1. EHS Coordinator- Lead Contact Meeting Presented by: Mary Lindstrom LAB COAT IMPLEMENTATION TEAM UPDATE 3/12/13

2. “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.” UPDATED LAB COAT RULE Chemical Hygiene Plan Template Revision 13 (1/31/2013)

3.  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. APPLYING THE NEW RULE

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

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

6. LAB COAT CONSIDERATIONS Price Convenience Safety

7.  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. SAFETY

8. STYLE CONSIDERATIONS “CLASSIC” LAB COATRECOMMENDED FEATURE CuffsLooseKnit/snap Front ClosureButtonsSnaps MaterialPolyester/cottonVaries based on hazards FitLoose/ill-fittingFitted, appropriately sized NecklineLow top buttonHigher neckline ColorUser’s choiceColor based on features

9.  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

10.  “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. FLAME RESISTANT COATS * Laboratory Coat Selection, Use, and Care Guidance Document https://ehs.mit.edu/site/sites/default/files/files/LabCoatGuidance.pdf

11.  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. SPLASH RESISTANT COATS * Laboratory Coat Selection, Use, and Care Guidance Document https://ehs.mit.edu/site/sites/default/files/files/LabCoatGuidance.pdf

12.  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! SPLASH RESISTANT COATS

13. LAB COAT CONSIDERATIONS Price Convenience Safety

14. LAB COAT MODELS

15.  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. CONVENIENCE

16. LAB COAT CONSIDERATIONS Price Convenience Safety

17.  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. PRICE

18.  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. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

19. EVALUATION OF BIDS Key FactorEvaluation Criteria QualityOverall experience and capability of Supplier meets or exceeds MIT’s mandatory requirements. PersonnelAbility to provide highly trained and experienced personnel. ServiceWillingness to provide immediate response to situations or concerns as they arise. PricingCompetitive pricing that will be guaranteed for the term of the Agreement. Financial StabilitySound financial condition. CommitmentWillingness to work with MIT in providing on-going cost effective and quality services. ContractWillingness to execute a contract prepared by MIT.

20.  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? CENTRALIZED SERVICE

21. 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

22.  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. WHAT SHOULD YOU DO?

23.  John Fucillo  Scott Ide  Dan Herrick  Donna Johnson  Rosa Liberman  Mary Lindstrom  Michele Miele  David Petricone  Emily Ranken  Steve Wetzel LAB COAT IMPLEMENTATION TEAM