| About This Archive | | DCHAS-L 2004 Index | | DCHAS-L Yearly Index | |
Check out Safety Emporium for your N95, N99, and face shield needs.
|
Previous by Date: Subject: Re: Visorgogs Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:12:52 GMT Author: "mrsafetyman**At_Symbol_Here**juno.com" |
Next by Date: Subject: Re: Visorgogs Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:18:03 EST Author: ACTSNYC**At_Symbol_Here**CS.COM |
Hmmmmm. Who do you think is on the Z87.1 committee? Some of them are the very manufacturers you want the committee to prevail upon! And this is something they don't want to do. It isn't that they haven't thought of it. They obviously know this would be easy for consumers and they are not interested in providing it. Read the list of committee members at the beginning of the standard. Monona Rossol - (been around a LONG TIME, and sit on many standard setting committees. Usually I am the only consumer oriented person in the room.) In a message dated 11/9/04 8:14:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, Labsafe**At_Symbol_Here**aol.com writes: > Depending on how strongly you feel about this, you might want to share your > thoughts (and mine) with the Z-87.1 committee at ASSE in Skokie, IL. ... > Jim > > PS. No one is suggesting that there is no labeling. The solution is > simple. The Z-87.1 committee should ask the manufacturer to put a letter (from the > selection chart) after the numbers to indicate which type of device it is. > An elegant solution (if I do say so myself)! > > >
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post