A professional chemist doing for profit chemistry is not a hobbyist

Earlier this week Greg Laden posted an intriguing article, Home Chemistry Hobbyist Shut Down in Massachusetts. He had picked up on this story via a post at the MAKE magazine Blog, Home science under attack. Both of the blogs where basing their commentary on this one article from the August 9th edition of the Worcester Telegram & Gazette. Let me start by summarizing the story as reported by two local newspapers, see the links below for the full text of the seven newspaper articles I found.

On the afternoon of August 5th 2008 the Marlborough Massachusetts Fire Department responded to a call of a fire in a two story house on Fremont Street. When they arrived they found a fire in a window air conditioner of a second floor bedroom and the lone occupant of the house at the time, homeowner Victor Deeb, had safely gotten out. The firemen put the fire out in about a minute but by that time there was more than a thousand dollars worth of smoke damage to the bedroom.  [updated 8/18 with information from Mr. Deeb’s comment] If this had happened to me I would have turned off the power to the air conditioner and put the fire out with a fire extinguisher avoiding the major smoke damage from waiting for the fire department to arrive. Since Mr. Deeb is a 71 year old who uses a cane to get around it is perfectly understandable why he called the fire department instead. [Mr. Deeb was trying to use a fire extinguisher on the fire when a passing Policeman saw the smoke and called the fire department.] (Photo of Mr. Deeb speaking to Police after the fire was put out, from The MetroWest Daily News)

The firefighters then followed standard procedures and checked that all the spaces in the house had been ventilated to remove the smoke and prevent further damage. When they went down into the basement they discovered a chemical R&D laboratory containing more than 100 unlabeled containers of chemicals [Mr. Deeb seems to dispute this]. The chemicals where in assorted containers from quart size up to 20 gallon drums some on shelves and some just sitting on the basement floor. Fire department officials attempted to find permits issued to Mr. Deeb for the storage of large quantities of chemicals but where unable to find any permits. The fire department then contacted the state fire marshal’s office who in turn called in the state bomb squad. If Mr. Deeb had obtained permits for possessing large quantities of chemicals they could have avoided the bomb squad but without the permits they had to take the safe approach and treat this as a potentially dangerous situation in a residential neighborhood. At no time did the authorities claim that Mr. Deeb was making weapons or drugs they simply had no way to know what was in the containers and without permits they could not simply take Mr. Deeb’s word for it that these unlabeled chemicals were not dangerous.

The Fire Department advised Mr. Deeb that this situation would take many hours to clear up so he should find a place to stay for a while. Mr. Deeb took the advise of the fire department and left with his family. Over the next two days the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and local authorities, with the cooperation of Mr. Deeb, removed over 1,500 containers of chemicals none of which turned out to be a biological or radioactive risk. Mr. Deeb and his family were allowed to return to their home on August 8th after the laboratory was safely dismantled and taken away. A hazardous materials cleanup company was contracted by MA DEP to test and then properly dispose of the chemicals. The Marlborough Department of Public Works is running tests to make sure none of the chemicals seeped into the town sewer system. While Mr. Deeb has likely violated numerous state and local safety regulations and laws, as of Saturday the 9th no citations had yet been issued.

This Saturday’s (8/16) Worcester Telegram & Gazette article has more details about the incident. The FBI showed up to take a look and there were thirty-five 20 gallon drums of chemicals that the hazmat contractor had to take for analysis and disposal. His laboratory was a mess with flammable chemicals stored next to the home’s furnace. By his own admission Mr. Deeb is a retired chemist who was very clearly running a for profit chemical R&D laboratory out of his basement in a residential neighborhood. He is considering suing the city for taking down his lab because he thinks his civil rights have been violated.

IMO, the fire department and other city and state officials did absolutely nothing wrong. They certainly did not violate Mr. Deeb’s civil rights because there is no civil right to possess and improperly store large quantities of regulated chemicals in your home. The officials had every right to enter his lab without a search warrant because they were called to the home by him [there] to put out a fire.

Mr. Deeb may be a very good chemist in fact judging by the number of patents he appears on it is almost a certainty. He has clearly been running a business from his home at least since 11/1/98. However he clearly does not understand laboratory safety rules, you must always properly label and store chemicals. Flammable chemicals like the acetone he had must be stored in fire proof cabinets not sitting on the floor or shelf and/or near a furnace. Mr. Deeb could not handle a small fire without the assistance of the fire department so obviously he couldn’t be trusted to handle a laboratory fire. He appears to not understand the need for permits and zoning clearance for commercial chemical research laboratories.

The reaction on the Internet is so far over the top I’m astounded. It seems that most of the people commenting on this story have made no effort to read the articles and are simply jumping to totally absurd conclusions based on preconceived notions. Here’s a list of my responses to the wild commentary and claims that are spreading across the Internet.

  1. Mr. Deebs was not a hobbyist, he freely admits this was a for profit R&D laboratory. Even without his admission the fact that he had hundreds of containers of chemicals including 35 twenty gallon drums puts him way beyond the hobbyist level.
  2. The government did not target Mr. Deeb in any way, they came to his aid when he called [put out a fire] and found him violating safety and zoning regulations.
  3. No government agency is going to come to your house because you gave your child a home chemistry set for Christmas.
  4. Having retail containers of household chemicals is not equivalent to having large quantities of industrial chemicals.
  5. The City Government of Marlborough Massachusetts is in no way comparable to the Nazi’s. Oh and it’s spelled Marlborough not Marlboro, that’s a brand of cigarettes.
  6. Thomas Edison did not set up laboratories in residential neighborhoods, he knew what he was doing could be hazardous so his laboratories where in private compounds and/or industrial districts.
  7. The police did not raid Mr. Deeb’s home, they did not kick down his door.
  8. Doing scientific research on a home computer is in no way even remotely equivalent to running an R&D laboratory with large quantities of chemicals.
  9. There was no fourth amendment violation, see number two above.
  10. That he has not yet been charged is not proof he didn’t break laws.
  11. This incident will not lead to the government burning our books.
  12. Mr. Deeb is not even remotely like a terrorist, any mention of 9/11 is absolutely ridiculous.
  13. Football is in no danger of being banned.
  14. Marlborough Massachusetts is not a police state.
  15. This is not equivalent to the two Steve’s founding Apple Computer in a garage, Woz is far too intelligent to improperly label and store large quantities of industrial chemicals.
  16. Ditto for Hewlett and Packard.
  17. Practicing putting in your living room, baking cookies for church, scrap booking and doing transcriptions are not even remotely similar to what Mr. Deeb did.
  18. The citizens of Massachusetts have rights, in fact we have some rights most other states do not grant to their citizens. e.g. Marrying the person you want to.
  19. This is not like outlawing innovation.
  20. Mr. Deeb did NOT take proper laboratory safety precautions, unlabeled and improperly stored containers is very bad.
  21. Building your own PC and running Linux on it are not going to get you into the trouble Mr. Deeb is in.
  22. The safety of Mr. Deeb’s neighbors IS the responsibility of the government.
  23. Mr. Deeb was not picked on because he was racially profiled as being of Middle Eastern descent.
  24. A hobbyist darkroom in your home is not equivalent to a R&D laboratory. A commercial darkroom on the other hand is regulated in similar ways to a R&D chemical lab.
  25. There were dangerous chemicals in Mr. Deeb’s laboratory by his own admission there was acetone. What the government officials have said is there where no biological or radiological hazards and no exceptionally explosive chemicals.
  26. Mr. Deeb did not give the fire fighters an inventory of the chemicals in his laboratory. Either he did not have an inventory or he wanted them to have to call in the bomb squad and hazmat teams, I’m guessing he didn’t have an inventory list.
  27. Making beer in your basement for personal use is not like a commercial research chemical laboratory.

I know it’s hard to research stories but that doesn’t excuse people from the obligation to examine the evidence. I’m most disappointed that so many people jump right to parroting the poorly researched and quote mined work of others to justify their preconceived notions. Any of these people who have integrity should take the time to read the articles, Google Victor M. Deeb and then post updates to correct their bogus reporting.

I have found one well researched response on the net, Mike O’Risal’s post is a very good read. Having read a number of excellent posts and comments by Mike over the past year, today I’ve added his blog to my reader and blogroll. On top of his good writing I need to start reading him regularly because he lives in my county, Worcester (pronounced Woostah in my native Yankee accent).

