The GHS Column Model

1. Elaborated by

Institut für Arbeitsschutz der Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung (IFA, Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German Social Accident Insurance)

to the top

2. Description

The Institute for Occupational Safety (IFA) of the Social Accident Insurance developed the Column Model to provide industry with a practical tool for identification of alternative substances. This is a simplified method to make a preliminary comparison between the risks of the different substances and products and offer a quick judgment on the convenience of substitution.

The model is based on 6 columns in which the following hazard categories are described:

Acute health hazards
Chronic health hazards
Fire and explosion hazards
Environmental hazards
Exposure Potential
Process hazards

Columns are devided into cells/boxes that contain the criteria to estimate the level of risk based on H phrases (R phrases in the former version), physical form of the substance, vapour pressure, German classification of hazards for the aquatic environment and type of process (open, manual, etc.). Cells/boxes correspond to risk levels, ranked from Negligible to Very high.

Users can compare risk levels of the substance in use and the alternatives by placing/ assigning both agents in their respective boxes in the table.

The necessary information to use this model can be obtained from Chemical Safety Data Sheets, and information on the process in which the given chemical is used.

Products and substances are compared by columns, i.e. by type of hazard. The acute health hazards and chronic health hazards must be evaluated jointly: products are only assessed for similar hazards. Conditions of product use must be considered. According to the hazard levels identified by this tool, the preferred substitute will be the one with the lowest hazard level.

However an alternative will hardly have the lowest level in all the hazard endpoints, so users must set their own criteria to decide which alternative is preferable. Users must decide which potential hazards are more relevant for the workplace where the product is used taking into consideration the company’s possibilities to control or manage the different hazards.

For instance, if an alternative substance has a lower level of toxicity than the product in use, but the environmental hazards are higher, the user must decide whether use conditions in the company allow an adequate control of environmental hazards or not, in order to choose that alternative.

The Columns Model includes criteria for the evaluation of hazards in case of lack of information on toxicity. The method advises against the use of substitutes for which there is no information about skin, toxic, mutagenic or sensitizing effects.

to the top

3. Reliability

Safety data sheets are an important source of information for this method. In various studies carried out across Europe, relevant deficits have been identified in safety data sheets, particularly for classification. Therefore, it may be advisable to check the classifications assigned to substances by using additional sources (e.g. ECHA substance database). However, the implementation of the European Chemicals Regulation (REACH) has improved the amount and quality of information for substances.

to the top

4. Applicability

Applicability is restricted to single cases of substitution of one product or chemical by another. It is not possible to compare products with alternative procedures or technologies. This method is aimed at SME’s and non-specialized users. It is applicable only to chemical hazards and risks.

to the top

5. User friendliness

The model is easy to handle by non-professional users and does not require special expertise if Chemical Safety Data Sheets are available.

to the top

6. Limitations

The method is based on the classification of substances. Classification is legally required for all substances that are placed on the market in the EU. However, from safety data sheets is often not obvious why a classification was NOT assigned (due to missing data or inconclusive data or due to data management that there is no danger?). In cases of doubt, classification should be cross-checked with other databases, e.g. ECHA substance database.
The most important advantage of this method is that is very easy to handle by non-professional users and facilitates a quick assessment on possible substitutes and alternatives.

to the top