*4.1. Preliminary Assessment*

In this phase, a preliminary analysis of the context has to be performed in order to understand the company's practical needs and the working tasks that should be performed. Accordingly, the employer has to verify the compliance with the general OHS requirements regarding the following topics:


The fulfilment of all these requirements is mandatory and to support their management a specific checklist was developed (Appendix A). The accomplishment of such requirements provides the necessary input to perform the specific evaluation of the so-called "chemical risks".

#### *4.2. Chemical Risk Assessment*

This analysis consists of a preliminary assessment (i.e., before the application of the pesticides is carried out) aimed at the definition of an exposure risk profile, and it is realized through a three-step approach. In the first step, the levels of exposure are estimated, considering all the possible exposure determinants present in the scenario under evaluation. Based on their conditions in this scenario, a numeric weight is assigned, and the obtained values are elaborated through a specific algorithm, to obtain and estimate of the possible level of exposure. Then, a value of toxicity is assigned considering the characteristics of the product that will be used. Finally, the estimation of the risk level is computed combining these values.

#### 4.2.1. Evaluation of the Possible Exposure

To evaluate the possible exposure level (Iexp) of the operators, the algorithm proposed by Colosio et al. [54] and Mandi´c-Raj´ceviˇc [73] was improved as follows:

$$\mathbf{I}\_{\rm exp} = \left[ (\mathbf{M} \mathbf{D} \mathbf{X} \times t\_{\rm M} + \mathbf{A} \mathbf{P} \mathbf{L} \times t\_{\rm A} + \mathbf{R} \mathbf{P} \mathbf{A} \mathbf{I} \mathbf{R} \times t\_{\rm R} + \mathbf{R} \mathbf{E} \mathbf{-} \mathbf{N} \mathbf{T} \mathbf{R} \mathbf{Y} \times t\_{\rm RE} \right] \times \mathbf{SK} \mathbf{L} \mathbf{L} \times \mathbf{P} \mathbf{P} \mathbf{E} \right] \times \mathbf{F} \mathbf{E} \mathbf{Q} \tag{2}$$

where the possible re-entry of the operator was included (RE-ENTRY), as well as a reducing factor considering the experience of the operator (SKILL), while PPE considers the status of the personal protective equipment and FREQ indicates how many times in a year the operator carries out activities involving the use of pesticides. With reference to the latter aspect, it has to be noted that, according to the current Italian OHS legislation, the employer has to update the risk assessment document at least yearly. As far as the time *t* is concerned, *tM*, *tA*, *tR*, and *tRE* represent the percentage of time dedicated to the MIX, APPL, REPAIR, and RE-ENTRY activities, respectively in a working day, taking into account that according to the Italian OHS legislation the duration of a working day is of 8 h. In other words, we assumed that the sum of these factors is not more than 100% of time of a regular working day, since the abovementioned activities cannot overlap each other as they are carried out sequentially by one operator only in a working day. Regarding the factor SKILL, the criteria used to introduce this aspect in Equation (2) are based on the information provided by the technical guideline provided by the International Social Security Association (ISSA) [76], where the skills of the operator are estimated considering its experience in carrying out a specific task.

As far as the RE-ENTRY working activities are concerned, they usually consist in any type of activity performed in a field where pesticides were previously used. From the legislative point of view, in line with the provisions of the Italian NAP, the re-entry in the field is allowed only 24 h after the pesticide's application. Then, during the following 24 h the operator can enter in the field only with the proper PPE; after that (i.e., after 48 h) the use of the pesticides' PPE is not mandatory. From an agronomic perspective, it has to be underlined that in some types of cultivations (e.g., maize or rice) the re-entry is not foreseen and thus it should not be computed. In our study, we included in this category the following situation: the operator needs to refill the atomizer's tank to complete the application and goes back and forward from the loading point to the application area. In case the cultivated field has more than one access, the latter activity is not computed if the operator can use other entry points avoiding the already sprayed areas. Although such criteria might appear quite simple, they are based on the experiences with farmers, which are often oriented towards practices that allow them to save time and resources.

The assessment criteria and the relative scores of the elements of Equation (2) are reported as follows: Table 3 (MIX), Table 4 (APPL), Table 5 (REPAIR), Table 6 (RE-ENTRY), and Table 7 (PPE, SKILL, and FREQ). The criteria used in the following tables are based on multiple sources: the starting

point consisted in the findings and the related scientific review provided by [36,64,73]; as additional references for the weighting factors we have considered technical guidelines in the field of pesticide management [77] and from other fields such as mechanical hazards [76]. Moreover, the weighting factors were further discussed in a group of experts in order to verify their usability and effectiveness.


**Table 3.** Exposure factors during mixing and loading activities.

MIX: mixing; LOAD: loads; CONC: concentration; COMP: compound.

It has to be noted that CONC refers to the concentration of the active principle used in the product: expressed as a percentage: this information can be depicted from the product's Safety Data Sheet (SDS) and it is expressed as a weight/weight (w/w) percentage (as indicated in Regulation (EC) no. 1272/2008).


**Table 4.** Exposure factors during the application activities.


**Table 4.** *Cont.*

APPL: application; DOSE: dose; SURF: surface; BAR: pressure; TRACT: tractor; INT: interventions; EQUIP: equipment.

It has to be noted that in Table 4, both INT and EQUIP were considered as additional weighting factors of the exposure risk during the application phase. This is because especially in small companies the attention paid to the condition of the application equipment is still limited [78–80].


**Table 5.** Exposure factors during in-field maintenance of the application equipment.



Based on the results obtained by means of equation (2), for each pesticide used it is possible to define an exposure level (Iexp), which can be classified as depicted in Table 8 following the criteria proposed in [42].


**Table 8.** Levels of possible exposure.

#### 4.2.2. Evaluation of the Toxicity Level

The creation of a grid for the evaluation of the toxicity exposure needs the synthesis of toxicity levels in ranked numeric values. As observed by Maroni et al. [31], despite its qualitative nature, the use of the information provided by the product labels for a preliminary risk assessment in an OHS context can be considered effective. Such an approach can answer to the needs of safety managers or entrepreneurs that can use the data provided by the pesticides' producers in compliance with the mandatory authorization's requirements [9], as practical information for a safe management of pesticides. For this reason, as a reference we used the list of substances provided by Regulation (EC) no. 1272/2008, although other types of lists proposed at the international level [81,82] can be found.

Based on this, we defined five levels of toxicity using as a surrogate of the potential toxicity the hazard statements (H) established for toxic substances by the Regulation (EC) no. 1272/2008. The grid is shown in Table 9, where a 1 to 5 toxicity index (Itox) is considered (1 = very low; 5 = very high). The use of a Likert scale [83], ranging from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important) is quite common in qualitative assessment and its application in risk assessment is foreseen by the ISO/IEC 31010 standard [84].


**Table 9.** List of the toxicity levels based on Regulation (EC) no. 1272/2008.


**Table 9.** *Cont.*

In the grid both hazard statements (H) and supplemental hazard statements relating to particular physical and health properties (EUH) were included: they were selected considering the pesticides most used in Italy. From the practical standpoint, it is worth noting that most of the products available on the market present more than one hazard statement. Hence, when carrying out the risk assessment, the value given to the product is established based on the highest score of the toxicity index.

#### 4.2.3. Definition of the Risk Level

The estimation of the risk level (RE) is performed combining the possible exposure level (Iexp) and the toxicity index (Itox) by means of the following equation:

$$\mathbf{R}\_{\rm E} = \mathbf{I}\_{\rm exp} \times \mathbf{I}\_{\rm tot} \tag{3}$$

The output of the second phase consists in the classification of the exposure risk level based on the criteria exposed in Table 10: the definition of the different levels' ranges are based on the suggestion provided by the ISO/IEC 31010 technical standard [84] for the implementation on the risk matrix.


**Table 10.** Levels of the exposure risk (RE).

#### *4.3. Improvement Options*

Based on the results obtained in the second phase, and the levels of risk pointed out, the next phase of the evaluation consists in the definition of the need of risk management options addressed at reducing the risk to acceptable values. In Table 11 the main preventive interventions which can be done by the company are shown.

**Table 11.** Improvement measures depending on the exposure risk's level.


Once the preventive/protective measures are put into practice, the level of the exposure risk has to be assessed again in order to verify the levels of risk anticipated after the intervention. It is worth noting that the advantage of this approach is that the risk is assessed before the application, and the application is done only when it has been proved the absence of an unacceptable risk.

Following the provisions of the OHS legislation, this information has to be documented in a proper risk assessment file concerning each type of pesticide used by the company. If the company uses more than one pesticide, the whole procedure described in the previous sections has to be applied for each product. Hence, the proper preventive/protective interventions have to be defined considering all the information collected, i.e., the overall risk assessment activities described in this section.
