摘要
目的对比分析3种典型职业健康风险评估方法的适用性。方法以北京市某木质家具制造企业检测数据为例,分别运用美国环境保护署(EPA)职员健康风险评估方法、新加坡化学毒物职业暴露半定量风险评估方法(MOM)和澳大利亚职业健康与安全风险评估管理导则(UQ)3种方法对其职业健康风险进行评估,分析3种方法异同之处。结果 EPA方法计算打磨工、喷漆工和包装工接触苯的致癌风险值为(3.96~14.04)×10^(-6)、(6.6~23.4)×10^(-6)和(2.64~9.36)×10^(-6),评估分级均为高风险,计算打磨工、喷漆工和包装工岗位的非致癌风险值为41.5、54.9和30.78,评估分级均为高风险;MOM方法计算打磨工、喷漆工和包装工的岗位风险值为4、4和3,评估分级均为高风险;UQ方法评估备料工、组装工和打磨工接触木粉尘及噪声的危险等级均为中等风险,评估打磨工、喷漆工和包装工接触苯、甲苯及二甲苯的危险等级分别为高、重大和重大。结论 EPA适用于针对职业病危害因素严格管控的风险评估;MOM方法适用于对化学物质毒性已分级的风险评估;UQ方法在评估新型职业病危害风险时具有较大优势。
[Objective]To compare and analyze the applicability of three typical occupational health risk assessment methods.[Methods] A wooden furniture manufacturing enterprise in Beijing was taken as an example. The United States EPA method,Singapore MOM method and Australian UQ method were used to evaluate the occupation health risk of the enterprise,and the similarities and differences of the three methods were analyzed. [Results] By the EPA method,the carcinogenic risk value of grinding workers,painters and packers exposed to benzene was respectively（3.96-14.04）×10^（-6）,（6.6-23.4）×10^（-6） and（2.64-9.36）×10^（-6）, all belonged to the high risk,and the non-carcinogenic risk value of grinding workers,painters and packers was respectively41.5,54.9 and 30.78,and all belonged to the high risk. By the MOM method,the post risk value of grinding workers,painters and packers was respectively 4,4 and 3,all belonged to the high risk. By the UQ method,the evaluation grades of the preparation workers,assembler and grinding workers who were exposed to wood dust and noise were moderate risk,while the risk grade of grinding workers,painters and packers exposed to benzene,toluene and xylene was respectively high,major and major.[Conclusion] The EPA method is applicable to risk assessment which the occupational hazards should be controlled strictly,the MOM method is applicable to the risk assessment which the toxicity of chemicals have been graded,and the UQ method has a great advantage in assessing the risk of new occupational hazards.
作者
叶飞
邢杨
刘冰冰
杨琳
张维
苏希鹏
YE Fei;XING Yang;LIU Bing- bing;YA NG Lin;ZHANG Wei;SUXi-peng(Occupational Health Research Center, Beijing A cade my of Safety Science and Technology, Beijing, 100070, China)
出处
《职业与健康》
CAS
2018年第8期1012-1016,共5页
Occupation and Health
基金
北京市科委科技计划项目(Z161100001116081)
关键词
职业健康
风险评估
对比研究
Occupational health
Risk assessment
Comparative study
