ABSTRACT
Objective@#To investigate the application and effectiveness evaluation of the standard of GBZ/T 229.2-2010 in practice, and to explore the applicability, aiming to provide technical evidence for the re-vision of GBZ/T 229.2-2010.@*Methods@#There were 2 questionnaire surveys carried out in the study, including general survey and specific survey. Databases were established and data were input with Excel 2010 and Epi-data version 3.1 software. SPSS version 19.0 software was used for data cleaning and statistical analysis.@*Results@#In total, the general survey received 100 questionnaires, with 59 from occupational health technical ser-vice organizations held by government, and 11 from colleges and universities. The leading three jobs using GBZ/T 229.2-2010 were the occupational hazards evaluation for constructive project (65.0%), lecturing/train-ing (50.0%), occupational hazards monitoring (43.0%), respectively. In the results of feasibility, scores of the fourth part "classification" , the fifth part "the principles of classification management" , annex A "the correct use instructions" were 3.4, 3.3, 3.5 respectively. In total, the specific survey received 27 questionnaires, with 18 from the employers and 9 from occupational health technical service organizations. The awareness rate of GBZ/T 229.2-2010 among occupational health professionals was 72.2%. In the results of feasibility, scores of the level of chemical hazards, occupational exposure ratio, physical labor intensity level, classification of expo-sure to industrial toxicants, principles of classification management, annex A "the correct use instructions" were 3.2, 3.7, 4.3, 4.1, 3.2, 3.2, respectively@*Conclusions@#The results indicates that each part of GBZ/T 229.2-2010 is feasible and practical. But there are still some problems, such as classification of different kinds of chemicals at workplace, and the interaction of occupational exposure to chemicals and other hazards at work-place, etc. We suggest that in the revision of GBZ/T 229.2-2010, the action level of hazards should be clear.