I’m sorry that Mr. Deeb has lost his R&D laboratory and likely will close his business. However, he should have followed the rules for running a commercial laboratory and gotten the proper permits and zoning variances. He may be ignorant of the law but that is not a valid excuse especially when you are running a for profit business.

The MetroWest Daily News articles:

Worcester Telegram & Gazette articles:

Victor Deeb’s business:

FCC News

The Do-Not-Call list has been made permanent!

The Federal Communications Commission has amended its rules to require telemarketers to honor registrations with the National Do-Not-Call Registry indefinitely. The previous rules provided that registrations would expire after five years.

This action is consistent with Congress’s mandate in the Do-Not-Call Improvement Act of 2007, which prohibits the removal of numbers from the Registry unless the consumer cancels the registration or the number has been disconnected and reassigned or is otherwise invalid. The Federal Trade Commission has already committed to retain numbers on the Registry indefinitely.

Read the full announcement here.

More DTV transition actions against retailers:

Big Lots Stores, $48K

Variety Wholesalers, $38K

BJ’s Wholesale Club, $20K

Conn’s Inc, $70K

Rent-A-Center, $60,000

Recent FCC enforcement actions

A forfeiture order of $9,000 has been issued to Christian Voice of Central Ohio, Inc., for repeatedly broadcasting commercial advertisements. At the time of the violations they held a noncommercial educational television license for WCVZ.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1092A1.txt

Digital Antenna, Inc. manufacturer of cell phone boosters and repeaters thinks, like the goofballs selling cell phone jammers, that what they do is allowed under the rules. The guys at Digital Antenna seem to think their systems are not transmitters, Doh! To top it off they apparently violated a Commission order by willfully and repeatedly failing to respond fully to a directive of the Enforcement Bureau to provide information to the FCC. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1093A1.txt

Two more retailers caught not properly labeling analog only TV’s, Value City Department Stores, Inc., ($216,000)  and Toys “R” Us, Inc., ($248,000).

Some of the previously fined retailers are challenging the authority of the FCC to fine them for violations of Section 15.117(k). AFAIK, the FCC has not made a formal response because this is going to federal court. It will be interesting to see who wins in court, if the FCC loses on this it could undermine much of the authority they need to keep our spectrum useful in the coming century. If that happens the Congress will need to re-write the legislation authorizing the FCC so, that we can have useful wired and wireless communication and broadcasting services. I’ll be following this story closely as it develops and will post when I have new information.

FCC issues $6 mil in fines against TV manufacturers and retailers

This week the FCC has taken action against television manufacturers and retailers for violating the rules regarding DTV and V-chip regulations.

From the FCC news summary:

The Commission’s DTV- related enforcement efforts have focused on protecting consumers from unknowingly buying televisions that will not allow consumers to enjoy the full benefits of the digital transition. The orders demonstrate the Commission’s commitment to strong enforcement in promoting the successful transition to digital television.

Here are links to the individual FCC actions:

Audiovox Corporation

Best Buy Co., Inc.

Circuit City

CompUSA

Fry’s Electronics

LG Electronics Inc.

Panasonic Corporation of North America

Philips Consumer Electronics North America

Polaroid Corporation

Precor Incorporated

Proview Technology

SANYO

Sears and Kmart

Syntax-Brillian

Target Corporation

Vizio, Inc.

Wal-Mart

Westinghouse Digital Electronics

 

More on Cell Phone Jammers

My post in October 2007, Cell Phone Jammer Foolishness, received a couple of interesting comments and is still attracting a lot of spam from sites that offer cell phone jammers. A recent piece of spam ended up pointing me to an excellent November 2007 New York Times article on this topic. A few examples of jammer users from that article made me realize that many of them are simply incompetent at their jobs and want to use jammers to cover up their shortcomings.

… upscale restaurant in Maryland …
The owner, who declined to be named, said he bought a powerful jammer for $1,000 because he was tired of his employees focusing on their phones rather than customers.
“I told them: put away your phones, put away your phones, put away your phones,” he said. They ignored him.

This owner can’t control his employees so he uses an illegal jammer to make up for his inability to discipline his employees. IMO, he deserves to go bankrupt as he is clearly not cut out to run a business with employees. This reminds me of the companies who’s supervisors can’t recognize when employees are under the influence of drugs and alcohol. Instead of training them to spot the problem they institute drug testing. This eliminates the drug abusers and the outside of work casual drug users while retaining the staff with drinking problems. I do not believe technology is ever a good replacement for competent managers and supervisors.

