MODEL OF RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHEMICALS HAZARDOUS TO HEALTH FOR THE USE OF SMALL

AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (TITLE VII-a - D.Lgs.626/94)

The model presented is currently undergoing a validation operation. Regions that
, in different ways, have participated in this trial are, in addition to Emilia-
Romagna, Tuscany, Lombardy, Veneto, Marche and Piedmont.
Premise
Alternatively, the measurement of the chemical agent is possible and widely prac
ticed, the use of risk assessment systems based on mathematical relations (or gr
aphical models) known algorithms (literally calculation procedures). Algorithms
(or models) are procedures that assign a numeric value to a number of factors or
parameters involved in determining the risk weighting for each of them differen
tly, the absolute importance and mutual evaluation on the final result. Obviousl
y, an algorithm (or model) is more efficient as the factors identified and their
"weight" are relevant to the type of risk Treaty. The factors identified are th
en placed in a simple mathematical relationship (or in a graphical model), which
provides a numerical index which gives not so much an absolute risk, as it allo
ws you to insert the value found in a "numerical scale of risk" identifying, for
the situation discussed the importance of a graduation index value calculated.
Thus assumes importance in the construction of an algorithm: the identification
of precise parameters that determine the risk, the identification of "weight" of
compensation factors against the risk, the identification number of the report
linking parameters between them ( factors additive, multiplicative, exponential,
...) the identification of the scale index values in relation to risk (eg very
low, low, medium, medium-high and high ....). The proposed model is a mode of an
alysis that allows for risk assessment in accordance with Article 72-quater of L
egislative Decree no. 626/94 (a Title VII "Protection from chemical agents") in
the model is in fact expected identification and the weight to be assigned to th
e parameters set out in Article of the law and which can not be ignored. The mod
el identifies a path simple, as simple as possible, to perform risk assessment b
y small craft enterprises, Industry, Commerce and Services without signing, at l
east at this stage, evaluations with measurement of the chemical. Finally, the m
odel should be understood as a process of "facilitation" which would allow small
and medium enterprises, the classification above or below the threshold of mode
rate risk. Should emphasize that prevention and protection of a general nature,
such as those provided by DPR 303/56 (General Norms for the Hygiene), DPR 547/55
(Rules for the prevention of accidents at work) and Article 72-d of D.Lgs.626/9
4 must be taken before the risk assessment.
2
The model for assessing the risk from exposure to hazardous chemicals
The risk R for risk assessments resulting from exposure to hazardous chemicals i
s the product of hazard and exposure to P (Hazard x Exposure).
R = PXE
The danger P is the rate of intrinsic hazard of a substance or preparation that
the application of this model is identified with the risk phrases that are used
in classification according to EU Directive 67 / 548/CEE amended. Each sentence
is assigned an R rating (score) taking into account the criteria for classificat
ion of substances and preparations, indicated in Legislative Decree 52/97, 65/20
03 and Ministerial Decree 28/04/1997 and 14/06 / 2002. The danger then P is the
potential hazard of a substance regardless of the levels at which people are exp
osed (intrinsic hazard). The exposure E is the exposure of individuals in specif
ic job. The risk R determined according to this model, takes into account the pa
rameters of Article 72-quater of Title VII bis of Legislative Decree no. 626/94:
• •
The danger P are taken into account the hazardous properties and assignment of a
 limit value professional, by the score awarded to them for the display and were
taken into account: type, duration of exposure, which is how the ' exposure, th
e amount used, the effects of preventative and protective measures taken.
The risk R in this model,€can be calculated separately for inhalation exposure a
nd dermal exposure:
Rinal = P = P x x Einal Rcute Ecute
Where a chemical agent are provided both routes simultaneously absorbing the cum
ulative risk R (Rcum) is obtained by the following calculation:
Rcum =
The ranges of variation of R are:
Rinal2 + Rcute2
0.1 <Rinal <100 1 <Rcute <100 1 <Rcum <141
3
Hazard Identification Index P
General
The transposition of Directive 98/24/EC and the subsequent imposition of Title V
II-bis of Legislative Decree no. 626/94 has confirmed that in the presence of ch
emical risk to the health of the general measures of protection under Article. 3
Leg. 626/94 and Articles. 9, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25 and 26 DPR 303/56 should in
any case always be strictly observed, of course together with the measures subs
equently identified with special art. 72-d Leg. 626/94 and that is:
a) b) c) d) e) f) g)
design and organization of systems of work at the workplace, the provision of ap
propriate equipment for specific work and its maintenance procedures, minimizing
the number of workers who are or might be exposed, the minimization the duratio
n and intensity of exposure, the appropriate hygiene measures, minimization of t
he number of agents present in the workplace as required processing; suitable wo
rking procedures including provisions which ensure the safe handling, in 'storag
e and transport in the workplace of hazardous chemical agents and waste containi
ng such chemical agents.
From this consideration of technical and legal consequence that a Title VII-Leg.
626/94 in no way lead to attenuation of general measures of protection of worke
rs at work, no matter what the application of Statement former, so that measures
of prevention and protection of a general nature referred to above must be appl
ied even before assessing the risk from chemicals. In other words, any model / a
lgorithm applied to the thorough assessment of chemical risks can not ignore the
preliminary implementation and priority of the principles and general measures
to protect workers. Is also useful to reiterate that if the risk from chemicals,
the health protection of workers from exposure to chemicals is increasingly tie
d to research and development of less hazardous products to prevent, reduce and
eliminate, where possible, the danger as a priority at source. The EU policy is
aimed at facilitating this vital process for the protection of human health and
in this context should be added to Title VII-bis of Legislative Decree. 626/94,
where it requires the employer to assess the risk for chemical health and safety
of workers in the selection of substances and preparations used in the producti
on process, and replace, if there is an alternative, what is dangerous with what
is or is not less dangerous. Do not forget that the use of carcinogens and muta
gens in the presence of risk from hazardous chemicals above the threshold assess
ment due to moderate, the substitution is a measure of protection mandatory and
failure to comply (artt.62 and 72 - e 1.D.Lgs paragraphs. 626/94) is penalized w
ith a default precision art. 89 paragraph 2. A) Leg. 626/94.
4
The use of models / algorithms for chemical risk assessment is also useful as a
tool that, from information equally available to all, to make choices between po
ssible chemical hazard that possess different, having the same function of use a
nd serve similar purposes, may be used in an equivalent manner. Able to discrimi
nate between chemicals with the same result of use, but different hazard means b
eing able to replace what is dangerous with what is not or has not, and then ful
fill the general measure of protection under Article . 3 paragraph 1. Lett. e) L
eg. 626/94.
Thorough assessment of chemical risk with Models / Algorithms
Confirmed and reiterated that the measures of prevention and protection of prior
ity over the general adoption of any model / algorithm for risk assessment, to p
erform in depth the process of risk assessment for health workers without making
measurements of ' agent or chemical agents in the production process is essenti
al to make the path planning to identify the intrinsic hazards of chemicals that
are used,€according to the terms and quantity of the chemical that is used and
therefore consumed in the production cycle, and exposure times of each employee.
This will make it possible to assess the chemical risks for each worker in rela
tion to their specific duties, which must be precisely identified by the employe
r and made known to the employee himself. The methodology that is proposed must
be able to assess the risk in relation to chemical hazard assessment for workers
' health and that based on the knowledge of the toxicological properties inheren
t in the short, medium and long term effects of hazardous chemicals used or shed
in the workplace according to the exposure of workers, which in turn depend on
the quantity of the chemical used or produced by the method of use and frequency
of exposure. The method indexed to be proposed will be a tool as simple as poss
ible, in which the toxicological properties of chemicals present in productive a
ctivities are evaluated and studied in order to give to any property, single or
combined graduation of danger therefore a score expressed in numbers from 1 to 1
0 (score) representing the danger P. In other words, the hazard index P aims to
synthesize a number of the health hazards of a chemical agent. It states that th
e toxicological properties valued between there are carcinogenic and / or mutage
ns, which are considered only under Title VII D.Lgs.626/94, because, legally, an
d for carcinogens or mutagens can not identifying a risk threshold below which t
he risk is moderate. Also confirms that, for carcinogens and / or mutagens, when
it comes to risk assessment in reality there is always linked to an exposure as
sessment.
5
Methods for assessing the intrinsic hazard to the health of a chemical agent. Cr
iteria for identification of the index P
The method of detecting a hazard index of P is based on the classification of da
ngerous substances and preparations established by Italian law, which, of course
, comes from directives and regulations of the EEC (67/548/CEE and following add
itions and modifications). Currently the last in our system of national legislat
ion transposing the general requirements for the classification of dangerous sub
stances and preparations is represented by Annex VIII to the Decree of the Minis
try of Health June 14, 2002, N.197 published in the ordinary supplement to Offic
ial Gazette No. 244, October 17, 2002. In the same decree was published the upda
ted list following the transposition of Directive 2001/59/EC laying XXVIII ° ada
ptation to technical progress Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 3686 hazardous sub
stances officially classified by their labeling that summarizes all hazardous pr
operties (toxicity, physico-chemical and ecotoxicological). Even the Legislative
Decree 14 March 2003, n.65 transposition of Directive 1999/45/EC of 31 May 1999
the European Parliament and Council, such a conventional method for assessing t
he health hazards of preparations of extreme importance to give proper grading t
he risk classification for health, whether official provisional tends to identif
y all the toxicological properties of substances and preparations which may pres
ent a hazard during normal handling or use. The inherent risks of dangerous subs
tances and preparations are reported in standard phrases (R phrases). These sent
ences are listed in the labeling of danger and safety data sheet, the latter now
out according to the dictates of the Ministerial Decree of 7 September 2002. By
assigning a value to the risk phrases (R phrases) single or combined properties
attributed to more dangerous and therefore the most dangerous classification is
possible to have a numerical index (score) for each hazardous chemical agent us
ed. The choice of the score higher hazardous chemical agent used multiplied by t
he index of exposure provides the opportunity to assess the risk for each chemic
al workers exposed to hazardous chemicals under any circumstances work. It 'obvi
ous that the result of the suffering of the limits of its classification criteri
a.
6
The determination of the score of danger is carried out in a weighted function o
f the hazard ranking assigned to individual categories of risk and the criteria
for the choice of symbols, indication of danger and choice of risk phrases relat
ing to the toxicological properties of hazardous chemicals in relation to routes
of exposure most relevant to the employee at work (via absorption inhaled> via
absorption through the skin / mucous> Via absorption by swallowing). Therefore,
the whole model refers both to the intrinsic hazard of chemicals to the concrete
situations that use, because the purpose of the method is to assess the chemica
l risks to health. Intrinsic hazard of an agent is a hazardous chemical characte
ristic invariable, independent of the circumstances in which it is used, the con
ditions of use are to determining the real risk, expressible as the product of i
ntrinsic hazard and degree of exposure of workers. Again, the degree of exposure
depends on many factors such as the amount of the chemical used or produced by
the method of use and frequency of exposure, ie the type of installation process
, from prevention and protection measures taken from the job, etc. ... Intrinsic
hazard of the chemical can be expressed only on a scale of relative values and
therefore to assess the hazard of chemical agents on the market or in the workpl
ace we must first provide a yardstick. The ordering of various chemicals dependi
ng on their intrinsic hazard, according to a semiquantitative scale at least, is
obvious practical value, such a scale can be created by attributing some proper
ties of substances in appropriate ratios. In the selection of properties to inde
x and weighting coefficients associated introduces an inevitable degree of arbit
rariness, but applying the same system to different chemicals, you get a compara
tive graduation uniform. The numerical result obtained by a method can only be c
onsidered indexed to the size it expresses. Furthermore it should be noted that
the methods of this type do not lend themselves to appreciate small differences
in risk and therefore a degree of uncertainty is always accompanied by the use o
f these assessment methods. In this case, these uncertainties are highlighted mo
re when it is near the threshold is determined by the writer on the moderate ris
k. Another aspect of utmost importance for proper grading the danger is alleging
that the criteria for classification and labeling of dangerous substances and p
reparations according to the directive 67/548/EEC and subsequent amendments and
additions are based on the principle that effects long term (eg. hazard category
of Toxic for reproduction), subacute or chronic allergies (eg. hazard category
of the sensitisers) are more stringent and important than acute effects.
7
The numerical index of the danger that lays graduation must take account of this
general principle. Do not forget that this principle of priority long-term toxi
cological effects than acute is the basis of applying the conventional method fo
r assessing hazard and consequent classification and labeling of preparations. H
owever, the graduation of the danger should also consider the meaning of the dif
ferent categories of risk in relation to methods used for determining the toxico
logical properties and the real dangers of the chemical to the worker. And 'why
very toxic and toxic only to the acute danger symbol with the skull and crossbon
es black on orange-yellow and the hazard of very toxic and toxic are considered,
however, although a little more dangerous respect to sensitizing inhaled exempl
ified by the symbol of St. Andrew's cross on black background yellow-orange indi
cating the danger of Harmful. Another example of grading the danger can be done
only with acute effects: the category of Very Toxic is more dangerous than the t
oxic, which is more dangerous than the Harmful based on the results of acute tox
icity expressed through oral and dermal LD50 and LC50 inhalation.
Choice of the toxicological properties to index
Indexing intrinsic toxicological properties it was considered that the toxicolog
ical properties have a primary significance in the risk assessment of chemicals
to humans.
Allocation coefficients (scores)
As has been above the toxicological properties of a chemical agent are derived f
rom the classification officer or provisional substances and preparations (R-phr
ases). In the absence of official classification, since those who enter the mark
et non-scheduled substances, alone or in preparations may carry different provis
ional classifications, you must use the provisional classification adopted by ma
nufacturers, importers or distributors of chemicals that includes the score P hi
gher. The coefficients (scores) assigned to the intrinsic properties of chemical
s are shown in the attached table. Attributing scores to the risk phrases refer
to the toxicological properties has been assessed mainly the magnitude of the cl
inical criteria as specified in DM 14/06/2002.
8
Given the low probability of occurrence, we chose to score relatively low but no
t zero in respect of the assessment of the hazard inherent in the case of effect
s due to ingestion. If an agent exerts its only dangerous if swallowed it is bel
ieved that the workplace the risk associated with this route of absorption can b
e eliminated at source by adopting proper sanitation and behavior, so it was con
sidered not to be considered in this model hazard if swallowed, while maintainin
g its values of scores within the table. He then hired an inequality between oth
er routes of introduction (dermal and inhalation) by attributing a "weight" grea
ter than the inhaled and has ensured that for each effect (harmful, toxic or ver
y toxic) the score given to each being introduced were respectively higher than
that attributed to the previous category for all routes, but less than that attr
ibuted to its category through all available channels (eg Toxic inhaled Harmful
superior to all available channels, but less than the value of Toxic all the way
). The risk phrases R39 (danger of very serious irreversible effects after singl
e exposure), R68 (possible risk of irreversible effects after a single exposure
to harmful substances) and R48 (danger of serious damage to health by prolonged
exposure long) it was considered appropriate to give the same weight, however in
relation to different categories of danger as it is very difficult to diversify
and choose the weight of an irreversible toxicological effects after a single e
xposure or after prolonged exposure. Also there is to be noted that these phrase
s are related to an irreversible effect, however differently from canonical effe
cts in the long term. In the attached table was given a score even preparations
not classified as dangerous to health, but which contain at least one hazardous
substance in an individual concentration of> 1% by weight in the weight of the g
aseous preparation, or> 0.2% volume than the volume of gas or preparation contai
ning a substance for which there are limits of expression community in the workp
lace, ie in reference to the preparations that you can access to an information
security under DM 07/09/2002 for understanding the composition of ingredients of
the preparation. It 'was given a score even for those not officially classified
as hazardous substances by inhalation and / or contact with skin / mucous membr
anes and / or ingestion, but which have been assigned an occupational exposure l
imit value (eg dimethyl ether, the chlorodifluoromethane, 1-methoxy-2propanolo,
1,2,3 trimethylbenzene, 1-methylbutyl acetate, 3-amyl acetate, hydrogen selenide
, metossimetiletossi-2-propanol, tert-amyl acetate etc. ...). It 'was also assig
ned a lower score than those not classified as hazardous substances by inhalatio
n and / or contact with skin / mucous membranes and / or ingestion, but have a l
imit value for occupational exposure (eg dioxide carbon). Finally, it was given
a score for substances and preparations not classified as hazardous, but in the
process transform or decompose emitting typical of hazardous chemical agents (eg
. In metalworking, welding, working with materials in plastics, etc ...).
9
This mode assigns a score to substances or preparations placed in a process is c
learly more complex and indefinite. This is a case where it is not possible to g
ive a certain weight to the toxicological properties of these substances and pre
parations (polymers, elastomers, alloys, etc. ..) they present no hazard during
normal handling or use. The difficulty of allocating a score to these tasks is d
ue to the inability to predict with certainty which hazardous chemicals are deve
loped during the process, the fact that thermodynamics and reaction kinetics for
the transformation reactions are little known or not are easily controllable. H
owever, it was decided to award a score still even in this case varied depending
on the knowledge of chemical agents which are expected to develop in the proces
s, obviously giving a score higher than those inhaled dangerous than other route
s of absorption. It 'been given a higher score for processes with high emissions
of chemicals than those with low emissions. In fact, the welding is characteriz
ed by an emission of hazardous chemicals in the flue gas is much higher compared
to the molding of plastics, in turn molding of plastics can be either high temp
erature (260 ° C) and low temperatures (80 ° C) with different rates of emission
. The minimum score is not zero was assigned to substances and preparations not
classified and not classified as dangerous in any way and do not contain any dan
gerous substance even as an impurity.
10
TABLE OF COEFFICIENTS P (SCORE)
text Harmful if inhaled Harmful by inhalation and skin contact Harmful by inhala
tion, skin contact and inhalation and if swallowed Harmful if swallowed Harmful
in contact with skin Harmful in contact with skin and if swallowed Harmful if sw
allowed Toxic Toxic by inhalation inhalation and contact with skin Toxic by inha
lation, in contact with skin and if swallowed Toxic by inhalation and if swallow
ed Toxic in contact with skin Toxic in contact with skin and if swallowed Toxic
if swallowed Very toxic by inhalation Very toxic by inhalation and skin contact
Very toxic by inhalation, skin contact Very toxic by ingestion and inhalation an
d ingestion Very toxic by skin contact Very toxic in contact with skin and if sw
allowed Very toxic if swallowed in contact with water free of toxic gases in con
tact with acids releases toxic gases in contact with acids liberates very toxic
gas Danger of cumulative effects Causes burns Causes severe burns to eyes Irrita
ting Irritating to eyes and respiratory irritation to eyes, respiratory system a
nd skin Irritating to eyes and skin irritation to respiratory irritation to resp
iratory and skin irritation to the skin Danger of very serious irreversible effe
cts Toxic: danger of very serious irreversible effects through inhalation 39/23/
24 Toxic: danger of effects very serious irreversible inhalation and skin contac
t 39/23/24/25 Toxic: danger of very serious irreversible effects through inhalat
ion, in contact with skin and if swallowed 39/23/25 Toxic: danger of very seriou
s irreversible effects inhalation and ingestion 39/24 Toxic: danger of very seri
ous irreversible effects in contact with skin 39/24/25 Toxic: danger of very ser
ious irreversible effects in contact with skin and if swallowed 39/25 Toxic: dan
ger of irreversible effects very serious ingestion
PHRASES R 20 20/21 20/21/22 20/22 21 21/22 22 23 23/25 24 23/24 23/24/25 26/27/2
8 26/28 26/27 24/25 25 26 27 27 / 28 28 29 31 32 33 34 35 36 36/37 36/37/38 36/3
8 37 37/38 38 39 39/23
Score 4.00 4.35 4.50 4.15 3.25 3.40 1.75 7.00 7.75 8.00 7.25 6.00 6.25 2.50 8.50
9.25 9 , 50 8.75 7.00 7.25 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 4.75 4.85 5.85 2.50 3.30 3.40 2.
75 3.00 3.20 2.25 8.00 7.35 8.00 8.25 7.50 6.25 6.50 2.75 11
text Very toxic: danger of very serious irreversible effects through inhalation
39/26/27 Very toxic: danger of very serious irreversible effects to one and has
contact with skin 39/26/27/28 Very toxic: danger of very serious irreversible ef
fects inhalation,€in contact with skin and if swallowed 39/26/28 Very toxic: dan
ger of very serious irreversible effects through inhalation and ingestion 39/27
Very toxic: danger of very serious irreversible effects in contact with skin 39/
27/28 Very toxic : danger of very serious irreversible effects in contact with s
kin and if swallowed 39/28 Very toxic: danger of very serious irreversible effec
ts if swallowed 40 possible carcinogenic effects - insufficient evidence 41 Risk
of serious eye injury 42 May cause sensitization by inhalation 42 / 43 May caus
e sensitization by inhalation and skin contact 43 May cause sensitization by ski
n contact 48 Danger of serious damage to health by prolonged exposure 48/20 Harm
ful: danger of serious damage to health by prolonged exposure Prolonged inhalati
on 48/20/21 Harmful: danger of serious damage to health by prolonged exposure th
rough inhalation and skin contact 48/20/21/22 Harmful: danger of serious damage
to health by prolonged exposure through inhalation in contact with skin and if s
wallowed 48/20/22 Harmful: danger of serious damage to health by prolonged expos
ure through inhalation and ingestion 48/21 Harmful: danger of serious damage to
health by prolonged exposure in contact with Skin 48/21/22 Harmful: danger of se
rious damage to health by prolonged exposure in contact with skin and if swallow
ed 48/22 Harmful: danger of serious damage to health by prolonged exposure if sw
allowed Toxic 48/23 : danger of serious damage to health by prolonged exposure t
hrough inhalation 48/23/24 Toxic: danger of serious damage to health by prolonge
d exposure through inhalation and skin contact 48/23/24/25 Toxic: danger of seri
ous damage to health by prolonged exposure through inhalation, in contact with s
kin and if swallowed 48/23/25 Toxic: danger of serious damage to health by prolo
nged exposure through inhalation and ingestion 48/24 Toxic: danger of serious da
mage to health by prolonged exposure in contact with skin 48/24/25 Toxic: danger
of serious damage to health by prolonged exposure in contact with skin and if s
wallowed 48/25 Toxic: danger of serious damage to health on prolonged exposure i
f swallowed 60 May 61 May impair fertility harm unborn children 62 Possible risk
of impaired fertility
PHRASES R 39/26
Score 9.35 9.50 9.75 9.00 7.25 7.50 3.25 7.00 3.40 6.50 6.90 4.00 6.50 4.35 4.60
4.75 4 40 3.50 3.60 2.00 7.35 8.00 8.25 7.50 6.25 6.50 2.75 10.00 10.00 6.90
12
text Possible risk of harm to the unborn child May cause harm to breastfed babie
s Harmful: may cause lung damage if swallowed Repeated exposure may cause skin d
ryness or cracking 67 Vapours may cause drowsiness and 68 Possible risk of irrev
ersible effects dizziness 68/20 Harmful: possible risk of irreversible effects t
hrough inhalation 68/20/21 Harmful: possible risk of irreversible effects throug
h inhalation and skin contact 68/20/21/22 Harmful: possible risk of irreversible
effects by inhalation in contact with skin and if swallowed 68/20/22 Harmful: p
ossible risk of irreversible effects through inhalation and ingestion 68/21 Harm
ful: possible risk of irreversible effects in contact with skin 68/21/22 Harmful
: possible risk of irreversible effects in contact with skin and if swallowed 68
/22 Harmful: possible risk of irreversible effects if swallowed Preparations not
classified as hazardous but containing at least one dangerous substance inhaled
belonging to any class of danger than dall'irritante Preparations not classifie
d as hazardous but containing at least one dangerous substance only through the
skin and / or just swallowed belonging to any class of danger and / or containin
g at least one substance classified as irritant Preparations not classified as h
azardous but containing at least one dangerous substance which has been assigned
a value limit Occupational Exposure Product is not officially classified as haz
ardous by inhalation and / or contact with skin / mucous membranes and / or inge
stion belonging to any class of danger, but which has been assigned a limit valu
e for occupational exposure Substance not classified as hazardous by inhalation
and / or contact with skin / mucous membranes and / or ingestion belonging to an
y class of danger,€but to whom was assigned a value occupational exposure limit
is not classified as dangerous substances and preparations, the use of technolog
y and involves high emissions of at least one chemical agent inhaled with score>
to 6.50. Substances and preparations not classified as dangerous the use of whi
ch involves high technology and emission of at least one chemical agent with inh
alation score <to 6.50 and> 4.50. Substances and preparations not classified as
dangerous the use of which involves high technology and emission of at least one
chemical agent with inhalation score <4.50 and> 3.00. Substances and preparatio
ns not classified as dangerous the use of which involves high technology and emi
ssion of at least one chemical agent with inhalation score <3.00 and> 2.10. Subs
tances and preparations not classified as dangerous the use of which involves hi
gh technology and emission of at least one chemical agent through the skin and /
or swallowed with a score> to 6.50. Substances and preparations not classified
as dangerous the use of which involves high technology and emission of at least
one chemical agent through the skin and / or swallowed with a score <to 6.50 and
> 4.50.
R PHRASES 63 64 65 66
Score 6.90 5.00 3.50 2.10 3.50 7.00 4.35 4.60 4.75 4.40 3.50 3.60 2.00 3.00
2.10
3.00
4.00
2.10
5.00
3.00
2.10
1.50
3.00
2.10
13
R PHRASES
text is not classified as dangerous substances and preparations, the use of tech
nology and involves high emissions of at least one chemical agent through the sk
in and / or swallowed with a score <4.50 and> 3.00. Substances and preparations
not classified as dangerous the use of which involves high technology and emissi
on of at least one chemical agent through the skin and / or swallowed with a sco
re <3.00 and> 2.10. Substances and preparations not classified as dangerous the
use of which involves a low-emission technology and at least one chemical agent
inhaled with score> to 6.50. Substances and preparations not classified as dange
rous the use of which involves a low-emission technology and at least one chemic
al agent with inhalation score <to 6.50 and> 4.50. Substances and preparations n
ot classified as dangerous the use of which involves a low-emission technology a
nd at least one chemical agent with inhalation score <4.50 and> 3.00. Substances
and preparations not classified as dangerous the use of which involves a low-em
ission technology and at least one chemical agent with inhalation score <3.00 an
d> 2.10. Substances and preparations not classified as dangerous the use of whic
h involves a low-emission technology and at least one chemical agent through the
skin and / or ingestion belonging to any class of dangerous substances and prep
arations not classified as dangerous and not containing any hazardous substance
Score 1.75
1.50
2.10
1.75
1.50
1.25
1.25
1.00
14
Determination of exposure to inhaled (Einal)
The index of exposure to inhaled Einal is determined by the product of a Sub-ind
ex I (intensity of exposure) for a sub-index d (distance of the worker from the
source intensity I):
Einal I x = d
a) Determination of Sub-index of the intensity of exposure The calculation of th
e Sub-index I are using the following 5 variables: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Chemical and p
hysical properties used Type Quantity Use Type Control Exposure time
1. Physical and chemical properties. It identifies four levels, in ascending ord
er with regard to the possibility of the substance to become available in the ai
r, depending on the volatility of the liquid and suspected or known size distrib
ution of powders: solid state / mists (large particle size spectrum), liquids of
low volatility [low vapor] liquid medium and high volatility [high vapor pressu
re] or particulate matter, gaseous state. To give substance to the corresponding
level can be identified using the criterion: SC: Maidment "Occupational Hygiene
Considerations in the Devolepment of a Structured Approach to Select Chemical C
ontrol Strategies Ann. Busy. Hyg. Vol 42, No 6 pp. 391-400, 1998 which is summar
ized below.
Levels of availability - DUST - Solid State / fog - Broad-spectrum particle size
Low: pellets and similar brittle solid, low evidence of dust observed during us
e. For example, pellets of PVC and paraffin wax. granular or crystalline solid.
When using the visible dust, but dust settles quickly. After use, the dust is vi
sible on the surface. For example: soap powder, granulated sugar.
Average
:
- Powders for High: fine dust and light.€During use can be seen forming a cloud
of dust that remain airborne for several minutes. For example: cement, titanium
dioxide, photocopier toner.
15
LEVELS Availability - ORGANIC LIQUID SUBSTANCES
350 300
Boiling point
Low volatility
[1] [2]
250 200 150 100 50 0
20 40
Average volatility
High volatility
60
80
100
120
140
Operating temperature equation of the line [1] = 5 x boiling temperature operati
ng temperature + 50 [2] = 2 x boiling temperature operating temperature + 10
16
2. Quantity in use. For quantities in use is the amount of chemical agent or pre
paration for actually present and in any manner, for use in the workplace on a d
aily basis. They identified five distinct classes as follows:
• • • • •
<0.1 kg from 0.1 to 1 1 -10 kg 10 kg - 100 kg> 100 kg
3. Type of use. It identifies four levels, always ascending to the possibility o
f leakage in the air, the type of substance use, identifying the source of expos
ure. Use in closed system: it is used and / or stored in airtight containers or
reactors and transferred from one container to another through pipes watertight.
This category does not apply to situations where, in any section of the product
ion process, there may be releases into the environment. In other words, the clo
sed system must be such in all its parts. Use resulting in inclusion in the matr
ix: the substance is incorporated into materials or products which prevented or
limited dispersal in the environment. This category includes the use of material
s in "pellets", dispersion of solids in water by limiting the release of dust an
d in general the incorporation of test substance in matrices that tend to retain
. Using controlled, non-dispersive: This category includes work involving limite
d only selected groups of workers, experts adequately the specific process, and
where there are adequate control systems to monitor and minimize exposure. Use w
ith significant dispersion: This category includes activities and processes that
may lead substantially uncontrolled exposure not only of employees but also to
other workers and possibly the general population. Can be classified into this c
ategory of processes such as spraying of plant protection products, the use of p
aints and other similar activities. 4. Type of control. Are identified by major
categories, the measures that can be planned and prepared so that the worker is
exposed to the substance, the order is decreasing effectiveness of control. Full
containment: corresponds to a closed loop situation. Should, at least theoretic
ally, to negligible exposure, if you exclude the case of malfunctions, accidents
, errors. Ventilation - local exhaust discharges and emissions (LEV): This syste
m removes the contaminant at its source of release, preventing the dispersal are
as with human presence, which could be inhaled. Segregation - separation, the em
ployee is separated from the source release of the contaminant in an appropriate
area of security, or there is adequate time intervals between the presence of t
he contaminant in the environment and the presence of staff in the same area. Th
is procedure is intended primarily to the adoption of methods and appropriate be
havior, properly controlled, rather
17
that an actual physical separation (as in the case of full containment). The dom
inant factor then becomes the conduct aimed at preventing exposure. The proper c
ontrol of this behavior is of primary importance. Dilution - ventilation: this c
an be natural or mechanical. This method is applicable in cases where it is poss
ible to minimize exposure and to make it negligible compared to the danger inher
ent risk factor. Generally requires an adequate continuous monitoring. Direct ma
nipulation (with individual protection systems), in which case the employee work
s in direct contact with the hazardous material, taking only a mask, gloves or o
ther similar equipment. We can assume that under these conditions exposures may
also be relatively high. 5. Exposure time. It identifies five intervals to defin
e the time of exposure to the substance or preparation: Less than 15 minutes, be
tween 15 minutes and two hours, between two hours and four hours, between four h
ours and six hours, more than six hours. The identification of the exposure time
must be made on a daily basis,€regardless of the frequency of use of the agent
based on wider time such as week, month or year. If the treatment involves the u
se of several hazardous chemicals in order to identify the exposure time of work
ers given the time that total exposes all hazardous chemicals. The five variable
s identified enable the determination of the sub-index I through a system of sco
ring matrices according to the following steps:
•
through the identification of chemical and physical properties of the substance
or preparation and quantities in use, inserted into a matrix, a first indicator
is set on four levels of D increasing potential availability to 'aerodispersione
; get the index D and identified the type of use, as defined in section 3, you c
an get through the next 2 matrix U indicator on three levels of increasing actua
l availability all'aerodispersione; get the index U and identified the "type of
control," as defined in section 4, by 3 matrix can be derived from a subsequent
letter C that takes into account the factors of compensation, relating to protec
tion and prevention measures adopted in the workplace; Finally C obtained by the
indicator and the time of actual exposure of the worker or workers can be given
through the matrix 4, the sub-index I, distributed on four different levels, co
rresponding to different "intensity of exposure, regardless of the distance from
the source of exposed workers.
18
•
•
•
b) Identification of Sub-index of the distance from the source of complaints
The sub-index d of the distance between a source of intensity I and the worker o
r workers exposed s: if these are close to the source (<1 meter) The sub-index r
emains unchanged (d = 1); gradually that the worker is away from the source sub-
index of the intensity of exposure should be reduced proportionally until reachi
ng a value of 1 / 10 of I for distances greater than 10 meters. The values of d
to be used are listed below:
Distance in meters Less than 1 1 to less than 3 3 to less than 5 5 to less than
10 Greater than or equal to 10
Values of d 1 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.1
Simplified scheme for calculating Einal
To facilitate the application of the model for assessing inhalation exposure (Ei
nal) is proposed a simplified scheme which allows:
• • • •
have the overall picture of all the variables that contribute inhalation exposur
e, to identify, for each of the variables, the option chosen by ticking the appr
opriate box, to identify, through the mechanism of the four matrices, the indica
tors Q, U, C and I, to calculate, through the value of the distance from the sou
rce of the value of Einal.
The scheme duly completed with: the allocation of variables, indicators Q, U, C,
I obtained, the distance from the calculation of Einal, be applied for each job
and each dangerous substance or preparation. The layout, with the date of compl
etion, can be directly inserted in the document risk assessment for the award of
the level of exposure.
19
Matrix 1
Chemical-physical properties
<0.1 kg
Solid / mist
Quantity in use
0.1 to 1 Kg 10-10 Kg 10-100 Kg> 100 Kg
Low
Low
Low
Middle / Lower
Middle / Lower
Low volatility
Low
Middle / Lower
Middle / High
Middle / High
High
Medium / High volatility and Particulate matter
Low
Middle / High
Middle / High
High
High
Gaseous state
Middle / Lower
Middle / High
High
High
High
Availability of indicator values (D) Low Medium / Low Medium / High High DDDD =
1 = 2 = 3 = 4
20
Matrix 2
Type of use
Closed system
Included in the matrix
Controlled use
Dispersive use
D1
Low
Low
Low
Average
D2
Low
Average
Average
High
D3
Low
Average
High
High
D4
Average
High
High
High
Values of the user (U) Low Medium High UUU = = = 1 2 3
21
Matrix 3
Type of control
Full containment Local exhaust Segregation / Separation General Ventilation Dire
ct manipulation
U1
Low
Low
Low
Average
Average
U2
Low
Average
Average
High
High
U3
Low
Average
High
High
High
Value in the compensation (C) Low Medium High C = 1 C = 2 C = 3
22
Matrix 4
Exposure time <15 minutes 15 minutes - 2 hours - 4 hours 4 hours - 2 hours 6 hou
rs> 6 hours
C1
Low
Low
Middle / Lower
Middle / Lower
Middle / High
C2
Low
Middle / Lower
Middle / High
Middle / High
High
C3
Middle / Lower
Middle / High
High
High
High
Sub-index values of intensity (I) Low Medium / Low Medium / High High I = 1 I =
3 I = I = 7 10
23
Physico-chemical properties
Solid-mists Media Low volatility and high volatility state for gas and dust
Scheme for the determination of exposure Einal 1 D 2 3 4
Substance or place lavoro_____________________________________ preparato________
________________________ Date compilazione________________________________
Quantity in use
<0.1 kg from 0.1 to 1 Kg 10-10 Kg 10-100 Kg> 100 Kg
Values of d
Less than 1 meter = 1 1 to less than 3 m = 0.75
Type of use
Inclusion in use closed system matrix controlled dispersive use
U 1 2 3
3 to less than 5 meters = 0.50 From 5 to less than 10 meters = 0.25 Greater than
or equal to 10 meters = 0.1
Type of control
Local exhaust Contenimeto full Segregation / Separation General Ventilation Dire
ct manipulation
C 1 2 3
Exposure time
<15 minutes 15 mins - 2 hours 2 hours - 4 hours 4 hours - 6 hours> 6 hours
1 I 3 7 10
24
Einal I x = d
Determination of dermal exposure (Ecute)
The proposed scheme considers only direct contact with solid or liquid, while th
e dermal exposure to gases and vapors is generally considered low, especially in
relation to the values of exposure by inhalation: In this context, the model co
nsiders only the variable levels skin contact. The index of dermal exposure Ecut
e is determined through a simple matrix that takes into account two variables: 1
. Type of use. It identifies four levels, always ascending to the possibility of
leakage in the air, the type of substance use, identifying the source of exposu
re. Use in closed system: it is used and / or stored in airtight containers or r
eactors and transferred from one container to another through pipes watertight.
This category does not apply to situations where, in any section of the producti
on process, there may be releases into the environment. In other words, the clos
ed system must be such in all its parts. Use resulting in inclusion in the matri
x: the substance is incorporated into materials or products which prevented or l
imited dispersal in the environment. This category includes the use of materials
in "pellets", dispersion of solids in water by limiting the release of dust and
in general the incorporation of test substance in matrices that tend to retain.
Using controlled, non-dispersive: This category includes work involving limited
only selected groups of workers, experts adequately the specific process, and w
here there are adequate control systems to monitor and minimize exposure. Use wi
th significant dispersion: This category includes activities and processes that
may lead substantially uncontrolled exposure not only of employees but also to o
ther workers and possibly the general population. Can be classified into this ca
tegory of processes such as spraying pesticides, the use of paints and other sim
ilar activities. 2. The levels of skin contact, identified with a scale of four
grades in ascending order: 1. No contact. 2. Accidental contact, not more than o
ne event per day, due to spillage or occasional releases (such as in the case of
preparing a paint). 3. Contact discontinuous from two to ten events per day, du
e to the characteristics of the process. 4. Extended contact, the number of dail
y events is greater than ten. After granting the assumptions about the above two
variables and using the matrix for assessing skin you can assign the value of E
cute.
25
Matrix for assessment of dermal exposure
No contact
Accidental contact
Contact discontinuous
Contact extended
Closed system
Low
Low
Average
High
Included in the matrix
Low
Average
Average
High
Controlled use
Low
Average
High
Very High
Dispersive use
Low
High
High
Very High
Values to be assigned to Ecute Low Medium High Very High Ecute Ecute = 1 = 3 = 7
Ecute Ecute = 10
26
Model for assessing the risk from hazardous chemicals resulting from work activi
ties
The model can also be applied to exposure to hazardous chemicals that are derive
d from employment. In this case, you should use great caution in the algorithm i
s the choice of points P is the calculation of E€Furthermore, we must also consi
der that the model can not always be specific for all activities which can devel
op chemical agents. In particular, applying the model to choose the P score is a
bsolutely important to know whether the scale of the development of the pollutan
ts from work is high or low and which classification can be attributed to chemic
als that are developed. For example, in general, the arc welding are occupations
with high emissions, while some types of TIG welding or brazing can be consider
ed low emission, however, if the plastic is very important to evaluate the opera
ting temperature to which they are subjected during processing. After choosing t
he size of the issue, assign a score to P is necessary to identify the chemicals
that develop, assign relative rankings (very toxic, toxic, harmful, irritant in
halation) and used for the calculation of R, the value of P higher. To qualify a
s value Einal must use a modified system matrices:
•
1/Bis the array using the quantities in use, daily and overall, the material fro
m which we can develop hazardous chemical agents, for example, kg of plastic mat
erial used, pounds of material used for welding (electrode, wire continuous or o
therwise), material used as a thermal degradation occurs, the other variable tha
t is used in the matrix is the "type of control," previously defined but with th
e exclusion of "direct manipulation". The matrix is used 2/bis index value deriv
ed from the matrix 1/Bis and exposure time, according to the criteria previously
defined, obtaining the value of the sub-index of intensity I multiplied by the
distance d, as in previous model, indicates the distance of exposed workers from
the emitting source.
•
The risk R inhalation of hazardous chemicals developed by work activities should
be considered once an assessment is conservative and calculated:
R = P x Einal
27
Matrix 1/Bis
Type of control
Quantity in use
Full Containment
Local exhaust
Segregation / Separation
General ventilation
<10 kg
Low
Low
Low
Average
10-100 kg
Low
Average
Average
High
> 100 kg
Low
Average
High
High
Value in the compensation (C) Low Medium High C = 1 C = 2 C = 3
28
Matrix 2/bis
Exposure time <15 minutes 15 minutes - 2 hours - 4 hours 4 hours - 2 hours 6 hou
rs> 6 hours
C1
Low
Low
Middle / Lower
Middle / Lower
Middle / High
C2
Low
Middle / Lower
Middle / High
Middle / High
High
C3
Middle / Lower
Middle / High
High
High
High
Sub-index values of intensity (I) Low Medium / Low Medium / High High I = 1 I =
3 I = I = 7 10
29
CRITERIA FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF RISKS FROM HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS
Values of Risk (R)
MODERATE RISK
Classification Moderate risk
0.1 <R <15
15 <R <21
Range of uncertainty.
And 'necessary before classification of moderate risk, scrupulously review the a
llocation of the various scores and reviewing preventive and protective measures
taken
21 <R <40
MODERATE TO HIGH RISK
Risk higher than moderate.
Apply Articles 72-e, f, Ii and undecies.
40 <R <80
Area of high risk.
R> 80
Severe risk zone.
Reconsider the location of the identification of prevention and protection with
a view to their possible implementation. Strengthening control such as health mo
nitoring, measurement of chemical agents and maintenance periods.
30
Annex: Guidelines for using the model
1. The risk R must be calculated for each job and for each substance and prepara
tions used.
2. Classification or moderate risk in more moderate must be made through the R v
alue of risk was higher. 3. When a substance or preparation have more phrases to
identify the points P to be introduced in the formula must be used the highest
value among those identified. 4. For example, for a job painting are used as coa
ting materials (preparations) for each of them must be applied in the calculatio
n model by identifying the amount used and exposure times on. For each of the co
ating should be awarded its highest score of P and R then calculated the risk fo
r each of the coatings.€The classification of the job will be done by comparing
the risk R higher result, with the criterion proposed by this model. 5. The asse
ssment of dermal exposure is mandatory when: The phrase R expressly provides a d
anger to the route of dermal safety data sheet of the substance or preparation i
ndicates the danger of absorption through the skin, • A substance present in the
preparation, conjunction with an occupational exposure limit value, note that y
ou can skin absorption, • Be identified in the working, the possibility of direc
t contact with the substance or preparation.
• •
The model in the case of simultaneous presence of the possibility of absorption
for inhalation and dermal routes provides a penalty of calculating the risk R 6.
When considering the sub-index exposure and is implicit in the evaluation of va
riables should be used in a careful analysis of the technological cycle of work
and, in particular:
•
The variable "type of control is evident that the existence of local exhaust is
not in itself sufficient to identify the box, but it should obey the garrison sp
ecifications that ensure efficiency and effectiveness, again in" type control "t
he identification of direct manipulation requires that the analysis on the measu
res of prevention and protection has been accomplished and there are no other po
ssibilities than the direct handling of the substance with the appropriate perso
nal protection and procedural measures (eg. certain working in construction or a
griculture)
•
31
•
In the quantitative variables, such as "the quantity in use" and "exposure time"
is important to make careful analysis of the work to identify the actual levels
on a daily basis and the actual time when workers are exposed to the substance
or preparation and in each case should guide analysis of such so-called conserva
tive, given the uncertainty that emphasizes the conditions that lead to the wors
t situation for the exposure of workers. In the case of dell'attibuzione exposur
e time, this is independent of the frequency of use, with what means that even f
or chemicals used for limited time periods during the year (eg two months per ye
ar or a day week) should be considered for the period of time equal to one worki
ng day (eight hours), the conditions for greater exposure. In this way means the
use of currency risk in the situation worse, by analogy with the measurement of
the chemical agent for the determination of daily and compared with its limit v
alue, calculated daily exposure (eight hours of conventional ). The sub-index al
lows assessment of exposures for workers who although not directly in contact wi
th the substance or preparation remain the same working environment and can be p
otentially exposed. In any case more than 10 meters away the value of d equal to
0.1 classifies the worker in the moderate risk (Rmax = 100 x 0.1 = 10) If the w
orker performs his work at a distance d from a source, that use hazardous chemic
als, at the same time, in turn, uses a dangerous substance or preparation in the
risk assessment relating to that job should be taken into account in terms of a
dditives, the risk from both sources. In other words, the worker undergoes durin
g its work the influence of direct exposure and exposure to a source at a distan
ce d should be in risk assessment, add the two results R obtained.
•
•
•
7.
A general recommendation to use the model to its ease of implementation: the eff
ort to simplify the assessment process can quickly calculate the risk R for a nu
mber too high for jobs and of substances and preparations. This possibility must
not fall into a mechanical application of the model, but you should always behi
nd the calculation of the risk R, make a careful analysis of cycles and work act
ivities, considering the time of exposure-related activities by exposed, use and
classification of dangerous substances, so as to correspond to any calculated r
isk R, a precise and effective process of risk assessment.
32