-------
-------
Flexographic Ink Options:
A Cleaner Technologies Substitutes Assessment
VOLUME 2
Design for the Environment Program
Economics, Exposure, and Technology Division
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (7404)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
February 2002
EPA 744-R-02-001B
Developed in Partnership with the Following Associations:
CflUFORNIR
FILM GCTRUD€RS
& CONV€RT6RS
RSSOCIflTION
NORTH AMERICA,
FILM&BAG
FEDERATION
-------
For More Information
To learn more about Design for the Environment (DfE) Flexography Partnership or the DfE Program, or
to download any of DfE's documents, visit
www.epa.gov/dfe
or contact us at
202-564-8780
dfe@epa.gov
To order additional printed copies of this document or other DfE publications, contact
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Service Center for Environmental Publications
P.O. Box 42419
Cincinnati, OR 45242-2419
Phone: 800-490-9198
513-489-8190
Fax: 513-489-8695
e-mail: nceipmal @one.net
Internet: www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ordering.htm
Disclaimer
This document presents the findings and analysis of a voluntary, cooperative effort between the
flexographic printing industry and the U.S. EPA. This is not an official guidance document and should
not be relied on by companies hi the printing industry to determine regulatory requirements. Information
on cost and product usage hi this document was provided by individual product vendors and has not been
corroborated by EPA. Mention of specific company names or products does not constitute an
endorsement by EPA.
11
-------
Acknowledgments
DfE would like to thank its many partners for their participation in the Rexography Project.
• Members of the Steering and Technical Committees provided valuable guidance and feedback
throughout the project. The Technical Committee included volunteer printers and suppliers,
who contributed much time, expertise, materials, and the use of their facilities; their
cooperation was essential to the project. (The next two pages list the participants.)
• Lori Kincaid of the University of Tennessee Center for Clean Products and Clean
Technologies analyzed the data on energy and resource conservation.
• John Serafano of Western Michigan University attended the performance demonstrations,
supervised the laboratory runs, and analyzed the performance data.
• Laura Rubin, formerly of Industrial Technology Institute, contributed to the cost analysis.
• Members of the EPA Workgroup contributed significantly, especially to the risk, cost, and
benefit-cost analyses. The Workgroup consisted of the following individuals: Susan Dillman,
Conrad Flessner, Jr., Eric Jackson, Susan Krueger, David Lai, Fred Metz, and Jerry Smrchek.
• This document was prepared by Susan Altaian, Dennis Chang, Cheryl Keenan, Harry (Trey)
Kellett m, and Srabani Roy of Abt Associates, Inc. under EPA Contract 68-W6-0021, Work
Assignments 3-07,4-05, and 5-08, and EPA Contract 68-W-01-039, Work Assignment 1-2.
EPA work assignment managers included Stephanie Bergman, Karen Chu, and James Rea.
in
-------
Members of the Flexography Partnership
Steering Committee
Robert Bateman
(representing California Film Extruders &
Converters Association)
Roplast Industries
3155 South 5th Avenue
Oraville, CA 95965
phone: 530-532-95000
fax: 530-532-9576
rbateman@roplast.com
Karen Chu
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Mail Code 7406
Washington, DC 20460
phone: 202-564-8773
fax: 202-564-8893
chu.karen@epa.gov
Norma Fox
California Film Extruders & Converters
Association
2402 Vista Nobleza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
phone: 949-644-7659
fax: 949-640-9911
nsfox@earthlink.net
George Fuchs
National Association of Printing Ink
Manufacturers
581 Main St.
Woodbridge, NJ 07095-1104
phone: 732-855-1525fax: 732-855-1838
gfuchs@napim. org
Doreen Monteleone
Flexographic Technical Association
900 Marconi Avenue
Ronkonkoma, NY 11779-7212
phone: 631-737-6020
fax: 631-737-6813
dmonteleone@flexography.org
Gary Cohen
RadTech International, M.A.
400 North Cherry
Falls Church, VA 22046
phone: 703-534-9313
fax: 703-533-1910
uveb@radtech.org
Ram Singhal
Flexible Packaging Association
971 Corporate Boulevard, Suite 403
Linthicum, MD 21090
phone: 410-694-0800
fax: 410-694-0900
rsinghal@flexpak.com
IV
-------
Technical Committee
A.J. Daw Printing Ink Co.*
Abt Associates Inc.
Akzo Nobel Inks Corp.*
American Inks and Coatings
Anguil Environmental Systems, Inc.
Automated Packaging*
Bema Film Systems, Inc.
Bryce Corporation*
Cello-Foil Products, Inc.*
Coast Converters
Curwood, Inc.
Deluxe Packages*
Dispersion Specialties, Inc.
DuPont Cyrel
Duralam, Inc.
E.L du Pont de Nemours & Co.*
Emerald Packaging*
Enercon Industries Corp*
Fine Line Graphics*
Flex Pack*
Flint Ink*
Fusion UV Systems, Inc.
Georgia-Pacific
Hallmark Cards
Harper Corporation of America*
Highland Supply Corporation
Huron River Watershed Council
International Paper
INX International Ink Co.*
Kidder, Inc.
Lawson Mardon Packaging USA*
MacDermid Graphic Arts*
Maine Poly, Inc.*
MEGTEC Systems
Mobil Chemical Corp.*
Orange Plastics
Pechiney Plastic Packaging
P-F Technical Services, Inc.
Precision Printing & Packaging, Inc.
Printpack, foe.
Progressive Inks*
Research Triangle Institute
Roplast Industries*
SC Johnson Polymer
Sericol
Strout Plastics
Sun Chemical Corporation*
U.S. EPA
UCB Chemicals
University of Tennessee
Waste Management and Research Center
Western Michigan University
Windmueller & Hoelscher Corp.*
* These companies voluntarily supplied materials for the CTSA or participated in the performance
demonstrations.
-------
Contents
VOLUME 2: APPENDICES
Appendices to Chapter 3; RISK
Appendix 3-A: Flexographic Ink Formulations and Structures
Appendix 3-B: Human Health and Ecological Hazard Results
Appendix 3-C: Supplementary Environmental Air Release Information
Appendix 3-D: Environmental Air Release Data
Appendix 3-E: Supplemental Occupational Exposure Assessment Methodology
Appendix 3-F: Occupational Exposure Data
Appendix 3-G: Supplementary General Population Exposure Information
Appendix 3-H: General Population Exposure Data
Appendix 3-1: Systemic Toxicity Risk Results
Appendix 3-J: Developmental Toxicity Risk Results
Appendix 3-K: Summary of Occupational Systemic Toxicity Risk — Dermal
Appendix 3-L: Summary of Occupational Systemic Toxicity Risk — Inhalation
Appendix 3-M: Summary of Occupational Developmental Toxicity Risk — Dermal
Appendix 3-N: Summary of Occupational Developmental Toxicity Risk — Inhalation
Appendix 3-O: Summary of General Population Systemic Toxicity Risk — Inhalation
Appendix 3-P: Summary of General Population Developmental Toxicity Risk — Inhalation
Appendices to Chapter 4; PERFORMANCE
Appendix 4-A: Overall Performance Demonstration Methodology
Appendix 4-B: Facility Background Questionnaire
Appendix 4-C: Performance Demonstration Data Collection Form
Appendix 4-D: Test Image Design
Appendix 4-E: Laboratory Test Procedures and Performance Data
Appendix 4-F: Anilox Configuration Data from the Performance Demonstrations
Appendix 4-G: Surface Tension Data from the Performance Demonstrations
Appendix 4-H: Viscosity Data from the Performance Demonstrations
Appendix 4-1: Descriptions and Test Data for Performance Demonstration Sites
Appendix 4-J: Descriptions and Performance Test Data for the Laboratory Runs
Appendix 4-K: Performance Test Data from Laboratory Runs for Inks Not Used in the Performance
Demonstrations
Appendices to Chapter 5; COST '
Appendix 5-A: Cost Analysis Methodology
Appendix 5-B: Supplemental Cost Analysis Information
Appendices to Chapter 6; RESOURCE AND ENERGY CONSERVATION ~
Appendix. 6-A: Supplemental Resource and Energy Conservation Information
Appendix 6-B: Clean-Up and Waste Disposal Procedures for Each Site
Appendix 6-C: Pollution Generation Reports
VI
-------
Appendix 3~A (Risk Chapter)
Flexographic Ink Formulations and Structures
Table 3-A.l lists every flexographic ink chemical that was studied in this CTSA, along with its CAS
number and other names by which the chemical is known.
Table 3-A.2 lists all the ink additives that were used during the performance demonstrations.
Following these tables is an alphabetical display of the chemical structures for all substances listed in
Table 3-A.l. in the flexographic ink formulations that were supplied for the performance demonstrations.
3-A, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Table 3-A.1 Flexographic Ink Formulation Chemicals
Chemical substance
Acrylated epoxy polymer
Acrylated oligoamine polymer
Acrylated polyester polymer #1
Acrylated polyester polymer #2
Acrylic acid-butyl acrylate-methyl ,
methacrylate-styrene polymer
Acrylic acid polymer, acidic #1
Acrylic acid polymer, acidic #2
Acrylic acid polymer, insoluble
Alcohols, C1 1 -1 5-secondary,
ethoxylated
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Ammonia
Ammonium hydroxide
Barium
2-Benzyl-2-(dimethylamino)-4'-
morpholinobutyrophenone
Butyl acetate
Butyl acrylate-methacrylic acid-
methyl methacrylate polymer
Butyl carbitol
C.I. Basic Violet 1 ,
molybdatephosphate
C.I. Basic Violet 1 ,
molybdatetungstatephosphate
C.I. Pigment Blue 15
C.I. Pigment Blue 61
C.I. Pigment Green 7
C.I. Pigment Red 23
C.I. Pigment Red 48, barium salt
(1:1)
C.I. Pigment Red 48, calcium salt
(1:1)
CAS number Synonym
NKa
NK
NK
NK
27306-39-4
NK
NK
NK
68131-40-8
61790-31-6
7664-41-7
1336-21-6
7440-39-3
119313-12-1
123-86-4
25035-69-2
112-34-5
67989-22-4
1325-82-2
147-14-8
1324-76-1
1328-53-6
6471-49-4
7585-41-3
7023-61-2
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, methyl ester, polymer
with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-
propenoic acid
Ethoxylated C1 1-1 5-secondary alcohols
Hydrogenated tallow amides
1 -Butanone, 2-(dimethylamino)-1 -[4-(4-
morpholinyl)phenyl]-2-(phenylmethyl)-
Acetic acid butyl ester
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyi-, polymer with butyl 2-
propenoate and methyl 2-methyl-2-propenoate
2-(2-Butoxyethoxy)ethanol
Benzenamine, 4-[(4-aminophenyI)(4-imino-2,5-
cyclohexadien-1-ylidene)methyl], N-Me derivs.,
molybdatephosphates
Benzenamine, 4-[(4-aminophenyl)(4-imino-2,5-
cyclohexadien-1-ylidene)methyl]-, N-Me derivs.,
molbdatetungstatephosphates
Copper(ll) phthalocyanine
Benzenesulfonic acid, ((4-((4-
(phenyIamino)phenyl)(4-(phenylamino)-2,5-
cyclohexadien-1-ylidene)methyl)phenyl)amino)-
Copper phthalocyanine green derivative
2-Naphthalenecarboxamide, 3-hydroxy-4-((2-
methoxy-5-nitrophenyl)azo)-N-(3-nitrophenyl)
2-Naphthalenecarboxylic acid, 4-((5-chloro-4-
methyl-2-sulfophenyl)azo)3-hydroxy-, barium salt
(1:1)
2-Naphthalenecarboxylic acid, 4-((5-chloro-4-
methyl-2-sulfophenyl)azo)3-hydroxy-, calcium salt
(1:1)
3-A, page 2.
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Table 3-A.1 Flexographic Ink Formulation Chemicals (continued)
Chemical substance
C.I. Pigment Red 52, calcium salt
(1:1)
C.I. Pigment Red 269
C.I. Pigment Violet 23
C.I. Pigment Violet 27
C.I. Pigment White 6
C.I. Pigment White 7
C.I. Pigment Yellow 14
C.I. Pigment Yellow 74
Citric acid
D&C Red No. 7
Dicyclohexyl phthalate
Dioctyl sulfosuccinate, sodium salt
Diphenyl(2,4,6-
trimethylbenzoyOphosphine oxide
Dipropylene glycol diacrylate
Dipropylene glycol methyl ether
Distillates (petroleum),
hydrotreated light
Distillates (petroleum), solvent-
refined light paraffinic
Erucamide
Ethanol
Ethanolamine
Ethoxylated tetramethyldecyndiol
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl carbitol
Ethyl 4-dimethylaminobenzoate
2-Ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate
CAS number
17852-99-2
67990-05-0
6358-30-1
12237-62-6
13463-67-7
1314-98-3
5468-75-7
6358-31-2
77-92-9
5281-04-9
84-61-7
577-11-7
75980-60-8
57472-68-1
34590-94-8
64742-47-8
64741-89-5
112-84-5
64-17-5
141-43-5
9014-85-1
141-78-6
111-90-0
10287-53-3
1241-94-7
Synonym
2-Naphthalenecarboxylic acid, 4-((4-chloro-5-
methyl-2-sulfophenyl)azo)-3-hydroxy-, calcium salt
(1:1)
2-Naphthalenecarboxamide, N-(5-chloro-2-
methoxyphenyl)-3-hydroxy-4-[[2-methoxy-5-
Xphenylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]azo]-
Diindolo(3,2-b:3',2'-m)triphenodioxazine, 8,1 8-
dichoro-5,1 5-diethyl-5,1 5-dihydro-
Ferrate(4-), hexakis(Cyano-C)-, methylated 4-[(4-
aminophenyl)(4-imino-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-
ylidene)methyl]benzenamine copper (2+) salts
Titanium oxide (TiO2)
Zinc sulf ide
Butanamide, 2,2'-((3,3'-dichloro(1 ,1'-biphenyl)-4,4'-
diyI)bis(azo))bis(N-(2-methylphenyl)-3-oxo-
Butanamide, 2-((2-methoxy-4-nitrophenyl)azo)-N-
(2-methoxyphenyl)-3-oxo-
2-Hydroxy-1 ,2,3-tricarboxylic acid
3-Hydroxy-4-((4-methyl)-2-sulfophenyl)azo)-2-
naphthalenecarboxylic acid, calcium salt
1 ,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dicyclohexyl ester
Succinic acid, sulfo-, 1 ,4-bis(2-ethylhexyl)ester, Na
salt
2-Propenoic acid, oxybis(methyl-2,1-ethanediyl)
ester
Propanol, (2-methoxymethylethoxy)-
Kerosene (petroleum), hydrotreated
Petroleum distillates
cis-1 3-Docosenoamide
Ethyl alcohol
2-Aminoethanol
Poly(oxy-1 ,2-ethanediyl), .alpha.,.alpha.'-[1 ,4-
dimethyl-1 ,4-bis(2-methylpropyl)-2-butyne-1 ,4-
diyl]bis[.omega.-hydroxy-
Acetic acid, ethyl ester
Ethanol, 2-(2-ethoxyethoxy)-
Benzoic acid, 4-(dimethylamino)-, ethyl ester
Phosphoric acid, 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl ester
3-A, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Table 3-A.1 Flexographic Ink Formulation Chemicals (continued)
Chemical substance | CAS number
Fatty acid, dimer-based polyamide
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers,
)olymers with ethylenediamine,
lexamethylenediamine, and
propionic acid
Glycerol propoxylate triacrylate
n-Heptane
1,6-Hexanediol diacrylate
1-Hydroxycyciohexyl phenyl ketone
Hydroxylamine derivative
2-Hydroxy-2-methylpropiophenone
Hydroxypropyl acrylate
Isobutanol
Isopropanol
sopropoxyethoxytitanium
)is(acetylacetonate)
2-Isopropylthioxanthone
4-lsopropylthioxanthone
Kaolin
Methylenedisalicylic acid
2-MethyI-4'-(methylthio)-2-
morphoiinopropiophenone
Mineral oil
Nitrocellulose
Paraffin wax
Phosphine oxide, bis(2,6-
dimethoxybenzoyl) (2,4,4-
trimethylpentyl)
Polyethylene
Polyethylene glycol
Polyol derivative A (generic ID) b
Polytetrafluoroethylene
Propanol
Propyl acetate
Propylene glycol methyl ether
Propylene glycol propyl ether
Resin acids, hydrogenated, methyl
esters
Resin, acrylic
NK
67989-30-4
52408-84-1
142-82-5
13048-33-4
947-19-3
NK
7473-98-5
25584-83-2
78-83-1
67-63-0
68586-02-7
5495-84-1
83846-86-0
1332-58-7
27496-82-8
71868-10-5
8012-95-1
9004-70-0
8002-74-2
145052-34-2
9002-88-4
25322-68-3
9002-84-0
71-23-8
109-60-4
107-98-2
1569-01-3
8050-15-5
NK
Synonym
Propoxylated glycerol triacrylate
2-Propenoic acid, 1 ,6-hexanediyl ester
;i-Hydroxycyclohexyl)phenylmethanone
2-Hydroxy-2-methyl-1 -phenyl-1 -propanone
2-Propenoic aid, monoester with 1 ,2-propanediol
2-Methyl-1 -propanol
2-Propanol
Titanium, ethoxybis(2,4-pentanedionato-O,O')(2-
propanolato)-
9H-Thioxanthen-9-one, 2-(1 -rnethylethyl)-
9H-Thioxanthen-9-one, 4-(1 -methylethyl)-
Aluminum silicate hydroxide
Methylenebis[2-hydroxybenzoicacid]
Morpholinopropiophenone, 2-methyl-4'-
(methylthio)-
Paraffin oils
Cellulose nitrate
Paraffin waxes and hydrocarbon waxes
Ethene polymer
Poly(oxy-1 ,2-ethanediyl), .alpha.-hydro-.omega.-
hydroxy-
1 -Propanol
Acetic acid, propyl ester
1 -Methoxy-2-propanol
1 -Propoxy-2-propanol
3-A, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Table 3-A.1 Flexographic Ink Formulation Chemicals (continued)
Chemical substance
Resin, miscellaneous
Rosin, fumarated, polymer with
diethylene glycol and
Dentaerythritol
Rosin, fumarated, ethyiene polymer
derivitized
Rosin, polymerized
Silanamine, 1,1,1-trimethyl-N-
(trimethylsilyl)-, hydrolysis products
with silica
Silica
Silicons oil
Siioxanes and silicones, di-Me, 3-
hydroxypropyl Me, ethers with
DOlyethylene glycol acetate
Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light
aliphatic
Styrene
Styrene acrylic acid polymer #1
Styrene acrylic acid polymer #2
Styrene acrylic acid resin
Tetramethyldecyndiol
Thioxanthone derivative
Trimethylolpropane ethoxylate
triacrylate
Trimethylolpropane propoxylate
triacrylate
Trimethylolpropane triacrylate
Urea
CAS number
NK
68152-50-1
NK
65997-05-9
68909-20-6
7631-86-9
63148-62-9
70914-12-4
64742-89-8
100-42-5
NK
NK
NK
126-86-3
NK
28961-43-5
53879-54-2
15625-89-5
57-13-6
Synonym
Resin, miscellaneous
Fumarated rosin, diethylene glycol pentaerythritol
polymer
Silicon dioxide
Siioxanes and silicones, di-Me
VM&P naphtha, Skellysolve
Ethenylbenzene
2,4,7,9-Tetramethyl-5-decyne-4,7-diol
Poly(oxy-1 ,2-ethanediyl), .aipha.-hydro-.omega.-
[(1-oxo-2-propenyl)oxy]-, ether with 2-ethyl-2-
(hydroxymethyl)-l ,3-propanediol
Poly(oxy(methyl-1 ,2-ethanediyl)), .alpha.-hydro-
.omega.-((1-oxo-2-propenyl)oxy)-, ether with 2-
ethyI-2-(hydroxymethyl)-1 ,3-propanediol (3:1)
2-Propenoic acid, 2-ethyl-2-(((1-oxo-2-
propenyl)oxy)methyl-1 ,3-propanediyl ester
a Not known.
b Actual chemical name is confidential business information.
3-A, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Table 3-A.2 Ink Additives Used in the Performance Demonstrations
Ink formulation
Solvent-based Ink #S1
Solvent-based lnk#S2
Water-based Ink #W1
Water-based Ink #W2
Site
9B
5
7
10
4
1
Color
blue
green
white
cyan
magenta
all colors
white
all other colors
blue, green
white
cyan
magenta
white
all other colors
blue
green
white
cyan
magenta
Chemical
propanol
none
propanol
n-propyl acetate
propylene glycol ether
trade secret
none
propanol
none
none
propanol
propylene glycol monornethyl ether
2-methoxy-1 -propanol
propylene glycol monornethyl ether
2-methoxy-1 -propanol
ethoxylated tetramethyl-decyndiol
none
isobutanol
ethyl carbitol
propanol
none
propanol
isobutanoi
ethyl carbitol
ammonia
isobutanol
ethyl carbitol
3-A, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Table 3-A.2 Ink Additives Used in the Performance Demonstrations (continued)
Ink formulation Site Color Chemical
Water-based Ink #W3
Water-based Ink #W4
UV-cured Ink #U1
UV-cured Ink #U2
UV-cured Ink #U3
2
3
9A
11
6
8
blue
green
white
cyan
magenta
blue
green
white
cyan
magenta
blue
green
white
cyan
magenta
green
all other colors
all colors
all colors
propanol
ammonia
asopropanol
polyfunctional aziridine
other compounds
propanol
ammonia
isopropanol
Dropanoi
ammonia
isopropanol
ammonia
ammonia
propanol
isopropanol
propanol
ammonia
ammonia
extender
propanol
ammonia
ammonia
2-butoxyethanol
ammonia
propanol
ammonia
ammonia
none
solids
ethyl carbitol
petroleum distillate
propanol
ammonia
ammonia
1 ,6-hexanediol diacrylate
none
none
none
3-A, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Chemical Properties Data
NK = not known
NAVG = number average molecular weight
NA = not available
E = estimated
Acrylated epoxy polymer, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG 1500
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow:NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Curable resin
Structure: An average of 2 acrylates/molecule
f^r^T^i
Q-^^S^Q-^^ ^f^o'^Y^-o
R--o OH H° o"R
Q^^^^ R and R' are not known O
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Acrylated oligoamine polymer, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, N, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG 2000
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA°C(E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log^K^: NA (E)
Log^: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Curable resin
Structure: An average of 2 acrylates/molecule
H H
^f^^^^^^^^^
o o
R = polymer
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Acrylated polyester polymer #1, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: Ebecryl 870
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG 4350
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
: NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Curable resin
Structure: An average of 5-6 acrylates/ molecule
O O O O
R, R1, and R" are not known
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Acrylated polyester polymer #2, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG 1500
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log^K^: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Curable resin
Structure: An average of 4 acrylates/ molecule
O O O O
R, R', and R" are not known
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 9
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Acrylic acid-butyl acrylate-methyl methacrylate-styrene polymer,
CAS # 27306-39-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, methyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate,
ethenylbenzene and 2-propenoic acid
Synonyms: NK Structure:
Molecular Formula: (C8H8.C7H12O2.C5H8O2.C3H4O2)X
Molecular Weight: >3000 (E)
Melting Point: >100 °C(E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: 1 g/cms(E)
NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Resin
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Acrylic acid polymer, acidic #1, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: (C3H402.C,H,O)X
Molecular Weight: NAVG 5000 (E)
Melting Point: NA°C(E)
Boiling Point: NA°C(E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
: NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
OH
R not equal to H
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Acrylic acid polymer, acidic #2, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula:(C3H402.C,H,O)x
Molecular Weight: NAVG 5000 (E)
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log^K^: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
OR
R not equal to H
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Acrylic acid polymer, insoluble, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG >10,000 (E)
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log^K^: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
0 R
R not equa! to H
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 11
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Alcohols, C11-15-secondary, ethoxylated, CAS # 68131-40-8
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Alcohols, C11-15-secondary, ethoxylated
Synonyms: Ethoxylated C11 -15-secondary
ales.
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: 347 (n = 3)
Melting Point °C (E)
Boiling Point: >350 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: Dispersible g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log^: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Dispersant
Structure:
R+R' = C10-14aikyl
Henry's Law: NA atm-ms/mol (E)
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated, CAS # 61790-31-6
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Synonyms: Armid HT
Molecular Formula: C18H37NO (TYPCL)
Molecular Weight: 283.50 (TYPCL)
Melting Point: 152°C(E)
Boiling Point: >400 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.00003 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
6.70 (E)
: 5.01 (E)
Log10BCF: 4.86 (E)
Function in ink: Vehicle
Structure:
CH^CHJ^.r NH2
O x £.* \ £. 1 O f.
Henry's Law: 1E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 12
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Ammonia, CAS # 7664-41-7
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Ammonia
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: NH3
Molecular Weight: 17.03
Melting Point: -77.7 °C (M)
Boiling Point: -33.35 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: >2160 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 310 (at 25 °C) g/L (M)
Density: vapor: 0.5967 (air = 1) (M)
liquid at -33 °C and 1 atm: 0.682 g/cm3
NA(E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Buffer
Structure:
NH,
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
POTW Overall Removal Rate (%):
Ammonium hydroxide, CAS # 1336-21-6
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Ammonium hydroxide
Synonyms: Ammonia aqueous, Aqua
ammonia
Molecular Formula: H4N.HO
Molecular Weight: 35.05
Melting Point: NA °C (M)
Boiling Point: NA °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 2160 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: None °C (M)
Water Solubility: >1000 (miscible) g/L (E)
Density: 0.900 g/cm3 (M)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log.oK^: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Buffer
Structure:
NH^OH
Approximately 28-29% NH3 in water.
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A,page 13
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Barium, CAS # 7440-39-3
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Barium
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: Ba
Molecular Weight: 137.34
Melting Point: about 710 °C (E)
Boiling Point: about 1600 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: Reacts
Density: 3.60 g/cm3 (M)
Log,^ NA(E)
Log10Koc:NA(E)
Log10BCF:NA(E)
Function in ink: Reactant
Structure:
Ba
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
2-BenzyI-2-(dimethylamino)-4'-morpholinobutyrophenone,
CAS #119313-12-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 1-Butanone, 2-(dimethylamino)-1-[4-(4-morpholinyl)phenyl]-2-(phenylmethyl)-
Synonyms: 2-Benzyl-2-(dimethylamino)-1-(4- Structure:
morpholinophenyl)-1 -butanone
Molecular Formula: C^H^N-A,
Molecular Weight: 366.51
Melting Point: 116-119 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 457 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Rash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.0061 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log,0K0«: 4.50 (E)
Log,^- 3.66 (E)
Log10BCF:3.19(E)
Function in ink: NA, initiator (E)
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/moi (E)
3-A, page 14
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Butyl acetate, CAS # 123-86-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Acetic acid, butyl ester
Synonyms: Butyl ethanoate, 1 -Butyl acetate
Molecular Formula: C6H12O2
Molecular Weight: 11 6.1 6
Melting Point: -78 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 124-126 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 1 1 .5 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 22 °C (M)
Water Solubility: 6.29 g/L (M)
Density: 0.882 g/cm3 (M)
Log10Kow:1.78(M),1.85(E)
Log10BCF:1.123(E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: 0.000315 atm-m3/mol (E)
Butyl acrylate-methacrylic acid-methyl methacrylate polymer, CAS # 25035-69-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate and methyl 2-methyl-
2-propenoate
Synonyms: Methacrylic acid, polymer with butyl
acrylate and methyl methacrylate
Molecular Formula: (C7H12O2.C5H8O2.C4H6O2)X
Molecular Weight: >3000 (E)
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log^K^ NA(E)
Log10Koc:NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 15
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Butyl carbitol, CAS # 112-34-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-(2-Butoxyethoxy)ethanol
Synonyms: Butoxydiethylene glycol, Diethylene
glycol n-butyl ether
Molecular Formula: C8H18O3
Molecular Weight: 162.25
Melting Point: -68.1 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 230.4 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.0219mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 110 "C open, 78 °C closed cup (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 g/L (miscible) (E)
Density: 0.967 g/cm3 (M)
0.56 (M), 0.29 (E)
: 1.0 (E)
Log10BCF: 0.196 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
C.I. Basic Violet 1, molybdatephosphate, CAS # 67989-22-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Benzenamine, 4-[(4-aminophenyl)(4-imino-2,5-cyclohexadien-1 -ylidene)methyl], N-
Me-derivs., molybdatephosphates
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C20H19N3.Mo.H3O4P
Molecular Weight: 350 (E)
Melting Point: >250 (dec) °C(E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.0001 g/L (E)
Density: 1.5 g/cm3 (E)
NA (E)
: NA (E)
Log,0BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 16
-------
APPENDIX 3-A(RfSK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
C.I. Basic Violet 1, molybdatetungstatephosphate, CAS # 1325-82-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Benzenamine, 4-[(4-aminophenyl)(4-imino-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-yIidene)methyl]-, N-
Me derivs, molybdatetungstatephosphate
Synonyms: C.I. Pigment Violet 3 Structure:
Molecular Formula: C19H19N3.Mo.W.H3PO4
Molecular Weight: >350 (E)
Melting Point: >250 (dec) °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 .5 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
H.N
NH,
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
C.I. Pigment Blue 15, CAS # 147-14-8
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Copper(ll)phthalocyanine
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C32H16CuN8
Molecular Weight: 576.08
Melting Point: NA°C(E)
Boiling Point: >450 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.001 g/L (E)
Density: 1.5 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA (E)
Log^K^: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 17
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
C.I. Pigment Blue 61, CAS # 1324-76-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Benzenesulfonic acid, ((4-((4-(phenylamino)phenyl)(4-(phenylamino)-2,5-
cyclohexadien-1-ylidene)methyl)phenyl)amino)-
Synonyms: Reflex Blue R
Molecular Formula: CgyH^NgOgS
Molecular Weight: 595.70
Melting Point: 350 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >450 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: 1 g/cm3(E)
- 6.514 (E)
: 9.227 (E)
Log10BCF: 4.721 (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
NHPh
'Position unspecified
NPh
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
C.I. Pigment Green 7, CAS # 1328-53-6
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: C.I. Pigment Green 7
Synonyms: Copper phthalocyanine Green
PG-7
Molecular Formula: Unspecified
Molecular Weight: >550 (E)
Melting Point NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >450 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.001 g/L(E)
Density: 1.5 g/cm3 (E)
; NA(E)
; NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
R substitution/position unspecified
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 18
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
C.I. Pigment Red 23, CAS # 6471-49-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Naphthalenecarboxamide, 3-hydroxy-4-((2-methoxy-5-nitrophenyl)azo)-N-(3-
nitrophenyl)
Synonyms: Naphthol Red B
Molecular Formula: C24H17N5O7
Molecular Weight: 487.43
Melting Point: 322 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >500 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
8.30 (E)
,: 4.9 (E)
Log10BCF: 6.08 (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Henry's Law: <1 E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
C.I. Pigment Red 48, barium salt (1:1), CAS # 7585-41-3
Chemical Properties and Information
Structure:
Chemical Name: 2-Naphthalenecarboxylic acid, 4-[(5-chloro-4-methyl-2-sulfophenyl)azo]-3-hydroxy-,
barium salt (1:1)
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C18H13CIN2O6S.Ba
Molecular Weight: 558.14
Melting Point: >250 (dec) °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.1 g/L (E)
Density: 1.5 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA (E)
LogwKm: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 19
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
C.I. Pigment Red 48, calcium salt (1:1), CAS # 7023-61-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Naphthalenecarboxylic acid, 4-[(5-chloro-4-methyl-2-sulfophenyl)azo]-3-hydroxy-,
calcium salt (1:1)
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C18H13CIN2O6S.Ca
Molecular Weight: 460.90
Melting Point: >250 (dec) °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.1 g/L(E)
Density: 1.5 g/cm3 (E)
Log,,,!^ NA(E)
Log10Koc:NA(E)
Log10BCF:NA(E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Vo-
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
C.I. Pigment Red 52, calcium salt (1:1), CAS # 17852-99-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Naphthalenecarboxylic acid, 4-((4-chloro-5-methyl-2-sulfophenyl)azo)-3-hydroxy-,
calcium salt (1:1)
Synonyms: C.I. Pigment Red 52:1
Molecular Formula: C18H13CIN2O6S.Ca
Molecular Weight: 460.90
Melting Point: >250 (dec) °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.0001 g/L(E)
Density: 1 .5 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mc$ (E)
3-A, page 20
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
C.I. Pigment Red 269, CAS # 67990-05-0
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Naphthalenecarboxamide, N-(5-chloro-2-methoxyphenyl)-3-hydroxy-4-[[2-
methoxy-5-[(phenyIamino)carbonyl]phenyl]azo]-
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C^H
Molecular Weight: 581.03
Melting Point: >350 °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
: 8.24 (E)
: 5.964 (E)
Log10BCF: 6.033 (E)
Function in ink: Pigment '
Structure:
NHPh
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
C.I. Pigment Violet 23, CAS # 6358-30-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Diindolo^-fcS'.Z-mJtriphenodioxazine, 8,18-dichloro-5,15-diethyl-5,15-dihydro-
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C^H^CI^C-a
Molecular Weight: 589.46
Melting Point: >200 °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.0001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log^: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/moi (E)
r
3-A, page 21
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
C.I. Pigment Violet 27, CAS # 12237-62-6
Chemical Properties and Information
Structure:
Chemical Name: Ferrate(4-), hexakis(cyano-C)-, methylated 4-[(4-aminophenyl)(4-imino-2,5-
cyclohexadien-1-ylidene)methyl]benzenamine copper(2+) salts
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C, H, N. (CN)6Fe. Cu
Molecular Weight: >350 (E)
Melting Point: >250 (dec) °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.01 g/L
Density: 1.5 g/cm3(E)
NA(E)
: NA (E)
Log,0BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Fe(CN)6
R = H or Me
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
C.I. Pigment White 6, CAS # 13463-67-7
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Titanium oxide
Synonyms: Titanium dioxide, Unitane
Molecular Formula: O2Ti
Molecular Weight: 79.88 (based on empirical formula)
Melting Point: 1855 °C(M)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoinfc NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: 4.23 (rutile); 3.9 (anatase); 4.13 (brookite) g/cm3
; NA(E)
: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
O=Ti=O
Henry's Law: NA atm-ms/mol (E)
POTW Overall Removal Rate (%):
3-A, page 22
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
C.I. Pigment White 7, CAS # 1314-98-3
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Zinc sulfide
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: ZnS
Molecular Weight: 97.43
Melting Point: >500 (dec) °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.0007 g/L (E)
Density: 4.1 0 g/cm3 (M)
NA(E)
Log10BCF:NA(E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
C.I. Pigment Yellow 14, CAS # 5468-75-7
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Butanamide, 2,2'-((3,3'-dichloro(1,1I-biphenyl)-4,4l-diyl)bis(azo))bis(N-(2-
methylphenyl)-3-oxo-
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C^
Molecular Weight: 657.52
Melting Point: 350 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >450 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: 7.02 (E)
Log^K^: 5.338 (E)
Log10BCF: 5.105 (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 23
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
C.I. Pigment Yellow 74, CAS # 6358-31-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Butanamide, 2-[(2-methoxy-4-nitrophenyl)azo]-N-(2-methoxyphenyI)-3-oxo-
Synonyms: 2-[(2-Methoxy-4-nitrophenyl)azo]- Structure:
o-acetoacetanisidide
Molecular Formula: C18H18N4O6
Molecular Weight: 386.34
Melting Point: 241 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >500 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.0038 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10BCF: 2.04 (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
MeO
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
Citric acid, CAS # 77-92-9
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Hydroxy-1,2,3-propanetricarboxylic acid
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C6H8O7
Molecular Weight: 192.12
Melting Point: 152-154 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 407 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: > 600 g/L (E)
Density: 1.665 g/cm3 (M)
: -1.72(M),-1.67(E)
i 1-0 (E)
Log10BCF: -1.537(E)
Function in ink: Buffer
Structure:
°°H
HO
OH
OH
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 24
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
D&C Red No. 7, CAS # 5281-04-9
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 3-Hydroxy-4-((4-methyl-2-sulfophenyl)azo)-2-naphthylenecarboxylic acid, calcium
salt
Synonyms: Pigment Red, Cl 15850:1 (Ca
salt)
Molecular Formula: C18HuN2O6S.Ca
Molecular Weight: 426,45
Melting Point: >250 (dec) °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 .5 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
Ca2*
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Dicyclohexyl phthalate, CAS # 84-61-7
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dicyclohexyl ester
Synonyms: Phthalic acid, dicyclohexyl ester
Molecular Formula: C20H26O4
Molecular Weight: 330.43
Melting Point: 64-66 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 395 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.0007 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.004 g/L (M)
Density: 0.9 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: 6.2 (E)
Log^: 4.25 (E)
Log10BCF: 4.48 (E)
Function in ink: Plasticizer
Structure:
Henry's Law: 6.43e-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 25
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Dioctyl sulfosuccinate, sodium salt, CAS # 577-11-7
Chemical Properties and Information
Bu
O
Chemical Name: Sulfosuccinic acid 1,4-bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester, sodium salt
Synonyms: Sulfobutanedioic acid, 1,4-bis(2- Structure:
ethylhexyl) ester, sodium salt, Docusate Na
Molecular Formula: CgoHgsOyS.Na
Molecular Weight: 444.55
Melting Point: 173-179 °C (M)
Boiling Point: >500 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 15g/L(M)
Density: 1.5 g/cm3(E)
LoaoK^ 3.949 (E)
Log10Koo: 3.018 (E)
Log,0BCF: 2.771 (E)
Function in ink: Surfactant
O
SO3- Na+
Bu
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Diphenyl (2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl) phosphine oxide, CAS # 75980-60-8
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Phosphine oxide, diphenyl(2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl)-
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C^H^O-P
Molecular Weight: 348.38
Melting Point: 88-92 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 474 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.00699 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10KM;3.87(E)
Log^: 2.895 (E)
Log10BCF:2.713(E)
Function in ink: Initiator
Structure:
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 26
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Dipropylene glycol diacrylate, CAS # 57472-68-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Propenoic acid, oxybis(methyl-2,1-ethanediyl) ester
Synonyms: None Structure:
Molecular Formula: C12H18O5
Molecular Weight: 242.30
Melting Point: -34 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 256 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.0194 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.968 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow:1.675(E)
Log10BCF:1.043(E)
Function in ink: Curing agent
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
Dipropylene glycol methyl ether, CAS # 34590-94-8
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 1,4-Dimethyl-3,6-dioxa-1-heptanol
Synonyms: 1 -(2-Methoxyisopropoxy)-2-
propanol, (2-Methoxymethylethoxy)propanol
Molecular Formula: C7H16O3
Molecular Weight: 148.20
Melting Point: -80 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 189°C(M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.41 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 74 °C (M)
Water Solubility: 370 g/L
Density: 0.948 g/cm3 (M)
Log10Kow: -1.99(E)
Log^: 1.0 (E)
Log10BCF: -0.381 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
OH
CH3 CH3
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 27
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light, CAS # 64742-47-8
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light
Synonyms: Kerosene (petroleum),
hydrotreated
Molecular Formula: C9H20 - C^H^
Molecular Weight: >1 30
Melting Point: -60 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 150-290 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <5 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.003 g/L (E)
Density: 0.8 g/cm3 (E)
™: >4.7 (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Defoamer
Structure:
A complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained by
treating a petroleum fraction with hydrogen in the
presence of a catalyst. It consists of hydrocarbons
having carbon numbers predominantly in the range of
C9 and C16 and boiling in the range of approximately
150°Cto290°C.
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Distillates (petroleum), solvent-refined light paraffinic,
CAS #64741-89-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Solvent refined light
Synonyms: None
>B2
Molecular Formula: C^H^C
Molecular Weight: >200 (E)
Melting Point: <25 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.03 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.00001 g/L(E)
Density: 0.8 g/cm3 (E)
; NA (E)
.: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Defoamer
paraffinic distillate (petroleum)
Structure:
A complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained as
the raffinate from a solvent extraction process. It
consists predominantly of saturated hydrocarbons
having carbon numbers predominantly in the range of
C15-C30 and produces a finished oil with a viscosity
of less than 100 SUS at 100 °F (19cSt at 40 °C).
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 28
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Erucamide, CAS # 112-84-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: cis-13-Docosenoamide
Synonyms: Erucyl amide
Molecular Formula: C^
Molecular Weight: 337.59
Melting Point: 79-81 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 461 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.0002 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: 8.445 (E)
Log.oK^: 6.071 (E)
Log10BCF: 6.1 88 (E)
Function in ink: Vehicle
Structure:
Henry's Law: 2.84E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
Ethanol, CAS # 64-17-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Ethyl alcohol
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C2H6O
Molecular Weight: 46.07
Melting Point: -114°C(M)
Boiling Point: 78 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 59.3 (M), 61.5 (E) mm Hg
Flash Point: 8 °C (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 (miscible) g/L (M)
Density: 0.785 g/cm3 (M)
Log10Kow: -0.31 (M), -0.14 (E)
Log^: 0 (E)
Log10BCF: -0.466 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
H3C
OH
Henry's Law: 5.67E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 29
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Ethanolamine, CAS # 141-43-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Aminoethanol
Synonyms: Glycinol, 2-Hydroxyethylamine
Molecular Formula: C2H7NO
Molecular Weight: 61.08
Melting Point: 10.5 °C (M)
Boiling Point 170 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.404 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 93 °C (M)
Water Solubility: Miscible g/L
Density: 1.012 g/cm3 (M)
Log10BCF:-1.22(E)
Function in ink: Buffer
Structure:
H2N'
,OH
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
Ethoxylated tetramethyldecyndiol, CAS # 9014-85-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), .alpha.,.alpha'.-[1,4-dimethyl-1,4-bis(2-methylpropyl)-2-
butyne-1,4-diyl]bis[.omega.-hydroxy-
Synonyms: Surfynol
Molecular Formula: (C2H4O)n(C2H4O)n(C2H4O)nC14H26O
Molecular Weight: >500 (E)
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >300 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: Dispersible g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3(E)
Log10K«; NA(E)
Log10Koc:NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Dispersant
Structure:
.OH
i
CH3 CH3
CH3
CH3
'OH
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 30
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Ethyl acetate, CAS # 141-78-6
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Acetic acid, ethyl ester
Synonyms: Acetoxyethane, Ethyl ethanoate,
Ethyl acetic ester
Molecular Formula: C4H8O2
Molecular Weight: 88.11
Melting Point: -84 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 76.5-77.5 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 93.7 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: -3 °C (M); 7.2 °C (open cup)
Water Solubility: 80 g/L (M)
Density: 0.902 g/cm3 (M)
Log10Kow: 0.73 (M), 0.86 (E)
Log^: 0.788 (E)
Log10BCF: 0.325 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: 0.000158 atm-m3/mol (E)
Ethyl carbitol, CAS #111 -90-0
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-(2-Ethoxyethoxy)ethanol
Synonyms: Diethylene glycol ethyl ether; 3,6-
Dioxa-1-octanol
Molecular Formula: C6H14O3
Molecular Weight: 134.18
Melting Point: -76 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 202 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.126 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 96 °C (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 (miscible) g/L (M)
Density: 0.999 g/cm3 (M)
-0.54 (M), -0.69 (E)
0 (E)
Log10BCF: -0.64 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 31
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Ethyl 4-dimethylaminobenzoate, CAS # 10287-53-3
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Benzoic acid, 4-(dimethylamino)-, ethyl ester
Synonyms: Perbenate
Molecular Formula: C^
Molecular Weight: 193.25
Melting Point: 64-66 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 269 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.0044 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.173 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10K00:1.824(E)
Log10BCF:1.97(E)
Function in ink: Initiator
Structure:
OEt
Henry's Law: 7.33E-7 atm-m3/mol (E)
2-Ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate, CAS # 1241-94-7
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Phosphoric acid, 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl ester
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C20H27O4P
Molecular Weight: 362.41
Melting Point: 87 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 443 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: 0.0019 g/L (M)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
5.73 (M), 4.205 (E)
: 4.125 (E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Plasticizer
Structure:
p\
fl
o—P-O.
Henry's Law: 2.7E-7 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 32
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Fatty acid, dimer-based polyamide, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and IhfoFmation
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, N, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG 2500
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >300 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 0.9 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log^K^ NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
"
Structure:
Csl"!i3\/1\_/mj i _^NX ji^sdimer-corA
O O
^6rl13
R and R1 are not known
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with ethylenediamine,
hexamethylenediamine, and propionic acid, CAS # 67989-30-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with ethylenediamine,
hexamethylenediamine, and propionic acid
Synonyms: None Structure:
Molecular Formula: C, H, N, O
Molecular Weight: >600 (E)
Melting Point: >100 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow: NA(E)
Log^: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Representative structure
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 33
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Glycerol propoxylate triacrylate, CAS # 52408-84-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Poly[oxy)methyl-1,2-ethanediyl)], .alpha.,.alpha'.,.alpha".,-1,2,3-
propanetriyltris[.omega.-[(1 -oxo-2-propenyl)oxy]-
Synonyms: .alpha.,.alpha'.,.alpha".,-1,2s3- Structure:
propanetriyltris[polypropylene glycol acrylate]
Molecular Formula: (C3H6O)n(C3H6O)n(C3H6O)nC12Hl4O6
Molecular Weight: >1000 (E)
Melting Point: NA°C(M)
Boiling Point: NA °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: >110°C(E)
Water Solubility: dispersible g/L (E)
Density: 1.064 g/cm3 (M)
; NA(E)
; NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Curing agent
CH3
CHj O
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
n-Heptane, CAS # 142-82-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Heptane
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C7H16
Molecular Weight: 100.21
Melting Point: -90.7 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 98.4 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 46 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: -1 °C open; -4 °C closed cup
Water Solubility: 0.0034 g/L (M)
Density: 0.684 g/cm3 (M)
: 4.66 (M), 3.78 (E)
: 2.439 (E)
Log10BCF: 3.312 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: 2.27 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 34
-------
APPENDIX 3-Af RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
1,6-HexanedioI diacrylate, CAS # 13048-33-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Propenoic acid, 1,6-hexanediyl ester
Synonyms: Acrylic acid, hexamethylene Structure:
ester, HDODA
Molecular Formula: C12H18O4
Molecular Weight: 226.28
Melting Point: -30 °C (E)
Boiling Point 259 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.0166 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: >110°C(E)
Water Solubility: 0.0748 g/L (E)
Density: 1.01 g/cm3 (M)
Log10Kow: 3.079 (E)
Log^: 2.101 (E)
Log10BCF: 2.110(E)
Function in ink: Curing agent
Henry's Law: 3.7E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
1-Hydroxycyclohexyl phenyl ketone, CAS # 947-19-3
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: (l-Hydroxycyclohexyl)phenylmethanone
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C13H16O2
Molecular Weight: 204.27
Melting Point: 47-50 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 290 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.000165 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 1.882 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
2.405 (E)
1.731 (E)
Log10BCF: 1.598(E)
Function in ink: Vehicle
Structure:
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 35
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Hydroxylamine derivative, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, N, O
Molecular Weight: 100-150 (E)
Melting Point: NA°C(E)
Boiling Point: 230-300 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.01 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <20 g/L (E)
Density. 0.9 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
; NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Inhibitor
Structure:
?H
R and R1 are not specified
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
2-Hydroxy-2-methylpropiophenone, CAS # 7473-98-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Hydroxy-2-methyl-1-phenyl-1-propanone
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C10H12O2
Molecular Weight: 164.20
Melting Point: 54.5 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 235 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.00429 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: >110°C(E)
Water Solubility: 25.3 g/L (E)
Density: 1.077 g/cm3 (M)
1.08(E)
: 1.0 (E)
Log10BCF: 0.591 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: 2.7E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 36
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Hydroxypropyl acrylate, CAS # 25584-83-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Propenoic acid, monoester with 1,2-propanediol
Synonyms: Propylenegl>v.ol acrylate, Acrylic Structure:
acid, hydroxypropyl ester
Molecular Formula: C6H10O3
Molecular Weight: 130.14
Melting Point: -4.4 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 191 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.124 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: 89 °C (M)
Water Solubility: 183.5 g/L (E)
Density: 1.044 g/cm3 (M)
0.245 (E)
-0.044 (E)
Log10BCF: 0.904 (E)
Function in ink: Reactive diluent
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
Isobutanol, CAS # 78-83-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-MethyM-propanol
Synonyms: 1-Hydroxymethylpropane,
Isobutyl alcohol
Molecular Formula: C4H10O
Molecular Weight: 74.12
Melting Point: -108 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 107.89 °C(M)
Vapor Pressure: 10.4 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 27 °C closed cup (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 (miscible) g/L (E)
Density: 0.803 g/cm3 (M)
Log^: 0.76 (M), 0.77 (E)
Log10K00: 0.311 (E)
Log10BCF: 0.348 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
CH,
H3C
OH
Henry's Law: 9.99E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 37
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Isopropanol, CAS # 67-63-0
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Propanol
Synonyms: Isopropyl alcohol, 2-propyl
alcohol
Molecular Formula: C3H8O
Molecular Weight: 6.10
Melting Point: -88.5 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 82.5 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 45.4 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 11.7 °C closed cup (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 (miscible) g/L (E)
Density: 0.785 g/cm3 (M)
0.05 (M), 0.28 (E)
: 0.025 (E)
Log10BCF: -0.192 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
OH
A
Henry's Law: 7.52E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
Isopropoxyethoxytitanium bis(acetylacetonate), CAS # 68586-02-7
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Titanium, ethoxybis(2,4-pentanedionato-O,O')(2-propanolato)-
Synonyms: 2-Propanol, titanium complex
Molecular Formula: C15H26O6Ti
Molecular Weight: 350.25
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.01 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: 30 °C (E)
Water Solubility: Reacts
Density: 1.1 g/cm3 (E)
Log^K^ NA(E)
Log,0Koc:NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Adhesion promoter
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
. 3-A, page 38
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
2-lsopropylthioxanthone, CAS # 5495-84-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 9H-Thioxanthen-9-one, 2-(1-methylethyl)-
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C16H14OS
Molecular Weight: 254.35
Melting Point: 141.7°C(E)
Boiling Point: 379°C(E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.00002 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.000032 g/L (E)
Density: 0.9 g/cm3 (E)
5.54 (E)
: 3.983 (E)
Log10BCF: 3.980 (E)
Function in ink: Photoinitiator
Structure:
Henry's Law: 9.99E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
4-lsopropylthioxanthone, CAS # 83846-86-0
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 9H-Thioxanthen-9-one, 4-(1-methylethyl)-
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C16H14OS
Molecular Weight: 254.35
Melting Point: 141.7°C(E)
Boiling Point: 379 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.000002 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: 0.000032 g/L (E)
Density: 0.9 g/cm3 (E)
5.54 (E)
: 3.983 (E)
Log10BCF: 3.980 (E)
Function in ink: Photoinitiator
Structure:
Henry's Law: 9.99E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 39
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Kaolin, CAS # 1332-58-7
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Kaolin
Synonyms: Clays, white, Aluminum silicate
hydroxide
Molecular Formula: AI2Si2Os(OH)4
Molecular Weight: 258.16 (from Emp. Form.)
Melting Point: >500 °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: 2.75 g/cm3(E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Pigment
Structure:
A clay that is essentially kaolinite, a hydrated
aluminum silicate. It has a high fusion point and is
the most refractory of all clays.
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Methylenedisalicylic acid, CAS # 27496-82-8
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Benzoic acid, methylenebis[2-hydroxy-
Synonyms: Methylenedisalicylic acid
Molecular Formula: C1SH12O6
Molecular Weight: 288.26
Melting Point: 220 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 517 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.0076 g/L (E)
Density: 0.9 g/cm3 (E)
Log,0Kow: 4.52 (E)
Log10BCF: 3.2 (E)
Function in ink: NA, crosslinker (E)
Structure:
*Positions not specified
Henry's Law: <1 E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 40
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
2-Methyl-4'-(methylthio)-2-morpholinopropioph?none, CAS # 71868-10-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Methyl-4'-(methyIthio)-2-morpholinopropiophenone
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C15H21NO2S
Molecular Weight: 279.40
Melting Point: 74-76 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 372°C (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.0000135 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 1.077 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
2.726 (E)
: 2.552 (E)
Log10BCF: 1.842(E)
Function in ink: Antioxidant, photinitiator
Structure:
Henry's Law: <1E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
Mineral oil, CAS # 8012-95-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Mineral oil
Synonyms: Paraffin oils
Molecular Formula: C, H
Molecular Weight: >100 (E)
Melting Point: <25 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >200 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.01 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.0001 g/L (E)
Density: 0.85 g/cm3(E)
NA(E)
: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Vehicle
Structure:
Liquid hydrocarbons from petroleum.
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 41
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Nitrocellulose, CAS # 9004-70-0
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Cellulose nitrate
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C, H, N, O
Molecular Weight: >1000 (E)
Melting Point: NA°C(M)
Boiling Point: >350 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 (miscible) g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
R
R = OH or NO2
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E-)
Paraffin wax, CAS # 8002-74-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Paraffin waxes and hydrocarbon waxes
Synonyms: Paraffin
Molecular Formula: C^^ (n>20, TYPCL)
Molecular Weight: >280 (TYPCL)
Melting Point: 50-57 °C (M)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.0004 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: about 0.9 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Wax
Structure:
A complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained
from petroleum fractions (by solvent crystallization or
the sweating process) or from the catalytic
hydrogenation of carbon monoxide. It consists
predominantly of straight chain hydrocarbons having
carbon numbers predominantly greater than C20.
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 42
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Phosphine oxide, bis(2,6-dimethoxybenzoyl)(2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)-,
CAS # 145052-34-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Phosphine oxide, bis(2,6-dimethoxybenzoyl)(2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)-
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: CajHggCvP
Molecular Weight: 490.54
Melting Point: 90 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 480 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.00054 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3(E)
3.724 (E)
: 2.528 (E)
Log10BCF: 2.60 (E)
Function in ink: Plasticizer
Structure:
OMe
OMe
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
Polyethylene, CAS # 9002-88-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Polyethylene
Synonyms: Ethylene polymer
Molecular Formula: (C2H4)n
Molecular Weight: 1500 -100,000
Melting Point: 85-110 °C (M)
Boiling Point: NA °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 0.92g/cm3(M)
Log10K»: NA(E)
Log.oK^: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Wax
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 43
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Polyethylene glycol, CAS # 25322-68-3
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Poly(oxy-1 ,2-ethanediyI), .alpha.-hydro-.omega.-hydroxy-
Synonyms: PEG, Polyglycol, Structure:
Polyoxyethylene
Molecular Formula: (C2H4O)n
Molecular Weight: 200 - 9000 (TYPCL)
Melting Point: -65 °C (M)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 (miscible) g/L (E)
Density: 1.1 g/cm3(E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Dispersant
HO
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
7TH
Polyol derivative A, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Polyol derivative A
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: >400
Melting Point: >280 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >600 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: >300 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log,0Kov; -2.76 (E)
Log10K00:1.0(E)
Log,0BCF: -2.33 (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
Henr/s Law:
R = OH or other
-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 44
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Polytetrafluoroethylene, CAS # 9002-84-0
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Polytetrafluoroethylene
Synonyms: PTFE, Polytef, Teflon
Molecular Formula: (C2F4)n
Molecular Weight: >1000 (E)
Melting Point: 321 (gels) °C (M)
Boiling Point: monomer gas formed at 400 °C
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 2.25g/cm3(M)
NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: Wax
Structure:
F F
F F
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Propanol, CAS #71-23-8
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 1-Propanol
Synonyms: n-Propyl alcohol,
1 -hydroxypropane
Molecular Formula: C3H8O
Molecular Weight: 60.10
Melting Point: -127°C(M)
Boiling Point: 97.2 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 21 (M), 23.4 (E) mm Hg
FlashPoint: 15°C(M)
Water Solubility: 1000 (miscible) g/L (E)
Density: 0.804 g/cm3 (M)
: 0.25 (M), 0.35 (E)
: 0.122 (E)
Log10BCF: -0.04 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: 7.52E-6 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 45
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Propyl acetate, CAS # 109-60-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Acetic acid, propyl ester
Synonyms: 1-Acetoxypropane
Molecular Formula: CSH10O2
Molecular Weight: 102.13
Melting Point: -92 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 101.6°C(M)
Vapor Pressure: 33.7 (M), 34.4 (E) mm Hg
Rash Point: 14 °C closed cup (M)
Water Solubility. 18.9 (M), 15.5 (E) g/L
Density: 0.888 g/cm3
1.24(M),1.36(E)
: 1.053(E)
Log10BCF: 0.712 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: 0.000223 atm-m3/mol (E)
Propylene glycol methyl ether, CAS # 107-98-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 1-Methoxy-2-propanol
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C4H10O2
Molecular Weight: 90.12
Melting Point: -142 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 118-119 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 12.5 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 33 °C (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 g/L (miscible) (E)
Density: 0.922 g/cm3 (M)
-0.489 (E)
: 0 (E)
Log10BCF: -0.602 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Henry's Law: 1.81E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 46
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPH1C INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Propylene glycol propyl ether, CAS # 1569-01-3
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 1-Propoxy-2-propanol
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C6H14O2
Molecular Weight: 118.18
Melting Point: -80 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 140-160 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 1 .7 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 48 °C (M)
Water Solubility: 125 g/L (E)
Density: 0.885 g/cm3 (M)
: 0 (E)
Log10BCF:0.145(E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
OH
Henry's Law: 3.46E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
Resin acids, hydrogenated, methyl esters, CAS # 8050-15-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Resin acids and rosin acids, hydrogenated, Me esters
Synonyms: Hydrogenated resin acid Me
esters
Molecular Formula: C21H36O2 (TYPCL)
Molecular Weight: 320.5
Melting Point: 113 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >350 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.00002 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.00001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10Kow:6.918(E)
Log.oK^: 5.07 (E)
Log10BCF: 5.028 (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
Representative structure
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 47
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Resin, acrylic, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG >30,000 (E)
Melting Point: NA°C(E)
Boiling Point: >350 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: >500 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF:NA(E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
R = H and/or other
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Resin, miscellaneous, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG 30,000 (E)
Melting Point: NA°C(E)
Boiling Point: >350 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
: NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF:NA(E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure: Unknown
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 48
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Rosin, fumarated, polymer with diethylene glycol and pentaerythritol,
CAS #68152-50-1
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Rosin, f umerates, polymer with diethylene glycol and pentaerythritol
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: (C6H12O4.C4H10O3.Unspecified)x
Molecular Weight: >1000 (E)
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >300 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.001 g/L (E)
Density. 1 g/cm3 (E)
: NA(E)
: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin, vehicle
Structure:
OR
R = continued polymer
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Rosin, fumarated, polymer with pentaerythritol, 2-propenoic acid, ethenylbenzene,
and (l-methylethylenyl)benzene, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Rosin, fumarated, polymer with pentaerythritol, 2-propenoic acid, ethenylbenzene,
and (l-methylethylenyl)benzene
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: (C5H12O4.unspecified)x
Molecular Weight: NAVG 2290
Melting Point: >1 00 °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
R - continued polymer
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 49
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Rosin, polymerized, CAS # 65997-05-9
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Rosin, polymd.
Synonyms: Gum rosin WW, polymers; Wood
rosin, Poly-pale resin
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG >1000 (E)
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
: NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
Polymer containing the
above resin
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Silanamine, 1,1,1-trimethyl-N-(trimethylsilyl)-, hydrolysis products with silica,
CAS # 68909-20-6
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Silanamine, 1,1,1-trimethyl-N-(trimethylsilyl)-, hydrolysis products with silica
Synonyms: None Structure:
Molecular Formula: C, H, O, Si
Molecular Weight: >10000 (E)
Melting Point: >500 °C (E)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L(E)
Density: 1.5 g/cm3 (E)
LogtoK^ NA(E)
Log10Koe;NA(E)
Log10BCF:NA(E)
Function in ink: Defoamer
— si—
o
R-O-Si-O-R
R = H or continued polymer
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 50
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FI.EXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Silica, CAS #7631-86-9
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Silicon dioxide
Synonyms: Silicic anhydride
Molecular Formula: SiO2
Molecular Weight: >10,000 (60.09 from Emp. Form.)
Melting Point: 1550 °C (M)
Boiling Point: NA °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.0001 g/L (E)
Density: 2.2 (amorphous) g/cm3 (M); 2.65 (quartz) g/cm3
NA(E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA(E)
Function in ink: NA, defoamer (E)
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Silicone oil, CAS # 63148-62-9
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Siloxanes and silicones, di-Me
Synonyms: .alpha.-Methyl-.omega.-
methoxypolydimethyl siloxane,
Poly(dimethylsiloxane)
Molecular Formula: (Si(CH3)2O)n
Molecular Weight: >1000 (E)
Melting Point: <-40 °C (E)
Boiling Point >450 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: 315 °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 0.963 g/cm3
NA (E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: NA, defoamer (E)
Structure:
RO-f-Si-0-t-
R
R = H or continued polymer
Henry's Law: atm-m3/moi (E)
3-A, page 51
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Siloxanes and silicones, di-Me, 3-hydroxypropyl Me, ethers with polyethylene glycol
acetate, CAS #70914-12-4
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Siloxanes and silicones, di-Me, 3-hydroxypropyl Me, esters with polyethylene glycol
acetate
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: C, H, O, Si
Molecular Weight: >1000 (E)
Melting Point: >100 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >350 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
RashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: Dispersible g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
ISIA(E)
: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: wetting agent, defoamer
Structure:
I I
RO—[-Si—O ]p [ Si-OH-R
' ^
R = H or continued polymer
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light aliphatic, CAS # 64742-89-8
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Solvent naphtha(petroleum), light aromatic
10-C10H22
Synonyms: Skellysolve
Molecular Formula: CSH
Molecular Weight: 100 (E)
Melting Point: <-80 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 35-160 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <355 mm Hg (E)
RashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.2 g/L (E)
Density: 0.8 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
Complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained from
the distillation of crude oil or natural gas. It consists
predominantly of saturated hydrocarbons having
carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C5
through C10 and boiling in the range of
approximately 35 °C to 160 °C.
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 52
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
StyreM CAS # 100-4^-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Ethenylbenzene
Synonyms: Vinylbenzene
Molecular Formula: C8H8
Molecular Weight: 104.15
Melting Point: -31 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 145-146 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 6.4 mm Hg (M)
Flash Point: 31 °C (M)
Water Solubility: 0.31 g/L (M)
Density: 0.909 g/cm3 (M)
2.95 (M), 2.89 (E)
: 2.714 (E)
Log10BCF: 2.102 (E)
Function in ink: Curing agent
Structure:
Henry's Law: 0.00281 atm-m3/mol (E)
Styrene acrylic acid polymer #1, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: Styrene acrylic acid polymer
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG > 30,000
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >300 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA°C(M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
: NA(E)
: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
R = H and/or other
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 53
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Styrene acrylic acid polymer #2, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: Styrene acrylic adic polymer
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: NAVG >10,000
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >300 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
Log10K™: NA(E)
Log,^: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
R = H and/or other
Henry's Law: NA atm-rtvYmol (E)
Styrene acrylic acid resin, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: Styrene acrylic acid resin
Molecular Formula: C, H, O
Molecular Weight: >10000
Melting Point: NA°C(E)
Boiling Point: >300 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Rash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.000001 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Resin
Structure:
R = H or other
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 54
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Tetramethyldecyndiol; CAS # 126-86-3
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2,4,7,9-Tetramethyl-5-decyne-4,7-diol
Synonyms: Surfynol 104
Molecular Formula: C14H26O2
Molecular Weight: 226.36
Melting Point: 42-44 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 255 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.00099 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: >110°C(E)
Water Solubility: 0.052 g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
3.609 (E)
: 1.328(E)
Log10BCF: 2.513 (E)
Function in ink: Solvent
Structure:
OH
OH
Henry's Law: 2.44E-7 atm-m3/mol (E)
Thioxanthone derivative, CAS # NK
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: NK
Synonyms: NK
Molecular Formula: C, H, O, S
Molecular Weight: 260 (E) (for R = iPr)
Melting Point: 150 °C (E)
Boiling Point: >350 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.00001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: <0.00005 g/L (E)
Density: 0.9 g/cm3 (E)
: NA(E)
: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Photoinitiator
Structure:
R position and content unspecified
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 55
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Titanium diisopropoxide bis(2,4-pentanedionate) CAS# 17927-72-9
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Titanium, bis(2,4-pentanedionato-.kappa.O,.kappa.O')bis(2-propanolato)-
Synonyms: 2-Propanol, titanium complex; Structure:
diiospropoxytitanium bis(acetylacetonate)
Molecular Formula: C16H28O6Ti
Molecular Weight: 364.30
Melting Point NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.01 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: 12 °C (M)
Water Solubility: Reacts
Density. 0.995 g/cm3 (M)
Log^K^ NA(E)
Log,0Koc:NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Adhesion promoter
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Titanium isopropoxide, CAS# 546-68-9
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Propanol, titanium(4+) salt
Synonyms: Tetraisopropyl titanate
Molecular Formula:
Molecular Weight: 284.26
Melting Point: 18-20 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 232 °C (M)
Vapor Pressure: 0.1 1 mm Hg (E)
Rash Point: 22 °C (M)
Water Solubility: Reacts
Density: 0.963 g/cm3 (M)
K^: NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Adhesion promoter
Structure:
—o o
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 56
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Trimethylolpropane ethoxylate triacrylate, CAS # 28961-43-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), ,alpha.-hydro-.omega.-[(1-oxo-2-propenyl)oxy]-, ether with
2-ethyI-2-(hydroxymethyI)-1,3-propanediol (3:1)
Synonyms: Ethoxylated trimethylolpropane,
triacrylate
Molecular Formula:
(C2H40)n(C2H40)nC2H40)nC15H2006
Molecular Weight: >500 (E)
Melting Point: NA °C (E)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
Flash Point: NA °C (M)
Water Solubility: Dispersible g/L
Density: 1 g/cm3 (E)
NA(E)
: NA (E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Curable resin
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
Trimethylolpropane propoxylate triacrylate, CAS # 53879-54-2
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Poly(oxy-(methyl-1,2-ethanediyl)), .alpha.-hydro-.omega.-((1-oxo-2-propenyl)oxy)-,
ether with 2-ethyl-2-(hydroxymethyl)-1,3-propanedio! (3:1)
Synonyms: None
Molecular Formula: (C3H6O)n(C3H6O)n(C3H6O)nC15H20O6
Molecular Weight: >500 (E)
Melting Point: NA°C(M)
Boiling Point: >250 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: <0.000001 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: >110°C(B
Water Solubility: Dispersible g/L (E)
Density: 1 g/cm3(E)
NA(E)
NA(E)
Log10BCF: NA (E)
Function in ink: Curable resin
Structure:
Henry's Law: NA atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 57
-------
APPENDIX 3-A (RISK)
FLEXOGRAPHIC INK FORMULATIONS AND STRUCTURES
Trimethylolpropane triacrylate, CAS # 15625-89-5
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: 2-Propenoic acid, 2-ethyl-2-(((1 -oxo-2-propenyl)oxy)methyl)-1,3-propanediol
Synonyms: TMPT, acrylic acid, triester with Structure:
2-ethyl-2-(hydroxymethyl)-1,3-propanediol
Molecular Formula: C15H20O6
Molecular Weight: 296.32
Melting Point: 27 °C (E)
Boiling Point: 322 °C (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.000563 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: >110°C(E)
Water Solubility: 0.0463 g/L (E)
Density: 1.10g/cm3(M)
2.863 (E)
: 3.282 (E)
Log10BCF: 1.946(E)
Function in ink: Curing agent
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
Urea, CAS #57-13-6
Chemical Properties and Information
Chemical Name: Urea
Synonyms: Carbamide, Carbonyldiamine,
Carbonyl diamide
Molecular Formula: CH4N2O
Molecular Weight: 60.06
Melting Point: 133-135 °C (M)
Boiling Point: 158 °C (dec) (E)
Vapor Pressure: 0.207 mm Hg (E)
FlashPoint: °C (M)
Water Solubility: 1000 g/L (miscible) (E)
Density: 1.335 g/cm3 (M)
: -2.11 (M),-1.56 (E)
: 0.632 (E)
Log10BCF:-1.834(E)
Function in ink: Slip additive
Structure:
O
A.
H2N NH2
Henry's Law: <1 E-8 atm-m3/mol (E)
3-A, page 58
-------
Appendix 3-B (Risk Chapter)
Human Health and Ecological Hazard Results
3-B, page 1
-------
UJ
OC
Q
cc
<5
O
Ul
Q
<
UJ
o
LL
S
en
d>
OC
CO
.E
0)
op
CO
m
w
X
Q
Ul
Q.
Q.
4
1
^
Comme
^
city value'
x
S
CO
^
—
O
2
c
o
Q.
o
1
Q
Systemic
O
1
C
L
1
0
1
5-
"><
CD
-
a,
O
3
0- 0
X
Ul
I
Q
CD
^
C
OC CD
•3 .
B
ta
0
A
«= £
75 5
o
k-
s
J20
0
_CD
"m
ard data are aw
N
ca
.c
CD
S3
CO
IE!
CO
Q.
Jg
.H
JC
1»
o
^2
ca
o
i
CD
u
CB
"c
CB |
§1
"g "
The LOAEL is bas
study conducted o
chloride.
0
CD
74 mg/kg/day - L {bor
effects)"
Q
Z
Q
"S
£
CD
Q
•z.
Q
Z
Q
I s
42. 1
*** l~ £*
•~S CD ••— *~*
T~ *• CO 1£_
• J-j CD fl»
CD
CD
a.
CO
CB
o
2
a.
CO
CD
CD
"CB
CD
c
O CO
CO ®
c;
15
CB
.c
—
CB
c
II
T3 w
CD C
The LOAEL is bas
study conducted o
chloride.
Q
z.
£
74 mg/kg/day - L (faoi
effects)
Q
CD
C
O
J3
"55
S
T3
CD
|
sys: decreases
softening
2
o
CM
T-
CB^
0 f
£ •*
Eg
c
CO
§"*: CB
•S ** "c
* "S >, P
The NOAEL is bas
inhalation NOAEL
mg/m3 from a stud
conducted on amn
Q
H
•o
co
CM 2 0
1. 8 mg/kg/day (W), 1
mg/kg/day (G) - N° (s
eye irritation, respirat
effects)
Q
Z
a
•z.
"CB
£
CD
•a
•a
"S5 _;
CS-|
g S
The RfC is based i
conducted on amn
Q
Q
z
jsf
"S S
O) ;>•> co co
5 § a?*
£•
2
2
"o.
g
1
-=
"CB
CO
sys: eye effects
effects
c
.s
13
CB
^
~
C
CB
§2 |
"8 "5 >, 2
The NOAEL is bas
inhalation NOAEL
mg/m3 from a stud
conducted on amn
Q
•o
§
^
2 ~».
cM-2-,5
1.8 mg/kg/day (W), 1
mg/kg/day (G) - ppm
eye irritation, respirat
effects)
Q
z
Q
2
0
CM
1 CD<9
111
£ ^.S
< £ ^
a
^
CB
0 .>
IT^
1 "S
>. Q.
^ E
^>i^-,
III
5li
a
&E
"His
^S XJ-=
P S"?
c CB 3
ill
0 <=. Q.
a
"is
£
CO
T3
Q
S>
CD §
O •*
3 TJ .^
1 s^
"•" i^
CM CO O)
"CB
•c
co *c £*
CO CO O
S "p 15
1. 15 mg/m3 -N (deci
body weight, increase
blood pressure, respi
effects)
Q
O —
£ ||S
f 41 |
tl|l
sys: decreased
and respiratory
blood pressure;
and weight gain
parameters
c
.0
to
CB
^
—
0
•a
CD
8 x.
Qj m
b >
"~""g
1 "CB
>. a.
CB c
^ .E
|f|
E t: 13
2i!
Q
CB o
~B>S
CB Q) */«'
eal
h* 03 05
8 g S
0 5=. Q.
T)
CD
CD^^
18
||||
CD CD co 3
I! — § §
^r co » =
CB t3 T3 TJ
3 CD CD P
sys: cardiovasc
reproductive eff
weight, decreas
mortality, impaii
2
o
co
CM"
CO
en
E «>
cs 5
OQ S.
-------
TJ
CD
O
C
1)
3
S
5
X
3
|
E
>
Developmental 1
c
1
"a
(/
u
I
a
cc
CO
1
O
Q.
TJ
C
CD
"5
1
o
"1
S-l
X
Is
a
) C
CC. ^
I TJ
O ®
o o
1 s
CD 3
•*•* CO
s.5
05 c
CD O
£§•
Q
3000 mg/kg/day -L
(neurotoxic effects)
a
urotoxic effects
CD
c
'i.
CO
2
0
^
2 i CD
c 6 c
2;||p
S'.c* o."o.co
C <]> Q P JT
ca £ ES-S
CMS.4E^=
a
2160 mg/kg/day -N
150 mg/kg/day -N
Q
z
Q
"o
£
CD
TJ
Q
50 ppm (approximately 242
mg/m3) -N (decreased body
and uterine weight,
embryotoxicity, hematological
effects, skeletal
malformations)
CM
25 ppm (approximately
mg/m3 ) - N
Q
z
o
S -1
O> 5K§* CO
O "n C3 C3
creased growth and hematol
dev: decreased maternal boi
, and liver weight; embryotoxil
ed non-viable implantations; <
; skeletal malformations
CD of .£2
ell
CO CD
Q
sod and skin effects
J2
CO
75
CD
TJ
Q
Z
500 mg/kg/day (1750 mg/m3
(W), 2652 mg/m3 (G)) - N
(decreased pup body weight)"
co
CO?--
2 ppm (approximately 1
mg/m3) - N (liver effects
Q
er effects
J
CO
c
1
CO
_c
Q
z
500 mg/kg/day - N (decreased
pup body weight)
^
"•»•
57 mg/kg/day -L(blooc
clinical chemistry effect
Q-
z
O)
fD = =
I 8 &
Dod, kidney, liver, and reprodi
, increased liver weight, chan
chemistry; dev: decreased o
'eight
s tl S >,
eo CD 73 i
"2
o
£
75
S 4
— ^ CO
•S'CM
m £
CO
d>
c?
Q.
CD
CO
-------
•a
Q)
C
s
E
a>
O
,0
Q.
(D
D)
O
u.
S
tn
w
o
CC
•o
(D
ra
~5
^,
73
X
o
"5
o
1
o
E
a
0
a>
CD
a
o
£
I
RfD/RfC
a
to
"5
i
0.
D
c
o
i_
&•
75
|
£
S
u
o
M
111
£
a
i
•^
i
CO
c
Chemical
S
o
" *•
o
S
c
0
»•
CD
P
|| CASnui
Q
Z
Q
Z
^
6000 mg/kg/day - M
Q
z
15
CD
•a
a
z
o
z
^^
>J_
eo
§^>
-E
6000 mg/kg/day (21
mg/m3 (W), 31 ,81 8
-Nb
Q
Z
Q
c
_o
15
CO
id
C
CD
5
C .
CD T3
CD Q
£cg
O
i ®
j2 °
11
O CO
Z S
Q
Z
6000 mg/kg/day - N
Q
0
1
o
CM
t—
c
CD
E _ op
cow 4
Q" 'to ^
dm?
CO
§co
•o —
a to"
JD C
|'a
§ ~
o ®
0. N
CD •*-
*- CO
t5 S
Z «
0
Z
*..
CO
'm
2750 mg/kg/day - L
(decreased body wi
Q
a
15
CD
T3
a
Z
Q
Z
n
E
I V
iy O)
2750 mg/kg/day (9e
(W), 14,583 (G))-L
(decreased body wi
a
z
a
c
_0
15
CO
£2
—
Q
Z
Q
Z
i<--s
I
7n
2750 mg/kg/day - L
(decreased body wi
a
-
CO
'5
S
-a
E
T3
CD
CO
CO
£
•a
1
S
o
CO ',
C
CD
.Q
425 mg/kg/day - L
(nephropathy, renal
hyperplasia)
Q
!s
15 £
m '5.
S CD
jSfi
l|
o -2
t-
w. a
P
a> CD ee
°° S"™
2 f- 03
S CD 2-
• • "5 ®
i
o
Tj"
•a
CD
CC
S
1 •*'
* !;
r-
~ CO ^~
O CM S
13
CD
CO g
C
—
1
CD
f
.i
*o
__
11
c
1
CO
£2
^C
Q
Q
Z
D
t -„-£-
fills'
lilt!
o
1
Q.
CO
CD
1
TO
0
1
Q^
5
•a
_CD
•° T5
II
S
o
CO
CM
C I*.
CD •
A~ CD CO
"- S CO
— : S •*
-------
j
|
Comment
4c
t
"o
1
1
™
o
Developmental
_0
E
1
to
o
SE
a
£
c
a
CO
'o
a.
c
o
2-
"5
1
0)
3 O
8|
K* *—
UJ
Is
f
*!.
C
!
c
v k.
: o
= o
0 £1
= E
0 =
^o c
j S
Q
6000 mg/kg/day - Nb
,0
z
mg/kg/day -
IT
CO
Q
Q
"
(
Q
f
o E
6000 mg/kg/day (21, 00
mg/m3 (W), 31 ,81 8 mg;
-Nb
n
c
fz
E •
00 Z^
SS
CM»
mg/kg/day (:
3420 mg/m
S S-
a
Q
z
.1
c5
01
.E
—
£ "c
tJ ^- C
icts were seen
ises tested in It
lie and develop
3= "a ^ CD
° •i'lll
Z 0 M »
6000 mg/kg/day - Nd
1
T3
"Z.
j
1
Q
Z
.£
D>
.C
'S
5
>»
II
JO M
g-o
||
2
o
CO
•a
89
5 *?
a
1000 mg/kg/day - Nb
•a
CD
CO
CO
CD
m ***
-Q tD
mg/kg/day -
ws weight, t
ins)b
111
Q
Q
Z
«
CD
Q
Z
E
fz
1000 mg/kg/day (3500
(W), 5303 mg/m3 (G)) -
*° i "
E ' ^
CO *~ * 2
pfl
III!
Q
Z
Q
to
1
—
5 CD
to t^
H3ts.were seen
t dose tested in
pmental study.
;£ to o
o o>g
Z .C -a
1000 mg/kg/day -Nf
•a "to"
CD C
CO O
si
CD >>
Si
35
j!
II
a
1 1
III
<0 =£ i
> £> S
"•5 .'S 'en
290 mg/kg/day • Nf
Zt-
-i
1
1
Q
CD
1-1
CD *tO
o "2
c -
— CO
£"§
S*«c
CD CD
CD
CD .^
S">
•J=
CO Q
CD CO
O g >.
CO CD "tO
"2
o
§
_
1"
•§ H -A
><£ t?
O o_ en
5
g CO
ted to be a derr
zer to humans.
i Moderate
5 — -2
olll
•o
-Q
2
0
3
CM
CD
CO „
.£ T3
_!s£
•§" § = v
O co co to
to
o
§>
a.
op"
co
-------
I
(0
Ul
DC
Q
DC
5
3
o
X
I
X
•o
O
E
o
c
«
75
^
73
I
ca
*+£
o
3
3
c
o
£
a.
o
75
°
Systemic
g
pr
e
W
c
73
i
a.
D
CD
2-
H<
CD
g
c
X
III
1
O
SI
1
Q
•z.
0
z
•a
CD _
£75
O m
100 mg/kg/day - N (de
body weight and teste;
blood effects)"
Q
Z
Q
75
CD
•o
O
Z
0
z
° C^
O) -^^ ^i *t^
100 mg/kg/day (350m
(W), 530 mg/m3 (G))-
(decreased body welgl
testes size, blood effei
o
•z.
Q
•z.
c.
.0
"5
75
•C
—
Q
Q
•z.
•a
co cb"
CO N
£ 'to
O «.
100 mg/kg/day -N(de
body weight and teste;
blood effects)
o
•z.
E
,0
T3
tD m
CO >
2 =50
c-| o
— g CO
y S* ®
OS £ N
•5 -a »
5 c co
>,a 2
•0 -a «
I c'l
CO O ~o
® "-K *£
2
o
s;
CO
CM
• ^ CD
fiti
S CD CO CO
0 P O O>
^-§ -c m
Q i= a.f~
75
CD
as g
•^ S
- 0)
£ o
^ r"
If
CD ^
8 »
CD .O
o "^
S o
T3 O
g.3
CO C
c ••
o
75
52
.£Z
~
CD
e
c
CD
CD
CO »
2 to
-2
~ CO
!fc "O
<» >.
o "c
Z o
a
•z.
1000 mg/kg/day -Nd
Q
z
0
2
0
r>- :i
to
N
t
1
cfi" °° '
O CD 4- f
Iii|
Q O) CD CO
~ cf
TB "o -2 "° "-S
eo c §" i " —
fSslil
iijfi!
C J=r tS1 ^ ^- § *S
]o
c
CD
CT
|
Si_
*y
CO
g.
CO
1
CD
Q
Z
O
a
z
Q
75
o
to
'I~
__;-T3
illii
1 s,
E Q.
CO C
CD 3
2 =
is
•c •=
S-c
0 0
CC co
0
Z
~>-x
j
*^
0.05 ml 2x/week
(approximately 400
mg/kg/day) - L (skin irr
Q
z
"CD"
0
E,
£2
o
a
c
J£
CO
C
"c
CD
JQ
si
CD
™
CO
g.
CO
75
CD
•a
0
Q
Z
c
w "
1*
E ,
400 mg/kg/day (1400
(W), 2121 mg/m3 (G))
irritation)1
Q
z
z
c
.2
2s
CO
^
—
Q
Q
Z
c
400 mg/kg/day - L (ski
irritation)1
Q
z
0
2
o
<3>
CM
CO
CM
Is
III
-------
Commen
?
s-
_o
I
O
w
endpoi
oxici
5- S
x
UJ
£8
CD C
CC o
si
S<
»s
O
U CO
si
>.'§
f s
|8
t|
p: 8.
T- W
Q
Z
rt
CD
o ns
=§.§
z£
• co
"s^
ts
Ȥ
2^
1
ys
Q
-
LU CO
a, S
i °-
S m
f s
i =
c o>
cs c
£ S
s£
3 s
|s
Ol
CO
a.
of
-------
I
CO
UJ
CC
Q
CC
Q
i
1
til
X
£
1
O
.0,
tn
CO
o
1
U
_E
jO
Q.
2
en
I
£
(0
I
s
m
0
CO
U
Q.
*J
CD
E
§
U
_ „
«s
m
Q
O
li
3 *•*
5
X
2
1
-
0 o
S
a
I
O
|
£
Toxlcltyendpolnts *
o
£1
3 CO
O ^
X
111
jfs
CD C
CC a>
o >.
E fe
? =
= E
ro =
o fc*
E «d
sz "
O
a
z
a
z
t*E
I'.s-if
E -| ^.e-.
O .5-.n .2
Q
Z
_—
£
CD
a
Q
z
c
"ca
CD
i
0)
t3 ^^
**"*" co
1 co
i O
{J
•&E
C CO
"™ CO
T- CO
CD C
5! -5
o
z
sys: blood, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal,
kidney, liver, neurotoxic, and respiratory
effects, decreased spleen and liver weight,
increased adrenal, lung, and kidney weight
c
o
1
CO
—
Q
Z
Q
Z
0
CO
Hi
D) ^JSp
E-| >.
d -S-Jo
sys: excess salivation, decreased food
consumption, neurotoxic and respiratory
effects, mortality, decreased body and
organ weights
2
o
CO
CO
11
•2.
i
s-
•o
i
E
3
O
CO
_
«2
i^
•0-&
8a
J3 S
^™ ' ^»
_1 |
s-l
$1
f£
TJ^ 03
O) <3>
El
10 .E
Q
Z
0
"co
CD
-Q
0
"E
Ez g 1
3 ^^^^ ® *S QJ
CM O CO D)"
CM "o 5
5*0 CD
^ -o €
l.'&a.'S
3)io i CD
£ t~ 5" g
Q
Z
Q
Z
c
o
to
ffl
£:
c
o
11
CD CO
Q. S
O> S
9 >.
0 "§
"° "co
111
B)® ^
C ^0 CD
CD >. Q.
—1 CO CO
•£• i>
CD CD •—
i 1 Ei
X c CD D)
s •g^g
I 111
||I|i-^
"o E ^ 05 ™
T- •<— ^ CO T3 O
*2
^g"
_8 *2
S- >^
_J CD
g-l
"^ ^3
D) CD
E o
10 .E
Q
Z
sys: decreased food consumption, bladder,
blood, kidney, liver, neurotoxic,
reproductive and spleen effects, altered
blood chemistry, increased kidney weight;
dev: decreased motile sperm, increased
liver weight, decreased brain weight and
birth weight in offspring
1
O
§
£
§
«5 O
05
ffi^
-------
CD
E
;
&
^
to
3
g
2-
o
X
2
I
o
a
e
a
a
I
o
a
Systemic
a
z
CD
1
75
Q.
•a
CD
3-
u
X
g
=) O
8|
o O
X *~
Ul
Is
a
C
OC CD
«5 ^
n
! 2
= E
~~ 3
S i
!<5
»S
o
Q
Z
"d
CD
CD
£5
==.%-
&.=•
-§ ~
O) CD
II
•O
tn CD
136 mg/kg/day - L (incn
liver weight, increased s
triglycerides)b
Q
z
Q
Z
"co
CD
•a
Q
Z
n
5 _C
c — ' *i
oS""!?
^•fes
5 1"=
€s »
£ f^- g^-
Tf c5 O Q.
?§.€.§.
"^
136 mg/kg/day
(476 mg/m3 (W), 721 mi
(G)) - L (increased liver
weight, increased serurr
triglycerides)b
Q
Q
z
c
.S
75
co
;§
CD
CO
CO ^
DJ S
< w
O 3
m c
o o
r- r->
T3
CD
CD
O
.C
t.1
•§.—
S-gj
^>'CD
E 5
ll
"O ^
i s
S P
136 mg/kg/day - L (incr
liver weight, increased s
triglycerides)
Q
CD CD CD
JO ^ CO CD
5 £ c £ a>
•— ri " — c "C3
~"1 — £ i- 75 — <"
£ to .2> § £ » S
g. o S "0 5 S £
03 :£ — c3
-CI gj CD •«-* C .is "O
•o &| ol If
I?*i3l!
1 "1)8 1^-
1 1 i ^ 1 1 "i
-§"ag§)§:c3c£
Ioi.£rac3o£~
Co£cOOT3ZJCfl3
"s
o
5f
•*
f »i-
S'-SS
mi
CM T3 Q.1-
Q
Z
O
z
^^
"co
o>
0.1 ml/animal/day (426
mg/kg/day) -L (dermal
irritation and necrosis,
decreased body weight
Q
z
a> ^
"w .,,
u
1 o
75 p
= I
Q. CD
-1"
CO O)
CO "o
III
0) 0 3=
C _Q O
CD T3 £•
I? Sf
S g S
§,8'|
CO "O ll
"eo
E
CD
•a
Q
Z
a
CO— ^^
^)_I o en
426 mg/kg/day (1491 m
(W), 2259 mg/m3 (G)) -
(dermal irritation and ne
decreased body weight
Q
z
Q
Z
C
g
S
co
i
Q
Z
Q
-^^
c
CO "co
p 0)
426 mg/kg/day - L (den
irritation and necrosis,
decreased body weight
Q
z
Q
Z
H
o
CO
o V
iffl
C5 o-S S
a
z
a
CD
&13
1000 mg/kg/day - N (en;
and gastrointestinal effe
Q
z
Q
Z
"co
CD
"D
O
Z
a
o
1
1635 mg/m 3 - L (neurot
effects)
Q
z
T3
2
0
"5
co"
'otoxic effect
3
CD
C
= £
^ .22
£*"E
11
1 s
™ §
CO CO
c
.9
75
75
s
Q
Z
Q
Z
CD
If
1000 mg/kg/day -N (er
and gastrointestinal effe
0
z
CD
&
g
T3
CD
CD
"CO „
s~i>
O g;
*= 5
11
11
|5
CO „
&>«
.- —
2
o
ID
•"3-
CD
C *P
(D
C?
Q.
Dp"
CO
-------
I
CO
111
cc
Q
DC
<
I
i
5
3
o
Q
Z
<
I
UJ
X
o
tn
to
.2
I
O
o
EE
(0
(0
X
£
ra
•Q ro CB
2 — o>
||1
a: S co
•O
CD
CO
ca
CD
o
S'cB
-I "5
>,£
750 mg/kg/d
Incidence of
variations)"
Q
Q
Q
~s
CD
T3
*~ —
CT ^_
W EZ
^ ^ >»
£ c n_
__ O """ O
o c w w
O3 CD O
sI?S
Ills
g.® 1 °>
g | go
3 *^ CO
<2 o "E c
co ^^ en co
CC co co co
J
2^ ^"^ —
JL"5
CM S" O-o^
§,«C§ C
;T E "o o
§-&oi
750 mg/kg/d
(W), 3977 m
(Increased in
skeletal varlc
Q
Q
•z.
Q
•z.
c.
2
T5
s:
r—
Q
•z.
T3
CD
CD
0
=-s
—1 CD
• ~5
CC? W
750 mg/kg/d
incidence of
variations)*1
o
z
•z.
CO
c
o
TB
ca
S
.2
CO
£
CD
CB
CD
O
S
1
o
oo
I
•Q
S
|.|g
If*
CD nj ^
|S,
n Q.
CC C.
if
i
0
in
of
JZ
Q.
OQ. cb
"Rl"! 3>
1C CD C C
CM £ CD I~.
0
0
S:
•>- S-
. CO
in CD
7.7 mg/kg/day (W)
mg/kg/day (G) - L (
lesions)0
Q
Q
CD
•a
Q
Q
Z
j=
Q.
"£_
C C
CM!
Q
CO
•K
S
i
&•
1
"a.
i
1
1
CO
"""
a
a
z
I
m
7.7 mg/kg/day (W)
mg/kg/day (G) - L (
lesions)0
o
a
2
o
5
—
a.
S *!*
Q. CO
5< CD °?
2 — S
>> o IS
a
o
a
ft?
3 <3
%>&^~~
E § t3
CO Cg ,g
o •£ <»
0
1
0
Q
a
CD
CD
"8
0.1 mg/m3 - N (bloi
neurotoxic effects)
a
CO
CB _
•gs
2 CD
CD •-
C CO
T3 2
§ »
TJ CD
il*
J3 N ^
111
nhalation
'
Q
Q
Q
a-
"&•§
'ft'0' "to1
E § tj
CO CD .g
o >S- cc
Q
Z
1
0
.
«g
CM
"5
CB ^*
'S co
J3 CO
O QQ
-------
•
^
i_
i
O
o
city value**
a
o
53
5
Developmental
Systemic I
1
r^
^
CO
a
"5
Q.
T3
c
CD
"x
CD
|s
n
_ 0
X
UJ
ffl
CD
0
c
DC 0
"OS _
n
CD
.a
= H
15 3
o c
|8
U
(0 CD
.gn! i^
i » 1 18 |I 1 *
S-Sfe'-il^-i 1 c?
*a *~ S ^ c ^ m c5
® N^,S.gc5 ^o£
|| c g- § S 1 1|
QCco^.S°.o.3.c:cD
atory effects, increased lun
ig carclnogenicity (rat)
'Q..2
£ E
§."c?
£•=:
c
1
CO
c
c
g
"c »-
o S
11
>. CD
O) ^ •
0 « 73
s = &
1 Q-l
X S CD
•o
10,000 mg/kg/day -L
(decreased pup body weight)
10,000 mg/kg/day • L (blood
effects)"
Q
z
o.
=3
a.
•a
CD
CO
CD
73
g
TJ
y
0^
~a o>
||
CO -Q
1
o
CO
Q"
CO
^
CO
c1?
=5 CM
Q CO
§. 52
e
O
Z
Q
Z
75 mg/kg/day - N (neurotoxic
effects, cataracts)"
o
z
Q
IB
CD
73
Q
Z
Q
Z
75 mg/kg/day (263 mg/m3 (W),
398 mg/m3 (G)) - N
(neurotoxic effects, cataracts)"
Q
z
Q
Z
c
.0
15
_c
Q
Z
Q
Z
75 mg/kg/day - N (neurotoxic
effects, cataracts)
Q
z
o o
ased body weight and food
ion, blood, liver, and neurot
irve fiber degeneration, catc
2 "S. c
CO O CD
2
O
CM
CD
• CD
O4 C
41! §3
sf£8-5
sin-
CM & £ CLf-
a
z
Q
Z
1 1676 mg/kg/day -Nb
Q
z
Q
15
CD
73
Q
Z
Q
Z
1676 mg/kg/day (5866 mg/m3
(W), 8888 mg/m3 (G)) - N*
Q
Z
Q
c
o
I
CO
_c
o>
IS
ll
£ CD
» 0
0 CO
CD O
8= 73
<» >,
0 •£
Z 0
O
•z.
1676 mg/kg/day -Nd
Q
z
•atory effects
a.
CO
£
H
<0
1
o
CO
= ,-
29
CD CM
is
I
Q.
cp"
CO
-------
m
CT
CT
><
C
11
o.
Q.
Comment
1
SJ
£?
o
X
S
s
s
o
S
c
o
Q
1»
0
o
System!
o
£
Q
£
s
i
03
•2
C
5
•5"
c
CD
O
X
*"
CD
1 1
UJ
,
J
£
<
; CD
: o
j e
en o
•5 .
£_
§1
m g
^o *•
O
CO
Reported to be an extreme
skin sensitizer In guinea pig
Q
H
o £
2 ID »±
S OS^->
CD > ^ CD
10 mg/kg/day -N(i
effects, Increased I
decreased thymus
squamous skin on
Q
•z.
Q
•z.
"a
CD
•o
Q
0
c?
°b £
•^ ~ Oi^^»
£ "p ^% S .£
^S1^ 5 5*2
co 5. § ^ £
S O)*^»
c ™ ^ -2
• Sic
mi
l>l 1 1
Q
Z.
Is
fill!
*n ~~~ ffi ^* CO
T3 « S 0 „-
S £ C*"^.^ Q
•5 -j*^ £• « "^
M 5 °_^ S °
g >-tn £ CD £
•8 T3 'o E ^) §
«" i CD a 1 S
g c > s * §
S o — "> 75 =
O 3= TJ -o = CT
S ffl C *" M C
Illilfl
2
o
in
CD •
Si
CD •
33 • ss-
° "^ Is ^
c 5?^- °-m
JS ." £ CD .5 •*
Q. J3 T3 J3 ^3 i—
Not reported to be a derma
sensitizer based on studies
with several materials.
a
t_
CD
.>
jS
D)
1580 mg/kg/day -I
(decreased body w
and kidney lesions'
Q
z
Q
To
1
Q
Q
Z
w u.
E <"
"5>_ =
1 £
S S"®-13
1580 mg/kg/day (5
(W), 8379 mg/m3 (j
(decreased body w
and kidney lesions'
Q
z
Q
c
i
CO
.c
_c
>.«
NOAEL is based upon a sti
with polyethylene glycol wit
MWof400.
a
CD
_>
• —
£
-y *®
1580 mg/kg/day - (
(decreased body v,
and kidney lesions
Q
z
I
CD
i
^1
£
.£?
^
"S
CO
£ o
ll
II •
2
o
f-
co
CD
CD
CD
S °?
>• S
•5 — c\i
§11
-------
Comment
1»
3
m
>
2-
u
1
CO
35
U
S
/elopmen
a
£
S
£
:
ID
0
cr CD
E S
cr
^
j2
: 3
co «
_o =
c
c
4
£
1 S
O
O
Not reported to be a skin
sensitizer (species not
indicated).
Q
•z.
j-j
i
0 mg/kg/day
o
o
co
Q
•z.
Q
•z.
"cO
1
I ARC (1987) has classified
polytetrafluoroethylene as a
Group 3 compound, not
classifiable as to its
carcinogenicity, based on no
adequate evidence in humans
and inadequate evidence in
experimental animals.
Q
cf
m
o .£
O. f£
§•5
I
co E i
Q
Z
£>
2
•!»
£ §
§ CD
. C
o •=
X =
0 c
0 ^
3 CD
CD OJ
= §
•§•5
if
CO O
§
"cc
1
The systemic NOAEL is
based upon a subacute study.
No effects were seen at the
only dose tested,
Q
•z.
•o
Z
I
1
O
O
o
CO
0
Z
Q
Z
2
o
r*. 10
1O
2
o
S o
2 CD ^>
"CD g3 ^P
Jc* S* o
O :£ o
D- O OJ
o
T3
CD
OJ m CDO
S 2 S?
1 S § -2
>~2. c co
|-z~-|
S S^"5 ?
|}||
co pSi J2
1 til
1
-a
§ #
£ *2
w ®
•a S
§§
— «J
"is* ^ c
O} Q) w
S) * c
6^|
U5 T3 CO
a
z
Q
z
75
E
1
The systemic LOAEL is based
upon a subacute study.
•o
CD "& o
fill
e-8 S|
|zjl
fcf§
Itti
o co _ 2
^D C3 (0 Q)
SS2-1
— *
C
"55
_
1
"t
1
Q
Z
|
O P
•?_§
S|
S .2>
.2 Q>
"o 5
If
Q.-Q
* CD
CO "O
1
CO
1
The U.S, EPA (1987) has
proposed that propanol be
given a Group C
classification, possible human
carcinogen, based on no
evidence of carcinogenicity in
humans and limited evidence
of carcinogenicity in
experimental animals.
to "^
H 2 |f
|-|||
||||
GO -Vf — £2
Itli
a "S 2
CD Bo
fS^^
-= >-^j § 2"
3 CD i *— O
m --»* ® ®
Hi ti i
^3 Q- o5 • CO
o
z
"8
0 CO
"x co
"o o
¥ CD
1S-
|i>
§ CD
_ ^
5 *—
CB ^
£ QJ
CD CO
o 2
i-ri=
§- •=;
._ « g
S.I1
CO CD CO
£
o
o>
A
"^
? CD
CB CO
S A
Dermal LDso > 20 mL/kg
(species not indicated). SAT:
Low to Moderate |
Q
z
o
z
Q
Z
Q
Z
-
E
1
Q
O
Z
Q
O
Z
Q
Z
|
to
CO
Oral LDjo's range from 6.64 to
9.37 g/kg for rats, mice, and
rabbits. ||
Q
Q
Q
z
Q
Z
15
o
o •"-
CD CO
CD
to
"^
">» CD
Q. •
2O5
c^
03
CD
O3
CO
Q.
op"
CO
-------
I
(O
UI
DC
Q
cc
C5
S
O
O
UI
111
s
X
•o
0)
§
to
_cs
I
O
o
1
2
en
o
x
(0
CO
O)
oc
(0
N
(D
"3 ^
• o
If
m =
O
!<
r
0
o
Not reported to be a dermal
sensitizer in guinea pigs.
ill nJ
^175
^-z'
III
Q
Z
>,
S" C CO
•g 2 S.
~3>I^ -a CD"JJ
"3> § co 2 2 S"
N2l§lf
5 i-75 e i |
id mortality, blood, neurotoxic,
cts, altered kidney weight
m ®
Si
11
CO CO
75
CD
•o
Q
z
>,T5
22.
C8 J8
— •§
X ^— *
1500 ppm (apprc
5530 mg/m3) - N
ossification)8
Q
•z.
•5;
fii
53 O c $
O =• CD £ CO S
;ed body weight and body
decreased food consumption,
toxic, kidney, liver, and
effects, and increased liver
weight, spermiophages in the
iiliii
s\fl"iil
.Q i-1 Co co
. . O) is t_ —
§.!§§.§
to S c = a.
c
o
1
75
f
Q
Z
u
'0J~
CD
« -c c?
§—••§.
Z jQ
1034 mg/kg/day
mg/kg/day (G) -
ossified hind-lim
.0
g/kg/day (V
g/day (G)-
E o>
5 E
Q
o
2
o
co
T-
'""'
•g
CJ
CD r- CO
C ^ '
*^ —
2 o 5S
Q. Q.1-
o
NOAELs and toxicity
endpoints are based on
studies conducted on acryli
acid homopolymer, CAS#
9003-01-4.
^
t
4000 mg/kg/day
~z
i
t mg/kg/day
§
Q
Q
7s
CD
•o
"z
i
o
£•
2
to
75.
^^
Z
i
II
O CD
Q
Z
ory effects, lung carcinogenicity
2
.. "55
11
c
.0
1
£
~z
1
4000 mg/kg/day
~z
t
&
I
t
o
o
o
CO
0
>ed body weight gain, kidney
iges in urine chemistry
CO 0
s*
CO (0
11
-------
I
1
b
5
!•
o
s
4-
1
O
Developmental
0
1
a
I
9
EC
5
K
CO
"5
Q.
•o
C
0)
2-
u
1
fl
§1
§ o
X
, X.
u
1
£
c
7= v>
= rf
»s
o
^ §-.CD 'S
¥73
^— c; w w w »~ r« ^—
till liiliff
lillli Id ill 1
Q
Z
Q
O
Q
Z
"eg
CD
13
Q
Z
,
CIS
.0
CD
^
S
u
•§ """
l*i
51.
Q
lymphatic and respiratory
g carcinogenicity (rats and
jcf §
I~-f
S
e s f=
O O CD
CM 13 »
Q
y.
-"Hi
jsed testes weight and size
enic depression, tubular atn
sed resorptions, malformati
^ O) S;
0 •§ fc
"O £ •—
« CO >
co co t:
1
CD
T3
"="£ >.
«f cT
S C «
0
200 mg/kg/day (700 mg/n
(W), 1061 mg/m3 (G))-L
(increased incidence of
resorptionsy
.E
£
§
T—
|f
1§i"3)D
E E?
l§.i
a
Q
z
1
«
^
—
a
z
^
CO
200 mg/kg/day - L (increa
incidence of resorptions)1
CD
to
E
X
o t
If
'1
QJ _^**
£ E
T~ CNJ
Q
c £
CD O>
sed food consumption,
itinal effects, increased sple
;reased seminal vesicle wei
CO g- (£
o 5= "^
•— 2 ^
§.11
CO CD 3
2
0
0
cn
CO
= ?
O CVJ
-------
•o
ffi
i
tn
n
_o
0)
s
£
o.
S
u.
o
*2
"5
0)
•o •?
ml
.£ §-§^
g §.-= £
CO
CD .fcj
•o o
CO c
o -CD
^1
HI
Z CO .£
"•fc.
0,000 mg/kg/da'
to
6750 mg/kg/day - Nb
o
z
Q
Z
•co
•I
Q
C3 w_
0
If) c
Is- cr
^§2
tS
J>CM
Sjcf
E§^_
O CT •<£
Sti
0 cC?
in fc ii-
^-^
S
6750 mg/kg/day (23,625
mg/m3 (W), 35,795 mg/m3
-N"
o
z
Q
C
1
CO
>,o
c"£ «
°3 0) ^
1l* *^ "^3
>, 5
fe CO CO
QJ
CO ^ -g
-------
(0
UJ
s
I
o
00
CO
111
_I
m
2 I £ E o<3
•Si fllil
•s ili§
IJiSl
•|?«: x-=
T3
£ £?
co £ o
§«1
CD
I
oa
-------
CO
CO
01
cc
Q
CC
N
X
o
5
o
o
X
Ul
X
X
I
Q
re
X
d>
CT
Q)
O
o
•z.
co
o
0
Q
O
o
jo
J2
=
re
•a
i
co
1
&
CC
CO
QQ
CQ
CT
X
Q
•z.
UI
o.
a.
5 S
g c
0
a
Ts
•o
S
o
CO
CD
XI
JS
1
TO
C
co
•C
0
S
I;
co
o
£•
CO
ll
r Chemical n
and CAS nil
lequate toxiclty data.
TJ
Ct
O
O
X
"5
c
c
L.
a
a
c
c
a
-SB
•o S
03 0
w"0.
It
CO CZ
% CD
L. co
1 1
§ °
"o -fe»
E "5
x: c
CO CD
"S CO
-1- CO
«^- *—
O 3
co E
CD ^
g& £
at E CD
a. CD 3=
XI O CD
co o x:
I-™?
• lung effects if
th acrylates, th
, Low concern
.0-* z
Low to Moderate concern 1
the polymer Is terminated \
and respiratory sensitizatic
Acrylated epoxy polymer
NK
15
Si
.2 T>
15 c
x: co
2 73
CO '5?
8|
O Co
sf §
,A, E
So"
— "CD
co §
CL-a
It
5 CD
CO 2
So
0 ^
x: c:
CO CD
*P £&
-1- co
"5 B
S S co
t c tS
S""^
co o x:
75. -52 o
2 §.2
• lung effects If
th acrylates, th
. Low concern
o "5 c:
Low to Moderate concern 1
the polymer is terminated '
and respiratory sensitizatic
CD
Acrylated ollgoamine poly
NK
-co
. CD
•n T3
J5 -0
To c
x: co
§&
•55
IS
cf^
•?- CD
_A, E
CO o
CD -jji
*o >
CD CD
£"°-
"co "£
S CD
1 1
CD °
"5 ^
E "5
€,'§
^ CO
J= CO
"5 3
I"8 •§
CL CD jg
CD g CD
5 g CD
CO O j|;
Q." 0
2§£
* lung effects if
th acrylates, th
. Low concern
o *> c
Low to Moderate concern 1
the polymer is terminated <
and respiratory sensitizatic
CD
1 Acrylated polyester polym
NK
I
. CD
CD -cj
CO C
x: co
2-5
co •§
§3
o g
•£, E
CO o
<» "S
75 S>
CD CD
co 75
% CD
L °>
•i 1
s °
"o 3?
Et5
x: c
^> CD
n 1
S L-
Cfl E CD
Q? t— ^
XI O CD
*- ^ £
cL— o
2 §^
»- CD ««-
r lung effects if
th acrylates, th
. Low concern
o *5 c
Low to Moderate concern 1
the polymer is terminated '
and respiratory sensitizatic
•>
CD
Acrylated polyester polym
NK
^
CD
15
x:
2
CO
f
CD
T—
.A,
CO
s
a.
CO
CO
CD
1
CD
"5
E
_o>
'r—
•5
CO
CD
0
t
CO
Q.
CD
I
2
r lung effects if
s.
o *?5
Low to Moderate concern 1
Low concern for other effe
]|.
11
1 Acrylic acid-butyl acrylate
methacrylate-styrene polv
27306-39-4
T>
.2
(Q
C
2
CO
8
o
cT
3,
CO
CD
"o
E.
CO
!>
CD
g
s
i
0
E
S
*o
CO
1
CD
XI
2
Q.
CO
CD
r lung effects if
s.
2 o
Low to Moderate concern i
Low concern for other effe
o
« Acrylic acid polymer, acid
NK
T3
CD
"5
x:
_c
2
CO
8
o
CD
£,
O
CD
CL
CO
•H
5
CO
3
S
•5
E
.5>
j^
"o
CO
CD
O
1o
CL
^
2
'o.
CO
CD
r lung effects if
s.
o "o
Low to Moderate concern i
Low concern for other effe
.9
« Acrylic acid polymer, acid
NK
"5
CD
CO
x:
c
2
co
S1
o
o
o
^A,
CO
s
5
_rt
1
E
^
^TO
'r~
"S
CO
CO
Q.
CD
XI
2
'o.
CO
CD
r lung effects if
s.
o "55
Low to Moderate concern '
Low concern for other effe
CD
XI
« Acrylic acid polymer, inso
NK
fc?
75
,S2
fz
r-
CO
Xj
"S
>.
;f
t5
CO
1
ZJ
CO
CD
£
H~
^s
;E
c
S
CO
m
1
CO
CO
CD
.2
1
2
"his material is
ig effects.
^ 5
Moderate concern overall.
result in eye irritation and 1
oi
g-
0
"S
cf
CO
•D
« Alcohols, C11-C15-secon
68131-40-8
Low concern overall.
73
S
m
« Amides, tallow, hydrogens
61790-31-6
•c
CD
CO
2
CO
S"
8
0
^
CO
CD
'8
Q.
CO
£
5
1
S
"o
E
x:
CO
'r-
"5
73
'•c
CO
CL
CD
1
Q.
2
r lung effects if
s.
o "Q
Low to Moderate concern
Low concern for other effe
^
15
E
75
co
Butyl acrylate-methacrylic
methacrylate polymer
25035-69-2
•rr
1
"co
CL
_O
•§
•a
S
"o
1
CO.
1
r oncogenicity,
£
Low to Moderate concern
CD
as
Q.
CO
O
f
CO
T3
«C.I. Basic Violet 1, molyb
67989-22-4
.ss
0
£
XI
o
CO
o
CD
05
cf
~
CO
CL
CL
CO
O
C
E
1
2
1
8-
1
^
'|
"o
H
r oncogenicity,
o
Low to Moderate concern
and liver effects.
i
S>
c
1
to
T3
I C.I. Basic Violet 1, molyb
phosphate
1325-82-2
Low concern overall.
C.I. Pigment Blue 61
1324-76-1
-------
i
5 8
C o
s
to
S
3
and available ac
Summary of SAT report i
||
ca E
c -
lg
to
.5.
o
3velopmental toxi
4 hour LCso in rats = 5420 mg/m* .
Low to Moderate concern foroncogenleity, neurotoxicity and d<
^-^.
^j
i
CO
•»3
CO
JD
co"
T3
CD
EC
1™
_: cc
die
Low to Moderate concern for oncogenicity.
^*
^^,
CO
E
1
co"
i
CD CM
E ^-
E co
d °
S-
:ity, and oncogen
Low to Moderate concern for mutagenicity, developmental toxii
T—
^^
CO
E
"o
1
CM
in
"8
a:
iv
If
n" CM
°- in
Low concern overall.
Red 269
«C.I. Pigment
67990-05-0
Low concern overall.
Violet 23
1C.I. Pigment
6358-30-1
£•
15
|
S
c
1
opmental toxicity
.&
0
cr
CD
O)
i
£
o
c
CD
C
O
.2
CD
o
1
CD
TJ
Q
_l
Violet 27
_; CM
^*
|
O
sity, and immunol
Low to Moderate concern for mutagenicity, developmental toxil
White 7
If
t*.
•j ...
3
E
CD
1
CD
25
CD
2
g
«
1 1,000 mg/kg.
ian200C. There
No clinical signs of toxicity were seen in rats exposed orally to
Low concern overall unless exposed to temperatures greater ti
oncogenicity, mutagenicity, neurotoxicity, and liver effects.
Yellow 14
'°- CO
d S
.J
!•
Low concern overall.
Yellow 74
<2 CM
<^ CO
ds
CD
§
1
C^
£
TJ
CO
CO
CD
a.
o
>
T3
:«
CD
8
^
', neurotoxicity, 01
irritation.
Oral LDso in rats = 4.6 g/kg. Moderate concern for genotoxicity
effects, dermal and respiratory sensitization, and skin and eye
S
a
glycol diacryl
»Dipropylene
57472-68-1
Low concern overall.
DErucamide
112-84-5
. ,
Oi \
8""
!§
CD"
c
™
1
^
S
£
B
2
CD
C
•a
brane irritation, a
iled.
1 Low to Moderate concern for eye, skin, lung and mucous mem
| surfactant nature of this material may cause lung effects if into
o
T3
C
91
tetramethylde
DEthoxylated
9014-85-1
.
"5
x
$
s
s
E
Q.
1
CD
•o
•o
i
cf
JO
_NI
"55
c
CD
toxicity, cardiac s
1 Low to Moderate concern for genotoxicity, oncogenicity, neural
0
1
thyl-aminobe
« Ethyl 4-dime
10287-53-3
Low concern overall.
u
i
o
imer-based p
73
1
t*
U- Z
Low concern overall.
fO 73
CD "5
E «
>. 0
o c
a. o
"o
i» §•
1 1
73 C
C18-unsatd.,
jdiamine,
mediamine, a
Fatty acids,
with ethylem
hexamethyle
67989-30-4
I Low concern overall.
CD
C
|
clohexyl pher
15
T- en
.&
"o
evelopmental toxi
Moderate concern for genotoxicity, dermal sensitization, and d
ne derivative
Hydroxylami
NK
Q.
CO
CO
-------
m
><
a
a
a.
§
o
*5
"3
Q
"E
CO
N
CO
s
I
0>
1
o
o
•*rf
3
_to
ca
ja
Q)
O
o
ca
a
u
£
J2
te
"5
•a
co
CO
•c
o
EL
0)
CC
CO
ON
CO
m
a>
a
£
i. o>
D 0
D ^
C °
S
CO
•o
3
3
Summary of SAT report and available ai
j_
11
» Chemical na
and CAS nun
JO
JO
'a
E
.C
f—
&
o
"52
roductive to
embranes.
£" ^
•^ 3
*5 o
C 0
Moderate concern for neurotoxicity, genotoxicity, oncogenlcity, and developme
expected to be reactive, which may result in Irritation of the eyes, skin, and mu
Ilsopropoxyethoxytitanium
bis(acetylacetonate)
68586-02-7
Low concern overall.
«2-lsopropylthioxanthone
5495-84-1
Low concern overall.
«4-lsopropylthioxanthone
83846-86-0
c
o
CO
Q.
O.
3
%
Low to Moderate concern for developmental toxicity, neurotoxicity, and immuni
||2-Methoxy-1 -propanol
1
Q
E
CO
of mucou
m, irritation
o
CO
£
a
Low to Moderate concern for effects on blood clotting, sensitization, Immunosi
developmental toxiclty, endocrine disruption, and genotoxicity.
»Methylenedisallcylic acid
27496-82-8
U}
1
£
co
A
ht species (:
O)
*CD
i
CO
Oral LDjo in rats and mice > 5 grams/kg.
Low to Moderate concern tor-lung effects if respirable particles of high molecul
Low concern for other effects.
1 Nitrocellulose
9004-70-0
Low to Moderate concern for respiratory effects.
(Paraffin wax
8002-74-2
to
||
» J5
c *~ o
c c ^
O ^ i—
5 13 o
§ •§ .2
•§ .3 §
O CO I
08 M JD
3 OT S
IARC (1987) has classified polyethylene as a Group 3 compound, not classifia
on no adequate evidence in humans and inadequate evidence in experimental
effects if respirable particles of high molecular weight species (>1 0,000) are in
I Polyethylene
9002-88-4
Low concern overall.
HPoIyol derivative A
Low concern overall. There is uncertain concern for respiratory sensitization.
CO
»
^
.g
1 Rosin, fumarated, polymer
glycol and pentaerythritol
68152-50-1
I Low concern overall.
« Rosin, fumarated
NK
•d
o
CO
£
CO
o"
o
o
o"
ht species (
0) Oj
CD 0
CO
ILow to Moderate concern for lung effects if respirable particles of high molecul
There is uncertain concern for respiratory sensitization. Low concern for other
« Rosin, polymerized
65997-05-9
»
S
CD
1
ow concern
-1
•d
"55
Low to Moderate concern for lung effects (silicosis) if crystalline material is inh
CD g
E —
£ "55
Z =i
Isilanamine, 1,1,1-trimethyl
silyl)-, hydrolysis products \
68909-20-6
!
•§
i
i
CO
3"
¥
^
a.
CO
s>
5
CO
Low to Moderate concern for lung effects If respirable particles of high molecul
concern for other effects.
CD
C
CD
>.
•s
Is,
CO "5
. a.
ii
Siloxanes and silicones, di-
hydroxypropyl Me, ethers w
glycol acetate
70914-12-4
D)
3
S
i
CO
CD
.E
"o
E
;ause defatt
V_J
o
J2
CO
Low to Moderate concern for neurotoxicity and lung irritation. The material ma
prolonged exposure.
o
CB
.9-
CO
£
D)
r~
» Solvent naphtha (petroleun
64742-89-8
-------
CM
CD
OJ
CO
Q.
CD"
CO
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
REFERENCES FOR TABLES 3-B.l AND 3-B.2
1. ATSDR. 1990. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Ammonia. U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta.
2. IRIS. 1997. Integrated Risk Information System. Online. Office of Research and Development, National
Center for Environmental Assessment, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH.
3. Tarasenko, N.Y., O.A. Pronin, and A.A. Silaev. 1977. Barium compounds as industrial poisons (an
experimental study). J. Hyg. Epidemiol Microbiol Immunol. 21:361-373.
4. CBBA-GEIGY. 1992. Initial Submission: Letter from CIBA-GEIGY submitting information on a 14-day oral
range-finding toxicity study with IRGACURE 369 in rats. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8E. U.S.
EPA Doc. No. 88-920004628. Microfiche No. OTS0537609.
5. Makshanova E.I., et al. 1977. [Title not given]. Zdravookhr Beloruss 4:81-82. Cited in HSDB, 1992.
6. RTECS. 1993. Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances. MEDLARS Online Information Retrieval
System, National Library of Medicine. Updated 05/11/93. Retrieved June, 1993.
7. U.S. EPA. 1989. HERD Project 10:008. Review of Section 4 Test Data- "A 90-day dermal toxicity/fertility
study in rats with diethylene glycol butyl ether (DGBE)". Memorandum from J. Seed, HERD OPTS, USEPA
to C. Roman, ECAD, OPTS, USEPA. October 18.
8. U.S. EPA. 1990. Health and Environmental Effects of Selected Aqueous Cleaner Chemicals. Health and
Environmental Review Division/Office of Toxic Substances, pp. 28-37.
9. U.S. EPA. 1991. HERD Profile. Diethylene glycol butyl ether. Working Draft.
10. Nolen G.A., et al. 1985. [Title not given]. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 5:1137-1143.
11. Hobson D.W., J.F. Wyman, L.H. Lee et al. 1986. Evaluation of the subchronic toxicity of diethylene glycol
butyl ether admmistered orally to rats. Summary submitted to Test Rules Development Branch, USEPA/OTS.
Cited in U.S. EPA, 1991.
12. SIDS. 1990. Screening International Data Set. SIDS Profile on the chemical Copper, [29H, 31H-
phthalocyaninato-(2-)] (C.I. Pigment Blue 15).
13. Anonymous. 1995. Kupferphthalocyanin, chloriert. Toxikologische Bertwung 229:15.
14. NTP. 1992. National Toxicology Program. Technical report on the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of
C J. Pigment Red 23 (CAS No. 6471-49-4) hi F344 rats and B6C3F mice (Feed Studies). NTP TR 411.
National Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC. Nffl Pub. No. 93-3142.
15. RTECS. 1997. Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances. MEDLARS Online Information Retrieval
System, National Library of Medicine.
16. StoMnger, H.E. 1981. Titanium. In Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology. Volume 2A. Third Revised
Edition. Clayton, G.D. and F.E. Clayton, Eds. John Wiley and Sons, New York. pp. 1968-1981.
17. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company. 1982. Bisazobiphenyl dyes derived from benzidine and its congeners,
orthotolidirie (dimethylbenzidine) and dianisidine (dimethoxylbenzidine). Submitted to EPA under TSCA
Section 8D. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 87-8220328. Microfiche No. OTS0215029.
3-B, page 22
-------
APPENDIX 3-B HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
18. Katz G.V. and Guest D. 1994. Aliphatic carboxylic acids. In: Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, 4th
ed., Vol. BE, Part E, Toxicology, G.D. Clayton and F.E. Clayton, Eds. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp.
3587-3589. -'"''
19. MHW, Japan 1993. Unpublished report on combined repeat dose and reproductive/developmental toxicity
screening test of D & C Red No 7.
20. Bornmann, G., A. Loeser, K. Mikulicz and K. Ritter. 1956. Uber das Verhalten des Organismus bei
Einwirkung verschiedener Weichmacher (Behavior of the organism as influenced by various plasticizers). Z.
Lebens.-Unters. Forsch. 103:413. (In German).
21. MacKenzie K, Kenwood S, Foster G, et al. 1990. Three-generation reproduction study with dioctyl sodium
sulfosuccinate in rats. Fundam Appl Toxicol 15(l):53-62.
22. Hansen M.K. M. Larsen, K.H. Cohr. 1987. A review of their chemistry and toxicology and the results of
determinations made during their use. Scandinavian J. Work Environ, and Health. 13(6):473-485.
23. BASF. 1992. Preliminary neurotoxicity study of Lucirin R8728 (Functional observational battery) in rats after
13 weeks administration by oral gavage. 8E document 8EHQ-0592-4415. Washington, DC: USEPA, OPPT.
24. Atlantic Richfield Company. 1983. TSCA Section 8(E) substantial risk notice for dipropyleneglycol diacrylate
(DPGDA) with EPA response dated 11/01/82. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc.
No. 88-8300429. Microfiche No. OTS0503681.
25. U.S. EPA. Date not given. Chronic skin absorption of propylene glycol methyl ether (33B) and dipropylene
glycol ethyl ether (SOB) in Rabbits. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8D. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 86-
890001219. Washington, DC:OPPT,USEPA.
26. Landry T.D., B.L. Yano. 1984. Dipropylene glycol monomethyl ether: a 13-week inhalation toxicity study in
rats and rabbits. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 4:612-617.
27. Browning E. 1965. Toxicity and Metabolism of Industrial Solvents, New York: American Elsevier.
28. Confidential. 1992. Lifetime dermal carcinogenesis bioassay of selected petroleum streams in GDI mice
(final) with attachments and letter dated 2/28/92 (sanitized). Submitted to U.S. EPA under TSCA Section 8E.
EPA Microfiche No. OTS0535767.
29. Standard Oil Co. 1984. Dermal sensitization results for several petroleum refinery process streams and
formulated/blend products. Submitted to U.S. EPA. March 15,1984. EPA Microfiche No. FYI-OTS-0384-
0301.
30. LARC. 1988. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of
Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Alcohol Drinking. Volume 44.
31. Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology. 1994. Eds. G. Clayton and F. Clayton. Fourth Edition, Volume 2,
Part D. Chapter 30: Alcohols. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
32. Anonymous. 1989. Health and Safety Studies for Diethanolamine with Cover Letter Dated 4/19/89. EPA/OTS
Docs. No. 86-890000205.
33. ACGIH. 1991. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. Documentation of Threshold
Limit Values and Biological Exposure Indices, 6th ed. ACGIH, Cincinnati, OH.
34. Mankes R.F. 1986. Studies on the embryopathic effects of ethanolamine in long-evans rats: preferential
embryopathy in pups contiguous with the male siblings in utero. Teratogen Carcinogen Mutagen. 6:403-417.
3-B, page 23
-------
APPENDIX 3-B HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
35. Eastman Kodak Co. 1992. TSCA sec 8(e) submission 8EHQ-92-10925 initial. Skin sensitization study in
guinea pigs. Washington, DC: OTS, USEPA.
36. Haskell Laboratory. 1996.90-Day inhalation study with — in rats (Preliminary report). 8E submission 8EHQ-
0896-13703. Washington, DC:USEPA.
37. Guant et al. 1968. Food Cosmet. Toxicol. 6(6):689.
38. Dow Chemical Company. 1984. Reproduction and fertility assessment study on diethylene glycol monoethyl
ether in mice (final report). Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-920001720.
Microfiche No. OTS0537183. Washington, DCrOPPT, USEPA.
39. Hardin et al. 1984. Environmental Health Perspectives. 57:69-74.
40. Browning. 1965. [Tifle not given] Tox and Metab Indus Solv. 632.
41. Monsanto. 1988. The effect of 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate on rat hepatic peroxisomes with cover letter
dated 05/09/91. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8(d). U.S. EPA Doc. No. 86-910000810. Microfiche
No. OTS0529442.
42. Monsanto. 1992. Initial submission: A single generation reproduction study with 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl
phosphate (EHDP) in rats with cover letter dated 01/12/93. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8(e). U.S.
EPA Doc. No. 88-930000142. Microfiche No. OTS0538371.
43. Bio/Dynamics Inc. 1984. A Subacute Dermal Study Toxicity Screen in Rats. Submitted to EPA under TSCA
Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-920006657. Microfiche No. OTS0543730. Washington,
DC:OPPT,USEPA. Retrieved 1991.
44. Eastman Kodak Company. 1992. Repeated Oral Administration of Five Ketones and n-Heptane to Rats. TSCA
8EHQ-92-11177. Washington, DC:OPPT, USEPA.
45. Bio/Dynamics Inc. 1980.26-week Inhalation toxicity study of heptane in the rat with cover letter. TSCA 8E
submission FYI-AX-1081-0135. Washington, DC:OPPT,USEPA.
46. Hoeschst Celanese Corporation. 1982. Teratology screen in rats. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8E.
U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-920000172. Microfiche No. OTS0534622.
47. Cavelier C. et al. 1981. [Title not given]. Ann. Dermato. Venereol. 108:559-66.
48. Celanese Chemical Company. 1982. Acute vapor inhalation toxicity study in rats. EPA Document NO. FYI-
OTS-0487-0544, Microfiche No. OTS0000544-4.
49. CIBA-GEIGY. 1985a. Initial submission: Preliminary testing for subacute toxicity in a 4-week experiment on
rats with oral application of Darocur 1173 with cover letter dated 07/01/94. Submitted to EPA under TSCA
Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-940000339. Microfiche No. OTS0556297.
50. CIBA-GEIGY. 1985b. Initial submission: Skin sensitization study of Darocur 1173 using Magnusson
maximization test in the guinea pig with cover letter dated 07/19/93. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section
8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-940000377. Microfiche No. OTS0555512.
51. Dow Chemical Company. 1983. Initial submission: Repeated inhalation toxicity of hydroxypropyl acrylate
(final report) with cover letter dated 04/21/92. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8(e). U.S. EPA Doc.
No. 88-920002542. Microfiche No. OTS0537352.
52. Tsulaya R.V., et al. 1978. Gig Sanit. Volume 5. pp. 6-9.
3-B, page 24
-------
APPENDIX 3-B HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
53. BASF AG. 1990. Department of Toxicology, unpublished results (Project number 33s0057/88021).
54. Hazelton Laboratories. 1983. 28-day subchronic percutaneous toxicity. Submitted to EPA under TSCA
Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 86870000155. Microfiche No. OTS0513340. Washington, DC:OPPT, U.S.
EPA. " -
55. Baikov B.K., et al. 1974. Hygienic standardization of the daily average maximum permissible concentrations
of propyl and isopropyl alcohols in the atmosphere. Gig Sanit. 4:6-13.
56. Antonova and Salmina. 1978. The maximum permissible concentration of isopropyl alcohol in water bodies
with due regard for its action on the gonads and the progeny. Gig SaniL 1:8-11.
57. IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). 1987. Overall evaluations of carcinogenicity: an
updating of IARC Monographs Volumes 1 to 42. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks
to humans. Supplement 7:70.
58. Rowe V.K. and S.B. McCollister. 1982. Alcohols. In: Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, 3rd ed., Vol.
2C, G.D. Clayton and F.E. Clayton, eds. New York: John Wiley and Sons, p. 4527-4704.
59. Proctor and Gamble. Undated. Unpublished data.
60. Patterson and Staszak. 1977. Effects of geophagia (kaolin ingestion) on the maternal blood and embryonic
development in the pregnant rat Journal of Nutrition 107(11):2020.
61. Carborundum Company. 1992. Letter from Carborundum Company to USEPA regarding the results of an on-
going chronic animal study on man-made refractory ceramic fibers (RFC). 8E Document 8EHQ-0892-0553.
Washington, DC: OPPT, USEPA.
62. CffiA-GEIGY. 1986. Final report for the 3 month oral toxicity study in rats for TK12955 (irgacure 907) with
cover letter dated 10/30/86. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8(e). U.S. EPA Doc. No. 89-870000028.
Microfiche No. OTS0509735-1.
63. IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). 1984. Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons, Part 2,
Carbon Blacks, Mineral Oils (Lubricant Base Oils and Derived Products) and Some Nitroarenes.
64. CIBA-GEIGY. 1993.14-Day Range Finding Study of Bis(2,6-Dimethoxybenzoyl)-2,4,4-
Trimethylpentylphospbine oxide in rats. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-
930000361. Microfiche No. OTS0571017. Washington, DC:OPPT,USEPA.
65. CffiA-GEIGY. 1992. Skin sensitization test in the guinea pig maximization test Submitted to EPA under
TSCA Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-930000131. Microfiche No. OTS0538360. Washington,
DC:OPPT,USEPA.
66. Smyth, H.F. Jr., C.P. Carpenter, C.S. Weil. 1950. Am Pharm Assoc Sci Ed. 39:349.
67. Rowe, V.K. and M.A. Wolf. 1982. Glycols. In Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, Volume I, G.D.
Clayton and F.E. Clayton Eds. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. P. 3817-3908.
68. U.S. EPA. 1993. Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables, Annual Update: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (March 1993).
69. Hanley T.R., J.T. Young, J.A. John, et al. 1984. Ethylene glycol monomethyl ether (EGME) and propylene
glycol monomethyl ether (PGME): Inhalation fertility and teratogenicity studies in rats, mice and rabbits.
Environ Health Perspect. 57:7-12.
3-B, page 25
-------
APPENDIX 3-B HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
70. Sittingbourne Research Center. 1985. Toxicology of industrial chemicals: the acute oral and percutaneous
toxicity, skin and eye irritancy and skin sensitizing potential with methyl proxitol. Submitted to EPA under
TSCA Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-920002329. Microfiche No. OTS0536381, Washington, DC:OPPT,
USEPA.
71. Bushy Run Research Center. 1990. Propasol Solvent P: fourteen-week vapor inhalation study with fischer 344
and sprague dawley rats. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 89-900000372.
Microfiche No. OTS0513453-3. Washington, DC:OPPT,USEPA.
72. Bushy Run Research Center. 1992. Developmental Toxicity Study of Propasol Solvent P Vapor in CD
(Sprague-Dawley) Rats. TSCA 8EHQ-92-11311. Washington, DC:OPPT, USEPA.
73. Bushy Run Research Center. 1986. PROPASOL Solvent P: Acute Toxicity and Primary Irritancy Studies.
TSCA 8EHQ-0592-3985. Washington, DC:OPPT, USEPA.
74. Haskell Laboratories. 1968. Three week feeding study in rats with polytetrafluoroethylene resins (Teflon). 8E
Document 8EHQ-92-12219. Washington, DC:OPPT, USEPA.
75. Zapp. 1962. Toxic and health effects of plastics and resins. Archives of Environmental Health 4:335-346.
76. Gibel, W., K. Lohs, G.P. Wildner, and T. Schram. 1974. Experimental studies on the cancerogenic effect of
higher alcohols, as illustrated by 3-methyl-l-butanol, 1-propanol and 2-methyl-l-propanol. S Exp Chir Chir
Forsch. 7:235-239.
77. Weese, H. 1928. Comparative investigation of the potency and toxicity of vapors of the lower aliphatic
alcohols. Arch Expt Pathol Pharmakol. 135: 118-130 (German).
78. Nelson, B.K., W.S. Brightwell, D.R. Mackenzie-Taylor et al. 1988. Food Chem Toxicol. 26: 247-254.
79. U.S. EPA. 1987. Health and Environmental Effects Document for n-Propyl Alcohol. Environmental Criteria
and Assessment Office, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Cincinnati, OH. ECAO-CIN-G005.
80. Smyth, H.F.Jr, C.P. Carpenter, C.S. Weil, et al. 1969. Range-finding toxicity data: List VII. Am Ind Hyg
AssocJ.30(5):470-476.
81. Munch, J.C. 1972. Ind Med.41(4):31-33.
82. Lovelace Research Institute. 1990. Chronic inhalation study being conducted at Lovelace Inhalation
Toxicology Research Institute on polyacrylate polymer.
83. Lovelace Research Institute. 1992. Letter Submitting a Status Update for a Chronic Inhalation Study in Rats
on Polyacrylate Polymer. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8E. U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-920000523.
Washington, DC:OPPT,USEPA.
84. Lindenschmidt et al. 1991. Effects of oral administration of a high-molecular weight crosslinked polyacrylate
in rats. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 17(1):128-135.
85. McGrath et al. 1995. Long-term effects of a cross-linked polyacrylate superabsorbent in hamster. J Appl Tox.
15:69-73.
86. Rice C.H., R.L. Harris Jr., H. Checkoway et al. 1986. Dose-response relationships for silicosis from a case-
control study of North Carolina dusty trade workers. In: Goldsmith D., D.M. Winn, and C.M. Shy, Eds.,
Silica, Silicosis, and Cancer. New York: Praeger Publishers, pp. 77-86.
3-B, page 26
-------
APPENDIX 3-B HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
87. Dow Corning Corporation. 1966. Report to dow corning corporation 28-day subacute dermal RBA study on
five silicone fluids with cover letter dated 04/20/94. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8D. U.S. EPA
Doc. No. 86-940001082. Microfiche No. OTS05563536.
88. Dow Corning. 1985. Study of the tolerance to k Dow Corning food additive and its effect upon nutrient
absorption, with cover letter dated 05/09/94. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8(d). U.S. EPA Doc.
No. 86-940001002. Microfiche No. OTS0557411.
89. Dow Corning Corporation. 1966. Report to Dow Corning Corporation rabbit teratogenic study of TX-135B
with cover letter dated 04/20/97. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8(d). U.S. EPA Doc. No. 86-
940001073. Microfiche No. OTS0556527.
90. Dow Corning Corporation. 1953. Acute Inhalation toxicity masonry water repllents and constituents with
cover letter dated 04/20/94. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8(d). U.S. EPA Doc. No. 86-940001031.
Microfiche No. OTS0556501.
91. Kishi, R., Y. Katakura, T. Ikeda, B.Q. Chen and H. Miyake. 1992. Neurochemical effects in rats following
gestational exposure to styrene. Toxicol Lett. 63:141-146.
92. Murray, F.J., J.A. John, M.F. Balmer et al. 1978. Teratologic evaluation of styrene given to rats and rabbits
by inhalation or by gavage. Toxicology. 11:335-343.
93. Rhone-Poulenc Inc. 1984. Initial submission: An oral teratology screening study of trimethylolpropane
ethoxytriacrylate, glyceryl propoxy diacrylate and * in rats with cover letter dated 10/27/92. Submitted to EPA
under TSCA Section 8(e). U.S. EPA Document No. 88-920010699. Microfiche No. OTS0555967.
94. Du Pont Chemical. 1973. Initial submission: Acute inhalation and subacute inhalation toxicity of 1,3-
propanediol, 2-ethyl-2-(hydroxymethyl), triacrylate in rats with cover letter dated 11/15/92. Submitted to EPA
under TSCA Section 8(e). U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-920009671. Microfiche No. OTS0571328.
95. NTP. 1997. 13-week dermal toxicity study of trimethylolpropane triacrylate and pentaerythritol triacrylate
(CAS Nos. 15625-89-5 and 3524-68-3). Unpublished report submitted by Battelle Laboratories to NTP,
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Reserach Triangle Park, NC, April, 1997.
96. Rh6ne-Poulenc Inc. 1979. Initial submission: Letter from Rhdne-Poulenc Inc. to USEPA regarding teratology
screen studies of various compounds in rats with attachments and cover letter dated 10/27/92. Submitted to
EPA under TSCA Section 8(e). U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-920009562. Microfiche No. OTS0571218.
97. Union Carbide. 1974. Initial submission: Letter submitting combined intracutaneous and topical sensitization
of four chemicals in the guinea pig. Submitted to EPA under TSCA Section 8(e). U.S. EPA Doc. No. 88-
920004598. Microfiche No. OTS0537579.
98. Fleischman R.W. et al. 1980. Journal of Environmental Pathology and Toxicology. 3:149-170.
99. Seipelt H., K. Zoellner, E. Hilgenfeld, H. Grossman. 1969. Untersuchungen an Niereg neugeborener Ratten
nach chronischer Hamstoffapplikation beimMuttertier. Zschr Urol. 62:623-627.
100. Alchangian L.V. et al. 1983. Vesta Dermatol Venerol. 9:26-29.
101. IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). 1997. Silica, Some Silacates, Coal Dust and Para-
Aramid Fibrils. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans, Vol. 68.
Lyon: IARC, pp 41-242.
102. Dodd D.E. et al. 1983. Ethylene glycol monoalkyl ethers: acute, 9-day, and 90-day vapor inhalation studies in
Fischer 344 rats. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 68:405-414.
3-B, page 27
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
103. Hardin B.D. et al. 1984. [Title not given]. Environ Health Perspectives 57:69-74.
104. Hardin B.D. et al. 1987. [Tifle not given]. Carcinog Mutagen 7:29-48.
105. Mellon Institute of Industrail Research. 1963. Results of three monhts of inclusion of Butyl CELLOSOLVE in
the diet of rats. 8E document 8EHQ-92-12447. Washington, D.C.: USEPA.
106. WIL Research Laboratories, Inc. 1983.90-Day subchronic dermal toxicity study in rabbits with ethylene
glycol monobutyl ether. TSCA FYI submission FYI-AX-0683-0178, microfiche 0178. Washington, D.C.:
USEPA.
3-B, page 28
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Hazard Profile
The environmental hazard assessment of chemicals consists of the identification of the
effects that a chemical may have on organisms in the environment. An overview of this
assessment process has been reported, for example, by Smrchek and Zeeman (1998)1 and by
Zeeman and Gilford (1993a)2. The effects are expressed in terms of the acute and chronic
toxicity of a chemical on the exposed organisms. There are generally given as either the
lethal concentration (LC) or as the effective concentration (EC), which describe the type and
seriousness of the effect for a known concentration of a chemical. When the effective
concentrations for a range of species for a chemical are tabulated, the tabulation is called a
Hazard Profile or Toxicity Profile. A more detailed discussion of a comprehensive Hazard
Profile has been presented by Nabholz, 1991.3 The most frequently used Hazard Profile for
the aquatic environment consists of a set of six effective concentrations as reported by
Nabholz, et al., (1993a).4 These are:
• Fish acute value (usually a fish 96-hour LCSO value)
• Aquatic invertebrate acute value (usually a daphnid 48-hour LC50 value)
• Green algal toxicity value (usually an algal 96-hour EC50 value)
• Fish chronic value [usually a fish 28-day chronic value (ChV)]
• Aquatic invertebrate chronic value (usually a daphnid 21-day ChV)
• Algal chronic value [usually an algal 96-hour no effect concentration (NEC) or
geometric mean maximum acceptable toxicant concentration (GMATC) value for
biomass]
For the acute values, the LC50 (lethality or mortality) or EC50 (non-lethal effects) refers to the
concentration that results in 50 percent of the test organisms affected at the end of the
specified exposure period in a toxicity test. The chronic values represent the concentration
of the chemical that results in no statistically significant sublethal effects on the test
organism following an extended or chronic exposure.
The Hazard Profile can be constructed using effective concentrations based on toxicity test
data (with measured test chemical concentrations) or estimated toxicity values based on
Structure Activity Relationships (SARs). The measured values are preferred because they
are based on actual test data, but SAR estimates, if available for the chemical class, can be
used in the absence of test data. Thus the Hazard Profile may consist of only measured data,
only predicted values, or a combination of both. Also, the amount of data in the hazard
profile may range from a minimum of one acute or chronic value to the full compliment of
three acute values and three chronic values.
In the absence of measured toxicity values, estimates of these values can be made using
Structure Activity Relationships (SARs). SAR methods include Quantitative Structure
Activity Relationships (QSARs), qualitative SARs or the use of the chemical analogs. The
use of SARs by OPPT has been described in other texts.5 The use and application of QSARs
specifically for the hazard assessment of new TSCA chemicals has been presented in other
3-B, page 29
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
information sources as well.6 The development, validation and application of SARs in OPPT
have been presented by OPPT staff.7-8-9-10-11-12
The predictive equations (QSARs) are used in lieu of actual test data to estimate a toxicity
value for aquatic organisms within a specific chemical class. The chemical classes and
subclasses with available QSARs, numbering a total of 140, have been listed.13-14 Although
the equations are derived from correlation and linear regression analysis based on measured
data, the confidence intervals associated with the equation are not used to provide a range
of toxicity values. Even with measured test data, the use of the confidence limits to
determine the range of values is not used.
Determination of Concern Concentration
Upon completion of a hazard profile, a concern concentration (CC) is determined. A
concern concentration is that concentration of a chemical in the aquatic environment which,
if exceeded, may cause a significant risk to aquatic organisms. Conversely, if the CC is not
exceeded, the assumption is made that probability of a significant risk occurring is low and
no regulatory action is required. The CC for each chemical is determined by applying
Assessment Factors (AsF)15 or Uncertainty Factors (UF)16 to the effect concentrations in the
hazard profile.
These factors incorporate the concept of the uncertainty associated with (1) toxicity data;
laboratory tests versus field test and measured versus estimated data and (2) species
sensitivity. For example, if only a single LC50 value for a single species, is available, there
are several uncertainties to consider. First, how reliable is the value itself? If the test were
to be done again by the same laboratory or a different laboratory, would the value differ, and
if so, by how much? Second, there are differences in sensitivity (toxicity) among and
between species that have to be considered. Is the species tested the most or the least
sensitive? In general, if only a single toxicity value is available, there is a large uncertainty
about the applicability of this value to other organisms hi the environment and large
assessment factor, i.e., 1000, is applied to cover the breadth of sensitivity known to exist
among and between organisms hi the environment. Conversely, the more information that
is available results hi more certainty concerning the toxicity values and requires the use of
smaller factors. For example, if toxicity values are derived from field tests, then an
assessment factor on 1 is used, because these tools measure chemical effects on field
organisms.
Four factors are used by OPPT to set a CC for chronic risk: 1,10,100, and 1000. The factor
used is dependent on the amount and type of toxicity data contained in the hazard profile and
reflects the amount of uncertainty about the potential effects associated with a toxicity value.
In general, the more complete the hazard profile and the higher the quality of the generated
toxicity data, the smaller the factor that is used. The following discussion describes the use
and application of the uncertainty or assessment factors:
• If the hazard profile only contains one or two acute toxicity values, the concern
concentration is set at 1/1000 of the acute value.
• If the hazard profile contains three acute values (called the base set), the concern
concentration is set at 1/100 of the lowest acute value.
• If the hazard profile contains one chronic value, the concern concentration is set at
1/10 of the chronic value if the value is for the most sensitive species. Otherwise,
it is 1/100 of the acute value for the most sensitive species.
3-B, page 30
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
• If the hazard profile contains three chronic values, the concern concentration is set
at 1/10 of the lowest chronic value.
• If the hazard profile contains a measured chronic value from a field study, then an
assessment factor of 1 is used.
Hazard Ranking
Chemicals can be also be ranked by their hazard concern levels for the aquatic environment.
This ranking can be based upon the acute toxicity values expressed in milligrams per liter
(mg/L). The generally accepted scoring used by OPPT is as follows:17-18
High Concern (H) £ 1
Moderate (or Medium) Concern (M) > 1 and <, 100
Low Concern (L) > 100
This ranking can also be expressed in terms of chronic values as follows:
High Concern (H) < 0.1
Moderate (or Medium) Concern (M) > 0.1 and <, 10.0
Low Concern (L) > 10.0
Chronic toxicity ranking takes precedent over the acute ranking.
REFERENCES
1. Smrchek, J.C. and M.G. Zeeman. 1998. "Assessing Risks to Ecological Systems from Chemicals."
Handbook of Environmental Risk Assessment and Management. P. Calow, Ed. Blackwell Science Ltd.,
Oxford, UK, 1998, pp. 24-90.
2. Zeeman, M.G. and James Gilford. 1993a. "Ecological Hazard Evaluation and Risk Assessment Under
EPA's Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA): An Introduction". Environmental Toxicology and Risk
Assessment, ASTM STP 1179, Wayne G. Landis, Jane S. Hughes, and Michael A. Lewis, Eds., American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 7-21.
3. Nabholz, J.V., 1991. "Environmental Hazard and Risk Assessment Under the United States Toxic
Substances Control Act,: The Science of the Total Environment Vol. 109/110, pp. 649-665.
4. Nabholz, J.V., Miller, P., and Zeeman, M., 1993a "Environmental Risk Assessment of New Chemicals
Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section Five," Environmental Toxicology and Risk
Assessment. ASTM STP 1179, Wayne G. Landis, Jane S. Hughes, and Michael A. Lewis, Eds., American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 40-55.
5. Clements, R.G. (Ed.) 1994. "Estimating Toxicity of Industrial Chemicals to Aquatic Organisms Using
Structure Activity Relationships, 2nd ed." EPA-748-R-93-001, Environmental Effects Branch, Health and
Environmental Review Division (7403), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC. PB94-108206, National Technical Information Services (NTIS),
U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, Va. 22161.
6. Clements, R.G., J.V. Nabholz, D.W. Johnson and M. Zeeman. 1993a. "The Use and Application of
QSAR's in the Office of Toxic Substances for Ecological Hazard Assessment of New Chemicals".
Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment ASTM STP 1179, Wayne G. Landis, Jane S. Hughes,
and Michael A. Lewis, Eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 56-64.
3-B, page 31
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
7. Zeeman, M.G. Nabholz, J.V., and R.G. Clements. 1993b. "The Development of SAR/QSAR for Use Under
EPA's Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA): An Introduction. Environmental Toxicology and Risk
Assessment 2nd Volume. ASTM STP 1216, J.W. Gorsuch, F. James Dwyer, Christopher G. Ingersoll, and
Thomas W. La Point, Eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 523-539.
8. Boethling, R.S. 1993. Structure Activity Relationships for Evaluation of Biodegradability in the EPA's
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment 2nd Volume.
ASTM STP 1216, J.W. Gorsuch, F. James Dwyer, Christopher G. Ingersoll, and Thomas W. La Point,
Eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 540-554.
9. Clements, R.G., J.V. Nabholz, D.E. Johnson, and M.G. Zeeman. 1993b. "The Use of Quantitative
Structure-Activity Relationships (QSARs) as Screening Tools in Environmental Assessment".
Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment 2nd Volume. ASTM STP 1216, J.W. Gorsuch, F. James
Dwyer, Christopher G. Ingersoll, and Thomas W. La Point, Eds., American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 555-570.
10. Nabholz, J.V., Clements, R.G., Zeeman, M.G., Osborn, K.C. and R. Wedge. 1993b "Validation of
Structure Activity Relationships Used by the USEPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for the
Environmental Hazard Assessment of Industrial Chemicals. Environmental Toxicology and Risk
Assessment 2nd Volume. ASTM STP 1216, J.W. Gorsuch, F. James Dwyer, Christopher G. Ingersoll, and
Thomas W. La Point, Eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 571-590.
11. Newsome, L.D., Johnson, D.E. and J.V. Nabholz. "Quantitative Structure-Activity Predictions for Amine
Toxicity Algae and Daphnids". Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment. 2nd Volume. ASTM
STP 1216, J.W. Gorsuch, F. James Dwyer, Christopher G. Ingersoll, and Thomas W. La Point, Eds.,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 591-609.
12. Lipnick, R.L. "Baseline Toxicity QSAR Models: A Means to Assess Mechanism of Toxicity for Aquatic
Organisms and Mammals. Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment 2nd Volume. ASTM STP
1216, J.W. Gorsuch, F. James Dwyer, Christopher G. Ingersoll, and Thomas W. La Point, Eds., American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 610-619.
13. Clements, R.G., J.V. Nabholz, M.G. Zeeman, C. Auer. 1995. "The Relationship of Structure-Activity
Relationships (SARs) in the Aquatic Toxicity Evaluation of Discrete Organic Chemicals." SAR and OSAR
in Environmental Research 3: 203-215.
14. Smrchek and Zeeman, 1998.
15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1984. "Estimating Concern Levels for Concentrations of
Chemical Substances in the Environment," Environmental Effects Branch, Health and Environmental
Review Division (7403) Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, DC.
16. Smrchek, J.C., R. Clements, R. Morcock, and W. Rabert. "Assessing Ecological Hazard Under TSCA:
Methods and Evaluation of Data." Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment. ASTM STP 1179,
Wayne G. Landis, Jane S. Hughes, and Michael A. Lewis, Eds., American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, 1993, pp. 22-39.
17. Ibid.
18. Wagner, P.M., Nabholz, J.V., Kent, R.J. 1995. "The New Chemicals Process at the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA): Structure-Activity Relationships for Hazard Identification and Risk
Assessment" Toxicology Letters 79:67-73.
3-B, page 32
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
Table 3-B.3 Estimated Lowest Aquatic Toxicity Values of Flexographic Ink Chemicals Based on
SAR Analysis or on Actual Measured Test Data
Chemical
Acrylated epoxy polymer
Acrylated oligoamine polymer
Acrylated polyester polymer #1
Acrylated polyester polymer #2
Acrylic acid-butyl acrylate-methyl
methacrylate-styrene polymer
Acrylic acid polymer, acidic #1
Acrylic acid polymer, acidic #2
Acrylic acid polymer, insoluble
Alcohols, C11-15-secondary, ethoxylated
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Ammonia fresh water
salt water
Ammonium hydroMde
Barium
2-Benzyl-2-(dimethylamino)-4'-
morpholinobutyrophenone
3utyl acetate
Butyl acrylate-methacrylic acid-methyl
methacrylate polymer
Butyl carbitol fresh water
salt water
C.I. Basic Violet 1, molybdatephosphate
C.I. Basic Violet 1 , molybdatetungstatephosphate
C.I, Pigment Blue 15
C.I. Pigment Blue 61
C.I. Pigment Green 7
C.I. Pigment Red 23
C.I. Pigment Red 48, barium salt (1:1)
C.I. Pigment Red 48, calcium salt (1:1)
C.I. Pigment Red 52, calcium salt (1:1)
C.I. Pigment Red 269
C.I. Pigment Violet 23
C.I. Pigment Violet 27
C.I. Pigment White 6
C.I. Pigment White 7
C.I. Pigment Yellow 14
C.I. Pigment Yellow 74
Citric acid
in hard water
Acute toxicity (mg/L)
Fish
Invert.
Algal
Chronic toxicity (mg/L)
Fish
Invert.
Algal
Concern
concen-
tration
a
a
a
a
a
£300
£300
2:400
£400
9
9
£30
£30
£40
£40
1
1
>1
>1
a
1
b
0.93
1.1
12
580
2.0
25
1
b
1.91
1.0
32
24
1
170
1
b
2.4
>30
31
1.5
2
0.2
0.002
0.07
0.06
1
23
0.3
3
0.2
0.005
. 0.6
0.14
3
13
0.2
7.8
0.3
0.01
0.6
>3
7.7
0.6
1.5
0.02
0.001
0.01-
0.006
0.3
0.8
0.02
0.2
a
1300
170
0.05
ora
0.08
ora
1300
821
0.05
ora
0.05
ora
760
0.05
ora
0.04
ora
140
0.05
ora
0.008
ora
41
0.005
ora
0.005
ora
40
0.01
ora
0.01
ora
2-4
0.001
0.001 for
solub.£0.005
a
<;70
s70 | s10
<,7
<7
s1
0.1
a
a
a30
£30
30
i30
£30
40
20
20
170
£3
£3
3
£3
£3
3
2
2
£20
0.3
0.3
0.3
a
a
0.05
ora
0.05
ora
0.05
ora
0.005
ora
0.005
ora
0.005
ora
0.001
a
a
a
a
>100
>100
5
100
10
10
1
30
0.1
3.0
3-B, page 33
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
Table 3-B.3 Estimated Lowest Aquatic Toxicity Values of Flexographic Ink Chemicals Based on
SAR Analysis or on Actual Measured Test Data (continued)
Chemical
D&CRedNo.7
Dicyclohexyl phthalate
DIoctyl sulfosuccinate, sodium salt
Diphenyl (2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyt)
phosphine oxide
Jipropylene gtycol diacrylate
Dipropylene glycol methyl ether
Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light
3istiltates (petroleum), solvent-refined
ght paraffinic
Erucamida
Ethanol
Ethanolamine
Ethoxylated tetramethyldeoynidiol
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl carbitol
Ethyl 4-dimethylaminobenzoate
2-Ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate
Fatty acid, dimer-based polyamide
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with
ethylenediamine, hexamethylenediamine, and
propionic acid
Glycerol propoxylate triacrylate
n-Heptane
1,6-Hexanediol diacrylate
1-Hydroxylcyclohexyl phenyl ketone
tydroxylamine derivative
2-Hydroxy-2-methylpropiophenone
Hydroxypropyl acrylate
Isobutanol
Isopropanol
lsopropo)tyethoxytitaniumbis(acetylacetonate)
2-lsopropylthioxanthone
4-lsopropylthioxanthone
Kaolin
Methylenedisalicylic acid
2-Methyl-4'(methylthio)-2-
morpholinopropiophoenone
Mineral oil
Nitrocellulose
Paraffin wax
Phosphine o»de, bis(2,6-dimethoxybenzoyl)
(2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)-
Polyethylene glycol
Acute toxicity (mg/L)
Fish
29
b
3
3
3.8
5000
0.23
invert.
37'
b
3
5.2
26
4600
0.3
Algal
20
0.05
30
0.43
2.7
2600
0.22
Chronic toxicity (mg/L)
Fish
>3
0.03
0.5
0.4
0.25
500
0.05
Invert.
2.6
0.03
.05
0.61
3
110
0.05
Algal
2
0.04
3
0.35
6
95
0.1
Concern
concen-
tration
0.2-0.3
0.003
0.05
0.04
0.03
10
0.005
a
4300
1035
>50
66
>1000
13
b
4000
100
>50
>1000
>1000
15
b
6100
63
>50
5
>1000
10
0.05
a
390
200
>10
7
900
2
0.03
76
10
>10
>100
190
1.3
0.03
60
0.85
>10
3.7
150
1.9
0.04
6
0.09
1
0.4
20
0.1
0.003
a
S4.5
0.41
2.4
33
s54
450
4.9
930
2700
13
b
b
>1000
>100
45
b
>100
5.1
ora
>100
£14
0.52
7.6
37
*3.9
460
160
910
2600
15
b
b
>1000
>100
51
b
>100
5.1
ora
>100
£1.6
0.37
0.82
24
£6.8
280
15
530
1400
10
b
b
>1000
30
33
b
>100
0.78
ora
>100
a
sO.13
0.08
0.2
4.8
£5
52
1.7
97
260
2
0.004
0.03
ora
>100
>10
6.6
0.002
ora
>10
a
0.9
ora
>10
sO.1
0.08
0.8
2.6
sO.4
- 18
20
26
57
1.4
0.004
0.03
ora
50
>10
3.6
0.004
ora
>10
1.2
ora
>10
sO.4
0.15
0.07
3.6
s1.4
20
4
25
48
2.3
0.004
0.03
ora
>100
3
5
0.010
ora
>10
0.62
ora
>10
0.01
0.008
0.007
0.3
0.04
2
0.2
2.5
5
0.1, 2:1.0°
0.001
0.003
5.0
0.3
0.4
0.001
1
0.06
1
3-B, page 34
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
Table 3-B.3 Estimated Lowest Aquatic Toxicity Values of Flexographic Ink Chemicals Based on
SAR Analysis or on Actual Measured Test Data (continued)
Chemical
Polyol derivative A
Polytetrafluoroethylene
Propanol
3ropyl acetate
Propylene glycol methyl ether
Propylene glycol propyl ether
Resin acids, hydrogenated, methyl esters
Resin, acrylic
Rosin, fumarated, polymer with diethylene glycol
and pentaerythritol
Rosin, fumarated, polymer with pentaerythritol, 2-
aropenoic acid, ethenylbenzene, and (1-
•nethylethylenyl)benzene
Rosin, polymerized
Silanamine, 1 ,1 ,1-trirnethyl-N-(trimethylsilyl)-,
lydrolysis products with silica
Silica
Silicone oil
Siloxanes and silicones, di-Me, 3-hydroxypropyl
Vie, ethers with polyethylene glycol acetate
Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light aliphatic
Styrene
Styrene acrylic acid polymer #1
Styrene acrylic acid polymer #2
Styrene acrylic acid resin
Tetramethyldecyndiol
Thioxanthone derivative
Titanium diisopropoxide bis (2,4-pentanedionate)
Titanium isopropoxide
Trimethylolpropane ethoxylate triacrylate
Trimethylolpropane propoxylate triacrylate
Trimethylolpropane triacrylate
Urea
Acute toxicity (mg/L)
Fish
>1000
Invert.
>1000
Algal
>1000
Chronic toxicity (mg/L)
Fish
>100
Invert.
>100
Algal
>100
Concern
concen-
tration
10
a
1800
41
>1000
a 1000
b
2:300
1700
430
>1000
a 1000
b
£400
970
3.2
>1000
^980
b
9
180
4
>1000
£180
0.001
ora
£30
42
16
210
£47
0.001
ora
£40
36
2.4
160
£44
0.005
ora
1
4
0.2
20
4
0.001
>1
a
a
a
>100
ora
>100
ora
>100
ora
>10
ora
>10
ora
>10
ora
>1
ora
a
>100
ora
>100
1.8
4
£300
£300
£300
31
b
2220
a2900
£8
$5.5
4.1
>1000
>100
ora
>100
2.2
13
2400
£400
2400
30
b
2110
22700
£70
s22
23.0
>1000
>100
ora
>100
1.5
0.72
9
9
9
30
b
219
£1500
£7
<:2.4
2.4
>1000
>10
ora
>10
0.31
1.6
£30
£30
230
3
0.05
ora
220
£270
£0.6
sO.21
0.21
>100
>10
ora
>10
0.23
0.95
240
240
240
3
0.05
ora
210
£60
£7
£2
2
>100
>10
ora
>10
0.38
0.06
1
1
1
3
0.05
ora
£5
£50
£2
sO.6
0.6
>100
1.0 or a
>1
0.02
. 0.006
>1
>1
>1
0.3
0.005
0.5
5
0.06
0.02
0.02
>10
No effects are expected because the chemical is a polymer or a high-molecular weight compound. The high molecular weight
(greater than 600 or 1,000) prevents passage through biological membranes.
b No toxic effects are expected in a saturated solution during the prescribed test duration, or no toxic effects can be measured due
to low water solubility.
c The first value (0.1) pertains to the stable complex of this chemical, and the second value (>1.0) pertains to the hydrolysis
products.
3-B, page 35
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
Table 3-B.4 Environmental Hazard Ranking of Flexographic Ink Chemicals
Chemical
Acrylated epoxy polymer
Aorylated oligoamine polymer
Acrylated polyester polymer #1
Acrylated polyester polymer #2
Acrylic acid-butyl acrylate-methyl
methacrylate-styrene polymer
Acrylic acid polymer, acidic #1
Acrylic acid polymer, acidic #2
Acrylic acid polymer, insoluble
Alcohols, C11-15-secondary, ethoxylated
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Ammonia
Ammonium hydroxide
Barium
2-Benzyl-2-(dimethylamino)-4'-
morpholinobutyrophenone
Butyl acetate
Butyl actylate-methacrylic acid-methyl
methacrylate polymer
Butyl carbitol
C.I. Basic Violet 1, molybdatephosphate
C.I. Basic Violet 1, molybdatetungstatephosphate
C.I. Pigment Blue 15
C.I. Pigment Blue 61
C.I. Pigment Green 7
C.I. Pigment Red 23
C.I. Pigment Red 48, barium salt (1:1)
C.I. Pigment Red 48, calcium salt (1:1)
C.I. Pigment Red 52, calcium salt (1:1)
C.I. Pigment Red 269
C.I. Pigment Violet 23
C.I. Pigment Violet 27
C.I. Pigment White 6
C.I. Pigment White 7
C.I. Pigment Yellow 14
C.I. Pigment Yellow 74
Citric acid
D&C Red No.7
Dicyclohexyl phthalate
CAS number
27306-39-4
68131-40-8
61790-31-6
7664-41-7
1336-21-6
7440-39-3
119313-12-1
123-86-4
25035-69-2
112-34-5
67989-22-4
1325-82-2
147-14-8
1324-76-1
1328-53-6
6471-49-4
7585-41-3
7023-61-2
17852-99-2
67990-05-0
6358-30-1
12237-62-6
13463-67-7
1314-98-3
5468-75-7
6358-31-2
77-92-9
5281-04-9
84-61-7
Lowest chronic
value (rng/L)
b
1
1
0.2
0.002
0.06
1
7.7
0.2
1.5
40
0.005
0.005
<1
2
2
3
0.005
1
2
0.03
Hazard rank"
L
L
L
L
L
M
M
L
M
H
H
M
L
M
M
L
L
H
H
L
M
L
L
M
M
M
L
L
H
L
L
L.
L
M
M
H
3-B, page 36
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
Table 3-B.4 Environmental Hazard Ranking of Flexographic Ink Chemicals (continued)
Chemical
Dioctyl sulfosuccinate, sodium salt
Diphenyl (2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl)
phosphine oxide
Dipropylene glycol diacrylate
Dipropylene glycol methyl ether
Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light
Distillates (petroleum), solvent-refined
ight paraffinic
Erucamide
Ethanol
Ethanolamine
Ethoxylated tetramethyldecyndiol
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl carbitol
Ethyl 4-dimethylaminobenzoate
2-EthyIhexyl diphenyl phosphate
Fatty acid, dimer-based polyamide
Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimers, polymers with
ethylenediamine, hexamethylenediamine, and
propionic acid
Glycerol propoxylate triacrylate
n-Heptane
1 ,6-Hexanediol diacrylate
1-Hydroxycyclohexyl phenyl ketone
Hydroxylamine derivative
2-Hydroxy-2-methylpropiophenone
Hydroxypropyl acrylate
Isobutanol
sopropanol
Isopropoxyethoxytitaniumbis(acetylacetonate)
2-lsopropylthioxanthone
4-lsopropylthioxanthone
Kaolin
Methylenedisalicylic acid
2-Methyl-4'(methylthio)-2-
morpholinopropiophenone
Mineral oil
Nitrocellulose
Paraffin wax
CAS number
577-11-7
75980-60-8
57472-68-1
34590-94-8
64742-47-8
64741-89-5
112-84-5
64-17-5
141-43-5
9014-85-1
141-78-6
111-90-0
10287-53-3
1241-94-7
67989-30-4
52408-84-1
142-82-5
13048-33-4
947-19-3
7473-98-5
25584-83-2
78-83-1
67-63-0
6858-02-7
5495-84-1
83846-86-0
1332-58-7
27496-82-8
71868-10-5
8012-95-1
9004-70-0
8002-74-2
Lowest chronic
value (mg/L)
0.5
0.35
0.25
95
0.05
60
0.85
>10
3.7
150
1.3
0.03
<0.13
0.08
0.07
2.6
0.4
18
1.7
25
48
4.6
0.004
0.03
50
3
3.6
0.002
>10
Hazard rank"
M
M
M
L
H
L
L
L
M
L
M
L
M
H
L
L •
H
H
H
M
M
' L
M
L
L
M
H
H
L
M
M
H
L
L
3-B, page 37
-------
APPENDIX 3-B
HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL HAZARD RESULTS
Table 3-B.4 Environmental Hazard Ranking of Flexographic Ink Chemicals (continued)
Chemical
3hosphine oxide, bis(2,6-dimethoxybenzoyl)
2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)-
3olyethylene
Polyethylene glycol
Polyol derivative A
Dolytetrafluoroethylene
3ropanol
3ropyl acetate
3ropylene glycol methyl ether
3ropylene glycol propyl ether
Resin acids, hydrogenated, methyl esters
Resin, acrylic
Rosin, fumarated, polymer with diethylene glycol
and pentaerythritol
Rosin, fumarated, polymer with pentaerythritol, 2-
sropenoic acid, ethenylbenzene, and (1-
methylethylenyl)benzene
Rosin, polymerized
Silanamine, 1 ,1 ,1 -trimethyI-N-(trimethylsilyl)-,
lydrolysis products with silica
Silica
Silicone oil
Siloxanes and silicones, di-Me, 3-hydroxypropyl
Me, ethers with polyethylene glycol acetate
Solvent naphtha (petroleum), light aliphatic
Styrene
Styrene acrylic acid polymer #1
Styrene acrylic acid polymer #2
Styrene acrylic acid resin
Tetramethyldecyndiol
Thioxanthone derivative
Titanium diisopropoxide bis (2,4-pentanedionate)
Titanium isopropoxide
Trimethylolpropane ethoxylate triacrylate
Trimethylolpropane propoxylate triacrylate
Trimethylolpropane triacrylate
Urea
CAS number
145052-34-2
9002-88-4
25322-68-3
9002-84-0
71-23-8
109-60-4
107-98-2
1569-01-3
8050-15-5
29003-01-4
68152-50-1
65997-05-9
68909-20-6
7631-86-9
63148-62-9
70914-12-4
64742-89-8
100-42-5
25005-34-1
126-86-3
17927-72-9
546-68-9
28961-43-5
53879-54-2
15625-89-5
57-13-6
Lowest chronic
value (mg/L)
0.6
b
>10
>100
b
36
2.4
160
>44
0.001
1
b
b
b
>10
b
>10
>10
0.23
0.06
1
1
1
3
0.05
5
50
>0.06
<_0.21
0.21
>100
Hazard rank8
M
L
L
L
L
L
M
L
L
H
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
H
M
M
M
M
H
M
L
H
M
M
L
a Ranking based on the lowest estimated chronic value; H = high, M = medium, L = low.
b No effects are expected because the chemical is a polymer or a high-molecular weight compound. The high
molecular weight (greater than 600 or 1000) prevents passage through biological membranes.
3-B, page 38
-------
Appendix 3-C (Risk Chapter)
Supplementary Environmental Air Release Information
Mass Balance Calculations
The mass balance calculations for determining environmental releases from the ink formulations were
conducted as follows for each formulation:
• Determine which components will volatilize (i.e., have vapor pressure greater than or equal to 0.001
mmHg at 25°C).
• Components that do not volatilize will remain on the substrate and are not expected to result in releases
to the environment.
• Multiply volatile component masses by 99.9% to represent the amount of the compounds that volatilize.
• Multiply the mass of the component that volatilizes by 30% to determine the mass of the component that
is released as fugitive emissions.
• Multiply mass of the component that volatilizes by 70% to determine the mass of the component that is
captured by the exhaust system.
• For solvent-based formulations, multiply the mass of the component captured by the exhaust system by
5% to determine the mass of the component that is released as stack emissions (the catalytic oxidizer has
a 95% destruction efficiency). For UV-cured and water-based formulations, the mass of the component
that is released as stack emissions is equal to the mass of the component captured by the exhaust system
(there are no controls on the UV-cured or water-based systems).
• Convert the release amounts from pounds per 7.5 hours to grams per second.
Sample Calculation of Environmental Releases
Following the methodology outlined above, the fugitive and stack releases for each component of the ink
formulations were calculated. Applying the above methodology to the example data presented in Table 3.8
resulted in the data presented in Table D.I below.
• The non-volatile components of the mixture are pigment, nitrocellulose, and resin; their vapor pressures
are less than 0.001 mmHg at 25°C.
• From Table 3.8, the total mass of ink mixture consumed per 7.5 hour run is 95.815 pounds.
• The mass of ethanol consumed per 7.5 hour run is the total mass of ink mixture consumed (95.815
pounds) times the weight percent of ethanol in the ink mixture (19.8%) or 18.971 pounds. Of this
amount, 99.9%, or 18.952 pounds, volatilizes per 7.5 hour run. The total mass of the five volatile
components consumed per 7.5 hour run is 77.131 pounds. Applying the same methodology, the total
mass of ink mixture that volatilizes per 7.5 hour run (99.9% of the amount consumed) is 77.054 pounds.
95.815 Ibs. ink mixture consumed (19.8%) = 18.971 Ibs. ethanol consumed
18.971 Ibs. ethanol consumed (99.9%) = 18.952 Ibs. ethanol volatilized
3-C, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-C SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL AIR RELEASE INFORMATION
Table 3-C Example Data for a Flexographic Printing Solvent-Based Formulation*
Chemical Component
Ethanol
Pigment
Propyl acetate
Propanol
Nitrocellulose
Resin
Glycol ether
Extender compound
Weight Vapor Pressure
Percent (mmHg at 25°C)
19.8%
14.6%
10.0%
43.3%
2.7%
2.2%
1.3%
6.1%
59.03
<10"6
33.7
21
^Q-6
2x1 0'4
10.2
0.001
Fugitive Air Release
(grams/sec)
0.096
0
0.048
0.21
0
0
0.0063
0.029
Stack Air Release
(grams/sec)
0.011
0
0.0056
0.024
0
0
0.00073
0.0034
"The solvent-based formulation presented above is a fictional formulation.
In this example:
• The mass of ethanol released as fugitive emissions (30% of the total amount released) per 7.5 hour run
is 5.686 pounds, which converts to 0.0957 grams of ethanol emitted per second. Similarly, the total mass
of the five volatile components released as fugitive emissions per 7.5 hour run is 23.116 pounds, which
converts to 0.389 grams of volatiles emitted per second.
18.952 Ibs. ethanol volatilized (30%) = 5.686 Ibs. fugitive ethanol emissions
5.686 lbs./7.5hrs. (1000g/kg)(lkg/2.21bs.)(lhr/3600sec)=0.0957 g/sec
• The mass of ethanol captured by the exhaust system per 7.5 hour run is the amount of ethanol that
volatilizes (18.952 pounds) times the capture efficiency (70%), or 13.266 pounds. The corresponding
total mass of the five volatile components captured by the exhaust system per 7.5 hour run is 77.054
pounds times the capture efficiency of 70%, or 53.938 pounds.
18.952 Ibs. ethanol volatilized (70%) = 13.266 Ibs. ethanol captured
• The mass of ethanol destroyed by the air control system is the amount of ethanol captured by the exhaust
system (13.266 pounds) times the destruction efficiency (95%), or 12.603 pounds. The total mass of the
five volatile components destroyed by the air control system is 53.938 pounds times the destruction
efficiency of 95%, or 51.241 pounds.
13.266 Ibs. ethanol captured (95%) = 12.603 Ibs. ethanol destroyed
• The mass of ethanol released as stack emissions per 7.5 hour run from the exhaust system is 5% of the
mass of ethanol captured (13.266 pounds), or 0.663 pounds, which converts to 0.011 grams of ethanol
emitted per second. The total mass of ink mixture that is released as stack emissions per 7.5 hour run
is 2.697 pounds, or 0.045 grams of ink mixture emitted per second.
13.266 Ibs. ethanol captured (5%) = 0.663 Ibs. ethanol stack emissions
3-C, page 2
-------
Appendix 3-D (Risk Chapter)
Environmental Air Release Data
3-D, page 1
-------
I
1U
0)
<:
ui
Ul
cc
cc
Ul
o
cc
z
Ul
X
C
a
fc
CM
I
a.
Q
A
-------
1
Ul
Ul
DC
OC
Ul
I
Ul
a
I
a
O
S
!c
Hi
to
< "o "S.
.2
"5 £
£
o
=
m
c 5 S
3 __ ^ CO
I 111
g o
< o £
x
Q
Z
Ul
Q.
a.
g.s
— (0
O
CO
CO
CM
CO
CM
CO
s
8
OJ
CM
O5
CM
CO
CO
£5
CO
CB^E
I!
8
CO
CM
CO
CO
§
.0
at
E *
I!
o
o>
00
co
§
§i
o
i;
1-1
CM
CO
o
o
o
05
I
li
Q. Q>
?t
CM
'•a TO
I!
CO
0}
O)
Q
CO
-------
UI
1
ui
en
oc
I
ui
9
OC
9
CT
X
c
IJ
a
**
0
Q.
D"
m
-------
I
Q
111
111
Ul
oc
cc
111
s
o
oc
Ul
x
E
u
c
in
(D
S5
Q.
Q"
CO
-------
1
P
£
CO
o
!
O
5
••- AJ to
w u CD
3 CB to
O S CO
C CO 0>
< "5 "£
< -g
: t5 co
i § S
t w Co
c So
S — = 2
g °o>g
ilii
CQ
*
x
a
a.
o
o
d
c to
&•§
S o
IE
CM
Additive:
diacrylate
CM
8
CO
o
O5
CO
o
CO
CO
§
O5
O
O
in
I
CO CO
CO
1
in
m
s
CO
O
d
CM
fc
S
CM
£•1
to
O)
CO
Q.
Q
-------
Appendix 3-E (Risk Chapter)
Supplemental Occupational Exposure Assessment Methodology
* . •' .-' 4!t • i.'St
Scenario I
The mass balance calculations.for Scenario I were conducted as follows for each chemical with a vapor
pressure less than 35 mmHg at 25°C (using the open surface model and the Fehrenbacher and Hummel vapor
generation rate)1:
• All concentrations were converted from weight percent to mole percent.
• The diffusivity of each chemical in the formulation was calculated using the following equation:
D^ = (4.09 x 10"5TL9 (l/29+l/M)°-5M'°33) / Pt
where:
D^ = Diffusivity, cm2/sec
T = Temperature, K
M = Molecular weight, g/g-mole
Pt = Total pressure, atm
• The vapor generation rate of each chemical in the formulation was calculated using the following
equation (Fehrenbacher and Hummel vapor generation rate):
= (0.02MXj P;*
(RT)
where:
G; = Vapor generation rate of substance i, g/m2-sec
M = Molecular weight, g/g-mole
Xj = Mole fraction of substance i in solution, dimensionless
P;* = Vapor pressure of pure substance i, mmHg at 25°C
D^ = Diffusivity, cnrYsec
vz = Air velocity above can, m/sec
Pi = The constant pi, 3.14159
z = Pool length in direction of air flow, m
R = Gas constant, 0.0624 mmHg-mVmol-K
T = Temperature, K
3-E, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-E SUPPLEMENTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
• Using the assumptions presented in Section 3.5, the potential inhalation dose rate of each chemical in
the formulation was estimated using the following equation:
I = 0.21GiAt
where:
I = Total amount of substance inhaled, mg/day
GI = Vapor generation rate of substance i, g/m2-sec
A = Surface area of liquid/air interface, m2
t = Duration of exposure, sec/day
The mass balance calculations for Scenario I were conducted for each chemical with a vapor pressure greater
than or equal to 35 mmHg at 25°C (using the open surface model and the Engel and Reilly vapor generation
rate)2:
• All concentrations were converted from weight percent to mole percent.
• The "generalized" Schmidt number was calculated using the following equation:
Sc = (2.94T°-9+0.0329T°-1)M0-33 / (1/28.9+1/M)0-5
where:
Sc = Schmidt number, dimensionless
T = Temperature, K
M = Molecular weight, g/g-mole
• The vapor generation rate of each chemical in the formulation was calculated using the following
equation (Engel and Reilly vapor generation rate):
j' = (2.1 x lO-'MXiPj'Av,0-78) / (zO
where:
M
X;
p.*
A
vz =
z =
Sc =
T =
= Vapor generation rate of substance i, g/sec
(Note: the units of the Fehrenbacher and Hummel vapor generation rate, GJ, are g/m2-sec,
the units of the Engel and Reilly vapor generation rate, Gj% are g/sec)
= Molecular weight, g/g-mole
= Mole fraction of substance i in solution, dimensionless
= Vapor pressure of pure substance i, mmHg at 25°C
= Surface area of liquid/air interface, cm2
Air velocity above can, ft/mm
Pool length hi direction of air flow, cm
Schmidt number, dimensionless
Temperature, K
Using the assumptions presented hi Section 3.5, the potential inhalation dose rate of each chemical in
the formulation was estimated using the following equation:
3-E, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-E SUPPLEMENTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
I = 0.21Gi't
where:
I = Total amount of substance inhaled, mg/day
GJ' = Vapor generation rate of substance i, g/sec
t = Duration of exposure, sec/day
Scenario K
The mass balance calculations for Scenario II were conducted for each formulation (printing room mass
balance model):
• The concentration of each chemical in the printing room was calculated using the following equation:
Cv = (l.TxltfTGA) / (MQk)
where:
Cv = Airborne concentration, ppm
T = Ambient temperature, K
G; = Vapor generation rate of substance i, g/m2-sec
A = Surface area of liquid/air interface, m2
M = Molecular weight, g/g-mole
Q = Ventilation rate, ftVmin
k = Mixing factor, dimensionless
It was assumed that GA equals the fugitive emission rate.
• The volume-based concentrations calculated above were converted to mass-based concentrations using
the equation:
where:
Cm
Cv
M
V
Airborne concentration, mg/m3
Airborne concentration, ppm
Molecular weight, g/g-mole
Molar volume of ideal gas at 25°C and 760 mmHg, L/mole
3-E, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-E SUPPLEMENTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
• Calculate the potential inhalation dose rate of each chemical in the formulation using the following
equation:
I = bCmt
where:
I = Total amount of substance inhaled, mg/day
b = Worker inhalation rate, nrVhour
Cm = Airborne concentration, mg/m3
t = Duration of exposure, hour/day
Assumptions — Occupational Exposure Assessment Methodology
Additional assumptions associated with the Fehrenbacher and Hummel vapor generation rate are listed
below:
• The surface temperature of the liquid and the evaporation rate are constant.
• The heat of evaporation is provided by the surroundings.
• Diffusion at the edge of the pool and in the direction of the air stream is negligible.
• The air velocity is constant and flowing hi only one direction.
• There is no mixing in the area above the pool of liquid.
• There is no local exhaust present.
• There are no physical barriers present at the edges of the pool.
• There are no effects from heat transfer.
• The incoming air flowing over the pool of liquid is free of the contaminant of concern.
Sample Calculation of Occupational Exposures
Following the method outlined above, occupational exposures for each chemical in the ink formulations were
calculated. Applying this methodology to the example data presented in Table [3.10] results in the data
presented in Table 3-E, below.
Table 3-E Example Data for a Flexographic Printing Solvent-Based Formulation'
Chemical
component
Ethanol
Pigment
Propyl acetate
Propanol
Nitrocellulose
Resin
Glycol ether
Extender
Weight
percent
19.8%
14.6%
10.0%
43.3%
2.7%
2.2%
1.3%
6.1%
*The solvent-based formulation presented
Vapor pressure Scenario 1
(mmHg at 25°C) (mg/day, typical)
59.03
<10'6
33.7
21
<10'6
2x1 0'4
10.2
0.001
above is a fictional formulation.
6.2
0
2.8
8.4
0
0
0.11
4.3x1 0'5
Scenario II
(mg/day, typical)
530
0
270
1,200
0
0
35
160
3-E, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 3-E SUPPLEMENTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Stepping through the calculations for ethanol:
Scenario I:
Ethanol has a vapor pressure greater than 35 mmHg at 25°C, so the open surface model and the Engel and
Reilly vapor generation rate were used to estimate the worker exposure in Scenario I.
• Sc = (2.94T0-9+0.0329T°-1)M0-33 / (1/28.9+1/M)0-5
where:
T = 298 K (Table [3.11])
M = 50 g/g-mole (Table [3.10])
Therefore:
Sc = (2.94(298)-°-9+0.0329(298)°-1)500-33 / (1/28.9+1/50)0-5
Sc = 1.18
• G£' = (2.1 x 10-7MPAvz°-78) / (zanSca67T)
where:
M = 50 g/g-mole (Table [3.10])
Xi = 0.305 (Table [3.10])
Pi* = 59.03 mmHg at 25°C (Table [3.10])
A = [Pi (z/2)2] = [3.14159(30.48/2)2] cm2 = 729.659 cm2
(calculated from the diameter given below (z=0.3048m))
vz= 100 ft/rnin (Table [3.11])
z = 1ft = 30.48 cm (Table [3.11])
Sc = 1.18 (calculated above)
T = 298 K (Table [3.11])
Therefore:
G^ =[2.1 x 10-7(50)(0.305)(59.03)(729.659)(100°-78)] / [(30.48an)(1.18°-67)(298)]
G^ = 0.0103 g/sec
• I = 0.21Gi't
where:
G;' = 0.0103 g/sec (calculated above)
t = 48 min/day = 2,880 sec/day (Table [3.11])
Therefore:
I = 0.21(0.0103)(2,880)
I = 6.23mg/day
3-E, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 3-E SUPPLEMENTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Scenario II:
• Q, = (UxltfTGjA) / (MQk)
where:
T = 298 K (Table [3. 11])
Gj A= fugitive emission rate = 0.096 g/sec (Table [D.I])
M = 50 g/g-mole (Table [3.10])
Q = 7,000 fiVmin (Table [3.11])
k = 0.5 (Table [3.11])
Therefore:
Cv=[1.7xlOs(298)(0.096)] / [(50)(7,000)(0.5)]
where:
Cy = 27.7 ppm (calculated above)
M = 50 g/g-mole (Table [3.10])
V = 24.45 L/mole (molar volume of an ideal gas)
Therefore:
Cm = [(27.7)(50)]/(24.45)
Cm = 56.7mg/m3
• I = bCmt
where:
b = 1.25 m3/hour (medium work inhalation rate [3])
Cm= 56.7 mg/m3 (calculated above)
t = 7.5 hours/day (Table [4.1])
Therefore:
I = (1.25)(56.7)(7.5)
I = 531mg/day
Ethanol has a vapor pressure greater than 35 mmHg at 25°C; therefore, the Engel and Reilly vapor generation
rate was used for Scenario I. Propyl alcohol has a vapor pressure less than 35 mmHg at 25°C; therefore, the
Fehrenbacher and Hummel vapor generation rate was used for Scenario I. These calculations are shown
below:
3-E, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 3-E SUPPLEMENTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Scenario I:
• D^ = (4-09 x 10-5T!-9 (l/29+l/M)°-5M^-33) / Pt
where:
T= 298 K (Table [3.11])
M= 60 g/g-mole (Table [3.10])
Pt= 1 atm (standard pressure)
Therefore:
D^ =(4.09 x 10-5(298)1-9 (l/29+l/60)°-560-°-33) / 1
Dah = 0.120 cm2/sec
• G; = {0.02MXi PJ* [DabV/tfPi^)]0-5} / RT
where:
M= 60 g/g-mole (Table [3.10])
Xp 0.555 (Table [3.10])
Pi*= 21 mmHg at 25°C (Table [3.10])
0^= 0.120 cm2/sec (calculated above)
vz 100 ft/min = 0.508 m/sec (Table [3.11])
Pi= The constant Pi, 3.14159
z= 1 ft = 0.3048 m (Table [3.11])
R= 0.0624 mmHg-m3/mol-K (gas constant)
T= 298 K (Table [3.11])
Therefore:
Gi={0.02(60)(0.555)(21)[(0.120)(0.508)/((3.14159)(0.3048))]as}/[(0.0624)(298)]
Gi = 0.190g/m2-sec
• I = 0.21GiAt
where:
Gj = 0.190 g/m2-sec (calculated above)
A = 0.0730 m2 (calculated from the diameter given above (z=0.3048m))
t = 48 min/day = 2,880 sec/day (Table [3.11])
Therefore:
1 = 0.21 (0.190)(0.0730)(2,880)
I = 8.39mg/day
3-E, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 3-E SUPPLEMENTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
REFERENCES
1. Fehrenbacher, M.C. and A.A. Hummel. "Evaluation of the Mass Balance Model Used by EPA for
Estimating Inhalation Exposure to New Chemical Substances," American Industrial Hygiene
Association, submitted for publication.
2. Engel, A.J. and B. Reilly. Evaporation of Pure Liquids from Open Surfaces. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Pre-Publication Draft.
3. Chemical Engineering Branch (CEB). Manual for the Preparation of Engineering Assessments, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, February, 1991.
3-E, page 8
-------
Appendix 3-F (Risk Chapter)
Occupational Exposure Data
3-F, page 1
-------
I
Q
UI
cc
r>
in
o
a.
x
UI
u
8
u.
eo
u
a.
a.
-------
I
Ul
cc
CO
o
a.
x
ui
O
Q.
O
o
o
§
§
o
o
O
CC
o>
£
a.
o
CO
n
at
I
s>
i
Q.
I
i
O
I
ta
0)
£
o
^
« ^ s?
I If
stl
§ 2-S
= 3 (8
tB «0 ^
ill
lit
*li
s
Sil1
"•§ S5
111
|||
s|t
l§?
!!i
u.
CT
X
S
Ul
Q.
Q.
r-i
O) (Q
« as
to c
o *
— (0
ss
M
•*= ^
O «SL
CO
CO
to
CM
CM
CO
§
CO
CO
co
CO
S
CO
3
CO
S
CO
CO
s
(O
CM
CO
CO
to
tf
CM
CM
CO
CO
CO
CM
co
co
8 S
ft
Is
CM
CM
CO
o>
CO
CD
CO
CO
cS
O>
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
•
CO
CO
co
o>
CO
CO
co
CD
O>
S.
iiT
co
I
I
Si
D)
a:
-------
I
Ul
oc
o
a.
ffi
O
o
o
•o
I
1
o
o
i
o
oc
CO
CO
a>
_o
J5
§
a>
CC
§
0.
"
a.
o
o
O
LU
CO
H-
CO
X
c
u
a.
a.
•*
CD
-------
1
111
oc
I
a.
<
o
O
O
O
•o
o
i
g
(0
i
Q.
.0
n
o>
o
(O
3
CO
0)
oc
1
(0
o
Q.
n
§
o
o
O
CO
J)
JQ
CB
X
Q
Z
UI
a.
Q.
in
o
I
-------
I
UI
re
o
ou
X
111
s!
O
Q
O
X.
c
i
(
CO
CD
-------
Q
111
CC
1
UJ
<
O
O
u
O
§
u
o
a>
!
0.
n
§
to
(0
0>
DC
0)
a.
x
ui
re
.o
I
o
u
O
re
X
c
u
Q.
a.
