Pesticide maximum exposure levels

Then, from the worker exposure data, an average and a maximum exposure level for each type of work activity involved with pesticide use is taken into consideration. The number of workers in each job category, the total yearly body dose (which may be derived from number of hours/days/months exposure in performing the job), and the total dermal absorption is all taken into consideration. Residue levels (including degradation products) found in treated crops or a particular product are used to assess consumer risk. 

Dermal Exposure Levels. Setting acceptable maximum dermal exposure levels to specific pesticides has been difficult. This is primarily due to a lack of specific data on dermal transport rates for specific pesticides as related to adverse effect levels and presumed no-effect levels. We are now requiring such data from the registrants, and our Department has a suggested protocol (1) that is offered to registrants that will provide such information from animal exposure studies. This dermal transport rate information is important in setting minimum field reentry intervals for field workers as well as in evaluating exposure levels of mixers, loaders, and applicators. 

A consensus has developed from the scientists conducting residential exposure assessments screening-level or initial tier exposure estimates need to be obtained from those activities and pesticide applications that maximize human contact potential with the pesticide such as a baby crawling on a treated surface. Assessments which conclude minimal risk to humans from maximum exposures are then used to predict minimal risk at lower exposmes. 

Today, when a pesticide with no detectable residues is registered for use, a Tolerance or maximum residue limit (MRL) is established at the lowest concentration level at which the method was validated. However, for risk assessment purposes it would be wrong to use this number in calculating the risk posed to humans by exposure to the pesticide from the consumption of the food product. This would be assuming that the amount of the pesticide present in all food products treated with the pesticide and for which no detectable residues were found is just less than the lowest level of method validation (LLMV). The assumption is wrong, but there is no better way of performing a risk assessment calculation unless the limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) of the method were clearly defined in a uniformly acceptable manner. 

In our study, volunteers wearing either WBDs or bathing suits performed a set of choreographed Jazzercize routines on chlorpyrifos-treated carpet. These exercises at a low work level were designed to represent a maximum daily surface contact and transfer of chemicals such as pesticides. Results were similar to exposures of two sets of adults who used insecticide foggers in their homes. 

This maximum legal exposure, often referred to as the Theoretical Maximum Residue Contribution, or TMRC, is compared with established toxicological criteria such as the reference dose (RfD) or Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) which represent, after analysis of animal toxicology data and extrapolations to humans, the daily exposure that is not considered to present any appreciable level of risk. When it is determined that the TMRC exposure is below the RfD or ADI, the EPA usually considers the risks from the pesticide in question to be negligible and approves the manufacturer s petition to establish a tolerance at or slightly greater than the maximum levels identified from the manufacturer s controlled field trials (Winter, 1992a). 

The ability to use probabilistic approaches to assess dietary pesticide exposure has also changed much of the emphasis of pesticide risk assessment practices from assessing long-term (chronic) exposure to short-term (acute) exposure. Deterministic approaches worked well with chronic assessments since the day-to-day variability in food consumption patterns and the variability of pesticide residue levels tended to average out over the course of a 70-year exposure period. Deterministic approaches have also often been used in the assessment of acute dietary risk by assuming an upper percentile level of food consumption and the maximum detected or allowable level of residue. The point estimate determined in this manner is then compared with the RfD to determine the acceptability of exposure under the specified conditions. 

Once OPs enter the body, they are mainly metabolized in the liver, gastrointestinal tract, malpighian tubulc.s, and body fat by mixed function oxida.ses, which further increase their toxicity. Oxidative desulfuration of OPs leads to maximum anticholincstera,se activity. To consider the possible toxic effect of OPs, it is necessary to take into account the type of chemical and the species in question because there are wide differences. For example, in vertebrates, after one. single exposure to OP pesticides the recovery time from the amicholincsicrase effecl-s ranges from I to 3 weeks, whereas only approximately 1 day is necessary to recover from exposure to a CM pesticide. Birds and mammals have similar metabolic responses to anticholinesterase pesticides. However, birds tend to be more sensitive to their toxic action, probably due to lower levels of metabolizing enzymes. 

An acute tolerance (MRL) assessment is routinely conducted by DPR to ensure that this level of residue will not result in adverse effects in consumers of treated commodities. It is the maximum amount of a pesticide residue dut is legally allowed on that commodity (14). By definition, the use of tolerance residue levels means that a point estimate, deterministic approach was used. DPR considers that acute, but not chronic, tolerance assessment is appropriate because it is highly improbable that an individual would consume a commodity with tolerance level residues on a chronic, annual basis. Similarly, it is considered by DPR to be inappropriate to use a percent crop-treated (%CT) adjustment on the tolerance assessment, whenever using a deterministic approach (Table VI). These tolerance assessments determined the MOS values at the 95 percentile of exposure. 

---