• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제25권4호
• /
• pp.482-492
• /
• 2015

Objectives: Exposure Assessment for workplace hazards where the exposure level is below occupational exposure limits(OELs) has been performed without considering either the degrees of risk or exposure levels and has failed to lead to intervention in many cases. The objective of this study was to suggest and test an application framework for risk assessment methodology under the current exposure assessment system in Korea. Materials: First, we investigated the exposure assessment systems in Korea and other countries. To adopt some risk assessment techniques, we also analyzed risk assessment systems and compared them to exposure assessment systems. A few suggestions were made. We held a public hearing during an industrial hygiene conference and took surveys using a questionnaire. Results: The first suggestion was to implement the risk assessment and exposure assessment through a "one-stop" system. In that case, one expected question would be who has been doing the jobs so far. In most cases, industrial hygiene consulting services or laboratories have been performing exposure assessment for business owners. Business owners are required to perform risk assessment. As two different groups of people will be required to implement two things in a one-stop system, they need to share information. As an information vehicle to share information, commonly filed survey checklists were suggested. The second suggestion was to categorize exposure level into four groups instead of the current binary divisions based on OELs. In the risk assessment system, exposure level is divided into four groups utilizing the cut-points of 10%, 50%, and 100% of OELs. The same schema can be adopted in the exposure assessment system and different levels of requirements can be assigned for each group. The third suggestion was regarding the regulation system. To provide the suggestions some thrust toward being implemented in the field, changes should be made in the legal system. Two different types of new exposure assessment result reporting forms were suggested. Some investigations such as an ergonomic survey are officially accepted as risk assessment under the current legal system. A few items were suggested to be included in the exposure assessment result reporting to be accepted as risk assessment. A pilot study in two small factories was performed and pointed out the strengths and weakness of our suggestions. Conclusions: Discussions and studies on the improvement of the exposure assessment system have been held for decades and no tangible changes have yet been made. We hope this result can help realize healthy lives for workers in Korea.

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 대한예방의학회 1994년도 교수 연수회(환경)
• /
• pp.426-430
• /
• 1994

The assessment of exposure is an important component of the risk assessment process. Exposure information is used in risk assessment in at least two ways: 1) in the identification of hazards and the epidemiologic research investigating exposure-response relationships and 2) in the development of population exposure estimates. In both of these cases, the value of a chemical risk assessment is enhanced by improvements in the quality of exposure assessments. The optimum exposure assessment is the direct measurement of population exposure; however, such measurements are rarely available. Recent developments in methods for exposure assessment allow estimates to be made that are valid representations of actual exposure. The use of these exposure estimates to classify exposures correctly enhances the likelihood that causal associations between exposure and response will be correctly identified and that population risks will be accurately assessed.

• 한국환경성돌연변이발암원학회지
• /
• 제19권2호
• /
• pp.95-101
• /
• 1999

Risk Assessment is an important area in toxicology and the methodology for risk assessment has been developed. Mathematical models used for risk assessment include one-hit multi-hit, two-stage, probit logistic, multistage, and linearized multistage models. For the assessment of exposure dose, environmental monitoring has been applied, but it has limitation to accurately assess exposure level because the levels in the air, water, foods, and soil may vary depending on time of sampling. In addition, humans can be exposed to various sources of exposure and thus it will be impossible to estimate the total level of exposure in humans by environmental monitoring. To eliminate the limitation of environmental monitoring, a direct measurement of toxic materials or modified biomolecules (called biomarkers) associated with the exposure of toxic materials is needed. Here, scientific basis of biomarkers and future direction have been considered for the assessment of carcinogen exposure and cancer risk in humans.

• 한국환경보건학회지
• /
• 제36권5호
• /
• pp.391-401
• /
• 2010

A reduction in risk of occupational exposure to chemical hazards within the workplace has been the focus of attention both through industry initiatives and legislation. The aims of this study were to develop an exposure matrix by industry and process, and to apply this matrix to control the risk of occupational exposure to Dichloromethane (DCM). The exposure matrix is a tool to convert information on industry and process into information on occupational risk. The exposure matrix comprised industries and processes involving DCM, based on an exposure database provided by KOSHA (the Korean Occupational Safety and Health Agency), which was gathered from a workplace hazards evaluation program in Korea. The risk assessment of the exposure matrix was performed using Hallmark risk assessment tool. The results of the risk assessment were indicated by a Danger Value (DV) calculated from the combination of hazard rating (HR), duration of use rating (DUR), and risk probability rating (RPR) of exposure to the chemical, and were divided into four control bands which were related to control measures. The applicability of the risk assessment of the exposure matrix was evaluated by a field study, and survey of the employees of the exposure matrix groups. Among 45 industries examined, this study found that greater attention should be paid to two industries: the manufacture of other optical instruments and photographic equipment, and the manufacture of printing ink, and to one process among 47 examined, the packing process in the manufacture of printing ink, because these were regarded as carrying the highest risk. This tool of a risk assessment for the exposure matrix can be applied as a general exposure information system for hazard control, risk quantification, setting the occupational exposure limit, and hazard surveillance. The exposure matrix includes workforce data, and it provides information on the numbers of exposed workers in Korea by agent, occupation, and level of exposure and risk.

• 환경영향평가
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.11-19
• /
• 2009

We conducted human risk assessment due to inhalation exposure to heavy metals emitted from incinerator. The process of health impact assessment(HIA) on incinerator is as follows: The first step is to presume and calculate the amount of heavy metals emitted using emission factor. The second step is to conduct an exposure assessment using the K-SCREEN model which is used for predicting the concentration in a conservative method. The last step is to carry out a risk assessment on carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic substances. This study revealed that rank of carcinogenic human risk was $Cr^{+6}$ > As > Ni > Cd, and values of human risk assessment on carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic substances is lower than the US criteria for risk assessment except $Cr^{+6}$. It is expected that the technique of HIA, especially human risk assessment on heavy metals, would be applied to the incinerator construction project. In addition, more systematic studies are needed to overcome some weak points and limits found in this study.

• 한국환경보건학회지
• /
• 제44권5호
• /
• pp.460-467
• /
• 2018

Objectives: The objectives of this study are to estimate the inhalation exposure level of benzene for workers using Tier 1 exposure models ECETOC TRA (European Center for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals Target Risk Assessment) and Stoffenmanager, and to investigate their reliability for exposure assessment in K-REACH. Methods: Two exposure scenarios, 'manufacture of benzene' and 'use as solvents,' were developed for assessment of workers' exposure to benzene. The Process Category (PROC) for ECETOC TRA was collected from the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) registration dossier, and the Activity for Stoffenmanager was converted from PROC using translation of exposure models (TREXMO). The information related to exposure, such as working duration, Respiratory Protective Equipment (RPE), Local Exhaust Ventilation (LEV), and Risk Management Measure (RMM) were classified into high, medium, and low exposure conditions. The risk was determined by the ratio of the estimated exposure and occupational exposure limits of benzene. Results: Under high exposure conditions, the worker exposure level calculated from all PROCs and Activities exceeded the risk level, with the exception of PROC 1 and Activity 1. In the medium exposure condition, PROC 8a, 8b, and 9 and Activity 3, 7, and 8 all exceeded the risk, whereas in the low condition, all PROCs and Activities were determined to be safe. As a result, action corresponding with the low exposure condition is required to reduce the risk of exposure among workers in workplaces where benzene is manufactured or used as a solvent. In addition, the predicted exposure levels derived from the exposure models were lower than measured levels. The exposure levels estimated from Stoffenmanager were more conservative than those from ECETOC TRA. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the feasibility of exposure models for exposure assessment through the example of occupational inhalation exposure assessment for benzene. For more active utilization of exposure models in K-REACH, the exact application of collected information and accurate interpretation of obtained results are necessary.

• 한국독성학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국독성학회 2006년도 추계학술대회
• /
• pp.34-45
• /
• 2006

Chemical toxicants are metabolically converted to numerous metabolites in the body. Toxicokinetic characteristics of metabolites could be therefore used as biomarker of exposure for human risk assessment. Biologically based dose response (BBDR) model was proposed for future direction of risk assessment. However, this area has not been developed well enough for human application. Benzo(a)pyrene (BP), for example, is a well-known environmental carcinogen and may produce more than 100 metabolites and BPDE-DNA adduct, a covalently bound form of DNA with benzo(a)pyrene diolepoxides (BPDES), has been applied to qualitatively or quantitaively estimate human exposure to BP. In addition, di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), a widely used plasticize. in the polymer industry, is one of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and has been monitored in humans using urinary or serum concentrations of DEHP or its monomer MEHP for exposure and risk assessment. However, it is difficult to estimate the actual level of toxicants using these biomarkers in humans using. This presentation will discuss a methodology of exposure and risk assessment by application of metabolic profiling kinetics.

