construction auedas drihne into an & t i n e duct can re(i.e., fiberglass, wood, ete.)
( 3 ) Corrosives (These columns should he marked with a plus or a minus.) Corrosive chemical use is identified. Ideally, eyewash facilities and deluge showers should be within laboratories. They should be required in academic teaching laboratories and acid glass washing facilities. The distances of 25 ft are maximum di.tancei Fcdeml OJIIA hn.
