SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL for Assessment of exposure determinants and exposure levels by using stationary concentration measurements and a probabilistic Near-Field/Far-Field exposure model

Koivisto, Antti Joonas; Spinazzè, Andrea; Verdonck, Frederik; Borghi, Francesca; Löndahl, Jakob; Koponen, Ismo K.; Verpaele, Steven; Jayjock, Michael A.; Hussein, Tareq; Ipiña, Jesús M. López De; Arnold, Susan; Furxhi, Irini

doi:10.5281/zenodo.4905515

Cited by 1 publication

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Koivisto et al . (2015) used DustMonitor NF measurements to calculate emission rates in mg/min by using a deterministic NF/FF model (Text S3, Extended data ( Koivisto et al ., 2021 )). The air mixing flow rate between NF and FF, β (m 3 /min), calculation methods are described by Ganser & Hewett (2017) .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The air mixing flow rate between NF and FF, β (m 3 /min), calculation methods are described by Ganser & Hewett (2017) . Text S4, Underlying data ( Koivisto et al ., 2021 ) gives a brief summary of the NF/FF model and the β approximation methods. Here, we tested and approximation method assuming low FF concentration and without emissions from the NF source where the β can be calculated from the NF concentration decay.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An ES consists of i ( i ≥ 1) Contributing Scenarios (CSs), where each CS can have j ( j ≥ 1) work tasks with different OCs ( Figure 1 ). In this study, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) terminology was used, see Text S1, Extended data ( Koivisto et al ., 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All exposure determinants are physical observables that can be quantified to form and improve a model structure and parametrization (see Text S2, Extended data ( Koivisto et al ., 2021 ); Jensen et al ., 2018 ). ECHA R.14 gives examples of the CoU information requirements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ECHA R.14 gives examples of the CoU information requirements. Exposure determinants relevance (sensitivity) varies significantly depending on OCs (Text S2, Extended data ( Koivisto et al ., 2021 )) and it usually needs to be assessed for each OC. Frequently, the exposure level depends on individual’s working practices, such as carefulness, that reduces exposure level ( Jensen et al ., 2015 ) or efficiency that reduces the exposure at the same processing volumes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Assessment of exposure determinants and exposure levels by using stationary concentration measurements and a probabilistic near-field/far-field exposure model

Koivisto

Spinazzè

Verdonck³

et al. 2021

Open Res Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation requires the establishment of Conditions of Use (CoU) for all exposure scenarios to ensure good communication of safe working practices. Setting CoU requires the risk assessment of all relevant Contributing Scenarios (CSs) in the exposure scenario. A new CS has to be created whenever an Operational Condition (OC) is changed, resulting in an excessive number of exposure assessments. An efficient solution is to quantify OC concentrations and to identify reasonable worst-case scenarios with probabilistic exposure modeling. Methods: Here, we appoint CoU for powder pouring during the industrial manufacturing of a paint batch by quantifying OC exposure levels and exposure determinants. The quantification was performed by using stationary measurements and a probabilistic Near-Field/Far-Field (NF/FF) exposure model. Work shift and OC concentration levels were quantified for pouring TiO2 from big bags and small bags, pouring Micro Mica from small bags, and cleaning. The impact of exposure determinants on NF concentration level was quantified by (1) assessing exposure determinants correlation with the NF exposure level and (2) by performing simulations with different OCs. Results: Emission rate, air mixing between NF and FF and local ventilation were the most relevant exposure determinants affecting NF concentrations. Potentially risky OCs were identified by performing Reasonable Worst Case (RWC) simulations and by comparing the exposure 95th percentile distribution with 10% of the occupational exposure limit value (OELV). The CS was shown safe except in RWC scenario (ventilation rate from 0.4 to 1.6 1/h, 100 m3 room, no local ventilation, and NF ventilation of 1.6 m3/min). Conclusions: The CoU assessment was considered to comply with European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) legislation and EN 689 exposure assessment strategy for testing compliance with OEL values. One RWC scenario would require measurements since the exposure level was 12.5% of the OELV.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations