# Accessible eyewash stations



## Codegeek (Dec 21, 2011)

I have a situation where we are trying to provide an emergency eyewash station that will comply with accessibility standards.  However, there is no clear language in ADA or the A117.1 specific to eyewash stations.  We've got a clear floor space designation but my concern has to do with the height and the distance from the front as well as the wall to the water discharge.  For drinking fountains, the dimensions are 15 inches minimum from the wall with 5 inch maximum from the front with a maximum height of 36 inches.  For reach ranges with a 5 inch reach projection, the maximum height is 42 inches.  However, this isn't really a reach range we're dealing with but rather the necessity to get water on one's face and I'm concerned that the proposed 41 inches in the diagram is too high.  
	

		
			
		

		
	

View attachment 1169

	

		
			
		

		
	
Does anyone have any insight or suggestions on this?  Thanks.

View attachment 1630


View attachment 1630


/monthly_2011_12/eyewash.JPG.377c6e7695a9e831ac2c78ec53ba797c.JPG


----------



## Codegeek (Dec 22, 2011)

Mark, are you out there?  I know California has some specifics on this issue and I thought you might be able to point me in that direction.


----------



## mark handler (Dec 22, 2011)

Eyewash Stations are regulated by Occupational Safety and Health Division = OSHA

They use ANSI/ISEA Z358.1-2009 as a standard

Eyewash Stations shall be

Accessible within 10 seconds. Path free from obstructions.

Training Required for all employees who might be exposed to a chemical splash.

Plumbed units activated weekly to flush lines and verify operation.

Self-contained units visually inspect fluid for change and to supplement in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions.

Flow rate of 0.4 gpm for 15 minutes required. Water nozzles 33" to 45" above floor and 6" from wall or obstruction.

*There are no Building code heights specified but 36 to 42 inches is a good height for a wheeler*


----------



## greenbubba (Apr 24, 2017)

Tacking on since the reg's are already cited, and I can find no evidence of change since original post. This article sums up the overlapping reg's nicely.
http://www.ishn.com/articles/86989-handicapped-accessible-emergency-showers-eyewashes

Our university often has to add an eyewash fairly often, when the lab's hazardous material uses change. Our lab inspector prefers a sink mounted eyewash since the drain is already there, and this is a good height. Of course he primarily concerned with ANSI Z358.1 only. Initially I thought this was a good solution as long as the eyewash was equipped with a drench hose. My thinking on the drench hose was a wheeler or small person could access the eyewash (within side reach ranges) and pull the hose to a comfortable level. However, I'm not sure someone with inability to grasp the fixture and hold the squeeze handle is accommodated. Similarly my lab dude does not like the squeeze handle in that emergency use calls for 15 minutes of eye-washing, which is a long time to squeeze. Makes sense and one could interpolate that based upon ADA for faucets and door knobs.

For employee work areas we advise the user that when disabled staff is hired, they must spend the money to accommodate staff. New eyewash, fume hood, workstation, etc. 

However, for any teaching lab we require compliance with the 5% accessible rule (students are not employees). That leaves me thinking we should install two eye washes. Not a big deal in new labs, but in retrofitting labs this can become a hot button issue. One could be sink/deck mounted for those who may have trouble bending. The second should be wall mounted along with clear floor area, protruding object requirements, etc. Third option would be wall mounted with a high and low eyewash, similar to a typical dual high-low water cooler installation.

My goal is to be consistent with these requests, and allow the lab (who generally pays for retrofits) some reasonable flexibility.

I'm basically looking for comments on my logic. Or am I making a mountain out of a mole hill requiring two? 

Thanks,
Charlie


----------



## ADAguy (Apr 24, 2017)

Treat similar to an accessible DF. The spout is close enough to the front and with a high enough stream to wash ones eyes. DF's have the clear knee space so your only concern would then be perpendicular or side approach. Follow ADA for clear floor space and reach ranges confirm that the eye wash meets those min/max and it becomes a performance issue.


----------



## north star (Apr 24, 2017)

*& = &*

greenbubba,

Nice article in your Link.
For us visually challenged...







Here's another related Article Link with dimensions, obtained thru ***greenbubba's***
Link:
*http://www.ishn.com/articles/101026-emergency-showers-and-eyewash-stations-your-guide-to-2014-ansi-z3581-revisions-best-practices*


*& = &*


----------



## greenbubba (Jan 6, 2020)

I seem destined to revisit this issue every couple of years. We have decided that when lab safety requires an eyewash or shower then 5% or min 1 must be compliant (regardless of 'employee work area' exceptions). Still, I have not found a guide for ADA compliance specific to eyewashes and showers. Therefore, I believe you have to depend on reach requirements, floor clearances, etc. to determine compliance. Considering that the spout height requirements for drinking fountains basically addresses placing your face over a spout, it seems to me that a high/low eyewash is also necessary.


----------



## ADAguy (Jan 6, 2020)

interesting observation, Hmmm?


----------



## classicT (Jan 6, 2020)

For eyewash, provide the bottle type within the accessible reach range or a unit on a hose (check this link out).

For shower, handle shall be within accessible reach range.


----------



## greenbubba (Jan 6, 2020)

Ty J. said:


> For eyewash, provide the bottle type within the accessible reach range or a unit on a hose (check this link out).
> 
> For shower, handle shall be within accessible reach range.


I thought of the bottle type but our safety folks don't like those because it requires the lab techs to periodically replace the water, which can get overlooked.


----------



## classicT (Jan 7, 2020)

greenbubba said:


> I thought of the bottle type but our safety folks don't like those because it requires the lab techs to periodically replace the water, which can get overlooked.


Did you see the link I posted?

https://www.eyewashdirect.com/guard...tmhCFRfbrNgrmoYUNYMh5xrwSxGyPUgxoCjYEQAvD_BwE


----------



## mark handler (Jan 7, 2020)

Ty J. said:


> Did you see the link I posted?
> 
> https://www.eyewashdirect.com/guard...tmhCFRfbrNgrmoYUNYMh5xrwSxGyPUgxoCjYEQAvD_BwE


*I see they warn CA residents but no one else about using their product
WARNING:* California Residents
This product can expose you to chemicals including Styrene, which is known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. For more information go to www.P65Warnings.ca.gov.


----------



## JPohling (Jan 7, 2020)

Ty J. said:


> Did you see the link I posted?
> 
> https://www.eyewashdirect.com/guard...tmhCFRfbrNgrmoYUNYMh5xrwSxGyPUgxoCjYEQAvD_BwE


Seems like a great option.  can be activated while on the bracket and be at a good position for someone in a chair.  and you don't have to squeeze and hold.


----------



## ADAguy (Jan 7, 2020)

JPohling said:


> Seems like a great option.  can be activated while on the bracket and be at a good position for someone in a chair.  and you don't have to squeeze and hold.





greenbubba said:


> I seem destined to revisit this issue every couple of years. We have decided that when lab safety requires an eyewash or shower then 5% or min 1 must be compliant (regardless of 'employee work area' exceptions). Still, I have not found a guide for ADA compliance specific to eyewashes and showers. Therefore, I believe you have to depend on reach requirements, floor clearances, etc. to determine compliance. Considering that the spout height requirements for drinking fountains basically addresses placing your face over a spout, it seems to me that a high/low eyewash is also necessary.



And what of floor drain placement for showers and barriers to lead wheels?

Timely topic, thank you.


----------



## ADAguy (Jan 8, 2020)

mark handler said:


> *I see they warn CA residents but no one else about using their product
> WARNING:* California Residents
> This product can expose you to chemicals including Styrene, which is known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. For more information go to www.P65Warnings.ca.gov.



Because we have more "suits" then anywhere else.


----------



## greenbubba (Jan 8, 2020)

Ty J. said:


> Did you see the link I posted?
> 
> https://www.eyewashdirect.com/guard...tmhCFRfbrNgrmoYUNYMh5xrwSxGyPUgxoCjYEQAvD_BwE


This is definitely a good option in certain situations but I'm leaning toward something like this so that 117.1 602.5 spout location 15" min from the wall is also addressed. https://www.hawsco.com/emergency-equipment/7610-axion-msr-sink-mount-eye-face-wash/


----------



## greenbubba (Jan 8, 2020)

ADAguy said:


> And what of floor drain placement for showers and barriers to lead wheels?
> 
> Timely topic, thank you.


We don't require floor drains, especially in retrofit situations. Typically a 5-gallon bucket is placed nearby for use during the required testing. Ideally, this pull-down type will be installed over an accessible sink with appropriate knee space but it could also just be wall mounted.


----------



## ADAguy (Jan 8, 2020)

Bucket won't contain 15 min. flow, no?


----------

