Comparison of chemical risk assessment methods in South Korea and the United Kingdom

Abstract

Min-Uk KIM, et al.: Comparison of CHARM and COSHH essentials . In 1998, the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) announced a series of papers concerning the control banding (CB) strategy used to determine the recommended level of risk control 4) . The HSE also developed the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Essentials to give small-and medium-sized enterprises advice on approaches for conducting risk assessment of chemicals in the workplace 5) . COSHH Essentials is a global chemical-managing toolkit that uses warning labels and a simple method for predicting exposure 6) . It employs a qualitative method based on the CB technique to assess and manage risks 7) . Various studies have been conducted using COSHH Essentials, which include a study on control methods and technique selection for vapor degreasing and bag filling operations and a study on comparing real The results obtained from applying COSHH Essentials and CHARM to 59 carcinogenic, mutagenic, and reprotoxic (CMR) substances were analyzed. The outcomes of the working environment assessments and the collated information about the usage of CMR chemicals were used for the analysis. Results: Among the 59 substances tested, 56 substances were rated at a risk level lower than 2, when evaluated with CHARM. However, with COSHH, all 59 substances were rated at risk level 3 or higher. With COSHH Essentials, the highest hazard group of 4 was automatically assigned to category E substances, regardless of the exposure level assessment. However, for CHARM, the risk could be adjusted according to the exposure level assessment, even for hazard group of 4. Conclusions: CHARM allocated lower risk levels to hazardous substances than COSHH Essentials. Ultimately, COSHH Essentials assesses exposure level through the physical properties and overall handling, and considers hazard with H-statements and R-phrases. COSHH Essentials was deemed more conservative than CHARM. CHARM may have underestimated the risk according to exposure level, even though the chemicals were highly hazardous. Therefore, CHARM can be used for the localized risk assessment of chemicals used in individual workplaces.

Benzene exposure assessment of printing workers treating petroleum-based cleaner in South Korea

“…CHARM is divided into five stages as shown in Table 3. The score for estimating risk level is given by a combination of exposure level (grades 1 to 4) and hazard level (grades 1 to 4) and the risk level is finally classified into grades 1 to 16 11) .…”

Chemical risk: state of the art of chemical substances exposure assessment

“…M. Kim, et al [27] carried out a chemical risk assessment of 59 carcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic substances (CMR). During their study they used the COSHH Essentials (UK) and the CHARM (South Korea) methods separately.…”

Recording from an Identified Neuron Efficiently Reveals Hazard for Brain Function in Risk Assessment

“…In most economic areas, newly developed substances are subjected to a risk assessment before being approved for commerce. Figure 1a illustrates the complex process of risk assessment as it applies to hazardous substances in both the U.S. and the EU [9,10], but also applies in many other economic areas [11][12][13][14][15]. Manufacturers, processors, and importers are required to provide information about the new substance they wish to use, taking legislative regulatory requirements into account, and yet keeping speed high and developmental costs low.…”

“…Regulatory governmental bodies generally approve the use of the new chemical under those conditions in the respective economic area. More specific testing is not common, and (in most states) not required by law [7,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15].…”