Next Article in Journal
Longitudinal Study of Metabolic Biomarkers among Conventional and Organic Farmers in Thailand
Next Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of Stoffenmanager and a New Exposure Model for Estimating Occupational Exposure to Styrene in the Fiberglass Reinforced Plastics Lamination Process
Previous Article in Journal
Does Emotion Regulation Predict Gains in Exercise-Induced Fitness? A Prospective Mixed-Effects Study with Elite Helicopter Pilots
Previous Article in Special Issue
AltrexChimie, a Web Application for the Management and the Interpretation of Occupational Exposure Measurements to Chemical Substances
Article

Comparison between Communicated and Calculated Exposure Estimates Obtained through Three Modeling Tools

1
Dipartimento di Scienza e Alta Tecnologia, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Via Valleggio 11, 22100 Como, Italy
2
TEAM mastery S.r.l. Via Ferrari 14, 22100 Como, Italy
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(11), 4175; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17114175
Received: 20 May 2020 / Revised: 8 June 2020 / Accepted: 9 June 2020 / Published: 11 June 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modeling Tools for Occupational Exposure Assessment)
This study aims to evaluate the risk assessment approach of the REACH legislation in industrial chemical departments with a focus on the use of three models to calculate exposures, and discuss those factors that can determine a bias between the estimated exposure (and therefore the expected risk) in the extended safety data sheets (e-SDS) and the expected exposure for the actual scenario. To purse this goal, the exposure estimates and risk characterization ratios (RCRs) of registered exposure scenarios (ES; “communicated exposure” and “communicated RCR”) were compared with the exposure estimates and the corresponding RCRs calculated for the actual, observed ES, using recommended tools for the evaluation of exposure assessment and in particular the following tools: (i) the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals Targeted Risk Assessment v.3.1 (ECETOC TRA), (ii) STOFFENMANAGER® v.8.0 and (iii) the Advanced REACH Tool (ART). We evaluated 49 scenarios in three companies handling chemicals. Risk characterization ratios (RCRs) were calculated by dividing estimated exposures by derived no-effect levels (DNELs). Although the calculated exposure and RCRs generally were lower than communicated, the correlation between communicated and calculated exposures and RCRs was generally poor, indicating that the generic registered scenarios do not reflect actual working, exposure and risk conditions. Further, some observed scenarios resulted in calculated exposure values and RCR higher than those communicated through chemicals’ e-SDSs; thus ‘false safe’ scenarios (calculated RCRs > 1) were also observed. Overall, the obtained evidences contribute to doubt about whether the risk assessment should be performed using generic (communicated by suppliers) ES with insufficient detail of the specific scenario at all companies. Contrariwise, evidences suggested that it would be safer for downstream users to perform scenario-specific evaluations, by means of proper scaling approach, to achieve more representative estimates of chemical risk. View Full-Text
Keywords: occupational exposure assessment; advanced REACH tool (ART); ECETOC TRA; STOFFENMANAGER®; scaling; exposure scenario; risk characterization ratio; occupational exposure models; REACH occupational exposure assessment; advanced REACH tool (ART); ECETOC TRA; STOFFENMANAGER®; scaling; exposure scenario; risk characterization ratio; occupational exposure models; REACH
MDPI and ACS Style

Spinazzè, A.; Borghi, F.; Magni, D.; Rovida, C.; Locatelli, M.; Cattaneo, A.; Cavallo, D.M. Comparison between Communicated and Calculated Exposure Estimates Obtained through Three Modeling Tools. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4175. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17114175

AMA Style

Spinazzè A, Borghi F, Magni D, Rovida C, Locatelli M, Cattaneo A, Cavallo DM. Comparison between Communicated and Calculated Exposure Estimates Obtained through Three Modeling Tools. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(11):4175. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17114175

Chicago/Turabian Style

Spinazzè, Andrea, Francesca Borghi, Daniele Magni, Costanza Rovida, Monica Locatelli, Andrea Cattaneo, and Domenico M. Cavallo. 2020. "Comparison between Communicated and Calculated Exposure Estimates Obtained through Three Modeling Tools" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 11: 4175. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17114175

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop