This paper presents an in-house BAuA study on the evaluation of the COSHH Essentials exposure predictive model. External validation is based on measurement data obtained in BAuA field studies performed in various industries, e.g. printing industry and textile industry. In addition, measurement data and information on industrial hygiene provided by the chemical industry within the framework of the Existing Substances Risk Assessment programme are used. Although the evaluated exposure data cover a wide variety of activities and workplace scenarios, there is still a considerable lack of appropriate exposure data, especially for the more stringent control strategies. It was found that the level of agreement between the measurements for solid substances (powders, dusts) and the predicted ranges is reasonably good. The situation is in part different for liquids. In workplaces where organic solvents are used in litre quantities, exposure levels are within the predicted ranges or are often lower. For small-scale uses of liquids (millilitre scale), e.g. in carpenters' workshops, there were indications that the exposure levels can exceed the predicted ranges. However, it must be noted that the database is rather small.

There is a principal need for more precise methodology with regard to the determination of occupational dermal exposure. The goal of the Systematic analysis of Dermal Exposure to hazardous chemical Agents at the workplace project was therefore to generate scientific knowledge to improve and standardize measurement methods for dermal exposure to chemicals at the workplace. In addition, the comparability of different measurement methods was investigated. Different methods (body sampling by means of coveralls and patches, hand sampling by means of gloves and washing, and head sampling by means of headbands and wiping) were compared. Volunteers repeatedly performed a selection of tasks under standardized conditions in test chambers to increase the reproducibility and decrease variability. The selected tasks were pouring, rolling, spraying, and handling of objects immersed in liquid formulations, as well as dumping and handling objects contaminated with powder. For the chemical analysis, the surrogate test substance Tinopal SWN was analyzed by means of a high-performance liquid chromatographic method using a fluorescence detector. Tinopal SWN was either applied as a solid product in its pure form, or as a low and high viscosity liquid containing Tinopal SWN in dissolved form. To compare the sampling methods with patches and coveralls, the exposure values as measured on the patches were extrapolated to the surface areas of the respective parts of the coverall. Based on this extrapolation approach, using the patch method resulted in somewhat higher exposure values compared to using a coverall for all exposure situations, but the differences were only statistically significant in case of the liquid exposure situations. Using gloves resulted in significantly higher exposure values compared to hand wash for handling immersed objects, rolling, and handling contaminated objects, and slightly higher (not significant) exposure values during pouring and spraying. In the same context, applying wipe sampling resulted in higher exposure values than using a headband, which was at least partly due to extrapolation of the wipe results to the surface area of the headband. No ‘golden standard’ with regard to a preferred measurement method for dermal exposure could be identified from the methods as investigated in the current study.

No abstract