Laboratory safety is dependent on a collaboration between safety personnel and the laboratory personnel conducting the research and sample analysis. It is important to understand the hazards and risk to determine the heirarchy of controls. In caertain instances, use of personal protective clothing and equipment may be best option to protect the worker from harm. This seminar presents the issues that are pertinent for safety professionals to consider when inspecting any laboratory and understanding the chemical process and equipment used in the analysis.

1. Laboratory Safety in the University Environment:
A Collaborative Effort between Safety Professionals
and Laboratory Personnel
Matthew A Stiegel, Ph.D.
10/24/2016
Duke Laboratory Safety Program

2. Outline
2
Objectives:
1. Describe the requirements defined by 29 CFR 1910.1450 (OSHA-Occupational
Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in Laboratories) and 29 CFR 1910.1200 (OSHA-
Hazard Communication Standard)
2. Identify exposure routes and measures that can be taken to minimize exposure
potential
3. Identify potential laboratory hazards that are not classified by the Lab Standard

3. Outline, cont.
• Overview
• Duke Lab Safety Program
• Importance
• Describe the requirements defined by 29 CFR 1910.1450 (OSHA-Occupational Exposure to Hazardous
Chemicals in Laboratories) and 29 CFR 1910.1200 (OSHA-Hazard Communication Standard)
• 1910.1450
• Hazardous chemicals
• Health Hazards
• Laboratory use of hazardous chemicals
• Employee exposure determination(s)
• Chemical Hygiene Plan
• 1910.1200
• Background
• Labeling
• Exposure routes and measures that can be taken to minimize exposure potential
• Other laboratory hazards
3

4. Background
4
Duke’s Lab Safety Program
• Multi-disciplinary team, members from divisions within the Occupational &
Environmental Safety Office (OESO)
• The Program provides
• Safety training, general and specialized
• Development of guidance documents for relevant regulatory reqs.
• Lab-specific SOPs for high-hazard activities
• Annual safety audits
• More…
• A collaborative effort between the lab safety program and researchers to maintain a
safe work environment

5. Background, cont.
5
Duke’s Lab Safety Program
• Research Labs-Primary Focus
• ~3000 employees work in labs
• ~500 labs
• ~200 BSL2 labs
• ~400 have/use chemicals
• ~300 have “Particularly Hazardous Substances”
• Sig. number of people that are in/around lab-related hazards on a daily basis

6. Culture of Safety
6
Extensive push to promote Safety Culture in the Lab environment
• Reporting:
• ACS, 2012- “Creating Safety Cultures in Academic Institutions”
• NRC, 2014- “Safe Science: Promoting a Culture of Safety in Academic
Chemical Research”
• APLU, 2015- “A guide to implementing a safety culture in our universities”
• Etc...
• Why?
• Increased awareness of lab-related accidents
• Known incidents at FSU, Texas Tech, Yale, UCLA, UF, UH, UMD…

7. Sheri Sangji-Accident at UCLA
7
• Transferring 2oz of tert-butyllithium in a
plastic syringe
• Syringe came apart
• Splashed on clothes
• 2nd and 3rd degree burns
• Died 18 days later

8. UH-Manoa Explosion
8
• Compressed CO2, H2, and O2 in an air
tank
• Pressure gauge was not rated for a
flammable atmosphere
• Finished an experiment and turned flow
off
• Spark detonated gas in the tank
• Researcher lost her arm

9. OSHA Lab Standard
“Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals”
29 CFR 1910.1450
9

10. OSHA Lab Standard
10
Background
• Laboratory environment is different than industrial and large scale operations
• Traditional Occupational Exposure
• Hippocrates, ~400 BC – lead colic
• Galen ~200 BC– acid mists
• Vitruvious, ~100 BC – mercury and lead workers
• Pliny the Elder, ~70 AD – sulfur, zinc, mercury, lead, arsenic
• Ramazzini, ~1700 - authored the first systematic treatise on occupationaldiseases
• Percival Potts, ~1755 – described scrotal cancer in chimney sweeps as occupational
disease
• Miners asthma, 1822 – identified as form of silicosis
• Caisson disease ~1841 – decompression illness – Navy submarines
• Asbestosis, described ~1899 – commercial production of asbestos insulation began in
1879, ended in ~1975
• Black lung disease, described ~1950 – coal miners

11. OSHA Lab Standard
11
Background, cont.
• Unique environment
• Scale
• smaller quantity
• different chemicals
• Different Risks
• Don’t need substance specific standards
• Greater flexibility needed in the lab environment
VS.

12. OSHA Lab Standard
12
• Who?
• Employee- an “individual employed in a laboratory workplace who
may be exposed to hazardous chemicals in the course of his or her
assignments
• Where?
• Laboratory- "laboratory use of hazardous chemicals" occurs. It is a
workplace where relatively small quantities of hazardous chemicals
are used on a non-production basis.
Laboratory scale- working with substances in which the containers
used for reactions, transfers, and other handling of substances are
designed to be easily and safely manipulated by one person.

13. OSHA Lab Standard
13
• What?
• Hazardous chemicals-chemical which is classified as health hazard
or simple asphyxiant in accordance with the Hazard Communication
Standard

14. OSHA Lab Standard
• What are hazardous chemicals?
• Health hazard
• Acute toxicity
• Skin corrosion or irritation
• serious eye damage or eye irritation
• respiratory or skin sensitization
• germ cell mutagenicity
• carcinogen
• reproductive toxic
• specific target organ toxicity
• aspiration hazard
The criteria for determining whether a chemical is classified as a health hazard are detailed in appendix A of the Hazard Communication Standard (§1910.1200)and
§1910.1200(c))
14

15. OSHA Lab Standard
15
• Particular hazardous chemicals
• Select carcinogens listed by:
• OSHA
• International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)-Group 1
• National Toxicology Program (NTP)- “Known…”
• Reproductive toxins
• High degree of acute toxicity
• Oral- LD50 ≤50 mg/kg of body weight
• Dermal- LD50 ≤200 mg/kg of body weight, continuous contact, 24 hr
• Inhalation
• LC50 ≤200 parts per million (ppm) by volume gas or vapor, 1hr
• LC50≤2 mg/liter or less for mist, fume, or dust, 1hr

16. OSHA-Hazard Communication Standard
29 CFR 1910.1200
• 2012- revised Hazard Communication (HazCom) Standard to align with the
Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS).
• HazCom- improves the consistency of information to users and enhances
worker comprehension of chemical hazards.
• Lab Standard supersedes some provisions of
HazCom, however:
• chemical classification
• hazard definitions
• labeling requirements
• shipping/use requirements

17. OSHA-Hazard Communication Standard
29 CFR 1910.1200
Safety Data Sheets (SDSs)- provide detailed, technical, information for a chemical or chemical
mixture
• Employees have to have access to SDSs
• on-line links are acceptable
• hardcopies have to be up to date
• labs must keep any SDS sent to them by a manufacturer or distributor
• SDSs must be developed for any chemicals produced for inter-laboratory
use or for any user outside the lab

18. OSHA-H tandard
Safety Data Sheets- p
in the following sections:
1) Identification
2) Hazard(s) identific
3) Composition/info
ingredients
4) First-aid measure
5) Fire-fighting mea
6) Accidental releas
7) Handling and sto
8) Exposure control
protection
ical or chemical mixture
al properties
y
tion
n
ns
n
n
azard Communication S
29 CFR 1910.1200
rovide detailed, technical, information for a chem
9) Physical and chemic
ation 10) Stability and reactivit
rmation on 11) Toxicological informa
12) Ecological informatio
s 13) Disposal consideratio
sures 14) Transport informatio
e measures 15) Regulatory informatio
rage 16) Other information
s/personal

19. HazCom Labeling-Health Hazard
• Carcinogen- May cause or is suspected of causing
cancer.
• Mutagen- May cause or is suspected of causing genetic
defects.
• Reproductive Toxicity- May damage or is
suspected of damaging fertility or the unborn child.
• Respiratory Sensitizer- May cause allergy or
asthma symptoms or breathing difficulties if inhaled.
• Target Organ Toxicity- Causes or may cause
damage to organs through a single, prolonged, or repeated
exposure.
• Aspiration Toxicity- May be fatal if swallowed and
enters airways.

