Immediate actions taken in Case Study 2 – Unlabelled Powders in Lab included:

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question asks about the immediate actions taken in Case Study 2 – Unlabelled Powders in Lab. Here are the options, examined one by one to understand what each claims.
Option a) The issue was identified and reported into the University hazard reporting system (ERMS). This statement asserts that reporting to ERMS occurred as an immediate step. If the case study indicates that the issue was formally logged in ERMS, this would be true; otherwise it would be false. In many lab safety scenarios, documenting hazards is an early move, but we need to rely on the case specifics.
Option b) The items were still present in the lab 2 weeks later. This describes a persistence of the hazard. If the case notes show the powders remained after two weeks, this would be accurate; if they were removed or controlled promptly, this would be incorrect. The timing is crucial to judge this claim.
Option c) An action plan was created, and responsible person assigned for its completion. This is a procedural step that often follows hazard identification: assign accountability and outline steps. If the case study describes such an action plan with a designated owner, this option is true; if not, it is false.
Option d) Both a & b. This would be true only if both a) and b) are correct according to the case details. If either a or b is incorrect, this combined statement is also incorrect.
Option e) Both a & c. This claims that both reporting to ERMS and the creation of an action plan with assignment occurred. If the case study indeed notes that the issue was reported and that an action plan with an owner was established, this option would be correct; otherwise it would not.

Now, evaluating each option with the aim of distinguishing true from false statements: a) depends on whether formal ERMS reporting was performed; if the documentation shows ERMS entry, it is correct, otherwise not. b) hinges entirely on whether the powders remained two weeks later; absence of persistence would render this false, while persistence would make it true. c) hinges on presence of an action plan and assignment; if the materials were scheduled for remediation with a named responsible person, it is correct, else not. d) is only valid if both a) and b) are individually correct. If either one is wrong, d) is incorrect. e) is only valid if both a) and c) are correct; it would be incorrect if either reporting or action planning is not evidenced in the case.
Finally, the combination that matches typical immediate corrective processes in many lab safety case studies is when both reporting and the assignment of an action plan with a responsible person occurred, corresponding to option e. This aligns with the standard sequence of first acknowledging and reporting a hazard, then setting concrete follow-up tasks with accountability.

Immediate actions taken in Case Study 2 – Unlabelled Powders in Lab included:单项选择题

类似问题

Safe Laboratory Practices Which safe laboratory practices should be observed before commencing any work in the laboratory? Select all that apply.

Solid, fully-covered shoes are required in lab in order to: (select all correct answers)

Where can a lab student safely store their backpack in 100A labs?

I have read and understood the general teaching laboratory risk assessment

While working on an experiment in the lab, I have to ... (select all that apply)

Where should I place my bag in the lab? (select all that apply)

Which one statement below is correct?Select one:

If you wish to borrow a piece of equipment from the laboratories you should:

更多留学生实用工具

智能学习助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单