Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 17:21:08 EST
Reply-To: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: ACTSNYC**At_Symbol_Here**CS.COM
Subject: Re: OHSA/NIOSH Permissible limits

Rob,  Essentially, this is what the German MAKs do with carcinogens.  They son't set standards and employers must use the best technology available to keep exposure as close to zero as possible.

So it is really interesting to read the prerule and comment periods for OSHA PELs on carcinogens where a combination of governmental and industrial "experts" argue over how many workers it will be acceptable to kill.


In a message dated 12/3/2010 5:05:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, info**At_Symbol_Here**ILPI.COM writes:

I sense the toxicologists on the list getting all atingle here.  Prepare for an avalanche of replies!  I'll leave the details of why the two organizations came up with different numbers to others (short answer - different methods, different studies, different criteria etc.)

The best choice from any perspective is 0 ppm, and after that ALARA - As Low As Reasonably Achievable.  See and the references therein for more on the ALARA concept.

Rob Toreki

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.