DCHAS-L Archives Apr 01 2010 - Re: Abbreviations

Acronyms are a problem. Solve the problem by following the advice given in the Chicago Manual of Style (mine is the 13th edition, ISBN 0-226-10390-0). Section 14.15 Agencies and Organizations states "Both in run of text (preferably after one spelled-out use) and in ...". The message is clear. I n a CHP, SOP, or other document define what the acronym means. Need I say thi s is only common sense? Carry this to the extreme. In a procedure write KBr (potassium bromide) the first time KBr appears. The resulting document may appear a bit pedantic or stilted but the chances are that it will stand up in court. Once you have established the meaning for acronyms in you workplace, use them. Just make certain that your employees have signed off as understandin g the applicable documents. Regards, Ernie Lippert On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:23 AM, wrote: > I agree with Ben. As an emergency response/hazardous waste site oriente d > field chemist and as one who routinely functions as a trainer/instructor in > the areas of hazardous waste site cleanup, hazardous materials response, and > homeland security/domestic preparedness, we are bombarded with a ton of > abbreviations which have multiple meanings that could have disastrous > consequences. One of the abbrevations that is mistaken quite frequently is > fp, which, depending upon the reference, could mean either flash point or > freezing point. Some responders do not bother to look in the index or > abbreviation section and generally assume fp to be flash point. > > In fact, FEMA, when it comes to the Incident Command System (ICS), requir es > the use of full terms when necessary and discourages abbreviations if > possible understanding that abbreviations can have different meanings to the > many different agencies responding to incidents. For example, NRC could > mean the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, National Response Center, or > National Research Council. One of the major sticking points has been > 10-codes. The problem with 10-codes is that they are not standardized an d > that can cause problems. An abbreviation section/addendum to any plan > (incident action plan, safety plan, etc.) usually alleviates a lot of the se > problems, but misunderstandings still occur. > > -------------- Original message from Ben Ruekberg : > -------------- > > I must agree about ambiguity of abbreviations. Consider the nuclear > industry (Health Physics) acronym =93ALARA,=94 which I have seen interpre ted as > =93As Low As Reasonably Achievable=94 and =93As Low As Readily Achievable .=94 To > me, there is a difference: =93achievement=94 may be difficult but extreme ly > worthwhile. In this case, the difference could have serious consequences . > > > > Ben > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU] *On Behalf > Of *wdwatt**At_Symbol_Here**COMCAST.NET > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:34 PM > *To:* DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU > *Subject:* Re: [DCHAS-L] Abbreviations > > > > I think it is risky. There are to many definitions of the same abbreviati on > or acronym out there. When I teach my class on regulations, I tell them t hat > LEPC means Local Emergency Planning Committee, but when I was in industry , > it meant that or Local Employee Participation Committee, depending on to > whom I was talking. > > Dr. Bill > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mary Ellen A Scott" > To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 2:30:01 PM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain > Subject: [DCHAS-L] Abbreviations > > To Everyone, > > > > What is your opinion of allowing laboratories to use abbreviations and > short hand *as long as* a key to those abbreviations is kept in a > conspicuous location and is clearly identified? > > > > Thoughts? and Thanks > Mary Ellen > >

=A0

Once you have established the meaning for acronyms in you workplace, u se them. Just make certain that your employees have signed off as understan ding the applicable documents.

Regards,

Ernie Lippert

=A0

On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:23 AM, <david.iacovone**At_Symbol_Here**att.net > wrote:

I agree with Ben.=A0 As an emergency response/hazardous waste site=A0o riented field chemist and as one who routinely functions as a trainer/instr uctor in the areas of hazardous waste site cleanup, hazardous materials res ponse, and homeland security/domestic preparedness,=A0we are bombarded with a ton of abbreviations which have multiple meanings that could have disast rous consequences.=A0 One of the abbrevations that is mistaken quite freque ntly is fp, which, depending upon the reference, could mean either flash po int=A0or freezing point.=A0 Some responders do not bother to look in the in dex or abbreviation section and generally assume fp to be flash point.=A0 =A0

=A0

In fact, FEMA, when it comes to the Incident Command System (ICS), req uires the use of full terms when necessary and discourages abbreviations if possible understanding that abbreviations can have different meanings to t he many different agencies responding to incidents.=A0 For example, NRC cou ld mean the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, National Response Center, or Nat ional Research Council.=A0 One of the major sticking points has been 10-cod es.=A0 The problem with 10-codes is that they are not standardized and that can cause problems.=A0 An abbreviation section/addendum to any plan (incid ent action plan, safety plan, etc.) usually alleviates a lot of these probl ems, but misunderstandings still occur.

-------------- Original message from Ben Ruekberg <bruekberg**At_Symbol_Here**CHM.URI.EDU< /a>>: --------------

I must agree ab out ambiguity of abbreviations.=A0 Consider the nuclear industry (Health Ph ysics) acronym =93ALARA,=94 which I have seen interpreted as =93As Low As R easonably Achievable=94 and =93As Low As Readily Achievable.=94=A0 To me, t here is a difference: =93achievement=94 may be difficult but extremely wort hwhile.=A0 In this case, the difference could have serious consequences.

=A0

Ben

=A0

From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of wdwatt**At_Symbol_Here**COMCAST.NET
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 20 10 4:34 PM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Abbreviations

=A0

I think it is risky. There are to many definitions of the same abbreviation or acronym out there. When I tea ch my class on regulations, I tell them that LEPC means Local Emergency Pla nning=A0Committee, but when I was in industry, it meant that or Local Emplo yee Participation Committee, depending on to whom I was talking.

Dr. Bill
----- Original Messag e -----
From: "Mary Ellen A Scott" <mas35**At_Symbol_Here**CASE.EDU>
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST. UVM.EDU
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 2:30:01 PM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
Subject: [DCHAS-L] Abbreviations

To Everyone,

=A0

What is your opinion of allowing laboratories to use abbreviations and short hand as long as< /span> a key to those abbreviations is kept in a co nspicuous location and is clearly identified?

=A0

Thoughts? and Thanks
Mary Ellen

About This Archive \|	DCHAS-L 2010 Index \|	DCHAS-L Yearly Index
Search All Posts: Advanced Search Disclaimer