E-News for July 2002
Greetings ALMA Members,
The hazards of chemical exposure, sharp tools, electrical devices, flammables, corrosives, and many other dangers associated with the equipment or materials used in the laboratory are well known to our personnel-- lab managers expend significant resources on training and protective equipment to safeguard the staff from these potential dangers. Threats to physical security have not typically been considered as part of these safety efforts or were treated in a cursory manner since the risk seemed negligible. The continuing terrorist threat has changed this perception. The chemical industry is taking a new look at security and the American Chemistry Council has added a new security code to its Responsible Care program. While the direct threat to laboratories is still low and we are generally not on the front lines of security efforts, we may still play a role. For example, a phoned threat may be answered by one of the lab staff, especially if plant phones roll into a continuously manned lab during off-hours. The staff may need training on how to handle these calls with instruction on what to listen for, what questions to ask, who to notify, and other procedures to follow. Refresher training on monitoring visitors and vendors who come into the lab might also be appropriate. Security might be a topic worthy of at least a monthly safety meeting.
Many lab managers, especially those supporting a production operation, have struggled with the issue of how to handle retest/resample requests. This issue typically arises when the client lacks confidence in a lab result or when a production operation wants to move marginal material into the specification range. With the lean staffing levels typical of today's labs, this issue can become an operational problem if the volume of retest/resample requests becomes too large. While written policies were once relatively rare, more labs seem to be negotiating reasonable rules with the client to formalize the terms under which retest/resample is permissible. Some approaches impose penalty charges for retest results where the lab's initial result is confirmed while others attempt to establish statistical rules based upon known test error to determine when and how many retests are permissible. Generally, these rules are applied only when results indicate that product is out-of-specification although logically the same rules should also apply to product marginally within specification. This point illustrates that the issue is not strictly technical but has commercial/political implications that realistically must be addressed by any policy. Innovative approaches are needed to define rules that achieve the right balance and consistency between technical merit and commercial reality. Surely there must be managers who have explored this problem in depth and have practical solutions that could be shared in Managing the Modern Laboratory.
If you have any comments, cost saving suggestions, opinions, etc. let me hear from you .
Wayne