Web links, documents and free of charge tools
The documents and tools listed below support a qualitative and quantitative,
occupational exposure risk assessment.
They are grouped in the following Click-and-go headers:
1. Exposure assessment and compliance testing
2. Sampling and analytical methods
3. Exposure databases
4. Occupational Exposure Limit Values (OELV)
5. Exceedance and Compliance
---5.3 App's for (log)normal compliance testing
6. Distributional fit and exposure variability
7. Compliance for mixtures
8. Exposure modeling
9. Chemical identification, physchem properties and hazard information.
For Specific Dutch tools click here (in het Nederlands).
1. Exposure assessment and compliance testing
Not free of charge, but recognized standards are:
In addition the following public available, free of charge documents can be used:
2. Sampling and analytical methods
689:2019 for a reasonable price. The EU standard to establish employers
odds to be in compliance with a limit values.
- A Strategy for Assessing and Managing Occupational Exposures. (Fourth edition
2015) of the AIHA
Free of charge sources with measurement methods are:
3. Exposure databases
For prior knowledge on substance workplace air exposures (raw and aggregated data),
Public and private occupational Exposure Databases may be based on the US
guidelines on core information for workplace exposure measurements on chemical
agents, which made it possible to construct exposure distributions per SEG.
OELV's differ in goal and quality and should therefore be chosen carefully.
4. Occupational Exposure Limits Values (OELV)
An employer needs to have an OELV for all chemicals to which workers are exposed
at the premises or under his responsibility.
As a license to operate, a reference
value to assess workers health risk and for legal compliance.
4.1. Finding the best suitable Public or Private OELV
There are (too) many organisations around the world that provide public and
Legal limits (national or federal) established by government are called public.
All other OELV's are called private. There are several registers (printed, on-
and offline database applications) that give overviews of international OELV's
based on their network or what they can find, for example:
In the paragraphs below the OELV sources are grouped according to the hierarchy
4.1.1 Unbiased health based only OELV's
"Health based only" means that no political, socioeconomic, corporate or technical
feasibility factors have influenced the value (level & duration). Unbiased
means at or close to the real workers no-effect/no-response level for long-term
shift exposure levels. OELV's published before 1997 may suffer from limited quality
control and transparency. The web sites below contain several hundreds of OELV
documents often, however, on the same chemical substances. The OELV's proposed
for the same chemical substances may differ in value, reflecting differences in
scientific sources used, different hazard assessment techniques (i.e. safety factors
used) and differences in hazard and health risk perception. Compliance with these
limits may safeguard the employer from liability for health claims.
4.1.2 Health/Toxicology based
EU Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limit values (SCOEL)
Corporate influence cannot be ruled out in the predecessor SEG summaries and
the older SCOEL summaries before 2000.
German MAK and BAT values from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
with documentation in German
Health Council of the Netherlands limit values for substances with a NOAEL,
additional risk levels for genotoxic carcinogens and sensitizes
The Nordic Expert Group for Scandinavian Criteria Documentation of Health
Risks from Chemicals (NEG)
French reference health values from ANSES
- The Scoel's work is taken over by the
RAC a scientific committee of ECHA, the EU REACH/CLP organisation with
limited knowledge and affection to working conditions control, non-manufactured
substances and the additional value of occupational epidemiology.
and BEI's Workplace air and biological monitoring OELV's from the ACGIH.
Often used (without reference) by countries for their national regulatory
or legal OELV's (see 4.3).
The TLV and BEI are intended to be unbiased health based. This may account
for the (limited number of) OELV's established or updated after 1996, after
corporate influence was ruled out.
Its impact has decreased in the last decades as the Documentation's are becoming
outdated and are of less quality compared to the documentation's of organizations
like the German DFG and Dutch Health Council
For the OELV's below the independency from interest groups and/or unbiased science
is not guaranteed.
Begründungen zu Arbeitsplatzgrenzwerten stakeholders documents in German
underlying the legal limits
French fiches de données toxicologiques (toxicological datasheets) from
the INERIS (in French)
Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limit values (SCOEL). Corporate
influence cannot be ruled out in the SEG and the older SCOEL documents
- REACH DNEL and DMEL. Based on product liability, suppliers needs to provide
users of their chemicals guidance on safe work (eSDS). The European
CHemical Agency (ECHA) has disseminated the REACH dossiers of twenty
thousand substances prepared by suppliers of chemicals in Europe. Of some
DNEL or DMEL are derived to safeguard the occupational and general public
use for inhalation, oral and skin exposure. The workplace air DNEL's differ
from OELV's in that REACH is based on the specific use of a suppliers product
and not on the whole occupational load during the workers shift (TWA) or task(STEL).
Further DN/MEL are derived using fixed assessment factors used to extrapolate
from route/dose/duration/species/response to human/worker inhalation or skin
exposure. Epidemiology, human health findings and an holistic evaluation are
hardly included in the DN/MEL assessment methods unless suppliers choosed
wisely to apply existing OELV's established by DFG or SCOEL as the DN/MEL.
However DN/MEL can be used as a starting point for developing a workplace
OELV, if higher
hierarchy OELV's do not exist. The reference periods "long-term" and "short
term" should carefully be considered if converted to TWA or STEL/Ceiling.
The long-term inhalation, local and systemic DN/MEL's for the worker can be
found in the GESTIS
- Workplace Environmental Exposure
Levels (OARS WEEL's), originally developed by AIHA.
In 2013 transferred to the Occupational Alliance for Risk Science (OARS) which
is managed by Toxicology for Risk Assessment (TERA)
- DNEL comparable methods to develop limit values for pharmaceutical active
ingredients exists from the EU
Medicine Agency and is a work item within
4.1.3 Regulatory OELV's in the EU EU Binding occupational exposure Limit Values.
Indicative Occupational Limits Values. adopted as regulatory limits in most
Germany TRGS 900.
Workplace exposure limits. Table 1 WEL (air). Table 2: Biological monitoring
guidance values (BMGV's)
valeurs limites d'exposition professionnelle (VLEP) indicative (VL), binding indicative (VRI) or binding restricted (=réglementaires contraignantes) (VRC).
list of legal limits (in Dutch)
Belgium KB Chemical agents.
Italy legislation for OELV.
Norway Limit values.
Most countries within and outside the EU have regulatory limits. Exceeding the
legal OELV may lead to a law enforcement penalty. See 5.1.
The GESTIS database
provides insight in the range of regulatory OELV's that are used in different
EU countries .
Gestis does not indicate if technical and/or economical feasibility is included
in the national OELV's
One should be aware that if socio-economical feasibility has lead to a legal
level exceeding the unbiased health based level, then legal non-exceedance prevents
a penalty but may not safeguard the employer from liability if the exposure
distribution (See 5.2 and 5.3) is not in compliance with the health
4.1.4 USA federal OELV's
The federal OELV's. Different states like Texas and California have there own
The sources in 4.1.1 through 4.1.4 disclose OELV's of the more data-rich substances.
Many substances lack sufficient and relevant high quality human health & toxicology
If, however, GHS or CLP health H3##-statements are known, then Kick-off
levels can be established.
H3##-statements to derive a Kick-off can be found in the ECHA database with
and labeling information for all harmonized (6000) and notified (>100,000)
dangerous substances in the EU.
Kick-off levels are used as a conservative starting point for compliance testing.
4.2 Guidance to deduce kickoff or OELV's
Although many tens of thousands of suitable OELV's or kickoff's can be found
with the hierarchical approach described in 4.1, there are
still substances without a public OELV or GHS/CLP health hazard classifications.
Theo following documents may help to fill this gap
NIOSH Occupational Exposure Banding
Occupational Exposure Banding process and its e-Tool
offers a framework to apply toxicology and potency information to generate quantitative
exposure levels in a tiered approach. Not surprisingly the tiered approach is
comparable to However the NIOSH document does indicate how and where to find
the GHS and toxicological information
The following tools will help you to establish a limit value if an OELV is
not established but health hazard information is available
Paul Scheepers, associate professor Health Evidence at the RadboutUMC Nijmegen
(the Netherlands), developed a structural search tool of human health toxicity
data for chemical substances.
The flow chart of Patchwork
2.8 (2022) guides you through the free accessible online scientific databases.
Kickoff levels can be derived based on existing GHS classification For higher
hierarchy OELV scientific literature needs to be screened and evaluated.
ECETOC Data-poor substances guidance
A guidance for setting occupational exposure limits for data-poor substances
has been developed by ECETOC, see TR-101
Characterisation of dose [concentration] - response for human health (Chapter
Appendix to Chapter R8 (2019) Characterisation of dose [concentration] - response
for human health: RAC
Occupational exposure limits
5. Compliance and exceedanceThe EN
689 states that the workplace air measurement procedures shall comply with
EN482 that limits the relative expanded uncertainty for
the measurement range around to the OELV.
ISO 22065 and the downloadable
IFA Excel application helps to calculate the expanded measurement uncertainty
for gasses and vapors.
NPR-CEN/TR 17055:2017.describes how the measuring procedures
for chemical agents complying with the requirements given in EN 482 and either
one of EN 838, EN 13890, EN 13936 and/or the EN 13205 series, as far as applicable,
have been chosen.
In some countries, workplace air exposure exceeedance can be controlled through
single sample exceedance tests.
In Europe compliance control is performed using hybrid decision schemes or SEG
exposure distribution compliance testing by the employers them selves or by
social security sponsored institutes like INRS (Fr) and IFA (Ge).
5.1 Single sample Exceedance test
Most working conditions legislation worldwide demands 'immediate action' if
exposure exceeds a legal OELV.
Exceedance leads in some countries to penalties if established by law enforcement.
As with speed traps, comparing a single workplace air measurement with the OELV
must be adjusted for sampling and analytical error
(OSHA OTM Section II: Chapter 1, IV. Post-Inspection Activities, D. Receive
sample results, 3.Calculations for Full-Period, Continuous Single Samples).
See also the compliance
To include measurement uncertainty in OELV exceedance testing and the EN689
preliminary test, several standards are available
NPR-CEN/TR 17055:2017 also lists additional sources for 2.
Sampling and analytical methods
Other standards on measurement uncertainty in workplace air sampling
The updated GUM
98: ISO - ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008 - Uncertainty of measurement — Part
3: Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. Based on JCGM 100
for Dutch labs NEN 7779:2018 'Environment, food and feed - Measurement uncertainty'
applies for chemical substances in workplace air as well.
table D-1 displays CVt for a large number of substance measurement methods
OSHA calculates the upper and lower confidence in the same
way as NIOSH 77-173, but does not provide which methods the Salt Lake Technical Center (SLTC) uses to establish
the sampling and analytical error (SAE).
Measurement uncertainty of equipment to calibrate the flow of the pumps according
5.2 Hybrid decision schemes
The EN689 'preliminary test' (clause 5.5.2)
The new EN689:2018 introduces a 'preliminary test' (clause 5.5.2) that compares
the maximum value of three to five PAS workplace air measurements with the OELV
and with a fraction (0.1 to 0.2) of the OELV.
For the comparison of the maximum value with the OELV measurement uncertainty
should be taken into account in the same way as in compliance
officer test. (see 5.1 Single measurement Exceedance)
This is, however, not described in the standard.
Decision scheme aim to test compliance with the OELV without using a mathematical
statistical distribution adjusting for the day-by-day exposure distribution.
The EN689 preliminary test is a modification of the French test which is partly
validated by INRS.
The Hybrid decision schemes (including the
BOHS/NVvA screening test and the French
Code de Travail Annexe 1.1.2 Demarché de control) are not only inaccurate, they are also
ineffective. They delay a compliance decision unnecessarily and are more
expensive compared to the (log)normal statistical test as they demand in most
cases more measurements. The decision schemes also underestimates workers' health
risk and delays necessary control measures for GSD>6.
5.3 SEG exposure distribution based statistical compliance testing
Since the introduction of HYGINIST
at the AIHCe
1990 in Anaheim, several app's are developed that establish the long-term
shift exposure of employees in a SEG and the confidence/credibility that exposure
complies with the OELV (see the limited list below)
Distribution based statistical tests can be applied on 2 or more, strategically
well performed PAS measurements.
are fit for both the EN689 C95%,70% and the AIHA's C95% exposure categories.
HYGINIST and IHStat-Bayes provide practically
the same results, although they use quite different numerical methods. IHDA-AIHA
results are also comparable as long as the GSD in parameter space boundary is
maximised at four.
App's for (log)normal SEG exposure distribution
6. Distributional fit and exposure variability
- The online application BWStatV
3 from the Belgium Society on Occupational Hygiene.
BWStat performs quality checks (Shape, between SEG subgroups) , the EN
689 preliminary (N=3->5) & the lognormal C95,70% statistical test, and
BOHS-NVvA Annex A.1. subgroup ANOVA.
- The Windows EXCEL application IHStat-Bayes(released
in august 2022), developed by Jerome Lavoue and his French-Canadian colleagues.
the AIHA and EN689 strategies . To install first download the Excel
AddIn and the Setup
. Then launch the Setup.exe from the download folder
- Paul Hewett's IHDA-AIHA
(released in 2022) for <=25 samples including LoD adjustment. Presumes
you have thoughts on the numerical value of the GSD of your SEG. Uses without
explanation GSD=4 as default in the parameter space boundery option.
is a Windows compliance testing tool with
See the YouTube demo
on how to enter sample size N and the descriptive statistics GM, GSD or
how to open a prepared text/CSV file with a .HYG extension , containing
only the numerical raw sample results. HYGINIST is useful if you want:
- (1) graphical and statistical Goodness-of-fit assessment for samples
of size 3<=N<=2000
- (2) different OELV compliance testing & exceedance probabilities:
- the 95% Upper Tolerance Limit (UTL) with 70% confidence (EN
BOHS-NVvA guidance & French
legal), UTL95,95% (IHSTAT, Tuggle) or any other UTL value with
- AIHA exposure categories C95% probability distribution
- the (archeic) maximum likelihood estimate (IHSTAT, employer's favorite)
- the unbiased estimate (useful if you want to optimize the sample
- (3) the arithmetic mean and its unbiased upper confidence limit (UCL),
useful to establish the long-term dose for chronic toxic substance based
on shift exposures (in Occupational Epidemiology) or the shift exposure,
based on consecutive short-term sampling
- (4) testing location GM and dispersion GSD against priors or a second
distribution, and combining two exposure distributions
- to estimate GM and GSD within a detection range: Regression through
the log(outcome) and their corresponding Normal Order Statistics (=NOS
or Rankits) (see the demo on YouTube),
- to calculate the unbiased estimate of the descriptive statistics,
- to calculate the exact confidence that C95% is below the OELV,
- to use other tolerance percentages than the French, BOS-NVvA (2011)
and EN 689 (2018) 95% with 70% confidence
- to estimate the optimal sample size for an initial survey or periodic
measurements, based on prior knowledge of level (GM) and dispersion
- to optimise the range of outcome from which GM and GSD are calculated
using censoring in the lognormal probability paper plot and the Shapiro
and Wilk goodness-of-fit test.
- to calculate Land's Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) for the arithmetic
mean (for long-term dose).
- to combine prior knowledge on GM and GSD with new sampling data (better
from Jérôme Lavoué of the University of Montreal. In English and French.
His Bayesian approach requires hardly existing knowledge on priors of the
exposure profile analysed. NDExpo
uses (like HYGINIST) the regression of detectables and corresponding Normal
Order Statistics/Rankits for point estimates of the non-deductible.
from INRS (Nancy,France). In French. With adjustments for non-detects
- SPEED Not free
of charge. For the analysis of repeated, shift-long measurements on at least
some members of a random sample of workers from a job group
Based on observations in different countries and many situations (Oldham UK
1953, Coenen GE 1966, Leidel US 1977) it is widely accepted that the body of
a workplace air exposure distribution is well represented by the lognormal distribution,
if exposure variability is influenced by the multiplicative interactions of
In the tails of the exposure distribution (<5% or >95%) the (log)normal shape
may not fit due to systemic or random measurement uncertainty or since statistical
probabilities can predict non-existing or non-realistic concentrations.
For example: concentrations that exceed physicochemical limitations like maximum
dustiness for airborn solids, the atmospheric pressure for a gas or the saturation
concentration for vapours.
A normal distribution may appear in constant workplace conditions, with high
control of workplace factors or if the influence of workplace factors is outshined
by the background concentration or the random variation in the measuring procedure.
In these cases the day-by-day exposure variability is so small that the differences
between the normal or lognormal C95% are negligible.
The sample Geometric Standard Deviation (GSD) is the lognormal descriptive statistic
for the variability (=dispersion) of the exposure data.
The GSD is:
the antilog (=EXP) of the standard deviation (s) of the logarithms of the results EXP(s)
the unbiased estimator of the population GSD [EXP(σ)] with minimum variance.
This means the most efficient estimator with an expectation equal to the population
EXP(σ). And this means in simple wording that the GSD equals EXP(σ)
on the average for every sample size.
by definition larger than one plus the analytical coefficient of variation
(1+CVt) (NIOSH 77-173 p124) .
considered to be an intrisic property for every substance/Similar Exposure
Group(SEG) combination, or its REACH equivalent the workers task/activity
Contributing Scenario (t-CS).
The numerical value of population GSD [EXP(σ)] of a substance air exposure
distribution in a SEG/t-CS depends on workplace factors in the exposure profile
the the number of different tasks/handlings included and sequentially performed
during the observation period (task, shift and/or the working week),
in- or outdoor,
industrial or professional setting
technical and organisational risk management measures (ventilation, instruction etc),
But also on:
the way workers do their job (between worker differences),
Space-time factors like global positioning and altitude, local climat and
its variability througout the year.
Reliable EXP(σ) per SEG/t-CS may be retrieved from the institutional databases
[see 3. Exposure databases], as they are based
on core information for workplace exposure measurements on chemical agents
GSD's of well defined SEG/t-CS's are also published in peer review, scientific
journals. Two leading articles are:
and Rappaport (1993 table 6). The median (50%-tile) GSD's found for different
production factors within single workplace SEGs range between 1.7 and 3.6 .
(2008) established reasonable worst case (RWC) total variances (σ2)
in well defined, but multiple workplace SEGs using a relative small but high
quality database, corresponding with a GSD=5.4 for solids and GSD=8.2 for liquids
These GSDs may even be too low as 0.5*LOD was used for the non-detectables up
TWA8 hours PAS measurements of SEG's in modern chemical industry
using well performed sampling plans and regression statistical analysis for non-detects
show GSD's up to 14. See BOHS
Conference 2013, GSDs
in the real world and The
distribution of long-term GSD's in chemical industry SEG's (in Dutch , English
states that GSD>3 indicates "process out of control or poorly defined groups".
Low GSDs are to be expected in:
highly controlled indoor workplaces, clean rooms etc.
REACH t-CS, assessing a single combination of Operational
Conditions (OC) and Risk Management Measures (RMM) in industrial use
SEG's of workers performing only a single-task at a fixed workplace
workplaces with a relatively high constant background that camouflage all
spatial and temporal variability of workers activity
So in a clean room and other situations where one would expect
a GSD at or just above 1+CVt, higher GSDs may indicate suboptimal controls or bad
technical sampling and/or laboratory handling.
GSD<1.5 in other situations then mentioned above may indicate "poor sampling strategy"
or "poor data handling" in example by:
small sample size underestimating the GSD
short sampling campaigns with measurements only on one or a few consecutive
sloppy handling of non-detectables
2-decades analytical detection methods (like gravimetric dust and inorganic acid)
using EM in stead of PAS
The resistance against high GSDs in IHStat may also be caused by the bad performance
of the two noncompliance statistics with GSD>3 and sample size <6.
Low GSDs occured in the ancient industrial hygiene era:
when workers in process industry and assembly lines performed a single task
during a whole shift,
with high background levels camouflaging the variability of workers activity,
when sampling techniques were insensitive, and
when officers in charge forbid their industrial hygiene sergeants to report
EN 689 (2018) supports a preliminary test in 5.5.2 for sample size 3,4 and 5.
Its use is justified by the INRS document
ND 2231. The document shows that the use of the preliminay test is only
justified for GSDs below 3-4.
Industrial Hygienist are advised, before testing compliance, to compare
the GSD found with an expected value, using:
measurement series performed before
GSDs reported in literature or if possible in large exposure databases
Read across with comparable substances and workplaces
Modeling, if possible
Tools to calculate and compare GSD's, and to test the Lognormal goodness-of-fit
can be found in 5. Compliance testing statistical
7. Compliance for mixtures
There are several methods for compliance testing of mixtures in the workplace
The three methods above imply, that the appraiser samples all components in
the mixture. Another approach for vapors with comparable effects is to select
the most critical component (based on the saturation concentration and the OELV)
and to adjust its OELV to the composition of the mixture in the air. XLUNIFAC
is the method of preference.
The methods above do not include synergy or antagonism, the phenomena that the
toxicokinetics and/or -dynamics of the health effects change due to the interaction
of the components in the mixed exposures
8. Exposure modeling
(TRanslation of EXposure MOdels) integrates six commonly used occupational
exposure models: ART v.1.5, STOFFENMANAGER® v.5.1, ECETOC TRA v.3, MEASE v.1.02.01,
EMKG-EXPO-TOOL and EASE v.2.0.
AIHA Tools and Links for Exposure Assessment Strategies
Advanced REACH Tool
Estimates the flux and the quantity penetrating the skin from the air or from
a liquid/solution in contact with the skin
UPERCUT A hazard identification tool for toxic risk following dermal penetration of chemicals
Seirich Un outil pour évaluer et prévenir les risques chimiques de travail
EPA ExpoBox (A Toolbox for Exposure Assessors)
9. Chemical identification, physchem properties
and hazard information
- the Raoult and XLUNIFAC
method for liquid mixtures. Adjusting the OELV of the lead/critical component,
becoming representative for the whole vapor mixture. Even if the fugacity
of the components behaves non-ideal.
- the Critical
Component or DPD+ approach.
Information on Chemicals with the REACH and CLP information on >200,000 substances
used in the EU. Check every EU Safety Data Sheet (SDS) or the harmonized classification
information using this site on recent changes
with nearly 10,000 substances, including information on occupational chemical
loads without an EU SDS obligation, like welding fumes or wood dust
Monographs Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk to Humans
Health Council of the Netherlands Evaluation of the carcinogenity, genotoxicity
and reprotoxicity, including non-REACH substances
Dohsbase contains substance
identity information of >260,000 chemicals, health hazard information of
110,000 and physchem information of 40,000 substances
NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards
Safe work Australia
Useful free of charge physchem online databases are:
eChemPortal. A public web site with information on chemical properties. ECHA is a key collaborator
in the development of the OECD physchem software and hosting
PubChem the open chemistry database at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Accessing ChemIDplus Content from PubChem.
ChemIDplus content is being migrated to PubChem.
NIST Chemistry WebBook.
The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
. Information on chemical health and safety data received by EPA and EPA's assessments and regulatory actions for specific chemicals
. The US SCR Syrres subsstance properties databases
EPI Suite is not only a large database with measured physchem data but also
with physchem estimates based on the SMILES code.
Data Chemical details for 8,599 unique substances (GSIDs) and DSSTox standard
chemical fields (chemical name, CASRN, structure, etc) for EPA ToxCast chemicals
and the larger Tox21 chemical list
The CambridgeSoft chemistry and biology reference database
Useful free of charge toxicological databases are
Toxic Substances Portal
In vier stappen beoordelen of uw bedrijf gezond en veilig werkt met gevaarlijke
stoffen volgens de Arbeidsinspectie
Grenswaarden Stoffen op de Werkplek van de Social Economische Raad (SER-GSW)
met Europese werkplek atmosfeer grenswaarden en REACH DNELs.
DOHSBase Database met het grootste en hierarchisch
opgebouwd bestand aan grenswaarden en meetmethoden
interne instructie (2007).
Beoordeling van de blootstelling aan gevaarlijke stoffen en het toetsen van de meetresultaten aan luchtgrenswaarden
Gevaarlijke Stoffen Tot stand gekomen door multidisciplinaire samenwerking
tussen de beroepsverenigingen van arbeids- en organisatiedeskundigen, bedrijfsartsen,
arbeidshygiënisten en veiligheidskundigen
NVvA en Arbo-pagina
De website van de Belgische Arbeidshygiene vereniging BSOH ontsluit een groot aantal pratische tools
Wil je meer weten over de Arbeidshygiëne in Nederland dan zoek dan op
de webstee van de Nederlandse Vereniging
voor Arbeidshygiëne. Voor Arbo in het algemeen is er de Startpagina
Bij de beoordeling van de blootstelling is voor veel stoffen de bijdrage van
de opname via de intacte maar onbeschermde huid belangrijk. Van de homepage
van Wil ten Berge is het freeware programma SKINPERM
te downloaden dat op grond van een aantal fysisch chemische parameters de
potentiële huiddoorlatendheid van een gas, damp of een vloeistof schat.
En met aanvullende gegevens over kleding, besmet oppervlak e.d. wordt de mogelijke
opname in het lichaam geschat. Een goede aanvulling dus op NEN 689 die volledig
op de werkplekatmosfeer is gefocust.
U vindt dit programma door te surfen naar http://home.planet.nl/~wtberge/
SKINPERM schat de hoeveelheid van een chemische stof die via huid in het
lichaam wordt opgenomen indien het agens:
- Zich als damp of gas in de werkplek atmosfeer bevindt of
- Als vloeistof of opgelost in een vloeistof met de huid in contact komt.
De opname van vaste stoffen en aerolsolen is niet met SKINPERM te schatten.