Protective suit failure lands Canadian lab worker in isolation
Nov10

Protective suit failure lands Canadian lab worker in isolation

An employee of Canada's national animal health lab is in isolation for 21 days following possible exposure to the Ebola virus, news agencies report. The employee was working with pigs that had been invected with Ebola to test how the disease responds to treatment with immune response proteins, CBC reports. The employee was going through standard decontamination procedures before leaving the lab when he or she noticed a split in the seam of their protective suit. Ebola is spread by direct contact with bodily fluids. "There is no reason to believe the employee involved in Monday's incident was in contact with the bodily fluids of the infected pig, according to Rebecca Gilman, spokeswoman for the Public Health Agency of Canada," CNN reports. The incident illustrates why personal protective equipment should not be the only barrier between a lab worker--or the outside world--and possible harm. Multiple approaches are necessary so that a single weakness does not lead to illness or...

Read More
Another biosafety lapse at CDC
Dec31

Another biosafety lapse at CDC

Early last week, news came out that the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention sent live virus internally to a lab not equipped to handle it. One technician was potentially exposed to the virus and is being monitored, but so far she is reportedly showing no signs of the disease. Stuart Nichol, chief of the CDC's Viral Special Pathogens Branch, attributed the incident to human error, the New York Times reported. Earlier this year, CDC "closed influenza and anthrax research sites and halted all biological materials shipments from its highest level containment labs following safety breaches that endangered dozens of employees," C&EN reported. The White House Office of Science & Technology Policy subsequently encouraged government and nongovernment labs to do a "safety stand-down" to review safety practices. Here's CDC's summary of the results of the...

Read More
Typo may have led to radioactive material leak
Dec09

Typo may have led to radioactive material leak

On Feb. 14, radioactive material leaked from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant nuclear waste repository in New Mexico. The leak was traced to a drum containing a reactive mixture of nitrate salts, an acid neutralizer, and an organic, cellulose-based cat litter used as a sorbent. From an investigation by the Santa Fe New Mexican: In a damning report issued in October, the Department of Energy’s Office of Inspector General chided [Los Alamos National Laboratory] and its waste packaging subcontractor EnergySolutions for the change from clay-based to organic kitty litter and the use of an acid neutralizer. “This action may have led to an adverse chemical reaction within the drums resulting in serious safety implications,” the report said, referring to the litter change. A lab spokesman said LANL officials recognize deficiencies in the lab’s safety processes were spotlighted by the disaster at WIPP. But LANL has never publicly acknowledged the reason why it switched from clay-based litter to the organic variety believed to be the fuel that fed the intense heat. In internal emails, nuclear waste specialists pondered several theories about the reason for the change in kitty litters before settling on an almost comically simplistic conclusion that has never been publicly discussed: A typographical error in a revision to a LANL policy manual for repackaging waste led to a wholesale shift from clay litter to the wheat-based variety. The revision, approved by LANL, took effect Aug. 1, 2012, mere days after the governor’s celebratory visit to Los Alamos, and explicitly directed waste packagers at the lab to “ENSURE an organic absorbent (kitty litter) is added to the waste” when packaging drums of nitrate salt. “Does it seem strange that the procedure was revised to specifically require organic kitty litter to process nitrate salt drums?” Freeman, Nuclear Waste Partnership’s chief nuclear engineer at WIPP, asked a colleague in a May 28 email. Freeman went on to echo some of the possible reasons for the change bandied about in earlier emails, such as the off-putting dust or perfumed scents characteristic of clay litter. But his colleague, Mark Pearcy, a member of the team that reviews waste to ensure it is acceptable to be stored at WIPP, offered a surprising explanation. “General consensus is that the ‘organic’ designation was a typo that wasn’t caught,” he wrote, implying that the directions should have called for inorganic litter. And now more than 5,500 containers of nuclear waste may contain organic sorbent. Moral of the story: Proofread your procedures carefully. Overall, the story paints Los Alamos National Laboratory waste-handling procedures and communication as a mess. I'm wondering about a couple of things, though. First is...

Read More
Sharing safety practices among academia, government, and industry
Nov19

Sharing safety practices among academia, government, and industry

The Council for Chemical Research is playing matchmaker to pair up academic institutions with government or industrial organizations to share safety practices. Says CCR: If you would be willing to share your safety practices with any interested academic CCR members, we would share contact information and a brief description of potential ways you might prefer to interact with the academic CCR members through various means (letters, emails, CCR website). ... Through this simple process, we hope to help academic chemistry and chemical engineering departments work together with industrial and government laboratories on this critically important topic, with key desired outcomes being sharing of best safety practices, enhanced safety training of researchers, fostering relationships between institutions, and useful publicity for all involved. The project stems from CCR's white paper on "Safety in Academic Laboratories." CCR also now has a safety award, which this year went to the University of Minnesota Departments of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering & Materials...

Read More
Legacy samples yield headaches
Sep09

Legacy samples yield headaches

Several safety breaches involving pathogens have brought attention to the problem of legacy samples. Vials of smallpox dating to the 1950s were discovered in unsecured Food & Drug Administation labs on the National Institutes of Health campus in Bethesda, Md., earlier this summer. Then, last week, the Washington Post reported that NIH workers found ricin, the bacteria that cause plague, and other so-called "select agents" where they weren't supposed to be. Meanwhile, FDA found staphylococcal enterotoxin in a lab that wasn't supposed to handle it. Select agents are "biological agents and toxins have been determined to have the potential to pose a severe threat to both human and animal health, to plant health, or to animal and plant products," according to the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention. There may be more coming: The White House Office of Science & Technology Policy has requested a safety stand-down in which government labs and nongovernment labs that receive federal funding are encouraged to do "an immediate sweep of their facilities that possess, use, or transfer human, animal, or plant infectious agent or toxin holdings to identify Biological Select Agents and Toxins (BSA) and ensure their proper registration, safe stewardship, and secure storage or disposal," according to an Aug. 18 memo. An Aug. 27 NIH notice says that its labs are conducting inventories of infectious agents and toxins. I'm sure all scientists can imagine what may have happened here: Someone left without clearing their bench or their lab. Someone else took over. Instead of cleaning out, they pushed the samples to the back of the fridge or storage area. Repeat. But someone, someday has to deal with it. Last year, the University of California, Davis, chemistry department cleaned out more than 10,000 lb of hazardous waste that had accumulated over decades, department safety manager Debbie M. Decker said in a talk at the ACS Meeting in San Francisco last month. Potentially explosive compounds filled a roughly 10 ft3 bunker, and it took about six months to get everything removed from campus for disposal, Decker said. So far, no one at NIH has gotten ill from the old samples. Nor was anyone at UC Davis hurt. But was it worth the risk not to clean out samples, reagents, or solvents sooner? Even if you think you might use something someday, will you trust that it's still good by then? Delaying disposal often just makes cleaning out more expensive, too, especially if you can no longer read a label or something becomes potentially explosive over time, such as with diethyl ether...

Read More
Safety compliance as a route to better safety culture
Jul11

Safety compliance as a route to better safety culture

One of the things that came up at the National Academy of Science's "Safety Culture in Academic Laboratories" committee meeting a couple of weeks ago was the idea that safety compliance leads to a better safety culture. Many safety professionals say that a culture of compliance is definitely not the best safety culture. Compliance is about box-ticking on things like standardized training and lab inspections. A good safety culture means that people are thinking through, talking about, and paying attention to what they're doing so they're actually working safer. Compliance will come from a good safety culture, but a good safety culture will not necessarily arise from compliance. Others argue, however, that safety culture can be improved through compliance. "It's worked well for us to develop our safety culture through ensuring compliance," because the compliance component promoted interactions between researchers and safety professionals, said Robert Eaton, director of environmental health and safety at the University of California, San Francisco. That only works if those interactions on compliance are positive, I suspect. In an organization in which researchers do not respect or understand the role of safety staff, then compliance is unlikely to do much for the overall safety culture. But perhaps compliance is an essential step en route to a better safety culture? Maybe organizations need some sort of base-level safety compliance to be able to move people to the next level--maybe people can't be brought to think critically about what they're doing when they're not even bothering with the basics of eye protection and closed-toe shoes. Representatives from Sandia and Lawrence Berkeley national laboratories presented what they're doing to push their organizations beyond what sounded like more of a compliance culture to more of a critical thinking culture. To the academics in the room, "You're at a state we were at 20 years ago," said J. Charles Barbour, director of the Physical, Chemical, & Nano Sciences Center at Sandia. Even if compliance culture is a necessary phase, though, perhaps academia can take advantage of the knowledge in industry and government labs to move people faster to critical thinking and safer work practices. One more meeting tidbit: Stanford University chemistry professor Robert Waymouth's suggestion for how to get recalcitrant faculty on board with lab safety programs was to appeal to their egos--in his words, their "desire for excellence"--with the explicit goal of being better than and informing industry rather than the other way around. (Along with, I hope, a desire not to have their lab members get hurt.) A final note: At the start of the open session, committee chair Holden Thorp noted that topics discussed during information-gathering do not necessarily indicate...

Read More