화학사고 시 수용체 보호를 위한 독성끝점 농도와 급성독성 자료를 활용한 우려농도 예측값 조사 (Investigation of the Guidance Levels for Protecting Populations from Chemical Exposure and the Estimation of the Level of Concern Using Acute Toxicity Data)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국환경보건학회
· 수록지 정보 : 한국환경보건학회지 / 44권 / 1호 / 44 ~ 54페이지
· 저자명 : 이지윤, 김순신, 양원호, 윤준헌, 류지성, 김정곤, 지경희

초록

Objectives: To protect individuals working at the site as well as the surrounding general population from a chemical accident, several emergency exposure guidance levels have been used to set alevel of concern for certain chemicals. However, a level of concern has not been established for many substances that are frequently used or produced in large quantities in Korean workplaces. In the present study, we investigated the guidance levels for protecting populations from chemical exposure and the estimation of level of concern using acute inhalation and oral toxicity data.




Methods: The number of chemicals to which emergency exposure guidance levels (e.g., ERPG-2, AEGL-2, PAC-2, and IDLH) can be applied were determined among 822 hazardous chemicals according to the ‘Technical Guidelines for the Selection of Accident Scenarios (revised December 2016)’. The ERPG and AEGL values were compared across all three tiers for the 31 substances that appeared on both lists. We examined the degree of difference between the emergency exposure guidance levels and the estimates of level of concern calculated from acute inhalation or acute oral toxicity data.




Results: Among the 822 hazardous chemicals, emergency exposure guidance levels can be applied to 359 substances, suggesting that the estimates of level of concern should be calculated using acute toxicity data for 56.3% of the hazardous chemicals. When comparing the concordance rates of ERPG and AEGL for 31 substances, the difference between the two criteria was generally small. However, about 40% of the substances have values diverging by more than three-fold in at least one tier. Such discrepancies may cause interpretation and communication problems in risk management. The emergency exposure guidance levels were similar to the estimates of level of concern calculated using acute inhalation toxicity data, but the differences were significant when using acute oral toxicity data. These results indicate that the level of concern derived from acute oral toxicity data may be insufficient to protect the population in some cases.


Conclusion: Our study suggests that the development of standardized guidance values for emergency chemical exposure in the Korean population should be encouraged. It is also necessary to analyze acute toxicity data and fill the information gaps for substances that are important in Korean workplace situations.

영어초록

Objectives: To protect individuals working at the site as well as the surrounding general population from a chemical accident, several emergency exposure guidance levels have been used to set alevel of concern for certain chemicals. However, a level of concern has not been established for many substances that are frequently used or produced in large quantities in Korean workplaces. In the present study, we investigated the guidance levels for protecting populations from chemical exposure and the estimation of level of concern using acute inhalation and oral toxicity data.




Methods: The number of chemicals to which emergency exposure guidance levels (e.g., ERPG-2, AEGL-2, PAC-2, and IDLH) can be applied were determined among 822 hazardous chemicals according to the ‘Technical Guidelines for the Selection of Accident Scenarios (revised December 2016)’. The ERPG and AEGL values were compared across all three tiers for the 31 substances that appeared on both lists. We examined the degree of difference between the emergency exposure guidance levels and the estimates of level of concern calculated from acute inhalation or acute oral toxicity data.




Results: Among the 822 hazardous chemicals, emergency exposure guidance levels can be applied to 359 substances, suggesting that the estimates of level of concern should be calculated using acute toxicity data for 56.3% of the hazardous chemicals. When comparing the concordance rates of ERPG and AEGL for 31 substances, the difference between the two criteria was generally small. However, about 40% of the substances have values diverging by more than three-fold in at least one tier. Such discrepancies may cause interpretation and communication problems in risk management. The emergency exposure guidance levels were similar to the estimates of level of concern calculated using acute inhalation toxicity data, but the differences were significant when using acute oral toxicity data. These results indicate that the level of concern derived from acute oral toxicity data may be insufficient to protect the population in some cases.


Conclusion: Our study suggests that the development of standardized guidance values for emergency chemical exposure in the Korean population should be encouraged. It is also necessary to analyze acute toxicity data and fill the information gaps for substances that are important in Korean workplace situations.

참고자료

· 없음