Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Regulating Chemical Risks pp 133–150Cite as

Occupational Exposure Limits in Comparative Perspective: Unity and Diversity Within the European Union

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

This is a book about the regulation of chemical risks; this chapter specifically concerns the regulation of chemicals in the occupational setting. People are exposed to a variety of chemicals during their life; some are to our knowledge not harmful while others are. Working life may be a major contributor to a person’s accumulated chemical exposure. A number of diseases have been related to the occurrence of harmful­ substances in the occupational setting, for instance asthma, allergies and several forms of cancer. One can conclude that the risks associated with chemicals exposure and their regulation in the work place is well worth scientific scrutiny. Occupational exposure limits (OELs) are limits of concentrations of specific substances in the air, averaged over a period of time. The rationale behind OELs is that if the dosage of a chemical is ­sufficiently low, no or acceptably low adverse health effects will arise. The dose–response relationship differs of course with the different inherent traits of the specific chemical. For some chemicals evidence suggests that a negative health effect only occurs above a certain level of exposure, this means that a safe level exposure is possible­ to achieve. For many chemicals this is not the case though, either there is not enough knowledge to derive a no effect level (NOAEL), if such one does indeed exist, or there is in fact a linear dose–response relationship without any threshold. In the ­latter case low-level exposure might only lead to very low individual risks but if many ­persons are exposed the collective exposure result in substantial population effects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    When OELs are revised, decreases are much more common than increases. The yearly decrease rate of an OEL for a particular substance can be calculated as (b/a) (1/n), b being the OEL n years after the year that a was the OEL for that same substance. The decrease rate of a list is the geometric mean of the decrease rates of all its substances. The decrease rate can also be expressed as the half-life of an exposure limit. If the OEL was 200 ppm in 1990 and 100 ppm in 2005 the exposure limit has been halved in 15 years, which corresponds to an average yearly decrease of 4.5% (1–0.5(1/15)). It should be noted that the OELs in actual fact are changed in a step-wise fashion, whilst half-life is based on a linear model.

  2. 2.

    The average level of the lists of OELs was calculated by the geometric means method. The list of OELs set by the European Commission is used as a comparison list to standardize all national lists, resulting in a new list of ratios for each nation. The geometric mean of these ratios is what in this chapter is called the average level of OELs. The EU level equals 1; a geometric mean above 1 means that the OELs on average are higher than the EU OELs, and vice versa. For further elaboration on the method, including the choice of geometric over arithmetic means refer to Schenk et al (2008a).

  3. 3.

    The geometric similarity is a measure of the distance of the national OELs from the EU OELs. In assessing a particular list the ratio for each substance, between its value on the list in question and the EU list, is used. Ratios above 1 are inverted while ratios below 1 are kept, resulting in a new list of similarity ratios. The geometric mean of the similarity ratios is then calculated. It can only assume positive values below or equal to 1. A geometric mean of 1 corresponds to complete similarity and as the geometric mean decreases so does the similarity of the exposure limits to the EU OELs.

References

  • ACGIH – American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (1971) Documentation of the threshold limit values for substances in workroom air, Third Edition 1971. ACGIH, Cincinnati.

    Google Scholar 

  • ACGIH – American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (1995) Threshold limit values for chemical substances and biological exposure indices. ACGIH, Cincinnati.

    Google Scholar 

  • ACGIH – American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (2005) Documentation of the TLVs and BEIs with other worldwide occupational exposure values CD-ROM. ACGIH, Cincinnati.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigelow P., Moore D., Yassi A. (2004) Assessing the health implications for healthcare workers of regulatory changes eliminating locally developed occupational exposure limits in favor of TLVs: An evidence-based bipartite approach. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 10(4): 433–444.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Castleman B.I. (2006) Legacy of corporate influence on threshold limit values and European response. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 49: 307–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham E.A., Todd J.J., Jablonski W. (1998) Was there sufficient justification for the 10-fold increase in the TLV for silica fume? A critical review. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 33(3): 212–223.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • CEC (1980) Council Directive 80/1107/EEC of 27 November 1980 on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to chemical, physical and biological agents at work.

    Google Scholar 

  • DFG – Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (1992) Occupational toxicants volume 4. VCH Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, Weinheim, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • DFG – Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (2003) Occupational toxicants. Volume 20. Wiley VCH GmbH&Co. KGaA,, Weinheim, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dow Chemical Co. (1978) Preliminary Study into the Environmental Fate of PARADOW Blocks, May 17, 1973. TSCA 8(d) Submission 8DHQ-0978-0299. Washington (DC):1978. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (1993) Commission Directive 93/67/EEC of 20 July 1993 laying down the principles for assessment of risks to man and the environment of substances notified in accordance with Council Directive 67/548/EEC.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2003) Technical guidance document in support of the commission directive 93/67/EEC in risk assessment for new notified substances and the commission regulation (EC) 1488/94 on risk assessment for existing substances. http://www.ecb.jrc.it/tgdoc. Cited March 2007.

  • EC (2004) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions – on the practical implementation of the provisions of the health and safety at Work Directives 89/391 (Framework), 89/654 (Workplaces), 89/655 (Work Equipment), 89/656 (Personal Protective Equipment), 90/269 (Manual handling of Loads) and 90/270 (display Screen Equipment). COM (2004) 62 Final. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2006) Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECHA – European Chemicals Agency (2008) Guidance on the implementation of REACH. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment Chapter R.8: Characterisation of dose [concentration]-response for human health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elovaara E. (1998) The Nordic expert group for criteria documentation of health risks from chemicals 122. Dichlorobenzenes. Arbete och hälsa 1998: 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estonia – Estonian ministry of Social Affairs (2001) Limit values for chemical hazards in the working environment. Regulation No. 293 of the Government of the Republic of 18 September 2001. RT I [State Gazette] 2001, 77, 460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estonia–Estonian ministry of Social Affairs (2007) Limit values for chemical hazards in the ­working environment. Regulation No. 293 of the Government of the Republic of 23 October 2007. RT I [State Gazette] 2007, 55, 369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feron V.J. (2003) Setting occupational exposure limits in the European Union. In: Occupational Exposure Limits – Approaches and Criteria. Proceedings from a niva course held in Uppsala, Sweden, 24–28 September 2001. Ed. Johanson G. Arbete och hälsa, 2003: 17, Stockholm, Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finland – Arbetsministeriet (1993) HTP-värden 1993. Säkerhetsmeddelande Nr 23. Arbetsministeriet Delegationen för arbetarskydd beträffande kemiska ämnen, Tammerfors, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finland – Social – och hälsovårdsministeriet (2002) HTP-värden 2002. Social och hälsovårdsministeriet, Tammerfors, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finland - Social – och hälsovårdsministeriet (2005) HTP-värden 2005. Social och hälsovårdsministeriet, Helsinki, Finland

    Google Scholar 

  • France – Insititut National de Recherche et de Sécurité (2005) Note documentaire: Valeurs Limites d’exposition professionelle aux agents chimiques en France. ND2098. Insititut National de Recherche et de Sécurité, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Germany – Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (1995) MAK- und BAT-Werte-Liste 1995. Senatskommision zur Prüfung gesundheitsschadlicher Arbeitsstoffe. Mitteilung 31.VHC Verlagsgesellschaft, Weinheim, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Germany – Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (2000) List of MAK and BAT Values 2000. Commission for the investigation of Health Hazards of Chemical Compounds in the Work Area. Report No. 36. Wiley-VHC, Weinheim, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Germany – Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (2005) List of MAK and BAT Values 2005.Commission for the investigation of Health Hazards of Chemical Compounds in the Work Area. Report No. 41. Wiley-VHC, Weinheim, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabbe H. (2001) How does Europeanization affect CEE governance? Conditionality, diffusion and diversity. Journal of European Public Policy 8(6): 1013–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, M. (2004) The British approach to asbestos standard setting: 1898–2000. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 46(5): 534–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gromiec J. (2008) Problems concerning the integration of ‘derived-no-effect-levels’ (DNELS) into occupational safety and health regulations. In Polish. Medycyna Pracy 59(1): 65–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Group d’experts sur la santé (2003) Fiche de synthèse: 1,4-dichlorobenzene. October 2003. Acquired through e-mail 2007-11-09 INRS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haber L.T., Maier A. (2002) Scientific criteria used for the development of occupational exposure limits for metals and other mining related chemicals. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 36: 262–279.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson S.O. (1997) Critical Effects and Exposure Limits. Risk Analysis 17(2): 227–236.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson S.O. (1998) Setting the Limit. Occupational Health Standards and the Limits of Science. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson S.O., Rudén C. (2006) Evaluating the risk decision process. Toxicology 218: 100–111.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hellman B. (1992) Basis for an occupational health standard: Chlorobenzene. Arbete och hälsa 1992: 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollingsworth R.L., Rowe V.K., Oyen F., Hoyle H.R., Spencer H.C. (1956) Toxicity of paradichlorobenzene; determinations on experimental animals and human subjects. AMA Archives of Industrial Health 14: 138–147.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ICI – Imperial Chemical Industries (1980) Paradichlorobenzene: long term inhalation study in the rat. Central Toxicology Laboratory: 1980. CTL study no. PRO130 No. CTL/P/447. Unpublished report.

    Google Scholar 

  • JBRC – Japan Bioassay Research Center (1995) Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of 1,4-dichlorobenzene in F344/DuCrj rats and Crj:BDF1 mice (two years inhalation studies). Report to the Ministry of Labour in Japan. November 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippert B., Umbach G., Wessels W. (2001) Europeanization of CEE executives: EU membership negotiations as a shaping power. Journal of European Public Policy 8(6): 980–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, G., Rosner, D. (1995) The limits of thresholds – silica and the politics of science, 1935 to 1990. American Journal of Public Health 85(2): 253–262.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen G.D., Øvrebø S. (2008) Background, approaches and recent trends for setting health-based occupational exposure limits: a minireview. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 51(3): 253–269.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • NTP – US National Toxicology Program (1987) Technical report on toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of 1,4-dichlorobenzene in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (gavage studies). Research Triangle Park (NC): National Toxicology Program NT;1987. NIH Publication No. 87–2575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piney M. (1998) Exposure limits and health risks arguments for a paradigm shift. In: Bal, R. and Halfmann, W. (eds) The Politics of Chemical Risk. Scenarios for a Regulatory Future. Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poland – The Minister of Labour and Social Policy (1998) The ordinance on the maximum admissible concentrations and intensities of harmful to health agents in the working environment. Journal of Laws 1998, No 79, item 513, Poland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poland – The Minister of Labour and Social Policy (2002) The Ordinance on the maximum admissible concentrations and intensities of harmful to health agents in the working environment. Dziennik Ustaw, No 217, item 1833, Poland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poland – The Minister of Labour and Social Policy (2005) The Ordinance on the maximum ­admissible concentrations and intensities of harmful to health agents in the working environment, Dziennik Ustaw 2005, No. 212, item 1769, Poland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley R.A., Chart I.S., Doss A., Gore C.W., Patton D., Weight T. M. (1980) Paradichlorobenzene long term inhalation study in the rat. Macclesfield (UK): ICI Central Toxicology Laboratory. Unpublished report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudén C. (2001) The use and evaluation of primary data in 29 trichloroethylene carcinogen risk assessments. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 34: 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudén C. (2004) Acrylamide and cancer risk – expert risk assessments and the public debate. Food and Chemical Toxicology 42: 335–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk L., Hansson S.O., Rudén C., Gilek M. (2008a) Occupational exposure limits: a comparative study. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 50: 261–270.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk L., Hansson S.O., Rudén C., Gilek M. (2008b) Are occupational exposure limits becoming more alike within the European Union? Journal of Applied Toxicology 28: 858–866.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk L. (2010) Comparison of Data Used for Setting Occupational Exposure Limits. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health16: 249–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • SEG – Scientific Expert Group (1994) Recommendation from Scientific Expert Group on Occupational Exposure Limits for 1,4-Dichlorobenzene. SEG/SUM/65, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweden – Arbetarskyddsstyrelsens Författningssamling (1996) Hygieniska gränsvärden och åtgärder mot luftföroreningar, AFS 1996: 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweden – Arbetarskyddsstyrelsens Författningssamling (2000) Hygieniska gränsvärden och åtgärder mot luftföroreningar, AFS 2000: 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweden – Arbetarskyddsstyrelsens Författningssamling (2005) Occupational exposure limit ­values and measures against air contaminants, AFS 2005: 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • UK – Health and Safety Executive (1995) Occupational Exposure Limits 1995. HSE Books, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • UK – Health and Safety Executive (2000) Occupational Exposure Limits 2000. HSE Books, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • UK – Health and Safety Executive (2005) List of approved workplace exposure limits. http://www.hse.gov.uk/coshh/table1.pdf. Cited March 2007.

  • US EPA – US Environmental Protection Agency (1996) One year study of p-dichlorobenzene administered orally via capsule to beagle dogs. Monsanto Company, Environmental Health Laboratory (EHL). No. ML-94-210. Project No. EHL 94093. Unpublished report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincent J.H. (1998) International exposure standards: a review and commentary. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 59: 729–742.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor A., Angerer J., Arnaud J., Claeys F., Kristiansen J., Mazarraza O., Menditto A., Patriarca M., Pineau A., Valkonen S., Weycamp C. (2007) Differences in national legislation for the implementation of lead regulations included in the European directive for the protection of the health and safety of workers with occupational exposure to chemical agents (98/24/EC). International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 80: 254–264.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walters D. (2002) The framework directive. In: Walters, D., and Lang, P. (eds) Regulating Health and Safety Management in the European Union. A study of the dynamics of change. College of Europe Publications, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters D., Grodzki K. (2006) Beyond Limits? Dealing with Chemical Risks at Work in Europe. Elsevier, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Södertörn University, SE 141 89, Huddinge, Sweden

    Linda Schenk

Authors
  1. Linda Schenk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Linda Schenk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Political Science, Södertörn University, Alfred Nobels allé 7, Flemingsberg, 14189, Sweden

    Johan Eriksson

  2. , Department of Political Science, Södertörn University, Alfred Nobels allé 7, Flemingsberg, 14189, Sweden

    Michael Gilek

  3. , Philosophy Unit, Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 78B, Stockholm, 10044, Sweden

    Christina Rudén

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schenk, L. (2010). Occupational Exposure Limits in Comparative Perspective: Unity and Diversity Within the European Union. In: Eriksson, J., Gilek, M., Rudén, C. (eds) Regulating Chemical Risks. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9428-5_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation