(552d) Lies of Omission: When Safety Data Sheets Don’t Communicate Reactivity Hazards

A great triumph of industrial and academic hazard awareness campaigns is the ubiquity of the safety data sheet (SDS). Thanks to consistent efforts from safety professionals, educators, regulatory agencies, and people across the chemistry and chemical engineering disciplines, the SDS is the basic expectation of most chemical safety evaluations. Under the Globally Harmonized System for Hazard Communication (GHS), SDSs identify hazards and provide guidance for handling, storage, personal protection, and emergency response. Rightfully, these documents are the first place many look when bringing a new chemical into a lab or pilot plant, performing a pre-task hazard analysis, or initiating a management of change process. However, the information on chemical reactivity hazards in an SDS may give an incomplete picture of potential worst-case scenarios. SDSs can even fail to identify significant reactivity hazards relevant in research and process development. In this talk, we discuss specific examples of chemicals for which reactivity hazards are not identified in available SDSs. We illustrate how a thorough search of the literature and appropriate chemical reactivity screening measurements can identify such hazards. We explore the reasons these innocent “lies of omission” might occur. Misconceptions about the meaning of certain GHS hazard statement codes can lead the unaware into believing that the absence of a hazard phrase indicates a chemical cannot participate in dangerous or even explosive reactions. Overall, we do not blame the SDS for its shortcomings. Instead, we encourage critical thinking and scientific due diligence when considering whether a chemical could represent a reactivity hazard.