_
-------
I
Q
Ul
DC
o
CL
§
o
o
o
TJ
§
1
S
g
cc
co
u>
n>
CO
o
CO
<*••
m
o>
DC
1
(0
o
Q.
X
Ul
"as
o
o
O
LL
CT
w
X
c
u
Cu
Q.
CD
I
-------
Ul
GC
i
o
I
o
1
£
o
o
oc
0)
2
Q.
0)
o
CO
I
o>
o
Q.
(0
o
I
i
o
u.
eo
X
c
u
a.
a.
I
a.
-------
UI
EC
o
Q.
2
z
1
Q
O
•a
1
1
<*,
I
CO
(0
as
0)
OD
O
OC
1
CO
g.
X
111
"3
as
Q.
o
u
O
tL.
CO
0)
5
to
X
c
u
a.
-------
Q
Ul
DC
CO
O
a.
I
Q.
§
O
•o
-------
1
111
cc
CO
o
&
UI
Q
1
g
o
o
u.
A
X
5
UI
I
CM
CD
I
-------
1
Ul
oc
OT
o
Q.
O
I
o
o
o
•o
o>
o
o
o
DC
CO
i
(
0>
o
0)
0>
cc
0)
Ul
"5
o
o
IL
O
«
u.
CT
X
Q
z
Ul
Q.
o
I
co
-------
I
UJ
tc
g
I
§
I
o
1
I
0.
m
CD
u
01
tn
m
u.
CO
X
c
u
a.
a.
CO
%
•o
0)
«
R
g
CO
§
CD
1
£
§
(U
CM
O>
CO
OJ
(O
CO
S>
o
-------
DC
1
X
111
g
O
o
o
o
u.
CO
X
C
u
Q.
in
a>
D)
a
-------
•p
I
o
.0,
o
o
OC
o
o
CO
OT
o
cc
£
I
Ul
"ra
I
Q.
O
O
CM
m
CO
Ul
Q.
a.
CO
CD
CO
-------
O
Q.
X
ui
g
O
Q.
§
O
f
8
O
s
3.
s>
Q.
to
o>
O
tn
-------
I
Q
Ul
EC
CO
O
a.
x
Ul
Q
I
g
P
O
§>
T3
CD
1
O
O
OC
§
CO
§
o
(O
e/T
o
DC
i
CO
a
X
Ul
"5
o
O
O
O
CM
Ul
CO
CD
5
S
m
H
o £•>;
l§f
Co rv o>
1 = &
i SS
s-
s i? cd
^ g 5J
A ft CO
s
•ill,
•
— 2 •>;
E i:i>
u.
eo
X
c
o
SP
"co
o
"co
_o
cu
O
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CO
o
Sg
If
CO
CM
CO
CO
CM
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CM
10
CO
CM
O
s
CO
a.
-------
UJ
oc
W
o
X
III
a.
§
O
L
m
X
a
t
CR
-------
1
Ul
cc
§
a.
x
Ul
I
2
i
o
o
o
o
E
§
cc
_
2
ra
O
1
0)
o
CO
co
o>
CC
1
m
o
I
s
o
I
u
o
O
CM
UL
CT
I
U.
u
a.
a
g 2-5
Pi
111
§0 -r;
v- >*
»= .3 Co
aj <2 5*
11
CO
co
co
CM
CO
co
CM
CO
s>
CM
o
o>
CO
a.
LL
CO
-------
CO
o
a.
x
Ul
O
o
o
TJ
o>
i
o
o
cc
Q. «j
(0
0)
u
CO
*t
s
(0
0)
cc
I
co
o
Q.
X
Ul
To
a
a.
o
o
O
CM
to
X
Q
Z
Ul
a.
CM
0>
I
CO
-------
I
Ul
cc
I
0.
2
I
o
o
o
CD
3)
ra
CD
1
O
I
o
CC
I
a
a.
&
(0
§
o
CO
S
o
OC
0
CO
i.
CO
3.
ts
a.
3
o
8
CM
III
sa
JQ
O
D
E
it
M \& *^^
jl|
111
HI
11
eo
X
c
u
a.
£•
o
e>
CO
»
0)
O
CM
CM
CM
CD
a>
co
co
CO
o
S "
I?
-------
Appendix 3-G (Risk Chapter)
Supplementary General Population
Exposure Information
This appendix presents information used to model and calculate the general population exposure values
presented in Chapter 3.
Generic Facility Assumptions
The following assumed values were used in the exposure modeling:
Table 3-G Generic Facility Assumptions for General Population Exposure Assessment
Ink type
Solvent-based3
Water-based a
UV-cured b
Facility
building
height (m)
6.1
6.1
6.1
Facility
stack
height (m)
9.1
9.1
9.4
Facility stack
diameter (m)
0.61
0.71
0.61
Stack exit
temperature
(K)
436
344
317
Stack exit
velocity (m/s)
17.78
17.78
7.87
a Reference 1
b Reference 2
Fugitive emissions from long web runs, e.g., vapors that leak from the building windows and roof vents, were
assumed to take place over an area of 100 square meters for the generic facility.
The weather conditions of the facility were assumed to be the same as those at San Bernardino, California.
These conditions were assumed because they would result in the highest average air concentration (from the
facility's air releases) of any of the approximately 500 weather stations in the United States.
Since flexographic printing facilities were expected to be located hi urban areas, the urban mode of the model
was selected. Finally, the following distances from the facility were selected for concentration calculations:
100 meters (m), 200 m, 300 m, 400 m, 500 m, and 1000 m.
Model Input Parameters
The Industrial Source Complex Long Term (ISCLT) Model (3) calculated more than one chemical at a time
and was run in "Urban 3" mode. Also entered into the model was the decay rate of the chemical, entered as
its half-life in seconds.
The Industrial Source Complex Long Term (ISCLT) Model used in this report required entries for the
folio whig inputs:
Fugitive releases: substance average annual release rate (g/s/m2)
Stack releases: substance average annual release rate (g/s)
stack height (m)
stack diameter (m)
3-G, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-G SUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL POPULATION EXPOSURE INFORMATION
stack exit temperature (°K)
stack exit velocity (m/s)
Both releases: zip code or latitude/longitude for weather station
distances from facility to calculate concentration (m)
rural or urban mode
building height (m)
substance half-life in air (s)
Sample Calculation of General Population Exposures
As discussed in Chapter 3, the toxicity concerns for the chemicals of interest dictated that either the Average
Daily Dose (ADD) or the Average Daily Concentration (ADC) were the appropriate exposure values. The
available toxicity factors indicated which of the two values should be used for subsequent risk calculations.
The calculations were as follows:
ADD (mg/kg-day) = [(Q(ER)(ED)(1 mg/1000ug)]/[(BW)(AT)]
ADC (mg/m3) = [(C)(ED)(mg/1000ug)]/(AT)
where:
C =
IR =
ED =
BW
AT
chemical concentration in air from air dispersion modeling (ug/m3)
inhalation rate; 13.2 (m3/d) average of adult male and female recommended rates (4)
exposure duration (days): for residential exposures, this is a multiple of (time per day) by (years
per residence), minus assumed vacation time of 14 days/yr. One source (5) has 30 years as the 95th
percentile value for the latter, and time per day values of 16.4 hours/day average indoors and
recommended 2 hours outdoors.
average body weight; 70 kg, standard average of male and female adult weights
averaging time; 30 years (time per residence, from above).
ADD for residence = (C)(13.2m3/d)(30yr*[(365d/yr*18.4hrs/24hrs/d) - 14d
vacation)](mg/1000ug)/[70kg*(30yrs*365d/yr)]
ADC for residence = (C)(13.2m3/d)(30yr*[(365d/yr*18.4hrs/24hrs/d) - 14d
vacation)](mg/1000ug)/(30yrs*365d/yr)
Regional Exposure
For determining regional exposure, the model used was BOXMOD, also implemented in the Graphical
Exposure Modeling System (6). BOXMOD used a parameter called "Time Constant" to account for
chemical degradation. The time constant is the inverse of the rate of decay used for the ISCLT model.
BOXMOD modeling was discontinued after partial modeling placed individual exposures uniformly at one-
half to one-third of the local exposure estimates.
3-G, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-G
SUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL POPULATION EXPOSURE INFORMATION
REFERENCES
1. Bemi, Dan. 1998. Wolverine Corporation. Personal, communication with Conrad Flessner, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). January 13,1998.
2. Timmerman, Mark. 1998. Trinity Packaging Corporation. Personal communication with Conrad
Flessner, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). March 3, 1998.
3. EPA. 1992. Industrial Source Complex (ISC2) User's Guide. Research Triangle Park, NC:
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-450/4-92008a. March 1992.
4. EPA. 1997. Exposure Factors Handbook Volume I: General Factors. Washington, DC: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/P-95/002Fa. August, 1997.
5. EPA. 1997. Exposure Factors Handbook Volume HI: Activity Factors. Washington, DC: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/P-95/002Fc. August, 1997.
6. GSC. 1991. Graphical Exposure Modeling System, GEMS, User's Guide. GSC-TR-32-91-001.
3-G, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-G
SUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL POPULATION EXPOSURE INFORMATION
This page is intentionally blank.
3-G, page 4
-------
Appendix 3-H (Risk Chapter)
General Population Exposure Data
3-H, page 1
-------
a
UJ
o.
-------
Q
Ul
oc
CO
o
Q.
O
s
Q.
2
oc
111
Ul
o
c
i
ffi
•§
to
o
1
CO
T3
u.
(0
(0
1
(0
a
i.
o
Q.
1
0)
0)
O
X
CO
12
CB
O
o>
m
8
u
SI
x
CO
X
Q
z
111
Q.
a.
ll
•
o
£
S
-------
I
Ul
i
CO
o
CL
o
§
£
O
Q.
<
|
a
•o
Q)
c
(0
I
o
§
O
O
•2
CO
T3
i
I
(0
a.
-------
a
in
oc
(0
O
a.
a
0)
a>
re
a.
O
O.
OC
UJ
HI
o
(0
1
0
u
o
o
X.
u
2
(O
a
i
a>
(0
±:
a>
DC
£
i
•a.
x
UJ
o
I
a.
o
a.
2
a>
a>
a
m
i
o
o
ffl
tr-
I1!
m
X
a
UJ
a.
o.
si
a>
£
O
VJ
1
fe
CO
I
•.
•*t
8
3 3
CO
8
£
CO
8
!
3
s.
eo
8
c\i
(O
£
CO
CM
*
X.
•a
,
Is
I
o
CL
1
ra
I
I
5
o
1
Is
o co
-------
I
Ul
DC
=3
1
Ul
o
o
en
2
£
X
CO
X
c
u
cu
5
"5
Q
1
CO
CO
CO
a
o
o>
CO
I
o
g-
ui
§
2
Q)
§
O
X
CO
_£
XI
CO
I
m
o £
-
O £
"
E
of1
Q ra
0=^
•
O
§
9
S
a>
to
I
to
U)
§
CD
3
S
§
9
CD
O
C
ui
8
S
§
S
CO
cvi
s-
Q.
I
CO
S
CO
IO
tt
f
1_
c
c
S S S fl
_
i
I
-------
Q
111
OC
3
CO
o
Q.
X
UJ
O
Q.
O
Q.
or
UJ
UJ
a
m
X
5
UJ
a.
a.
a>
i
o
Q
§
8
j>.
"5
Q
§>
2
I
ra
S"
a
o>
Q
>•
"53
Q
I
I
i
«
Q>
OC
I
(0
o
Q.
X
ui
s
a.
2
a>
a
CN
X
CO
S
I
IB
O £
S"
< E
O E
"
§
§
O E
S"5>
< E
=5-
§
O E
o •=
"!
o,
JC
o
S
S
9 §
§
8
CO
?«
00
<»
8
8
8
§
8
CO
°
-------
1
111
EC
«
g
i
2
g
tr
ui
ai
•o
Oi
a S:
O
Q
*«*
§
u
i
(0
Q
I
TJ
I
S"
Q
o>
CO
O
Q
CD
I
I
co
o
DC
o
g"
m
I
13
Q.
O
Q.
x
co
c
.
.2
00
03
I
CO
-------
Q
111
DC
Q.
X
UJ
Q.
O
CL
CC
111
UJ
OS
O E
< E
ST
O E
§
o
"
Q 6)
9*
0 E
eo
X
C
u
CL
CL
ri
o>
as
•o S
i £
i- -D
O «
O
11
0..2
i_ O
II
3
*!
C 03
P
5 o
£>«
a-|
•ss ®
S-g
s^
15
.CO
03 (D
II
O)
I
CL
I
CO
.0
o>
CO
CO O
« g-
CO
-------
APPENDIX 3-H
GENERAL POPULATION EXPOSURE DATA
This page is intentionally blank.
3-H, page 10
-------
Appendix 3-1 (Risk Chapter)
Systemic Toxicity
Risk Concern Results
Formulation
SAT
hazard
level"
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure ab
Concern
level c
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a*
Concern
level
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure **
Concern
level
Solvent-based Ink #S1 -Site 9B
BLUE
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Pigments - organometallic
3olyol derivatives
Resins
Resins
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
Aromatic esters
Organotitanium compounds
Alkyl acetates
Resins
Water
Organic acids or salts
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
M
L
LM
476
1695
59.2
180
0.34 (HQ)
1.5 xlO4
6.22
potential
low or
negligible
clear
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
lower
negligible
clear
GREEN
Alcohols
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Polyol derivatives
Pigments - organic
Pigments - organometallic
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Propylene glycol ethers
Resins
Resins
LM
LM
LM
L
L
708
2.52
3974
39.7
104
2.16 (HQ)
potential
clear
low or
negligible
clear
potential
potential
87.5
0.1
1060
4.67
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
4.3x1 0s
313
5.1x1 08 .
2.3x10*
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
103
1.5
28.7
0.1
3.7 (HQ)
low or
negligible
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
potential
no exposure
no exposure
5.0x1 0s
7301
1.4x1 0s
4371
7.5x1 O^HQ)
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
1
Formulation
Inorganics
II
Water
WHITE
IJPigments - inorganic
[Alcohols
(Hydrocarbons - low
((molecular weight
IJResins
IJResins
11 —
Alkyl acetates
uAlkyl acetates
UAtcohols
([Hydrocarbons - high
Hmolecular weight
iJPolyol derivatives
[Organic acids or salts
II
Water
H , — —
[Alcohols
SAT
level d
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure *b
5.3x104
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
M
3.23 (HQ)
684
1.00(HQ)
174
7167
98.3
Concern
level °
low or
negligible
potential
potential
potential
potential
low or
negligible
clear
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure "•"
15.9
46
0.024
9.38
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure6
potential
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
General population ||
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
7.8x10"
2.2x1 0s
117
4.5x10*
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
CYAN
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
[Resins
[Alkyl acetates
[Propylene glycol ethers
Ipolyol derivatives
[Alcohols
[Resins
Water
Alkyl acetates
MAGENTA
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
(JResins
JAIkyl acetates
L
LM
L
LM
LM
L
LM
1.74
830
16,6
3.23 (HQ)
174
1.97
1322
clear
lower
negligible
clear
potential
potential
1.29
14.9
4-4 (HQ)
0.19
clear
low or
negligible
1.41
231
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
potential
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
6226
7.3x10"
g.ixio-^HQ)
904
6790
1.1x10"
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible ||
low or II
negligible I]
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
'
low or |
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-1, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Propylene glycol ethers
Polyol derivatives
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Inorganics
Pigments - organometallic
Resins
Water
Trade Secret
Propylene glycol ethers
SAT
level"
LM
LM
L
, Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
2.47 (HQ)
69.4
139
124 (HQ)
28
'Concern
level c
potential
clear
potential
clear
potential
Inhalation
•Margin of
Exposure a'b
3.5 (HQ)
60
0.14
24.3
Concern
level
potential
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure *"
7.2x1 0'5 (HQ)
2.9x1 0s
697
1.2x1 0s
Concern
level
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
lower
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 5
BLUE
Alcohols
Resins
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - organometallic
Polyol derivatives
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus
compounds
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
GREEN
Alcohols
Resins
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alkyl acetates
Pigments - inorganic
L
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
385
233
21.7
60.6
1824
1469
456
310
potential
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
potential
29.6
41.4
6.82
0.028
potential
no exposure
clear
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
L
LM
452
177
0.67 (HQ)
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
30.9
27.9
potential
no exposure
clear
no exposure
1.4X105
2.0X105
3.3x1 04
134
1.5x1 0s
1.4x1 0s
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
3-1, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Alcohols
Alcohols
'igments - organic
'olyol derivatives
'igments - organometallic
'igments - organometallic
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Slloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus
compounds
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
SAT
hazard
level d
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure "*
21.1
60.2
6764
3190
1308
• 406
276
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Resins
Alcohols
tydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alkyl acetates
L
L
LM
LM
3.37 (HQ)
602
144
110
1306
405
Concern
level °
clear
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
• negligible
potential
potential
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure "*
5.89
0.024
potential
potential
low or
negligible
potential
low or
negligible
potential
15.3
8.43
0.017
Concern
level
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
2.8x10"
118
no exposure
no exposure
potential
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
7.4x10*
4.1x10*
80
Concern
level
lower
negligible
lower
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
CYAN
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
L
LM
L
421
265
1003
59.7
23.9
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
clear
22.1
32.2
0.019
5.14
potential
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
1.1x1 0s
1.6x1 0s
90
2.5x10*
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or
negligible
no exposure
3-I, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Organophosphorus
compounds
SAT
level"
LM
LM
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
1347
418
284
Concern
level c
low or
negligible
potential
potential
: inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
MAGENTA
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Organophosphorus
compounds
L
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
482
118
33.6
20.7
1285
398
271
potential
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
potential
potential
32.7
18.5
0.014
5.73
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure **
1.6x1 0s
8.9x10"
65
2.8x10*
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 7
BLUE
Alcohols
Resins
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - organometallic
Polyol derivatives
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
L
LM
LM
LM
L
978
325
2.79
84.4
2542
potential
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
69.8
53.6
0.81
0.036
potential
no exposure
clear
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3.4x1 05
2.6x1 0s
3938
174
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus
com pounds
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
SAT
hazard
level d
LM
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a>b
2048
635
432
Concern
level c
low or
negligible
potential
potential
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure **
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure ab
GREEN
Alcohols
Resins
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alky) acetates
Pigments - inorganic
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments -organic
Poiyol derivatives
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - organometallic
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Organic adds or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus
compounds
rlydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
L
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
976
292
0.41 (HQ)
2.66
99.4
1.1 xlO4
5288
2172
673
458
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
potential
71.1
49.4
0.79
0.043
potential
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3.5x1 05
2.4x1 0s
3828
209
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Resins
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular v/eight
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
L
L
2.53 (HQ)
1252
191
145
1739
539
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
lower
negligible
potential
36.7
13
0.025
no exposure
no exposure
potential
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
1.8x1 0s
6.3x10*
123
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
ydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
SAT
level11
LM
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a>b
4.02
Concern
level c
clear
4 Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure **
0.48
Concern
level
clear
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure 3|b
2327
Concern
level
low or
negligible
CYAN
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Organophosphorus
compounds
MAGENTA
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
L
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
956
395
1496
89.2
2.83
2009
623
424
potential
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
potential
potential
82.3
78.6
0.046
0.99
L
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
995
189
54
2.77
2061
639
potential
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
potential
67.4
29.6
0.022
0.77
potential
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
4.0X105
3.8x1 05
221
4825
3.3x1 05
1.4x1 0s
105
3716
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Organophosphorus
compounds
SAT
hazard
level"
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure •*
435
Concern
level °
potential
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
Concern
level
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure **
Concern
level
no exposure
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 10
BLUE
Alcohols
Resins
lydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
'igments - organometallic
'olyoi derivatives
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus
compounds
^rocarbons - low
molecular weight
L
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
1023
339
2.38
88.2
2655
2143
664
452
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
potential
86.3
66.2
0.82
0.044
potential
no exposure
clear
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
4.2x1 0s
3.2x1 0s
3966
215
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Alcohols
Resins
rlydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alkyl acetates
Pigments - inorganic
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organic
Polyd derivatives
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - organometallic
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
L
LM
LM
LM
L
939
282
0.42 (HQ)
2.48
95.7
1.1 x104
5093
2087
647
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
69.6
48.4
0.75
0.042
potential
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3.4x1 0s
2.3x1 05
3634
205
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus
compounds
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
SAT
hazard
level"
LM
LM
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Resins
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alcohols
Amides, tallow, hydrogenated
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
L
L
LM
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a>b
440
Concern
level °
potential
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure "*
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
2.38 (HQ)
1331
203
155
1848
573
3.17
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
low or
negligible
potential
clear
41.6
14.7
0.029
0.41
no exposure
no exposure
potential
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure *b
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
2.0x10=
7.1x10*
140
1964
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
CYAN
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Organophosphorus
compounds
Propylene glycol ethers
Propylene glycol ethers
L
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
LM
1070
442
1676
99.4
4.39
2247
697
474
17 (HO.)
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
potential
potential
clear
85.4
81.8
0.047
1.43
53 (HQ)
potential
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
4.2x1 0s
3.9x1 05
228
6933
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
lower
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
3-I, page 9
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
SAT
hazard
level"
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure *"
Concern
level °
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
MAGENTA
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Resins
'igments - organometallic
Alcohols
Alky) acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Organophosphorus
compounds
Propylene glycol ethers
Propylene glycol ethers
L
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
LM
1140
216
61.8
2.14
2363
733
498
3.36 (HQ)
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
potential
potential
potential
81.6
35.9
0.026
0.63
12 (HQ)
Concern
level
potential
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
4.0x1 05
1.7x1 0s
127
3028
2.4x1 0"(HQ)
Concern
level
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
. lower
negligible
Water-based Ink #W1 - Site 4
BLUE
Acrylic acid polymers
"igments - organometallic
Alcohols
Water
Pigments - organic
Ethyiene glycol ethers
Resins
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
LM
L
L
LM
1293
9.14
15.1
339
2.24
488
low or
negligible
clear
clear
potential
clear
potential
4.94
1.25
???
43 (HQ)
0.38
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
no exposure
potential
no exposure
clear
clear
1.8x10*
4586
1.2X106
0.01 2 (HQ)
1395
GREEN
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organic
LM
LM
329
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Acrylic acid polymers
Alcohols
Water
Resins
Ethylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylic acid polymers
Water
Resins
Alcohols
Organic acids or salts
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene giycol ethers
CYAN
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Water
Ethylene glycol ethers
Organic acids or salts
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
SAT
hazard
level"
LM
L
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
LM
LM
LM
MAGENTA
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Water
Ethylene glycol ethers
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Organic acids or salts
LM
LM
LM
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
13.4
21.3
526
2.21
724
3.33 (HQ)
24.3
1.54
627
10.7
37.3
4426
4.41
41.7
10.6
Concern
level °
clear
clear
potential
clear
potential
potential
clear
clear
lower
negligible
clear
clear
low or
negligible
clear
.;,.-..,.. ^Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
8.64
2.1
409
37 (HQ)
0.68
3.03
272 (HQ)
1.78
40.5
11 (HQ)
clear
clear
1.73
Concern
level
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
potential
clear
clear
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
3.1x10*
7688
2.3x1 0s
0.010 (HQ)
2463
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
1.1x10*
0.075 (HQ)
6520
1.5X105
0.003 (HQ)
6333
Concern
level
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 11
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
SAT
hazard
level"
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
4.13
Concern
level c
clear
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
12 (HQ)
Concern
level
clear
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
0.003 (HQ)
Concern
level
low or
negligible
Water-based Ink #W2 - Site 1
BLUE
Water
'igments - organometallic
Resins
lesins
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organic
Pigments - organic
Ethytene glycol ethers
norganics
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
•tydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
Alcohols
L
LM
L
L
LM
M
951
279
632
1.6X104
0.27 (HQ)
1.1 x104
0.13 (HQ)
131
19.2
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
lower
negligible'
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
clear
5.6 (HQ)
1.1 x104
0.3 (HQ)
1.2x10*
0.55
96.7
11.6
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
clear
clear
0.002 (HQ)
6.3x1 07
7.0x1 0-5 (HQ)
6.8x1 07
2020
5.4x1 05
4.2x10*
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
GREEN
Water
Resins
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Resins
Ethylene glycol ethers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
LM
LM
L
LM
M
157
8775
247
0.47 (HQ)
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
low or
negligible
8821
10 (HQ)
0.3 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
clear
low or
negligible
4.9x1 07
0.003 (HQ)
9.1x1 0-^HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
WHITE
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
LM
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 12
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Pigments - inorganic
Alcohols
SAT
level d
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a>b
8.29
51
2.01 (HQ)
6983
2.93 (HQ)
383
Concern
level c
clear
clear
potential
lower
negligible
potential
potential
«, , , Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure *b
1.37
308 (HQ)
0.008
1152
52.4
Concern
level
clear
clear
clear
low or
negligible
no exposure
clear
CYAN
Water
Pigments - organometallic
Resins
Ethylene glycol ethers
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ettiers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
MAGENTA
Water
Resins
Acrylic acid polymers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - low
molecular weight
Pigments - organic
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
Water-based Ink #W3 -
L
LM
387
1.58(HQ)
11
115
LM
LM
M
L
-Site 2
140
7795
86.8
0.54 (HQ)
1.64(HQ)
10
low or
negligible
potential
clear
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
low or
negligible
potential
clear
0.21
37.3
6.4 (HQ)
2.8 x104
8.2 (HQ)
0.1 (HQ)
0.21
37
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
potential
low or
negligible
no exposure
clear
clear
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
7599
0.084 (HQ)
29
6.3x1 06
1.9x1 0s
781
2.1x1 0s
0.002 (HQ)
1.6x1 0s
0.002 (HQ)
2.8x1 0'5 (HQ)
775
2.1x1 0s
Concern
level
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
BLUE
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
LM
L
LM
LM
2.01
725
clear
potential
70 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
0.01 9 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 13
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Olefin polymers
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
'dyfunctional aziridine
Other components
SAT
hazard
level d
L
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
69.1
1111
1.4x10*
Concern
level c
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
25.6
5.2 (HQ)
7.76
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
clear
potential
clear
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
9.3x1 04
0.001 (HQ)
2.8x10*
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
GREEN
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
'igments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Pigments - organic
Alcohols
Olefin polymers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
LM
LM
L
L
LM
646
1.49
279
18.5
862
129
2039
potential
clear
potential
clear
potential
clear
low or
negligible
93 (HQ)
0.15
8.41
48.5
2.8 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
clear
potential
0.026 (HQ)
574
4.7x1 04
1.8x1 0s
7.6X10"4 (HQ)
1.6X104
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Olefin polymers
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
2.55 (HQ)
2.27
571
0.73 (HQ)
85.7
2526
1.7x10*
potential
clear
potential
low or
negligible
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
154 (HQ)
0.024
12.8
5.7 (HQ)
3.77
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
potential
clear
0.042 (HQ)
86
4.6x10"
0.002 (HQ)
1.4X104
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
3-I, page 14
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
SAT
hazard
level"
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
Concern
level °
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure "•"
Concern
level
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure "*
Concern
level
CYAN
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Olefin polymers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Propylene glycol ethers
Alcohols
Organic acids or salts
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
1554
1.12
409
1.9x104
374
low or
negligible
clear
potential
low or
negligible
potential
54 (HO)
1483
6.6 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
0.015 (HQ)
5.4x1 06
0.002 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
MAGENTA
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Olefin polymers
Siloxanes
'ropylene glycol ethers
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
Alcohols
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
32.7
1.62
510
2.7 X104
578
2340
1.1 x104
clear
clear
potential
low or
negligible
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
58 (HQ)
1317
6.6 (HQ)
1310
8.73
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or
negligible
clear
0.01 6 (HQ)
4.8x1 06
0.002 (HQ)
4.9x1 0s
3.2x10*
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 3
BLUE
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
LM
L
LM
LM
L
1.49
532
clear
potential
49 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
0.014 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-i, page 15
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
SAT
hazard
level d
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure "*
21.1
72.5
Concern
level c
clear
clear
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
15
42 (HQ)
Concern
level
no exposure
clear
clear
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure aib
5.4x1 04
0.011 (HQ)
GREEN
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Pigments - organic
Alcohols
Olefin polymers
Ethyiene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Organic acids or salts
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethyiene glycol ethers
Olefin polymers
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Organic adds or salts
Extender
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
450
1.05
202
12.9
601
4684
potential
clear
potential
clear
potential
low or
negligible
2.70 (HQ)
2.16
541
0.77 (HQ)
30.5
288
CYAN
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Olefin polymers
LM
LM
L
1474
1.06
potential
clear
potential
low or
negligible
clear
potential
low or
negligible
clear
92 (HQ)
0.16
8.41
0.8 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
no exposure
• clear
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
217 (HQ)
0.017
3.38
67 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
clear
clear
26 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
0.025 (HQ)
574
4.7x10*
2.3x1 0"(HQ)
0.060 (HQ)
61
1.2x10"
0.018 (HQ)
0.007 (HQ)
Concern
level
no exposure
low or
negligible
lower
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
lower
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
3-I, page 16
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Propylene glycol ethers
Alcohols
Organic acids or salts
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
SAT
hazard
level"
LM
LM
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure ^b
388
1.8x104
158
| Concern
* level c
potential
low or
negligible
potential
Inhalation
'Margin of
ExposUre a'b
3087
7.2 (HQ)
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a*
1.1x107
0.002 (HQ)
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
MAGENTA
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Olefin polymers
Siloxanes
Propylene glycol ethers
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
LM
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
24
1.2
376
2.0x10"
556
115
clear
clear
potential
lower
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
17 (HQ)
4526
405
7.2 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
potential
0.005 (HQ)
1.7X107
1.4X106
0.002 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
Water-based Ink #W4 - Site 9A
BLUE
Water
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Propylene glycol ethers
Propylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
LM
770
88.2
2.54 (HO)
23
2242
3.0 x104
39.4
low or
negligible
clear
potential
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
0.18
1.8(HQ)
39.9
27.6
5.2x10*
55.9
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
potential
potential
clear
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
clear
662
5.0x1 0'5(HQ)
1.5x1 0s
1.0x10=
2.9x1 08
2.0x10=
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
3-I, page 17
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC HISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
SAT
hazard
level"
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure **
290
Concern
level c
potential
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
5.2 (HQ)
Concern
level
potential
GREEN
Water
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylic acid polymers
Alcohols
Pigments - organic
Resins
'igments - organometallic
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
norganics
Alcohols
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Alcohols
LM
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
2.55 (HQ)
20.1
6881
3154
180
7741
8.26
2294
381
LM
LM
LM
LM
4.52 (HQ)
151
54.9
6.92
1923
potential
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
low or
negligible
clear
low or
negligible
potential
potential
low or
negligible1
potential
clear
clear
low or
negligible
0(HQ)
29.8
0.39
1.4X104
4.3 (HQ)
29.4
3.8 (HQ)
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
low or
negligible
potential
clear
no exposure
no exposure
potential
0.040
9.88
42 (HQ)
2.99
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
clear
clear
no exposure
no exposure
CYAN
Water
Pigments - organometallic
954
low or
negligible
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
0.001 (HQ)
0.0 (HQ)
1.1x1 0s
1410
7.7x1 07
0.001 (HQ)
1.1x10s
0.001 (HQ)
143
3.6x10*
0.01 2 (HQ)
1.1x1 04
Concern
level
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
lower
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 18
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Acrylic acid polymers
Resins
Alcohols
Propylene glycol ethers
Propylene glycol ethers
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Solids
Ethylene glycol ethers
3etroleum distillate
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
MAGENTA
Water
'igments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Alcohols
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - high
molecular weight
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
SAT
hazard
level"
LM
L
LM
LM
LM
LM
LM
LM
LM
LM
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
63.1
3.36 (HQ)
15.9
1.1 x104
1639
3.8 X104
38.6
282
Concern
level c
clear
potential
potential
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
potential
11.2
103
25.8
4412
980
622
clear
potential
clear
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
potential
: Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure **
0.11
2.8 (HQ)
3345
17.5
5.6x10"
47.4
6.1 (HQ)
0.27
47.3
9762
15.5
1.9(HQ)
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
clear
potential
no exposure
low or
negligible
clear
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
clear
potential
no exposure
no exposure
clear
clear
low or
negligible
clear
no exposure
no exposure
potential
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure "•"
413
7.6x1 0-^HQ)
1.2X107
6.4x10*
3.1x1 0s
1.7x105
0.0 (HQ)
991
1.7x1 0s
5.4x1 07
5.7x1 04
5.2x1 0-^HQ)
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
UV-cured Ink #U1 - Site 1 1
BLUE
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
LM
L
LM
2521
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-1, page 19
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Otefin polymers
SAT
hazsrd
level d
LM
M
LM
L
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
Concern
level °
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure "•"
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
Acrylated polyols
WHITE
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic esters
Organophosphorus
compounds
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
Pigments - inorganic
Pigments - inorganic
CYAN
Acrylated polymers
3igments - organometallic
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
MAGENTA
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
LM
LM
LM
M
LM
L
M
314
2564
potential
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
LM
LM
LM
LM
M
LM
L
LM
103
3.25 (HQ)
low or
negligible
potential
LM
LM
LM
M
LM
L
LM
671
2521
11.2
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 20
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
SAT
hazard
level"
LM
LM
M
LM
L
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
2521
' Concern
level °
low or
negligible
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
UV-cured Ink #U2 - Site 6
BLUE
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Polyol derivatives
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Olefin polymers
Alcohols
Aromatic ketones
LM
M
L
LM
L
L
LM
L
67.5
1029
1.1
0.94
59.9
44.9
1.1 x104
clear
low or
negligible
clear
clear
potential
potential
low or
negligible
1.38
74.8
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyois
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Polyol derivatives
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organic
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Olefin polymers
LM
L
M
LM
LM
L
0.35
0.69
62.3
473
59.9
44.9
1.1X104
clear
clear
clear
potential
potential
potential
low or
negligible
1.66
142
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
4299
3.5x1 05
5153
6.7x1 0s
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 21
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Alcohols
Aromatic ketones
SAT
level"
LM
L
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a>b
Concern
level c
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure "•"
Concern
level
no exposure
no exposure
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polymers
Organophosphorus
compounds
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Alcohols
Olefin polymers
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
CYAN
Acrylated polymers
'igments - organometallic
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polyols
Polyd derivatives
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Olefin polymers
Alcohols
Aromatic ketones
Acrylated polyols
M
LM
L
LM
L
LM
M
L
LM
L
LM
L
3.72 (HQ)
0.22
0.56
7.14
89.5
1.1 x104
64.9
701
70.4
1.44
60.6
45.5
1.1 x104
6.82
MAGENTA
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polymers ,
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Polyol derivatives
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic ketones
LM
L
LM
M
L
11.1
52
1.36
0.49
potential
clear
clear
clear
potential
low or
negligible
potential
low or
negligible
clear
clear
potential
potential
low or
negligible
clear
0.18
21.6
4.35
182
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
578
1.0X105
1.4x10*
8.6x1 05
clear
clear
clear
clear
2.65
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
8232
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-I, page 22
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC S5SK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Olefin polymers
Alcohols
Aromatic ketones
SAT
hazard
level d
LM
L
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure a'b
59.9
44.9
1.1 x104
Concern
level0
" potential
potential
low or
negligible
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure *b
iis
Concern
level
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
5.5x1 05
Concern
level
lower
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
U V-cured Ink #U3 - Site 8
BLUE
Acrylated polymers
'igments - organic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
LM
L
M
LM
LM
M
LM
L
2521
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
LM
M
LM
LM
M
LM
L
308
2521
potential
low or
negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Organophosphorus
compounds
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
Aromatic ketones
LM
LM
LM
LM
M
LM
L
LM
3.63 (HO)
97.1
potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-!, page 23
-------
APPENDIX 3-1
SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
SAT
hazard
level"
Occupational
Dermal
Margin of
Exposure **
Concern
level c
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a>b
Concern
level
General population
Inhalation
Margin of
Exposure a'b
Concern
level
CYAN
Acrylated polymers
3igments - organometallic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Slloxanes
Olefin polymers
MAGENTA
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
LM
M
LM
LM
M
LM
L
LM
L
M
LM
LM
M
LM
L
671
2521
low or
negligible
low or
negligible
2521
low or
negligible
.
