Recommendation 26

HM Government Acknowledged

HSE recognise the need to ensure that exposure limits are based on the best available science and should be linked to strong evidence of the realisation of tangible health benefits. HSE will review any robust, peer reviewed evidence on exposure levels that show tangible health benefits for GB workers. Where there is evidence of a new workplace exposure limit being required, there will be a full consultation and cost benefit analysis conducted as part of introducing any change. HSE’s Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (CAR) Post Implementation Review (PIR) will be published later this year. As committed to at the inquiry, HSE has considered whether any of the inquiry findings are relevant to the scope and evidence which was gathered as part of the PIR. The CAR 2012 PIR has been structured around the PIR objectives, outlined earlier, using the evidence that was collected in mid-2021. In effect, the PIR did not specifically consider changes to asbestos occupational exposure limits as this was outside the remit of this review. However, the current OEL is set out in those regulations and the PIR did not find any evidence that duty holders were concerned about the current exposure limits at that time. The committee suggested HSE should move to a lower OEL on the basis that currently HSE’s policy prioritises immediate practical risks over longer-term benefits. HSE’s evidence to the committee was that the underlying science being used to justify a new limit is not certain at this stage. However, HSE is continuing to monitor international developments in this area. Recognising that, in February 2021, the European Chemical Hazards Agency (ECHA) launched a stakeholder consultation on a scientific report for OELs on asbestos. This supported their Committee for Risk Assessment in adopting an opinion. The proposals included a lowering of the OEL from 0.1 to 0.01 f/ml (8-hour time weighted average). The justification was based on the application of the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research model. The same model was used by Germany, The Netherlands and Switzerland. This model was based on a risk assessment of whole life fibre exposure i.e. the risk to health if an individual was exposed to the lower limit for the entirety of their working life. HSE’s evidence was that the assumptions built into this model are not representative of real life, with exposure being more unevenly distributed. The Committee noted in their inquiry report that HSE’s concerns about the ECHA report, used for the basis of lowering the exposure levels, were shared by the Faculty of Asbestos Assessment and Management part of the British Occupational Health Society (FAAM/ BOHS)1 which concludes: ‘…while the [ECHA] report was well-presented, there are appreciable defects in the scientific method through the exclusion of relevant considerations, the omission of evidence, defects in the transparency of the evidence base, missing elements in the scientific evidence base and a failure to appreciate the relationship between practice considerations and the realisation of the objective of limit values in the context of the Directive and European Law’ In GB, the approach for exposure control to asbestos is that OELs and the clearance indicator act as ‘triggers’ for action rather than levels that workers could be expected to be exposed to over a working lifetime. The limits are part of a framework in which carcinogenic exposures are required to be reduced as low as reasonably practicable (both within the Control of Substances Hazardous to health [COSHH] and the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012). Many other countries do not have such a framework in place. HSE will continue to monitor international developments in this area and the evidence base to consider the range of interventions that might be suitable, including any change to the exposure limit in GB.