---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 10:19:02 -0800 (PST)
From: San Diego Natural History Museum <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
     [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]
Subject: Fire and alcohol
 
This message is being cross-posted to both museum conservation and safety
lists and may be forwarded.
 
We are facing a problem that has come up at other natural history museums
when the issue of fire safety and labeling arises: namely, what are we,
really? The issue arises in dealing with what are commonly called "wet" or
"fluid" collections, those collections of animals or tissues preserved in
alcohol or other volatile solvents. The fire marshal here will continue to
cite us until we have placed a universal warning label on every jar
containing specimens in our collections. In many cases, this label is
larger than the jar label, and sometimes larger than the jar.
 
In our collections, there are literally millions of specimens in ethanol.
The number of labels which would have to be generated is in the hundreds
of thousands.
 
We label and contain containers of undispensed chemicals, but the
preservative in the specimen jars is diluted to 70% ethanol before it is
used. As John Simmons of the University of Kansas and others have shown,
the concentration level often continues to drop when specimens are stored
in the alcohol. A 70% level appears to be optimum for the prevention of
biodeterioration of specimens.
 
We are attempting to identify and isolate those specimen jars containing
any of the more dangerous solvents, but those are a tiny minority.
 
There is not yet any sort of fireproofing of the storage rooms themselves,
and no explosion-proofing. Building upgrades are in the works.
 
My question is this: since there do not seem to be fire codes written for
this type of situation (we seem to be closest to codes for liquor
warehouses), how much of this is subjective interpretation and how much is
common sense when it comes to labeling every jar? Has anyone else faced
these requirements? I am certainly willing to comply with everything we
need to do, but this one puzzles me. It will increase handling (and
consequent wear) of the specimens if the hazard label obscures the
information label. We have suggested labeling the door to the storage
area, but that is considered additional, not alternative. Comments and
advice are much appreciated.
 
Sally Shelton
Collections Conservation Specialist
San Diego Natural History Museum
[log in to unmask]