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
8 A Margin-of-Exposure (MOE) or a Hazard Quotient (HQ) gives an estimate of the "margin of safety" between an estimated
exposure level and the level at which adverse effects may occur. Hazard Quotient values below unity imply that adverse effects are
very unlikely to occur. The more the Hazard Quotient exceeds unity, the. greater the level of concern. High MOE values, such as
values greater than 100 for a NOAEL-based MOE or 1000 for a LOAEL-based MOE, imply a low level of concern. As the MOE
decreases, the level of concern increases.
b The absence of HQ or MOE values in this table indicates that insufficient hazard data were available to calculate a HQ or MOE for
that chemical.
cThe Concern Level is derived from a MOE or an HQ. The criteria in Table 3.15 on page 3-48 were used.
d SAT Levels of Concern are generated by the OPPT Structure Activity Team to predict toxicity based on analog data and/or
structure-activity considerations. L = low, LM = low to moderate, and M = moderate.
0 No level of concern could be assigned to this chemical due to no exposure.
1A chronic/subchronic MOE was not available for this chemical due to a lack of hazard data for this route of exposure; however, the
risk associated with dermal exposure to this chemical is expected to be very low.
3-1, page 24
-------
Appendix 3-J (Risk Cfiapter)
Developmental Toxicity
Risk Concern Results
Formulation
Occupational
Dermal
MOEa>b Concern Level"
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
General Population
Inhalation
MOE Concern Level
Solvent-based Ink #S1 - Site 9B
BLUE
Alcohols
Alley! acetates
Pigments - organometallic
Polyol derivatives
Resins
Resins
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
Aromatic esters
Organotitanium compounds
Alkyl acetates
Resins
Water
Organic acids or salts
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
10.2
0.0057
218
1.4x105
268
GREEN
Alcohols
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Polyol derivatives
Pigments - organic
Pigments - organometallic
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Propylene glycol ethers
Resins
Resins
norganics
Water
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Resins
Resins
Alkyl acetates
Alkyl acetates
15.1
108
1345.033
0.0099
1046
5.3x1 04
potential
clear
SAT
low or negligible
SAT
SAT
low or negligible
low or negligible
467
843
244
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
clear
low or negligible
low or negligible
14.6
potential
550
78.2
973
1177
756
84.7
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure*3
potential
no exposure
no exposure
2.3x1 06
4.1 x106
1.2x1 0s
2.7x1 06
3.8x1 0s
4.7x1 06
5.7x1 06
3.7x1 06
4.1 x106
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
5olyol derivatives
Organotitanium compounds
Organic acids or salts
Water
Alcohols
Occupational
Dermal
MOE"*
0.01665
6.7x10*
4231
Concern Level0
clear
SAT9
low or negligible
low or negligible
Inhalation
MOE Concern Level
314
489
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
CYAN
Alcohols
'igments - organometallic
Resins
AlkyI acetates
Propylene glycol ethers
Polyol derivatives
Alcohols
tesins
Water
AlkyI acetates
MAGENTA
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
Resins
AlkyI acetates
Propylene glycol ethers
Polyol derivatives
Alky) acetates
Alcohols
Inorganics
Pigments - organometallic
Resins
Water
Trade secret
Propylene glycol ethers
74.9
561
699
0.01659
potential'
potential
low or negligible
clear
67.2
504
627
2437
potential
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
84.8
28.3
913
2347.977
0.01327
20.8
703
potential
potential
SAT
low or negligible
low or negligible
clear
clear
low or negligible
73.5
1231
791
2031
1878
607
potential
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
1.5X106
2.4x1 06
3.2x1 05
2.5x1 06
3.1 x106
1.2X107
3.5x1 0s
3.0x1 06
3.9x1 06
9.9x1 06
9.1x1 0s
3.0x1 06
Concern Level
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 5
BLUE
Alcohols
Resins
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
AlkyI acetates
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - organometallic
8.22
935
0.0058
clear
low or negligible
clear
SAT
158
355
361
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
7.7x1 0s
1.7x106
1.7X106
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Polyol derivatives
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus compounds
tydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Occupational
Dermal
MOEa>b
1.4x104
456
328
Concern Level6
low or negligible
potential
potential
x Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Alcohols
Resins
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Alkyl acetates
Pigments - inorganic
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organic
3olyol derivatives
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - inorganic
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus compounds
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
9.66
907
0.0057
1.2X104
406
292
clear
low or negligible
clear
low or negligible
potential
potential
165
307
319
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
8.0x1 05
1.5x1 0s
1.5X106
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Resins
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Hydrocarbons - tow molecular
weight
Alkyl acetates
12.9
0.01049
1.2X104
405
potential
clear
low or negligible
potential
81.4
215
no exposure
no exposure
Potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
4.0x1 0s
1.0x106
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
CYAN
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
9.0
clear
118
low or negligible
5.8x1 0s
low or negligible
3-J, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
) Occupational
Formulation
Resins
'igments - organometallic
Alcohols
AlkyI acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
SHoxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Organophosphorus compounds
Dermal
MOE"'b
0.0057
1028
1.3X104
418
301
Concern Level"
clear
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
potential
Inhalation
MOE
243
268
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
1.2x108
1.3x106
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
MAGENTA
Alcohols
^rocarbons - low molecular
weight
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
AlkyI acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
SHoxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyd derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Organophosphorus compounds
10.3
0.003
891
1.2x10*
398
287
potential
SAT
clear
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
potential
174
177
299
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
8.5x1 0s
8.5x1 0s
1.4x106
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 7
BLUE
Alcohols
Resins
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
AlkyI acetates
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - organometallic
Polyol derivatives
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
20.9
120
0.0081
potential
low or negligible
clear
SAT
372
42.4
467
low or negligible
no exposure
potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
1.8x106
2.1x1 0s
2.3x1 06
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus compounds
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Occupational
Dermal
MOE8*
2.0x1 04
635
457
Concern Level0
low or negligible
potential
potential
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Alcohols
Resins
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Alkyl acetates
Pigments - inorganic
Alcohols
Alcohols
Pigments - organic
Polyol derivatives
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - inorganic
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus compounds
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
20.9
114
0.0095
2.0x10*
673
485
potential
low or negligible
clear
low or negligible
potential
potential
379
41.2
562
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
1.8X106
2.0x1 05
2.7x1 06
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Resins
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
26.8
0.01389
1.6x104
539
173
potential
clear
low or negligible
potential
low or negligible
196
332
25.1
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
9.6x1 0s
1.6x106
1.2x1 0s
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
CYAN
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Resins
20.4
potential
439
low or negligible
no exposure
2.1x1 06
low or negligible
no exposure
3-J, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Alcohols
AlkyI acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
SHoxanes
[Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
1 E —
IPoIyol derivatives
(Hydrocarbons - low molecular
(weight
Occupational
Dermal
MOE"-"
0.0085
122
1.9x104
623
449
Concern Level0
clear
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
potential
Inhalation
MOE
593
51.8
Concern Level
no exposure
potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
MAGENTA
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Resins
[pigments - organometallic
| Alcohols __
|| AlkyI acetates
|| Alcohols
llAmides or nitrogenous
[(Organic acids or salts
||siloxanes
llAmides or nitrogenous
||polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
21.3
0.0052
119
1.9x104
639
460
potential
SAT
clear
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
potential
359
283
40.0
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
Inhalation ||
MOE
2.9x1 06
2.5x1 05
1.8X106
1.4x1 0s
1.9x1 0s
Concern Level ||
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
.,._
II
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
Solvent-based Ink #S2- Site 10 . ||
|j BLUE
JAlcohols
HResins
{Hydrocarbons - low molecular
[[weight
llAlkyl acetates
[[Alcohols
I) Alcohols
||p|gments - organometallic
[[Polyol derivatives
'(Amides or nitrogenous
Ijcompounds
||Organic acids or salts
llSiloxanes
21.9
102
0.0084
2.0x1 04
664
potential
low or negligible
clear
SAT
low or negligible
potential
0.458
42.8
577
clear
no exposure
potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
2.2x1 06
2.1x10s
2.8x1 06
-H
low or negligible ||
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure |l
3-J, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus compounds
tydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Occupational
Dermal
MOEa'b
478
Concern Level0
potential
'•";.:,<: Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Alcohols
Resins
tydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Alkyl acetates
'igments - inorganic
Alcohols
Alcohols
3igments - organic
'olyol derivatives
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - inorganic
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organophosphorus compounds
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
20.1
107
0.0091
2.0x104
647
466
potential
low or negligible
clear
low or negligible
potential
potential
371
39.3
551
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
1.8x106
1.9x1 0s
2.7x1 06
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure '
no exposure
' no exposure
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Resins
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
28.4
0.01485
1.7x10*
573
137
potential
clear
low or negligible
potential
low or negligible
222
376
21.2
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
1.1x1 0s
1.8x106
1.0x1 0s
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
CYAN
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
22.9
!
0.0095
potential
clear
455
614
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
2.2x1 06
3.0x1 06
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
3-J, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Organophosphorus compounds
Propylene glycol ethers
Propylene glycol ethers
Occupational
Dermal
MOE"-"
189
2.1 x104
697
502
133
Concern Level0
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
potential
low or negligible
SAT
Inhalation
MOE
74.8
52.7
Concern Level
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
SAT
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
3.6x1 05
2.6x1 05
Concern Level
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
SAT
MAGENTA
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Alkyl acetates
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Organic acids or salts
Siloxanes
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Polyol derivatives
•Jydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Organophosphorus compounds
Propylene glycol ethers
Propylene glycol ethers
24.4
0.0059
92.1
2.2x1 04
733
527
672
potential
SAT
clear
potential
low or negligible
potential
potential
low or negligible
SAT
435
343
32.6
238
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
potential
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
SAT
2.1x1 06
1.7X106
1.6x1 0s
1.2x106
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
SAT
Water-based Ink #W1 - Site 4
BLUE
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Water
Pigments - organic
Ethylene glycol ethers
Resins
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Acrylic acid polymers
393
1005.025
low or negligible
low or negligible
258
165
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
9.4x1 0s
9.2x1 05
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
Occupational
Dermal
MOEa>b Concern Level"
0.04658
clear
; •> Inhalation
MOE Concern Levei
5000
low or negligible
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
1.8x107
Concern Level
low or negligible
GREEN
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Alcohols
Water
Resins
Ethylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
577
1418
0.06912
low or negligible
low or negligible
clear
450
276
8813
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
1.6x106
1.5X106
3.2x1 07
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
WHITE
3igments - inorganic
Acrylic acid polymers
Water
Resins
Alcohols
Organic acids or salts
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
1045.957
37.5
low or negligible
potential
158
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
5.7x1 0s
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
CYAN
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Water
Ethylene glycol ethers
Organic acids or salts
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
712
28.7
1607
low or negligible
potential
low or negligible
235
2114
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
1.3x106
7.7x1 06
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
MAGENTA
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Water
Ethylene glycol ethers
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
i
704
low or negligible
227
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
1.3X106
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 9
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Organic acids or salts
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Occupational
Dermal
MOE"1" | Concern Level6
39.2
potential
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
Water-based Ink #W2 - Site 1
BLUE
Water
Pigments - organometallic
Resins
Resins
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organic
Pigments - organic
Ethylene glycol ethers
norganics
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
Alcohols
745
5576
7.5x1 04
1.6x1 0s
825
low or negligible
low or negligible'
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
832
5.5x1 04
2.9x1 04
606
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
3.0x1 06
20.0x1 08
1.61X108
2.2x1 06
GREEN
Water
Resins
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Resins
Ethylene glycol ethers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
418
3168
low or negligible
low or negligible
647
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
2.4x1 06
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
WHITE
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
9950
4737.977
low or negligible
low or negligible
410
781
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
2.3x1 06
2.9x1 06
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
3-J, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Pigments - inorganic
Alcohols
Occupational
Dermal
MOE8-"
1.6x104
Concern Level0
low or negligible
'-^--m
MOE
2731
halation
Concern Level
no exposure
low or negligible
General Population
Inhalation
MOE Concern L.GVO!
1 0.0x1 06
no exposure
low or negligible
CYAN
Water
Pigments - organometallic
Resins
Ethylene glycol ethers
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
1.3x104
low or negligible
1.1x10*
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
MAGENTA
Water
Resins
Acrylic acid polymers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - low molecular
weight
Pigments - organic
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
374
2804
1.2x104
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
2068
1.1x104
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
7.8x1 07
6.2x1 07
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
7.5x1 06
7.8x1 07
6.2x1 07
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 2
BLUE
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
Polyfunctional aziridine
Other components
725
1304
2976
1.38
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
clear •
1336
1.0x1 0s
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
4.9x1 06
3.7x1 08
no exposure
.no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
3-J, page 11
-------
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
1 Formulation
Occupational
Dermal
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
|| GREEN
JWater
[[Acrylic acid polymers
[[Pigments - inorganic
llAcrylic acid polymers
(Amides or nitrogenous
|pigments - organic
lloiefin polymers
[JEthylene glycol ethers
||siloxanes
[[Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
(Amides or nitrogenous
(1 Alcohols
WHITE
Pigments -inorganic
[Water
[[Acrylic acid polymers
JAmides or nitrogenous
llEthylenB glycol ethers
loiefin polymers
llsiioxanes
Alcohols
[[Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
HAmides or nitrogenous
[(compounds
[Alcohols
11 CYAN
JWater
IJAcrylic acid polymers
llPigments - organometallic
|]Acrylic acid polymers
JAmides or nitrogenous
[[compounds
||oiefin polymers
pthylene glycol ethers
[fsiloxanes
|propylene glycol ethers
[[Alcohols
llOrganic acids or salts
HAmides or nitrogenous
0.02669
2.2x1 0s
862
774
5549
clear
low or negligible
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
1991
2524
2530
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
571
1.3x10*
686
3691
1.66
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
clear
408.998
613
i
potential
low or negligible
2358
667
4.9x1 04
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
Inhalation
MOE
7.5x1 06
1.4x107
9.2x1 06
2.1x1 08
8.6x1 06
2.4x1 06
1.8x108
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure ||
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible ||
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Occupational
Dermal ,; .
MOE*"" | Concern Level6
Inhalation
MOE | Concern Level
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
MAGENTA
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Olefin polymers
Siloxanes
Propylene glycol ethers
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
Alcohols
327
510
843
1.0x1 0s
1.03
low or negligible
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
clear
6.8x1 04
1.1x1 0s
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
2.5x1 0s
4.1X108
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
Water-based Ink #W3- Site 3
BLUE
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
532
957
907
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
782
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
2.8x10°
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
GREEN
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Pigments - organic
Alcohols
Olefin polymers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Organic acids or salts
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
0.01928
1.5x104
601
541
clear
low or negligible
potential
low or negligible
2063
2524
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
7.5x1 06
1.4x1 0s
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 13
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Occupational
Dermal
MOE"1" | Concern Level0
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Olefin polymers
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Organic acids or salts
Extender
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
541
1.2x10*
649
1314
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
1656
176
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
6.1x1 06
6.4x1 0s
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
CYAN
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Olefin polymers
Ethylene glycol ethers
Siloxanes
Propylene glyco! ethers
Alcohols
Organic acids or salts
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
388
583
potential
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
MAGENTA
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Acrylic acid polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Ethylene glycol ethers
Olefin polymers
Siloxanes
Propylene glycol ethers
Organic acids or salts
Alcohols
Ethylene glycol ethers
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
240
376
620
8000
low or negligible
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
809
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
3.0x1 06
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
' I
3-J, page 14
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
^ Occupational ..^
Dermal
MOE"'"
Concern Level6
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
Water-based Ink #W4 - Site 9A
BLUE
Water
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Alcohols
Propylene glycol ethers
Propylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
0.0084
888
581
224
2.2x1 0s
1695
clear
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
2369
1523
997
386
3.9x1 0s
2916
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
8.6x1 06
5.6x1 06
3.7x1 06
2.1x106
2.1 5x1 09
1.1x1 07
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
GREEN
Water
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylic acid polymers
Alcohols
Pigments - organic
Resins
Pigments - organometallic
Pigments - inorganic
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
865
0.0172
5.7x10*
229
low or negligible
clear
low or negligible
potential
1553
5059
1.0x105
412
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
5.7x1 06
1.8X107
5.71 X108
2.3x1 06
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Water
Acrylic acid polymers
Inorganics
Alcohols
0.01442
low or negligible*
clear
515
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
1.9x106
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
3-J, page 15
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Occupational
Dermal
MOE8* | Concern Level15
2363
192
low or negligible
potential
Inhalation
MOE
515
41.9
Concern Level
low or negligible
clear
no exposure
no exposure
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
1.9x106
2.3x1 0s
Concern Level
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
CYAN
Water
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Resins
Alcohols
Propylene glycol ethers
Propylene glycol ethers
Alcohols
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
weight
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Solids
Ethylene glycol ethers
Hydrocarbon - high molecular
weight
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
MAGENTA
Water
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylic acid polymers
Alcohols
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Hydrocarbons - high molecular
wefghl
Siloxanes
Alcohols
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
0.006
672
401
238
164
2.8x1 0s
noexp
1661
112
0.0098
1112
3.3x1 04
98.0
clear
ow or negligible
ow or negligible
ow or negligible
potential
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
clear
low or negligible
low or negligible
clear
1475
1004
1.8X104
244
4.1x1 05
noexp
2472
3554
2465
7.2x1 04
217
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
potential
no exposure
no exposure
5.4x1 06
3.7x1 06
6.5x1 07
1.4X106
2.30x1 09
noexp
9.0x1 06
1.3x107
9.0x1 06
40.0x1 08
1.2x106
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 16
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
1
Formulation
Occupational
Dermal
MOE8-" Concern Level"
Inhalation
MOE Concern Level
General Population
Inhalation
MOE Concern Level
UV-cured lnk#U1 -Site 11
BLUE
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefln polymers
112
SAT
low or negligible
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefln polymers
Acrylated polyols
WHITE
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic esters
Organophosphorus compounds
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
Pigments - inorganic
Pigments - inorganic
114
630
SAT
low or negligible
SAT
potential
187
CYAN
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
112
SAT
SAT
low or negligible
SAT
SAT
793
SAT
low or negligible
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
1.99X107
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
3-J, page 17
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
;
Formulation
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
MAGENTA
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Aromatics ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
Occupational
Dermal
MOEa>b
Concern Level0
112
112.
SAT
low or negligible
low or negligible
SAT
Inhalation
MOE Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
U V-cured Ink #U2 - Site 6
BLUE
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Polyol derivatives
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Olefin polymers
Alcohols
Aromatic ketones
150
623
GREEN
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - inorganic
Polyol derivatives
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organic
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Olefin polymers
Alcohols
Aromatic ketones
231
240
SAT
potential
SAT
low or negligible
188
SAT
low or negligible
potential
SAT
572
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
8.8x1 0s
2.7x1 06
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 18
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Occupational
Dermal.,,, ii7
MOE8-" Concern Level0
^Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
General Population
Inhalation
MOE | Concern Level
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polymers
Organophosphorus compounds
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Alcohols
Olefin polymers
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
145
134
low or negligible
potential
SAT
44.4
no exposure
no exposure
clear
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
2.1x1 0s
CYAN
Acrylated polymers
3igments - organometallic
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polyols
Polyol derivatives
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Olefin polymers
Alcohols
Aromatic ketones
Acrylated polyols
124
4545
MAGENTA
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polyols
Acrylated polyols
Polyol derivatives
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Olefin polymers
Alcohols
Aromatic ketones
111
327
168
SAT
potential
SAT
low or negligible
373
SAT
low or negligible
low or negligible
SAT
potential
326
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
1.8x106
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
potential
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
1.5X106
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
low or negligible
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 19
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Occupational
Dermal
MOE"1" Concern Level0
Inhalation
MOE Concern Level
General Population
Inhalation
MOE Concern Level
UV-cured Ink#U3 - Site 8
BLUE
Acrylated polymers
3igments - organic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Slloxanes
Olefin polymers
SAT
SAT
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
GREEN
Acrylated polymers
Pigments • inorganic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
WHITE
Pigments - inorganic
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Acrylated polymers
Aromatic esters
Organophosphorus compounds
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
Aromatic ketones
SAT
SAT
SAT
SAT
SAT
SAT
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
CYAN
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organometallic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
SAT
SAT
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
3-J, page 20
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
Formulation
Occupational
Dermal
MOE8*
Concern Level0
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
General Population
Inhalation
MOE
Concern Level
MAGENTA f.
Acrylated polymers
Pigments - organic
Acrylated polyols
Aromatic esters
Aromatic ketones
Aromatic ketones
Amides or nitrogenous
compounds
Siloxanes
Olefin polymers
SAT
SAT
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
no exposure
SAT
no exposure
' no exposure
a A Margin of Exposure (MOE) or a Hazard Quotient (HQ) gives an estimate of the "margin of safety" between an estimated
exposure level and the level at which adverse effects may occur. Hazard Quotient values below unity imply that adverse effects are
very unlikely to occur. The more the Hazard Quotient exceeds unity, the greater the level of concern. High MOE values, such as
values greater than 100 for a NOAEL-based MOE or 1000 for a LOAEL-based MOE, imply a low level of concern. As the MOE
decreases, the level of concern increases.
bThe absence of HQ or MOE values in this table indicates that insufficient hazard data were available to calculate a HQ or MOE for
that chemical.
cThe Concern Level is derived from a MOE or an HQ. Concern Levels for developmental toxicity were assessed by criteria
presented in a memorandum from J. Seed to T. O'Bryan, "Criteria for 8(e) CAP Submissions", USEPA, OPPTS, March 25,1994.
No level of concern could be assigned to this chemical due to no exposure.
e The OPPT Structure Activity Team has indicated a concern for developmental toxicity for this chemical. SAT concerns are
provided only for those chemicals with insufficient developmental hazard data available. It should be noted that SAT-based
developmental toxicity concerns were not ranked as were systemic toxicity concerns; the SAT indicated only if a concern for
developmental toxicity existed for a given chemical.
f A developmental MOE was not available for this chemical due to a lack of hazard data for this route of exposure; however, the risk
associated with dermal exposure to this chemical is expected to be very low.
3-J, page 21
-------
APPENDIX 3-J
DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN RESULTS
This page is intentionally blank.
3-J, page 22
-------
Appendix 3-K (Risk Chapter)
Summary of Occupational
Systemic Toxicity Risk Concern — Dermal8
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
Solvent-based Ink #S1 - Site 9B
BLUE (15)d
GREEN (12)
WHITE (13)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (63)
4
2
1
1
1
9/63
(14%)
potential
concern
1
3
4
2
3
13/63
(21%)
clear
concern
2
2
1
2
3
10/63
(16%)
SAT-based evaluation °
low
concern
low-
moderate
concern
moderate
concern
No
exposure
No data
2
2
1
2
2
9/63
(14%)
5
3
5
2
4
19/63
(30%)
1
-
1
-
-
2/63
(3%)
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
1
1/63
(2%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 5
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
3
5
2
3
2
15/70
(21%)
3
3
4
3
3
16/70
(23%)
2
2
-
2
2
8/70
(11%)
2
2
2
2
2
10/70
(14%)
5
5
2
4
5
21/70
(30%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 7
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (71)
3
5
3
3
2
16/71
(23%)
3
3
3
3
3
15/71
(21%)
2
2
1
2
2
9/71
(13%)
2
2
2
2
2
10/71
(14%)
5
5
2
4
5
21/71
(30%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 10
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (16)
MAGENTA (16)
TOTALS (75)
4
5
3
4
3
19/75
(25%)
2
3
3
2
3
13/75
(17%)
2
2
1
3
2
10/75
(13%)
2
2
2
2
2
10/75
(13%)
5
5
2
5
6
23/75
(31%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3-K, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-K
OCCUPATIONAL SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN - DERMAL
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT-based evaluation6
low
concern
low-
moderate
concern
moderate
concern
No
exposure
No data
Water-based Ink #W1 - Site 4
BLUE (10)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (7)
TOTALS (43)
1
-
-
2
-
3/43
(7%)
2
3
1
-
-
6/43
(14%)
3
3
2
3
3
14/43
(33%)
2
1
1
-
-
4/43
(9%)
2
3
3
4
4
16/43
(37%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Water-based Ink #W2 - Site 1
BLUE (16)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (6)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (48)
7
3
1
1
3
15/48
(31%)
2
1
3
2
1
9/48
(19%)
1
-
2
1
2
6/48
(13%)
3
1
-
1
1
6/48
(13%)
2
3
1
1
2
9/48
(19%)
1
1
-
-
1
3/48
(6%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 2
BLUE (13)
GREEN (13)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (13)
TOTALS (62)
2
1
3
2
3
11/62
(18%)
1
3
2
2
2
10/62
(16%)
2
3
2
1
2
10/62
(16%)
1
1
-
-
-
2/62
(3%)
5
4
5
6
6
26/62
(42%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
1
-
-
-
3/62
(5%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 3
BLUE (10)
GREEN (11)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (12)
TOTALS (56)
0
1
1
2
2
6/56
(11%)
1
3
3
2
2
11/56
(20%)
3
2
2
1
2
10/56
(18%)
1
-
-
-
-
1/56
(2%)
5
5
5
6
6
27/56
(48%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
1/56
(2%)
Water-based Ink #W4 - Site 9A
BLUE (14)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (17)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (66)
3
4
2
4
2
15/66
(23%)
3
3
2
3
2
13/66
(20%)
2 ,
2
2
2 .
2
10/66
(15%)
1
1
-
1
-
3/66
(5%)
5
5
4
5
4
23/66
(35%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
2/66
(3%)
3-K, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-K
OCCUPATIONAL SYSTEMIC P'SK CONCERN - DERMAL
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT-based evaluation °
low
concern
low-
moderate
concern
UV-cured Ink #U1 - