Key takeaway
RIVM’s new framework identifies 49 substances and groups for possible Dutch workplace exposure limits, but does not itself create legal limits. The report signals closer attention to CMR risks, substance grouping and exposure evidence, with clear implications for industrial employers managing hazardous substances.
No. The report creates a stock list of substances that may be prioritised for Health Council advisory values. The Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment would still need to decide which substances enter the work programme and whether legal limits are later established.
RIVM could not use Dutch workplace exposure as a ranking factor because national public data was unavailable. Better exposure data would help regulators prioritise substances more accurately and help companies demonstrate how workers are protected from hazardous chemicals.
Source basis: RIVM report 2025-0069, 2026
The Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment has identified 49 substances and substance groups that may require future Dutch workplace exposure limits, using a new framework designed to make chemical prioritisation more transparent and systematic. The RIVM report, commissioned by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, could influence future decisions affecting manufacturers, chemical suppliers, occupational safety teams and downstream industrial users.
Workplace exposure limits define the maximum concentration of hazardous substances to which employees may be exposed. In the Netherlands, public limits are set by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, particularly for substances with European binding limits, substances without a clear “owner”, and chemicals with a high likelihood of causing health harm. RIVM applied the framework to substances that may be carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction, known as CMR substances.
The resulting 49-item stock list is not a final regulatory list, but a pool of substances that may be considered for future Health Council advisory values and possible legal limits.
The framework uses three criteria: inclusion, exclusion and weighting. Inclusion criteria determine whether a substance enters the stock list. Exclusion criteria remove substances already covered by other rules, banned substances or substances unlikely to involve Dutch workplace inhalation exposure. Weighting criteria then rank urgency based on hazard, existing limits in other countries and whether the item is a group or individual substance. RIVM began with a broad inventory using sources including IARC, the SIN List and ECHA’s ARN list. After exclusions, 49 substances or groups remained for further prioritisation.
Of the 49 items, 21 scored two or higher: 11 substance groups and 10 individual substances. The five highest-ranked groups were organic hydroperoxides and aliphatic or cumyl peroxides, simple vanadium compounds, polyphenylenes and partially hydrogenated derivatives, untreated or mildly treated mineral oils, and strong inorganic acid mists. For industry, the report’s most immediate message is data quality. RIVM said national public data on Dutch workplace exposure was unavailable, meaning exposure could not be used as a weighting criterion.
The institute calls for better exposure information, potentially through occupational health and safety services or AI-supported methods. Manufacturers and downstream users should review CMR substance inventories, process-generated emissions, supplier data and worker exposure monitoring. Stronger records may help businesses prepare if any of the 49 substances move into the Health Council work programme.
RIVM’s new framework identifies 49 substances and groups for possible Dutch workplace exposure limits, but does not itself create legal limits. The report signals closer attention to CMR risks, substance grouping and exposure evidence, with clear implications for industrial employers managing hazardous substances.
The EPA has concluded that 1,2-dichloroethane poses unreasonable risks to workers under 15 industrial use conditions, launching the TSCA risk management phase for PVC and chlorinated chemical supply chains.
The Silica Dust (Exposure) Bill proposes new UK measures to address occupational silica exposure, including screening and restrictions on high-risk practices. While still under review, it highlights growing regulatory focus on worker health and may prompt businesses to reassess dust control and compliance strategies.
The EU’s new exposure limits for cobalt, PAHs and 1,4-dioxane will reshape chemical risk management across manufacturing. Compliance deadlines begin soon.
Subscribe to Foresight Weekly for expert-picked regulatory developments across chemicals, sustainability, product safety, ESG, and HSE.
Free forever. Unsubscribe anytime.
Read by professionals at
