Hi Dan
You make some interesting comments, but unfortunately the issues that Jeff Simpson raises is not only complex but goes beyond that of health and safety. In fact, this is an issue that has been raised by HSE Division on numerous occasions with Chem Ed Division, Course Accreditation Committee and the Board. There are many factors that have contributed to this problem. In short there is a:
- lack of understanding between the difference between OHS safety inductions (as required by all universities before students can go into a laboratory) and actually understanding the regulatory framework (which is managed by at least nine regulatory bodies) that applies to the importation, manufacture, use. handling, use, transport and disposal of chemicals.
- a lack of Course Co-ordinators and academics not being prepared to include relevant content in their courses, and
- a lack of industry consultation (and consultation within the RACI) by those who develop the Chemistry Academic Standards Statement, and the Chemistry Teaching Learning Outcomes (TLO's) divisions within the RACI relating to the the Teaching Learning Outcomes.
However, what concerns me that we are now seeing a distinct discrepancy between the Science TLO - (5.3 demonstrating knowledge of the regulatory frameworks relevant to their disciplinary area and personally practising ethical conduct) to a somewhat watered down version that appears as the Chemistry TLO 5.3 (recognising the relevant and required ethical conduct and behaviour within which chemistry is practised). These are significantly different in context and content.
What we need is not just graduate chemists who behave in an ethical manner, but who understand the somewhat complicated regulatory framework that is chemical regulation within Australia. Until the RACI and those who seek to accredit courses and determine content understand the regulatory framework, and how it applies to a chemical's lifecycle we will continue to see an increase is preventable incidents.
Regards
Lisa
------------------------------
Lisa Stevens
Principal OHS Consultant
Lisa J Stevens And Associates
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 02-05-2024 09:36
From: Daniel Turner
Subject: Lack of basic Chemical Management knowledge by Senior Managers that result in Dangerous Situations
HI Jeff,
Great to speak to you yesterday and thank you for raising this important question via MyRACI, as I would hope that it should solicit some contributions from members active on this community-even if only privately with you directly.
The criminal culpability of business owners in the activities of their operations that result in death shall surely be a driver for change. However, without any legislated requirement, it'll always be those wishing to shave their costs that will inevitably flout or circumvent safeguards in the handling of hazardous chemicals.
Any loss of life or damage to the environment due to intentional mismanagement of chemicals that leads to a dangerous situation must be called out.
All the best with your continued endeavours to raise awareness in this important area of chemical safety.
Dan
Original Message:
Sent: 01-05-2024 22:31
From: Jeff Simpson
Subject: Lack of basic Chemical Management knowledge by Senior Managers that result in Dangerous Situations
For example in Melbourne in late 2023 we had two deaths from fires started by static discharges from pouring Hydrocarbons into IBCs with no bonding and grounding in place.
I am interested in everyone's experience in Australia and New Zealand of Dangerous Situations for humans and the environment, in the last 15 years, that have occurred from lack of basic Chemical Management knowledge by Senior Managers in businesses, in Authorities, in technical Associations.
Then what do we need to do to ensure Senior Managers have sufficient Chemical Management knowledge for their business, Authority, or technical Association?
Jeff.Simpson@haztech.com.au
www.haztech.com.au
------------------------------
Jeff Simpson
Chemicals Management Consultant
------------------------------