One of my customers (electrical repairs) just decided one day they would also get into the printing business and aquired two Epson printers, massive ones about 2 metres wide, and have employed a young woman to operate these. They work OK, but when they get warmed up there is a smell, and they run much of the day, so I was brought in to investigate.

There is no suitable ventilation in the room. The room is big enough ~100 cub.m., but all they have is a ceiling air-con, no exhaust vents, just a couple of windows which only partially open. The vapours are not really going anywhere though they do seep into a corridor!

The smell is from three substances/solvents in the inks, not very volatile but the printer is running quite warm when it gets going. I am familiar with the substances one is a ketone, the other two are glycol derivatives.

I have conducted the usual COSHH assessment and asked them to detemine if the the air-con can replace the air at least 5 times an hour if at least two suitable exhaust vents are fitted to two windows.

Now, one of the glycol ether solvent/substances TGDE is a reproductory toxicant, hazard statement H360, so I'm also recommending that they should not employ a female in the printing room. Not only is the TGDE likely present in the atmosphere, but there is the risk of splashing when changing cartridges and cleaning etc. which PPE might not always protect against. I'm assuming the TGDE could enter the bloodstream via skin or lungs (?)

So, no ladies please. Is that a reasonable recommendation to make? I feel very sorry for the woman, I haven't told her the potential hazrd. I'm making the recommendation anyway to cover my back-side, and have issued the management with with one of my dreaded Advisory Notes.

John

Poorly planned, not thought through.

You should not be saying don't employ females - what about young and/or male workers whose reproductive function and off-spring can also be affected.

A lot of these reprotoxic concerns are only now coming forward (look to Scandinavia who push vociverously about endocrine disruptors) - we have a very, very long way to go before the risks of substances are fully known and understood

Basically your client needs to put in place adequate ventilation to reduce the hazard OR eliminate the hazard they introduced

Originally Posted by: Doublestemcell

Posting deleted - Advertising - Mods still have difficulty removing some posts - so this has been over-written

Mod 1

Same idiot different posting

Edited by moderator 26 October 2016 08:05:23(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

fairlieg, it's tetra-

I expect the % TGDE (maybe I should say TetraEGDME) in the inks varies with the colour; all the msds say 10-20%. It's not very volatile, and I have not determined if there are exposure limits - no figures in the msds's that I have consulted - but the printer runs very warm and the more volatile ketone will likely assist evaporation of the TetraEGDME. When the printouts have dried or cooled down maybe some TetraEGDME remains in the printed media (?) and could present a skin absorption risk (?)

John

If your SDS is showing a CAS No 110-71-4 then only Latvia reports an OEL of 10mg/m3 LTEL 8hr

https://echa.europa.eu/substance-information/-/substanceinfo/100.003.451

Included on the candidate SVHC list for authorisation back in 2012

https://echa.europa.eu/brief-profile/-/briefprofile/100.005.086

No hits in GESTIS