Corrigendum to: The Global Landscape of Occupational Exposure Limits—Implementation of Harmonization Principles to Guide Limit Selection (Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 12, S1, (S127-S144), 10.1080/15459624.2015.1060327);The Global Landscape of Occupational Exposure Limits-Implementation of Harmonization Principles to Guide Limit Selection

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene

Volumn 12, Issue , 2015, Pages S127-S144

  Deveau, M ^a   Chen, C P ^b   Johanson, G ^c   Krewski, D ^a   Maier, A ^d   Niven, K J ^e   Ripple, S ^f   Schulte, P A ^g   Silk, J ^h   Urbanus, J H ^e   Zalk, D M ⁱ   Niemeier, R W ^g  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b CHINA MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^c KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL B V   (United States)

^f DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY   (United States)

^g NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH   (United States)

^h Occupational Safety and Health Administration   (United States)

ⁱ LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

harmonization; occupational exposure limit; risk policy; risk science

Indexed keywords

DANGEROUS GOODS;

DANGEROUS GOODS; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; PROCEDURES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; STANDARDS; THRESHOLD LIMIT VALUE; TOXICITY;

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; THRESHOLD LIMIT VALUES;

EID: 84947555068     PISSN: 15459624     EISSN: 15459632     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15459624.2016.1221624     Document Type: Erratum

References (96)

