Domain: Waste Management & Environmental Services
Question:
An RG2 lab autoclaves all solid biohazard waste on-site. A review shows that common autoclaved items are regularly contaminated with small amounts of organic solvents. This practice has never been formally reevaluated. List the steps you would take to reassess the waste stream, manage the risk immediately, and update the program so the new rules are consistently followed going forward. If you tell me which style you want to standardize on for your dataset (memo vs email vs "next 24 hours" vs checklist), I'll stick to that pattern and vary the phrasing so it doesn't feel templated.

Expected points in a correct answer:
States that risk assessment should govern waste management across collection, handling, storage, treatment, and disposal
Re-characterize the waste stream due to solvent contamination.
Formally re-runs the risk assessment and procedure review based on the re-characterized waste stream.
States that the waste program is expected to be periodically reviewed or reassessed.
States that "nothing bad has happened yet" is not a defensible basis for continuing the treatment pathway when hazards have changed.
Puts an immediate hold on autoclaving any biohazard waste that includes chemical contamination until the review is complete.
Isolates solvent-contaminated biohazard waste as a separate, non-comingled stream during the review.
States you should never autoclave infectious waste that contains mixtures of chemicals/corrosive/volatile/explosive/radioactive materials.
Initiates documented waste characterization review.
Includes running a documented waste characterization review with Biosafety (biological hazard controls).
Includes Environmental/waste compliance in the documented waste characterization review.
Includes lab operations (what's happening upstream, causing solvent carryover) as a stakeholder in the documented waste characterization review
States the review evaluates chemical compatibility of autoclaving for this stream.
States the review evaluates secondary risks such as volatilization, residue concerns, and downstream disposal constraints
States the review's purpose is to determine whether autoclaving remains appropriate for this waste stream.
States that documented review is needed to make the decision defensible instead of relying on "we've always done it this way."
Creates an enforceable decision rule that classifies items as either "trace solvent carryover" or "chemical contaminated/mixed stream."
Defines the "trace solvent carryover" category as eligible only if it can be justified safely and remains compliant.
Defines the "chemical contaminated/mixed stream" category as not allowed to go to the autoclave.
States the decision rule is intended to make decisions risk-based and repeatable (not inconsistent judgment calls).
If waste is chemically contaminated/mixed, require segregation at the point of generation.
If items are chemically contaminated/mixed, requires applying the label such as "Chemical Contaminated - DO NOT AUTOCLAVE."
If items are chemically contaminated, routes them through the chemical/mixed-waste pathway (not the autoclave).
States the chemical/mixed-waste pathway may require off-site treatment depending on site program.
As a corrective action, assesses upstream assay/workflow steps to identify and address the root cause of solvent carryover
Implements upstream process changes to reduce solvent carryover and prevent recurrence.
States that reducing mixed-waste generation helps prevent recurrence.
Updates the waste handling program plan to reflect revised waste descriptions and treatment decisions.
States that relevant workspace SOPs are updated to reflect the new waste handling rules
Delivers training/communication so staff follow the new pathway going forward.
Treats the situation as a real waste-stream change requiring formal action, not "business as usual."
States the decision rule aligns with the template's expectation for structured program controls.