Lab Coat implementation Team update - EHS

download report

Transcript Lab Coat implementation Team update - EHS

LAB COAT IMPLEMENTATION TEAM UPDATE

EHS Coordinator Lead Contact Meeting

Presented by: Mary Lindstrom

3/12/13

UPDATED LAB COAT RULE

“At a minimum, a laboratory coat or equivalent protective clothing is required for work with hazardous chemicals , unsealed radioactive materials, and biological agents at BL2 or greater.”

Chemical Hygiene Plan Template Revision 13 (1/31/2013)

APPLYING THE NEW RULE

 Some MIT groups already had more restrictive language – these should be unchanged.

 DLCs using the original CHP language could see an increase in demand for clean lab coats.

IMPLEMENTATION Create a program that will aid DLCs in providing coats people want to wear in an efficient manner.

COMMON COMPLAINTS

    Coats don’t fit Don’t know how to get clean coats Coats don’t offer protection Costs too much to buy/launder

LAB COAT CONSIDERATIONS

Safety Price Convenience

SAFETY

 There is currently no standard lab coat model at MIT with respect to safety features.

 Goal:  Identify best features available in lab coats.

 Encourage standardization of coats within research areas to promote consistency.

STYLE CONSIDERATIONS

“CLASSIC” LAB COAT RECOMMENDED FEATURE Cuffs Loose Knit/snap Front Closure Buttons Material Polyester/cotton Snaps Varies based on hazards Fit Loose/ill-fitting Neckline Low top button Color User’s choice Fitted, appropriately sized Higher neckline Color based on features

FLAME RESISTANT COATS

 Labs should have flame resistant (FR) coats available for researchers as needed based on a hazard assessment.

 FR coats (ex: Nomex) should be worn whenever working with pyrophorics.

FLAME RESISTANT COATS

 “

A coat that is advertised as flame resistant has not been tested using criteria involving flammable chemicals on the coat.

”*  Wearing FR coats is only one step to staying protected.

 Researchers should utilize other engineering controls and proper experimental techniques to limit hazards associated with flammable materials.

* Laboratory Coat Selection, Use, and Care Guidance Document

https://ehs.mit.edu/site/sites/default/files/files/LabCoatGuidance.pdf

SPLASH RESISTANT COATS

 OSHA Bloodborne Pathogen Standard: 

Personal protective equipment will be considered "appropriate" only if it does not permit blood or other potentially infectious materials to pass through to or reach the employee's work clothes, street clothes, undergarments, skin, eyes, mouth, or other mucous membranes under normal conditions of use and for the duration of time which the protective equipment will be used. * Laboratory Coat Selection, Use, and Care Guidance Document

https://ehs.mit.edu/site/sites/default/files/files/LabCoatGuidance.pdf

SPLASH RESISTANT COATS

 FR or poly/cotton coats may not provide protection needed if there is a substantial splash hazard.  If chemical splashes are a concern, use of a rubber apron over the lab coat is recommended.

 When in doubt, perform a hazard assessment!

LAB COAT CONSIDERATIONS

Safety Price Convenience

LAB COAT MODELS

CONVENIENCE

 The Lab Coat Team has researched a variety of lab coat supply and laundry models.

 Most convenient model for reusable coats involves combination rental/laundry service.

 Reduced up-front cost vs. buying coats.

 Sizes/numbers of rented coats can be changed on demand.

 Automatic repairs of minor problems.

 Automatic replacement of old coats.

LAB COAT CONSIDERATIONS

Safety Price Convenience

PRICE

 Cost savings possible when multiple labs combine resources.

 Lab Coat Team has facilitated cheaper prices from multiple laundry companies vs. previous MIT contracts.

 Request for Proposal (RFP) will potentially bring costs down even further.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

 MIT is soliciting bids for lab coat supply and laundry services using an RFP.

 Covers both rental and lab-owned coat models.

Supplier’s Questionnaire

to help MIT understand each Supplier’s capabilities. 

Price Proposal

to o utline Supplier’s pricing structure, including pricing to implement and maintain proposed solutions.

EVALUATION OF BIDS

Key Factor Evaluation Criteria Quality Overall experience and capability of Supplier meets or exceeds MIT’s mandatory requirements.

Personnel Ability to provide highly trained and experienced personnel.

Service Willingness to provide immediate response to situations or concerns as they arise.

Pricing Competitive pricing that will be guaranteed for the term of the Agreement.

Financial Stability Sound financial condition.

Commitment Willingness to work with MIT in providing on-going cost effective and quality services.

Contract Willingness to execute a contract prepared by MIT.

CENTRALIZED SERVICE

 Benefits:  Consistency across labs in coat quality and laundering  Take advantage of volume discounts  Questions to consider:  Who is in charge?

 Where are clean/dirty lab coats stored?

 How do we track inventory to limit loss?

 Which model will best serve the labs within an area?

 How is billing for a centralized service handled?

OVERALL LAB COAT GUIDANCE

 Upon completion of the RFP process, overall lab coat guidance will be provided to the MIT community.

     Information to be include: Style considerations Preferred vendor information How to set up the service (physical locations, management, billing) Ongoing monitoring of service and feedback

WHAT SHOULD YOU DO?

 If your DLC has a lab needing lab coats immediately, contact Mary Lindstrom for a summary of suppliers and contacts.

 Start considering coat supply in your DLC(s).

  Is there centralized service now?

If not, could your labs benefit from a more centralized system?

 When the preferred vendor(s) is selected by MIT, talk to your AOs and labs about how they can improve lab coat supply for their areas.

LAB COAT IMPLEMENTATION TEAM

     John Fucillo Scott Ide Dan Herrick Donna Johnson Rosa Liberman      Mary Lindstrom Michele Miele David Petricone Emily Ranken Steve Wetzel