1. Waters, M., L. McKernan., A. Maier., M. Jayjock., V. Schaeffer, L. Brosseau.: Exposure estimation and interpretation of occupational risk: Enhanced information for the occupational risk manager. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12 (0): S99-S111 (2015).
2. Zielhuis, R.L., P.C. Noordam., C.L. Maas., J.J. Kolk, H.P. Illing.: Harmonization of criteria documents for standard setting in occupational health: a report of a workshop. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 13 (3): 241-262 (1991).
3. Paustenbach, D.J., D.M. Cowan, J. Sahmel.: The history and biological basis of occupational exposure limits for chemical agents. In Patty's Industrial Hygiene, R. V and B. Cohrssen. (eds.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2011.
4. Derivation of MAK values. Available at: http://www.dfg.de/en/dfg-profile/statutory-bodies/senate/health-hazards/structure/working-groups/derivation-mak/index.html 2013).
5. Ripple, S.: History of occupational exposure limits. Exposure Setting Processes-An International Challenge, Workshop at the International Occupational Hygiene Assocation (IOHA) Conference, Rome, Italy 2010).
6. The Nordic Expert Group Available at: http://www.av.se/arkiv/neg/the-neg/2013).
7. European Commission.: Methodology for the Derivation of Occupational Exposure Limits: Key Documentation (Version 7). (2013).
8. Adkins, C., L. Booher., D. Culver., et al.: " Occupational exposure limits: do they have a future " Available at http://www.ioha.net/assets/files/MASTER%20OEL%20Green-Paper%2009%2018%2009(1).pdf.
9. Paustenbach, D.J.: Occupational Exposure Limits. In ILO Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety, pp. 30.27-30.34. Geneva: International Labour Organisation, 1997.
10. Wheeler, M.W., R. Park., A.J. Bailer, C. Whittaker.: Historical context and recent advances in exposure-response estimation for deriving occupational exposure limits. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12 (0): S7-S17 (2015).
11. Dankovic, D.A., B.D. Naumann., A. Maier., M.L. Dourson, L. Levy.: The scientific basis of uncertainty factors used in setting occupational exposure limits. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12 (0): S55-S68 (2015).
12. Howard, J.: Setting occupational exposure limits: are we living in a post-OEL world U. Pa. J. Lab. Empl. L. 7 (3): 513-528 (2005).
13. United States Department of Labor.: Occupational Health and Safety Standards 1910.1000 Z Toxic and Hazardous Substances, Washington DC.
14. European Commission: Council Directive 98/24/EC of 7 April 1998 on the protection of the health and safety of workers from the risks related to chemical agents at work Available at https://osha.europa.eu/en/legislation/directives/75.
15. Salter, L, E. Levy.: In the Eye of the Storm: Case Study One: The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. In Mandated Science: Science and Scientists in the Making of Standards, L. Salter. (ed.), pp. 36-66. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988.
16. Piney, M.: Exposure limits, practicability and health risks: Arguments for a paradigm shift. In The Politics of Chemical Risk: Scenarios for a Regulatory Future, R. Bal. and W. Halffman. (eds.), pp. 27-73. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.
17. Vincent, J.H.: International occupational exposure standards: a review and commentary. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 59: 729-742 (1998).
18. Hansson, S.O.: Setting the Limit: Occupational Health Standards and the Limits of Science. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
19. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).: Sources, Abbreviations, Definitions and Terms Used Within the Database and Its Reports. In Documentation of the TLVs and BEIs with Other Worldwide Occupational Exposure Values: 2006 CD-ROM, ACGIH (ed.), pp. 1-15. Cincinnati, OH: ACGIH, 2006.
20. National Academy of Sciences (NAS).: Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2009.
21. Krewski, D., M. Westphal., M.E. Andersen., et al.: A framework for the next generation of risk science. Environ. Health Perspect. 122 (8): 796-805 (2014).
22. Laszcz-Davis, C., A. Maier, J. Perkins.: The hierarchy of OELs: A new organizing principle for occupational risk assessment. Synergist: 26-30 (March 2014).
23. Nielsen, G.D, S. Ovrebo.: Background, approaches and recent trends for setting health-based occupational exposure limits: a minireview. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 51 (3): 253-269 (2008).
24. Kreider, M.L, E.S. Williams.: Interpreting REACH guidance in the determination of the derived no effect level (DNEL). Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 58 (2): 323-329 (2010).
25. Ader, A.W., J.P. Farris, R.H. Ku.: Occupational health categorization and compound handling practice systems: roots, application and future. Chem. Health Saf. 12 (4): 20-26 (2005).
26. American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA). Control Banding Working Group: Guidance for Conducting Control Banding Analyses. Fairfax, VA: AIHA 2007.
27. Naumann, B.D.: " Control banding in the pharmaceutical industry." Occupational Hygienists Conference Proceedings 2005. Available at: http://www.aioh.org.au/downloads/documents/ControlBandingBNaumann.pdf (accessed November 15, 2014).
28. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).: Qualitative Risk Characterization and Management of Occupational Hazards: Control Banding (CB). DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2009-152 (2009).
29. Ripple, S.: Hyped about hazard banding. Synergist: 43-45: 60 (2009).
30. Zalk, D.M, D.I. Nelson.: History and evolution of control banding: a review. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 5 (5): 330-346 (2008).
31. Barlow, S.: Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC): A Tool for Assessing Substances of Unknown Toxicity Present at Low Levels in the Diet. Brussels, Belgium, ILSI Press, 2005.
32. Kroes, R., J. Kleiner, A. Renwick.: The threshold of toxicological concern concept in risk assessment. Toxicol. Sci. 86 (2): 226-230 (2005).
33. Dolan, D.G., B.D. Naumann., E.V. Sargent., A. Maier, M. Dourson.: Application of the threshold of toxicological concern concept to pharmaceutical manufacturing operations. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 43 (1): 1-9 (2005).
34. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).: Current intelligence bulletin 66: derivation of immediately dangerous to life or health (IDLH) values. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2014-100 (2013).
35. Brandys, R.C, G.M. Brandys.: Global Occupational Exposure Limits for Over 6,000 Specific Chemicals. 2nd Edition. Hingdale, IL: Occupational and Environmental Health Consulting Services Inc., 2008.
36. Schenk, L., S.O. Hansson., C. Rudén, M. Gilek.: Occupational exposure limits: a comparative study. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 50 (2): 261-270 (2008).
37. Chemical Abstracts Service.: " CAS REGISTRY(SM) surpasses 75 million small molecules 2013).
38. TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory: Basic Information. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/tscainventory/basic.html 2013).
39. Health Canada: Proposal for Priority Setting for Existing Substances on the Domestic Substances List Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999: Greatest Potential for Human Exposure. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Health Canada, Existing Substances Division, (2003).
40. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).: " Classification and Labelling Notification Report on 4 January." Available at http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13585/clp-final-report-20110104-en.pdf.
41. Schenk, L.: Comparison of data used for setting occupational exposure limits. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health 16 (3): 249-262 (2010).
42. Chen, C.P., H.W. Ahlers., G.S. Dotson., et al.: Efficacy of predictive modeling as a scientific criterion in dermal hazard identification for assignment of skin notations. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 61 (1): 63-72 (2011).
43. Haber, L.T. and A. Maier.: Scientific criteria used for the development of occupational exposure limits for metals and other mining-related chemicals. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 36 (3): 262-279 (2002).
44. United States Department of Labor OSH Act of 1970. Available at https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owasrch.search-form%3Fp-doc-type=OSHACT.
45. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).: 2014 TLVs and BEIs. Cincinnati, OH: ACGIH 2014.
46. Castleman, B.I, G.E. Ziem.: Corporate influence on threshold limit values. Am. J. Ind. Med. 13 (5): 531-559 (1988).
47. Henschler, D.: Evaluation of adverse effects in the standard-setting process. Toxicol. Lett. 64-65: 53-57 (1992).
48. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.: Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals. Fifth revised edition. Geneva: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2013.
49. ACUTEX.: Methodology to develop AETLs (2006).
50. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC).: Guidance on Assessment Factors to Derive a DNEL. Technical Report No. 110. Brussels: European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals, 2010.
51. Illing, H.P.: Extrapolating from toxicity data to occupational exposure limits: some considerations. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 35 (6): 569-580 (1991).
52. Ku, R.H.: An overview of setting occupational exposure limits (OELs) for pharmaceuticals. Chem. Health Saf. 7 (1): 34-37 (2000).
53. Ritter, L., C. Totman., K. Krishnan., R. Carrier., A. Vezina, V. Morisset.: Deriving uncertainty factors for threshold chemical contaminants in drinking water. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health B Crit. Rev. 10 (7): 527-557 (2007).
54. Schenk, L, G. Johanson.: Use of uncertainty factors by the SCOEL in their derivation of health-based occupational exposure limits. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 40 (9): 791-798 (2010).
55. Renwick, A.G., J.C.M. Dorne, K. Walton.: Pathway-related factors: The potential for human data to improve the scientific basis of risk assessment. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 7 (1): 165-180 (2001).
56. International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS).: Chemical-Specific Adjustment Factors for Interspecies Differences and Human Variability: Guidance Document for Use of Data in Dose/Concentration-Reponse Assessment. Harmonization Project Document No. 2. Bussels: IPCS, 2005.
57. European Chemicals Agency.: Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment Chapter R.8: Characterisation of dose [concentration]-response for human health. ECHA-2010-G-19-EN Helsinki, Finland: European Chemicals Agency, 2012.
58. Schenk, L, G. Johanson.: A quantitative comparison of the safety margins in the european indicative occupational exposure limits and the derived no-effect levels for workers under REACH. Toxicol. Sci. 121 (2): 408-416 (2011).
59. Dyck, R., M.S. Islam., A. Zargar., A. Mohapatra, R. Sadiq.: Application of data fusion in human health risk assessment for hydrocarbon mixtures on contaminated sites. Toxicology 313 (2-3): 160-173 (2013).
60. Islam, M.S., A. Zargar., R. Dyck., A. Mohapatra, R. Sadiq.: Data fusion-based risk assessment framework: An example of benzene. Int. J. Syst. Assur. Eng. Manage. 3 (4): 267-283 (2012).
61. International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS).: Part 1: IPCS Framework for Analysing the Relevance of a Cancer Mode of Action for Humans and Case-Studies; Part 2: IPCS Framework for Analysing the Relevance of a Non-Cancer Mode of Action for Humans. Harmonization Project Document 4. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCS 2007.
62. Tao, T., Y. Bhuller., Y. Bonvalot., et al.: Weight of Evidence: General Principles and Current Applications at Health Canada (2011).
63. Rhomberg, L.R., L.A. Bailey, J.E. Goodman.: Hypothesis-based weight of evidence: a tool for evaluating and communicating uncertainties and inconsistencies in the large body of evidence in proposing a carcinogenic mode of action-naphthalene as an example. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 40 (8): 671-696 (2010).
64. Klimisch, H.J., M. Andreae, U. Tillmann.: A systematic approach for evaluating the quality of experimental toxicological and ecotoxicological data. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 25 (1): 1-5 (1997).
65. Money, C.D., J.A. Tomenson., M.G. Penman., P.J. Boogaard, R.J. Lewis.: A systematic approach for evaluating and scoring human data. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 66 (2): 241-247 (2013).
66. Chambers, A., D. Krewski., N. Birkett., et al.: An exposure-response curve for copper excess and deficiency. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health B Crit. Rev. 13 (7-8): 546-578 (2010).
67. Dourson, M.L., L.K. Teuschler., P.R. Durkin, W.M. Stiteler.: Categorical regression of toxicity data: a case study using aldicarb. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 25 (2): 121-129 (1997).
68. Tyshenko, M.G., S. El Saadany., T. Oraby., et al.: Expert elicitation for the judgment of prion disease risk uncertainties. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health A 74 (2-4): 261-285 (2011).
69. Lundberg, P.: National and international approaches to occupational standard setting within Europe. Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 9 (1): 25-27 (1994).
70. Travis, C.C, H.A. Hattemer-Frey.: Determining an acceptable level of risk. Environ. Sci. Technol. 22 (8): 873-876 (1988).
71. United States Government Accountability Office (USGAO).: Chemical risk assessment: Selected federal agencies procedures, assumptions, and policies. No. GAO-01-810 (2001).
72. International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS): International Programme on Chemical Safety Harmonization Project Strategic Plan: Harmonization of Approaches to the Assessment of Risk from Exposure to Chemicals. Available at: http://www.who.int/entity/ipcs/methods/harmonization/strategic-plan.pdf 2013).
73. International Council on Mining and Metals The Setting and Use of Occupational Exposure Limits: Current Practice. " Available at https://www.icmm.com/document/17.
74. International Council on Mining and Metals.: Towards a Harmonized Approach to Setting Occupational Exposure Limits: Report of an ICMM-Sponsored Workshop, London, November 9-11, 2005 2006).
75. Mikheev, M.I.: Toward WHO-recommended occupational exposure limits. Toxicol. Lett. 77 (1-3): 183-187 (1995).
76. International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS).: 1,2-Dichloroethane. Concise International Chemical Assessment Document No. 1 (1998). Geneva: IPCS.
77. Ding, Q., L. Schenk., K. Malkiewicz, S.O. Hansson.: Occupational exposure limits in Europe and Asia-continued divergence or global harmonization Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 61 (3): 296-309 (2011).
78. Woodall, G.M. and R.B. Goldberg.: Summary of the workshop on the power of aggregated toxicity data. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 233 (1): 71-75 (2008).
79. Schenk, L., S.O. Hansson., C. Rudén, M. Gilek.: Are occupational exposure limits becoming more alike within the European Union J. Appl. Toxicol. 28 (7): 858-866 (2008).
80. Dourson, M.L, J.F. Stara.: Regulatory history and experimental support of uncertainty (safety) factors. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 3 (3): 224-238 (1983).
81. Seeley, M.R., L.E. Tonner-Navarro., B.D. Beck., et al.: Procedures for health risk assessment in Europe. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 34 (2): 153-169 (2001).
82. WHO.: Assessing Human Health Risks of Chemicals: Derivation of Guidance Values for Health-Based Exposure Limits. Environ. Health Criteria 170 (1994).
83. Haber, L.T., J.E. Strawson., A. Maier., I.M. Baskerville-Abraham., A. Parker, M.L. Dourson.: Noncancer Risk Assessment: Principles and Practice in Environmental and Occupational Settings. In Patty's Toxicology, E. Bingham. and B. Cohrssen. (eds.), Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. pp. 89-132.
84. GESTIS International Limit Values." Available at: http://limitvalue.ifa.dguv.de/Webform-gw.aspx 2013).
85. Chemical exposure limits." Available at: http://www.ilo.org/safework/info/publications/WCMS-151534 2013).
86. Information on Chemicals." Available at: http://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals 2013).
87. TOXNET: Toxicology Data Network." Available at: http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov 2013).
88. Zalk, D.M.: Control Banding: A Simplified, Qualitative Strategy for the Assessment of Risks and Selection of Solutions. Delft, Netherlands: TU Delft, 2010.
89. Brouwer, D.H.: Control banding approaches for nanomaterials. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 56 (5): 506-514 (2012).
90. Van Duuren-Stuurman, B., S.R. Vink., K.J. Verbist., et al.: Stoffenmanager Nano Version 1.0: a web-based tool for risk prioritization of airborne manufactured nano objects. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 56 (5): 525-541 (2012).
91. Zalk, D.M., S.Y. Paik, P. Swuste.: Evaluating the Control Banding Nanotool: a qualitative risk assessment method for controlling nanoparticle exposures. J. Nanopart. Res. 11 (7): 1685-1704 (2009).
92. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).: Current Intelligence Bulletin 63: Occupational Exposure to Titanium Dioxide. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2011-160 (2011).
93. Kuempel, E., V. Castranova., C. Geraci, P. Schulte.: Development of risk-based nanomaterial groups for occupational exposure control. J. Nanopart. Res. 14 (9): 1-15 (2012).
94. Schulte, P., V. Murashov., R. Zumwalde., E. Kuempel, C. Geraci.: Occupational exposure limits for nanomaterials: state of the art. J. Nanopart. Res. 12 (6): 1971-1987 (2010).
95. Zalk, D.M., R. Kamerzell., S. Paik., J. Kapp., D. Harrington, P. Swuste.: Risk level based management system: a control banding model for occupational health and safety risk management in a highly regulated environment. Ind. Health 48 (1): 18-28 (2010).
96. Zalk D.M.: Participatory occupational hygiene: a path to practical solutions. Asia. Pac. Newsl. Occup. Health Saf. 9 (3): 51 (2002).