• Toxicological Research
• /
• 제17권
• /
• pp.17-24
• /
• 2001

Risk assessment is useful tool making good decisions on the risks of certain hazardous com-pound and suggests safe margin through scientific process using toxicological data, statistical tool, exposure value and relevant variants. The goal of risk management is to protect the public health from hazardous compound based on result of risk assessment having reality. For the suggestion of exact man-aging information, risk assessment must be designed to represent a "plausible estimate" of the exposure to the individuals and to minimize uncertainty. Risk assessment methodology and knowledge are expected to change more rapidly than before and up-to-date methodology should be applied in regulatory aspects through the Agency. For the useful application of risk assessment, the communication between the risk assessor and the risk manager is needed before the initiation of the risk assessment and upon its completion. Generally, the risk assessment itself as a practical tool in the regulatory decision making process would be regarded with social economic impact.ic impact.

• 한국환경보건학회지
• /
• 제47권2호
• /
• pp.155-165
• /
• 2021

Objectives: Acute exposure to high concentrations of chemicals can occur when a chemical accident takes place. As such exposure can cause ongoing environmental pollution, such as in the soil and groundwater, there is a need for a tool that can assess health effects in the long term. The purpose of this study was assessing the health risks of residents living near a chemical accident site due to long-term exposure while considering the temporal concentration changes of the toxic chemicals leaked during the accident until their extinction in the environment using a multimedia environmental dynamics model. Methods: A health risk assessment was conducted on three cases of formaldehyde chemical accidents. In this study, health risk assessment was performed using a multimedia environmental dynamics model that considers the behavior of the atmosphere, soil, and water. In addition, the extinction period of formaldehyde in the environment was regarded as extinction in the environment when the concentration in the air and soil fell below the background concentration prior to the accident. The subjects of health risk assessment were classified into four groups according to age: 0-9 years old, 10-18 years old, 19-64 years old, and over 65 years old. Carcinogenic risk assessment by respiratory exposure and non-carcinogenic risk assessment by soil intake were conducted as well. Results: In the assessment of carcinogenic risk due to respiratory exposure, the excess carcinogenic risk did not exceed 1.0×10-6 in all three chemical accidents, so there was no health effect due to the formaldehyde chemical accident. As a result of the evaluation of non-carcinogenic risk due to soil intake, none of the three chemical accidents had a risk index of 1, so there was no health effect. For all three chemical accidents, the excess cancer risk and hazard index were the highest in the age group 0-9. Next, 10-18 years old, 65 years old or older, and 19-64 years old showed the highest risk. Conclusion: This study considers environmental changes after a chemical accident occurs and until the substance disappears from the environment. It also conducts a health risk assessment by reflecting the characteristics of the long-term persistence and concentration change over time. It is thought that it is of significance as a health risk assessment study reflecting the exposure characteristics of the accident substance for an actual chemical accident.

• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• 제20권4호통권51호
• /
• pp.279-286
• /
• 2005

Earthworm (Eisenia fetida) acute toxicity test was carried out and ecological risk assessment in soil was performed with national monitoring data. 14 day - $LC_{50}$ of nonylphenol and bisphenol A were 288.1 mg/kg and 90.1 mg/kg, respectively. And NOECs of nonylphenol and bisphenol A were 250 mg/kg and 50 mg/kg, respectively. Significant weight decrement was appeared at 70 mg/kg of bisphenol A, however, nonylphenol at concentrations tested did not severe adverse effect on the weight decrement. The environmental monitoring has been carrying out by NIER since 1999. Exposure levels of nonylphenol in soil were ND$\sim$10.55 $\mu$g/kg and those of bisphenol A were ND$\sim$15.50$\mu$g/kg in National Monitoring data which had been performed from 2000 to 2004. The measured soil exposure level was applied to evaluate the environmental risk assessment. The values of PNEC for bisphenol A and nonylphenol were determined as 0.5 mg/kg and 2.5 mg/kg, respectively using the safety factors which were suggested in EU and OECD. The values of HQ (PEC/PNEC) were determined to be below I for bisphenol A and nonylphenol when the maximum exposure levels for bispheol A (15.50$\mu$g/kg) and nonylphenol (10.55$\mu$g/kg) were applied. Conclusively, the environmental risk assessment of bisphenol A and nonylphenol was not critical in soil.