Examples of using Operator exposure in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Acceptable operator exposure level.
Operator exposure risk assessment.
This is a mix of symptoms from operator exposure and ingestion.
Acceptable Operator Exposure(AOEL) of 0.0025 mg/kg bw/day.
Human Health andEnvironment Concerns with regard to operator exposure and aquatic ecosystems.
Acceptable Operator Exposure Level(AOEL): 0.001 mg/kg bw/day.
None of the intended uses were considered to present an acceptable risk as regards operator exposure and the environment.
Acceptable Operator Exposure Level AOEL.
Where PPE is used mixing andloading is generally thought of as the most likely time for operator exposure.
No monitoring data for operator exposure under normal conditions were provided.
The evaluation identified concerns with regard to the safety of parathion,in particular with regard to operator exposure and non-target organisms.
Consideration of operator exposure scenarios indicates an unacceptable risk to the operator for all uses of alachlor.
Acceptable Daily Intake(ADI) and Acceptable Operator Exposure Level(AOEL) 0.0025 mg/kg bw/day.
European Community: From the assessments made, it was concluded parathion did not satisfy the safety requirements laiddown in Directive 91/414/EEC, in particular with regard to acceptable operator exposure and exposure of non-target organisms.
The UK POEM model("Predictive Operator Exposure Model") gave estimated exposures below the AOEL for gun and knapsack application methods if gloves are worn.
A closed container and handsfree weighing andsample handling minimizes operator exposure to hazardous and toxic substances.
With the German BBA model(operator exposure model developed at the former"Biologische Bundesanstalt"), only the knapsack application gave estimated exposures below the AOEL(79% and lower) with the use of gloves.
Accordingly, the Community requirement, which prohibit any exposure higher than the acceptable operator exposure level, have not been satisfied.
The results of risk evaluation based on Generic Databases to predict operator exposure indicate the need to proceed to a Tier-III risk assessment, based on actual measurements of exposure, rather than on exposure estimates.
The reason for the proposal to list Gramoxone Super in Annex III was the occurrence of a number of poisoning incidents during the agricultural use of Gramoxone Super(operator exposure) in the field under conditions of use that are reported to be common in Burkina Faso.
Calculations based on the UK and German operator exposure assessment models for the use patterns within the European Community, gave values higher than the AOEL for all uses of the products considered, even when adequate PPE is worn during the operation of mixing, loading and application.
The Court noted that in a Guatemalan study one of the participating operators underwent exposure to paraquat equivalent to 118% of the acceptable operator exposure level fixed for that substance, despite use under the proposed conditions.
Potential effects following operator exposure are predominantly skin irritation(mainly on hands and feet), nausea and headaches associated with the smell of the product(due to the added stenching agent) and, to a lesser extent, eye irritation, nail damage and nose bleeds.
The OHS risk assessment utilised measured worker exposure studies,published literature and predictive exposure modelling(UK Predictive Operator Exposure Model- POEM) to estimate the risk to workers using parathion.
The calculations based on the UK and German operator exposure assessment models that are used during reviews in the European Community gave values higher than the agreed acceptable operator exposure level(AOEL) for all uses, even when adequate Personal Protective Equipment(PPE) is worn during mixing, loading and application.
From the assessments made, it was concluded that the submitted information had not demonstrated that the safety requirements laid down in Article 5(1)(a) and(b) and 5(2)(b)of Directive 91/414/EEC were met, in particular with regard to operator exposure and non-target organisms.
Operator exposure estimates, calculated using the experimentally determined specific exposures provided by the German Generic Database indicated that, when no personal protective equipment(PPE) is worn, the AOEL will be exceeded in all scenarios of exposure, whether assuming a 20% or a 10% skin absorption.
Specifically, the use and mischaracterization of the nature and severity of toxicological endpoints(dermal vs. inhalation)to generate the total systemic Acceptable Operator Exposure Level(AOEL) combining the inhalation and dermal route of exposure is unacceptable.
Regarding the risks for human health,the review of trichlorfon as an active substance in plant protection products resulted in the conclusion that the exposure estimates for operators, workers and bystanders were much higher than the provisional acceptable operator exposure level AOEL.
Regarding human health, it was determined through exposure modelling that workers applying endosulfan in a number of scenarios would be exposed to levels above the acceptable operator exposure level(AOEL), even when using standard personal protective equipment.