[Comparison and analysis research on occupational exposure limits of coal dust between China and foreign countries].

Abstract

Objective: To study and compare the occupational exposure limits (OELs) of coal dust between China and foreign countries, understand the OEL of coal dust in China, and provide data and basis for revising the OEL of coal dust in China. Methods: In August 2023, by searching the official websites of limits setting institutions in relevant countries and regions at home and abroad, collecting and sorting out the OELs of coal dust issued by 10 limit setting institutions in 6 countries and the background information of the formulation, and conducting specific analysis on the classification, limit level and formulation principles of coal dust OEL in each country/institution. Results: In China and Japan, the total dust and respirable dust of coal dust OEL were established respectively, while in other countries, only the time-weighted average concentration (TWA) of respirable coal dust exposure was established. The TWA prescribed by China's Notional Health Commission, the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) , the United States Mining Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) and the Australian Safety Work Bureau when the SiO(2) content was less than 5% were 5, 2.4, 2 and 3 mg/m(3) respectively. China GBZ 2.1-2019 sets the limit of 2.5 mg/m(3) for respirable coal dust with SiO(2) content less than 10%. The TWA set by the American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and the South African Department of Mines and Energy (DME) for anthracite coal were 0.4 and 0.8 mg/m(3), respectively, and bituminous coal or lignite were 0.9 and 1.8 mg/m(3), respectively. The respirable coal dust TWA set by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in the United States was 1 mg/m(3), and the TWA set by the New Zealand Work Safety Authority was 3 mg/m(3). Conclusion: At present, the OEL of coal dust in China is at a relatively loose level, and it is suggested to further explore the possibility of revising coal dust OEL.