20. Acute Toxicity
May be fatal or toxic if swallowed, inhaled, or in contact with skin.
HazCom Labeling-Skull and Crossbones

21. HazCom Labeling-Flame
• Emits Flammable Gas- In contact with water
releases flammable gases, which may ignite spontaneously.
• Flammable- Flammable, highly flammable, or extremely
flammable liquid and vapor, solid, aerosol, or gas.
• Organic Peroxide- Heating may cause a fire.
• Pyrophoric- Catches fire spontaneously if exposed to air.
• Self-Heating- Self-heating; may catch fire.
• Self-Reactive- Heating may cause a fire. Excludes
explosives, organic peroxides, and oxidizers.

22. HazCom Labeling-Exclamation Mark
• Acute Toxicity- Harmful if inhaled, swallowed, or in contact with skin.
• Irritant (skin and eye)- Causes skin irritation; causes serious eye
irritation.
• Narcotic Effects- May cause drowsiness or dizziness.
• Respiratory Tract Irritant- May cause respiratory irritation.
• Skin Sensitizer- May cause an allergic skin reaction.
• Hazardous to Ozone Layer * - Harms public health and the
environment by destroying ozone in the upper atmosphere.
*not mandatory

23. Gases Under Pressure
Contains gas under pressure; may explode if heated. Contains refrigerated gas; may cause cryogenic burns
or injury.
HazCom Labeling-Gas Cylinder

24. • Skin Corrosion/Burns- Causes severe skin burns and eye
damage.
• Eye Damage- Causes serious eye damage.
• Corrosive to Metals- May be corrosive to metals.
HazCom Labeling-Corrosion

25. • Explosives
– Unstable explosive
– Explosive; mass explosion hazard
– Explosive; severe projection hazard
– Explosive; fire, blast or projection hazard
– Fire or projection hazard
• Self-Reactives- Heating may cause an explosion
• Organic Peroxides- Heating may cause an
explosion
HazCom Labeling-Exploding Bomb

26. Oxidizer
May cause fire or explosion; strong oxidizer. May cause or intensify fire; oxidizer. May intensify fire;
oxidizer.
HazCom Labeling-Flame over Circle

27. Aquatic Toxicity
Harmful, toxic or very toxic to aquatic life. May have long lasting effects.
*not mandatory
HazCom Labeling-Environment*

28. OSHA Lab Standard
28
• How?
• Maintaining all permissible exposure limits(PELs)
• Other occupational exposure limits
• ACGIH
• AIHA
• NIOSH
• Recommended level by manufacturer
• Protecting from other potentially hazardous chemicals
• Exposure Determination
• Monitoring
• Risk
• Hazard Potential
• Exposure Potential

29. How?
29
Define the Hazards
=
What, how, where, who?
Ask questions…
X
Define Exposure Potential

30. Chemical Hygiene Plan
30
• Chemical Hygiene Plan (CHP) has to:
• Protect Employees- maintaining PELs and protect from other potentially
hazardous chemicals
• Readily available to employees
• Reviewed annually
• CHP Components:
• Standard Operating Procedures
• Control Measures
• Chemical Hygiene Officer
• PHSs used in the lab
• Training requirements

31. Outline
• Overview
• Duke Lab Safety Program
• Importance
• Describe the requirements defined by 29 CFR 1910.1450 (OSHA-Occupational Exposure to Hazardous
Chemicals in Laboratories) and 29 CFR 1910.1200 (OSHA-Hazard Communication Standard)
• 1910.1450
• Hazardous chemicals
• Health Hazards
• Laboratory use of hazardous chemicals
• Employee exposure determination(s)
• Chemical Hygiene Plan
• 1910.1200
• Background
• Labeling
• Exposure routes and measures that can be taken to minimize exposure potential
• Other laboratory hazards
31

32. Exposure Routes
32
Oral Inhalation Dermal &
Injection
From: http://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/mph-modules/ExposureAssessment/expRoute.png

33. 33From: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hierarchy/images/hierarchycontrols.jpg

34. Limiting or Minimizing Potential Exposure
34
Basic Work Practices
• Safety Training
• Hazard Communication
• Minimize the production of splashes or aerosols
• No food or drinks, smoking, handling contact lenses, and applying cosmetics in lab areas. No
mouth pipetting.
• Wash hands after working with potentially hazardous materials, removal of gloves, and before
leaving the laboratory
• Engineering Controls
• Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
• Available, used, and worn appropriately

35. Protects:
• workers
• the laboratory environment
Used for:
• volatile chemicals
• radioactive material
• particularly hazardous substances
• toxic or irritating chemicals
• odor control
Usually non-filtered exhaust of air to the
outdoors
Engineering Controls-Chemical Fume Hood
From: http://www.haldemanhomme.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Lab-Casework-Bloomington-Fume-Hoods.png

36. How to NOT use a Chemical Fume Hood!
Engineering Controls-Chemical Fume Hood

37. Gloves, use-specific
Dependent on the Hazard:
• chemicals
• biologicals
• radioactive materials
• extremely hot or cold item
• sharp objects
Personal Protective Equipment-Gloves
s Nitrile: most chemicals and infectious material
Insulated gloves
Cut-resistant Silver Shield
Hmm…

38. Lab Coats
•Small volumes of low hazard chemicals (dryor
liquid)
•Biological Materials (a must when workingat
Biosafety Level 2 and above)
• Radiation sources
Personal Protective Equipment-Lab Coats
Seamless front liquid-resistant gowns
•Large volumes of human blood or body fluids;
infectious cultures
Fire-resistant Lab Coats
Rubber-coated aprons
•Large volumes of corrosive or other
hazardous liquid chemicals
• Removing hot liquids from autoclaves

39. Personal Protective Equipment-Eye/Face
Face shield- Provides splash protection for the face
• Safety Glasses and Goggles- Provide protection for the eyes
Goggles should be used for chemical splash protection

40. Disposable Tight-fitting Respirators (ex. N-, P-, R-type respirator)
• Provide protection to the user against aerosols or particulates:
• Infectious material
• Animal allergens
• Other particulates
Powered Air Purifying Respirators (PAPRs)
• Supplies HEPA filtered air to the user
• Provides protection against infectious aerosols and animal dander
• Also provides full-face splash protection.
Half-face and full-face tight fitting masks- Protection based on chosen
filters(cartridges)
• Particulate
• Gas
Personal Protective Equipment-Respiratory Protection

41. Outline
• Overview
• Duke Lab Safety Program
• Importance
• Describe the requirements defined by 29 CFR 1910.1450 (OSHA-Occupational Exposure to Hazardous
Chemicals in Laboratories) and 29 CFR 1910.1200 (OSHA-Hazard Communication Standard)
• 1910.1450
• Hazardous chemicals
• Health Hazards
• Laboratory use of hazardous chemicals
• Employee exposure determination(s)
• Chemical Hygiene Plan
• 1910.1200
• Background
• Labeling
• Exposure routes and measures that can be taken to minimize exposure potential
• Other laboratory hazards
41

42. Peroxide-formers
• Can form explosive friction-sensitive peroxides over time or upon exposure to air
• Peroxide-formation cannot be prevented once the chemical has been opened unless the
chemical is maintained under an inert atmosphere
• Examples: diethyl ether, tetrahydrofuran (THF)
Other Reactives
• Can form friction or shock-sensitive crystals/hazardous reactants over time
• If possible, observe containers for crystal-formation prior to opening
• DO NOT open if crystals are found. Contact OESO-EP immediately
• Examples: perchloric acid, picricacid
Other Lab Hazards (not covered by the Lab Standard):
Physical Hazards

43. Other Lab Hazards (not covered by the Lab Standard):
Physical Hazards
Cryogens
Liquid Nitrogen (LN2) and Liquid Helium (LHe) common
in the lab environment
Hazards
• Asphyxiation due to oxygen deficiency
• Frost-burn, frost-bite
• Potential for explosive failure due to over-
pressurization
• Can be flammable (LN2)
• Can be an oxidizer (LO2)

44. OSHA Bloodborne Pathogens Standard (1910.1030) covers exposures to:
• Human blood, body fluids, cell lines (primary and well-characterized)
Requirements
• Exposure Control Plan
• Training
• Offering Hepatitis B vaccine
CDC/NIH Biosafety and Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL)
• Laboratory Biosafety Level Criteria (BSL1 – BSL4)
• Vertebrate Animal Biosafety Level Criteria (ABSL1 – ABSL4)
Other Lab Hazards (not covered by the Lab Standard):
Biologicals

45. National Institutes of Health Recombinant DNA
(rDNA) Guidelines
The NIH rDNA guidelines explicitly include both rDNA and RNA
that is derived from rDNA
Examples are:
• Plasmids
• Viral vectors
• Any synthetic DNA or RNA, including PCR products and
oligonucleotides
• Any RNA produced from rDNA, including mRNA, siRNA,
shRNA, miRNA, etc.
• Creation of transgenic / knockout animals and plants
• Human cells modified by these materials
Other Lab Hazards (not covered by the Lab Standard):
Biologicals

46. A Collaborative Effort between Safety Professionals and
Laboratory Personnel
46
2015 Lab Safety Survey
• Campus-wide laboratory safety survey
• ~500 labs on Duke’s campus
• ~3000 employees within the labs
• Gain a better understanding of the efficacy and perceptions of the program
• Distributed to ~3000 Duke Employees
• Principal investigators, post-docs, lab technicians, lab managers, graduate
students, etc.
• 22% response rate

47. Questions
47
1. Existing Duke laboratory safety manual, SOPS, and protocols are appropriate for the work I do.
2. I understand the risks of the hazardous materials I work with.
3. I understand the reasons behind the safety protocols and what they are meant to accomplish.
4. I have the materials or tools I need to follow safety protocols.
5. I know enough about laboratory safety to recognize safety problems in the laboratory where I
work.
6. I understand how to report a safety event.
7. I feel free to report hazardous conditions, unsafe behaviors, or safety violations.
8. Laboratory safety training at Duke is sufficient for my needs.
9. Duke has a strong culture of safety in its laboratories.
1. My Principal Investigator emphasizes the importance of laboratory safety.
2. If yes, how helpful was the interaction? (Previous question: In the past 12 months, have you
interacted with the Occupational and Environmental Safety Office (OESO)?)
3. In your opinion, is the level of oversight and internal audit process related to Lab Safety
appropriate?
4. How does the Lab Safety Program and the regulation of compliance of these programs compare to
previous institutions with which you have been affiliated?

48. Job Classification vs. Tenure
Job Classification
AverageTimeatDuke(years)
0-2
3-5
6-10
11-15
48

49. 6
7
8
9
10
Highest Rated Questions by Tenure
0-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 >15
Tenure at Duke (years)
Question
2
3
4
5
7
AverageRating
49
2. I understand the risks of the
hazardous materials I work with.
3. I understand the reasons behind
the safety protocols and what they
are meant to accomplish.
4. I have the materials or tools I need
to follow safety protocols.
5. I know enough about laboratory
safety to recognize safety
problems in the laboratory where I
work.
7. I feel free to report hazardous
conditions, unsafe behaviors, or
safety violations.
Questions

50. Lowest Rated Questions by Tenure
6
7
8
9
10
AverageRating
0-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 >15
Tenure at Duke (years)
Question
6
9
11
12
13
50
6. I understand how to report a safety
event.
7. Duke has a strong culture of safety in
its laboratories.
11. If yes, how helpful was the interaction?
(Previous question: In the past 12
months, have you interacted with the
Occupational and Environmental Safety
Office?)
12. In your opinion, is the level of oversight
and internal audit process related to Lab
Safety appropriate?
13. How does the Lab Safety Program and
the regulation of compliance of these
programs compare to previous
institutions with which you have beenaffiliated?
Questions

51. Highest Rated Question by Job Classification
Job Classification
AverageRating
10
9
8
7
6
Question
2
3
4
5
51
2. I understand the risks of the
hazardous materials I work with.
3. I understand the reasons behind
the safety protocols and what they
are meant to accomplish.
4. I have the materials or tools I need
to follow safety protocols.
5. I know enough about laboratory
safety to recognize safety
problems in the laboratory where I
work.
Questions

52. Lowest Rated Question by Job Classification
Job Classification
AverageRating
10
9
8
7
6
Question
9
11
12
13
52
9. Duke has a strong culture of safety
in its laboratories.
11.If yes, how helpful was the
interaction? (Previous question: In
the past 12 months, have you
interacted with the Occupational
and Environmental Safety Office
(OESO)?)
12.In your opinion, is the level of
oversight and internal audit
process related to Lab Safety
appropriate?
13.How does the Lab Safety Program
and the regulation of compliance
of these programs compare to
previous institutions with which
you have been affiliated?
Questions

53. 53
Duke Labor
Debr
Ray
Mar
Chri
Dan
Beth
Ras
Sam
La T
Cou
Acknowledgements
atory Safety Program
a Hunt
Hackney
y Brock
stina Carinci
iel James
any Lanham
hida Lawrence
Pass
onya Raines
rtney Stanion