The carriers also raise a public safety issue: jammers could be used by criminals to stop people from communicating in an emergency.

This is aspect of the jammer issue I hadn’t thought about, it’s another good reason to keep the ban on all radio jamming devices.

In evidence of the intensifying debate over the devices, CTIA, the main cellular phone industry association, asked the F.C.C. on Friday to maintain the illegality of jamming and to continue to pursue violators. It said the move was a response to requests by two companies for permission to use jammers in specific situations, like in jails.

This reminds me of a comment I received on my previous post.

in need of info about jaming cell phones at a large prison , inmates are paying officers and employees some were around 500.00 bucks per phone to sneek them in effective range would have to be 1/4 mile to fully cover the site, and maybe mounted out side or on top of a bldg for max range , please notify me of any companys that sell this type of equipment.

I replied:

My first thought is that the officers and employees are breaking the law and need to be prosecuted. What other items are they smuggling in for the prisoners, weapons, money, heroin, crack, arresting the law breakers will work for all these problems. Frankly, IMHO, smuggling items into a prison is a worse breach of the law than all the prisoners in for drug possession. If the prison authorities don’t care about their employees and officers breaking the law then why should anyone help them.

That said, if the prison officials want a lazy, ignore the law breakers, way out of their problem they should consult the FCC as special licenses to do radio jamming might be available for prisons.

Since their are no special licenses or regulation waivers for prisons the only legal options they have are to use RF shielding materials in the prison or prosecute the law breakers. Another user described in the NY Times article is:

Gary, a therapist in Ohio who also declined to give his last name, citing the illegality of the devices, says jamming is necessary to do his job effectively. He runs group therapy sessions for sufferers of eating disorders. In one session, a woman’s confession was rudely interrupted.
“She was talking about sexual abuse,” Gary said. “Someone’s cellphone went off and they carried on a conversation.”
“There’s no etiquette,” he said. “It’s a pandemic.”
Gary said phone calls interrupted therapy all the time, despite a no-phones policy. Four months ago, he paid $200 for a jammer, which he placed surreptitiously on one side of the room. He tells patients that if they are expecting an emergency call, they should give out the front desk’s number. He has not told them about the jammer.

Sorry Gary but I don’t buy it that you can’t do your job effectively without breaking the law. Why don’t you just insist that your patients leave their cell phones outside when they enter a session. I’m guessing your patients don’t feel you are worth the visit if they have to follow rules of courtesy demanded by you. How can you be truly useful advising your patients if you can’t even get them to be courteous. The final example is:

… New York school bus driver named Dan.
“The kids think they are sneaky by hiding low in the seats and using their phones,” Dan wrote in an e-mail message to Mr. Thakkar thanking him for selling the jammer. “Now the kids can’t figure out why their phones don’t work, but can’t ask because they will get in trouble! It’s fun to watch them try to get a signal.”

Smooth move Dan, you can’t control the kids in your charge so you use a jammer. How would you feel if there is an accident, you are disabled and some of the kids are hurt. You can’t turn off the jammer so now any surviving children with phones or spectators nearby can’t get help as quickly as they could. Seconds can save lives so when you use a jammer you may end up preventing someone’s life from being saved. I just hope that the only people who suffer due to a situation like this are the bozo’s who feel this need to use illegal cell phone jammers.

FCC wants to make Do Not Call list permanent

Conformity Magazine pointed me to this December 4th notice from the FCC. The commission would like to eliminate the automatic expiration for the Do Not Call registry. I think every US citizen who is not employed in the telemarketing industry would like this rule change to go through.

The statement of Chairman Kevin J. Martin sums up the commission’s decision:

Today’s action tentatively concludes that telephone numbers registered in the National Do-Not- Call Registry will not expire after 5 years. The Commission continues to move forward to protect consumers who have registered their telephone numbers on the Do-Not-Call list. Consumers expect their telephone numbers to remain protected under the Do-Not-Call list until they have cancelled their registration or their telephone number is disconnected or reassigned.

Austin Hughes Solutions, Inc. busted by the FCC

The FCC has busted these guys for failing to comply with non-interference regulations.

From the Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture:

We conclude that Austin Hughes is apparently liable for forfeiture for its apparent willful and repeated violations of Section 302(b) of the Act and Section 2.803(a)(2) of the Rules by marketing nine unauthorized Class A21 digital devices prior to performing the required verification testing.

The proposed fine is $63,000.00, probably too little to make Austin Hughes change their ways.

FCC and CPSC news

Via Conformity magazine, Radio Operator Fined for Failing to Make Equipment Available for Inspection. This is important for US citizens to remember, if the FCC requests access to your property to investigate an interference claim, you are required to admit them. Failure to do so leaves you open to large fines, Mr. Winston could have avoided this $7000.00 fine if he had cooperated. Here’s the FCC’s forfeiture order for this case.

Most of the time I write about the FCC coming down hard on companies and individuals. For a change of pace here’s a case where the FCC is being very nice to an offender. The FCC issued a citation to Surveillance-Video.com for selling illegal wireless cameras. The cameras were operating at 1.2GHz which is a clearly restricted band allocated for aeronautical navigation systems. The company stopped selling the cameras as soon as they were notified of the violation so, the FCC did not fine them. The lesson here is, if your selling electronic devices and the FCC says stop, don’t resist, don’t hesitate, just stop selling them and cooperate as much as you can with the FCC. This will help you prevent receiving a big forfeiture order from them.

OK, I guess this needs to be said, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A LEGAL JAMMER. This is one of the very few areas of FCC regulation that is simple, nobody is allowed to jam radio signals of any kind. If you build, import or sell any type of jammer you can be fined if caught. Read about the latest actions on this issue over at Conformity.

Finally, the latest list of notable CPSC recalls is up at Conformity Magazine.

FCC Issues $1 Million Forfeiture Order

I think I scooped Conformity Magazine on this one, it’s not that I was trying to scoop them, I just got lucky. 😉

Last year I posted about the FCC issuing a notice of apparent liability against Behringer USA, Inc. On June 1st, the FCC released the forfeiture order for one million dollars, ouch. The FCC rejected Behringer’s claims including one that CE compliance = FCC compliance. Quote from the order:

12. We disagree. Although the CE and the FCC standards share some common elements, as the NAL noted, “[CE] testing neither is the equivalent of nor demonstrates compliance with the Commission’s technical standards.”

Lesson for all you designers, manufacturers and, importers of embedded devices, follow the FCC rules, they take their job very seriously. If FCC enforcement isn’t enough inducement think of it this way. How would you like it if an emergency professional had delays helping you or a loved one because some interfering product is being operated nearby. Think about it, RF interference isn’t usually a life or death situation but it could be.

FCC, EPA and CPSC news

Three interesting regulatory related news stories from Conformity this week.

Story one:
The FCC has turned down a request from alarm system providers who wanted an extension on the availability of the old Cellular Analog Service Requirement. It is still widely deployed as the backup link for alarm systems but the FCC will not extend the deadline past it’s termination date of February 18, 2008. This does not mean all service providers will turn off their systems on that date, it means they have the legal right to turn off their systems then. Full details are in the FCC order. After all the pushing back of deadlines the FCC had to do for analog TV service, I had figured they wouldn’t allow any further moving of this deadline.

Story two:
Safety of products made in China not so good according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). From the Conformity article:

According to the CPSC, about two-thirds of all U.S. product recalls involve imported products. Since products manufactured in China account for approximately 40% of all consumer products imported into the U.S., efforts to curb the importation of defective products from China has become a major agency priority.

See the CPSC report for details of how they’re going to keep us safer. FYI – the link in the PDF report is wrong, the China program plan page is here. While this is a good step it is vitally important that consumers watch out for themselves. If a product looks or feels unsafe, don’t buy it just because it’s cheaper than the alternatives. Remember, in the USA, regulatory action for safety doesn’t usually happen until after someone is harmed.

Story three :
EPA report on the majority of e-waste still going to landfill. From the EPA fact sheet:

About 15-20 percent were collected for recycling. The recycled/disposed split remained fairly constant between 1999-2005. Although recycling continues to increase, the percentage recycled remains constant …

This comes as no surprise to me, e-waste recycling is very inconvenient and/or expensive. If everywhere in the US had easy to use, zero cost, e-waste disposal, the number of items ending up in landfill would likely drop significantly.