From: david.iacovone**At_Symbol_Here**att.net Date: January 15, 2010 2:48:08 PM EST Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] DOT information from MSDSs It has been my experience, speaking as someone with a hazardous materials and hazardous waste response background, that whether or not it requires DOT placarding is dependent upon volume. Many MSDSs are deficient in this area because some are materials that are usually shipped in small quantities. The DOT guidebook and IATA regs are better sources for shipping info. Also, Russ is correct in this instance. Don't rely upon MSDSs for shipping requirements. It has also been my experience that manufacturer's don't always tell you everything, especially in the case of trade name products, unless pressed in emergency situations. === From: "Phil Anderson"
Date: January 15, 2010 2:33:19 PM EST Subject: RE: [DCHAS-L] DOT information from MSDSs As someone who must write MSDS's (as well as do a million other things) I note your overall displeasure with the MSDS situation. The MSDS is/was meant to provide safety information for the persons who handle a chemical, or chemical mixture. Any use of it for other duties is an extention of the MSDS beyond where it was originally intended. There are several layers of data that I must absorb and distill and otherwise get into the computer before I can get it to spit out an MSD. If the MSDS were to be a complete manual for the handling of a chemical, this would not be enough, but it isn't (probably a Master's or Ph.D may be adequate, but also not likely). What an MSDS is, is a snapshot of the data and the material. It is limited to the available data, and it is always changing. The problems arise when the data is conflicted or old data is viewed with the same "rose colored glasses" that modern researchers seem to enjoy. Our task, should we be foolish enough to accept it is to be chemists, physicians, etc. The best thing we can do is to buy our materials (either the rarities found in acedemia or the 5000 gallon tank trucks found in industrial use) from the people who provide adequate MSDS's. Look before leaping! And when we turn down a supplier for this reason, tell him! Most chemical suppliers in this country are honest, but generally overworked. If something is wrong on his MSDS that causes him to lose sales, most will fix it, IF he is aware of the discrepancy! Some of the data desired may not be reasonably provided on a brief MSDS. Some of it may be too new or too unproven (or even wrong) to be included. Remember- these things are NOT peer reviewed papers on the safety that one may want. But the writers, in general, should be competent. A reason that I only last year started to include DOT provisions on the MSDS I write, is in anticipation of the adoption of some sort of 15 part format when the US Congress permits it as I am going to retire, probably before this becomes a final regulation. The DOT changes their shipping class breakdowns every so often, which is why I did not include them before. I just hope that DOT does not change something that affects the classing I use now. (As they did about 20+ years ago, when they changed the flash point for Combustible/Flammable from 100 F. to 140F.) Had to "rant", sorry! Phil Anderson Technical Director Aqua Science, Inc. === From: "Larry D. McLouth" Date: January 15, 2010 12:40:19 PM EST Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] MSDS source? Hi Katherine, Visit the MSDS HyperGlossary...(use Google search). This has a bunch of free MSDS sites and links to other safety related items, including OSHA regs and proposed standards. I believe this is hosted by the Safety Emporium which sells lab and safety supplies. You may be interested in the FAQs - there you'll find a lot of info about MSDSs, the regulatory drives and OSHA interpretations. Good Luck! Larry === From: harsimran kaur Date: January 15, 2010 12:33:00 PM EST Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] MSDS source? Katherine, In college for chem lab, we were told to use SRI Hazard MSDS Index and I have been using the same ever since. Here's the link: http://hazard.com/msds/index.php Simran
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post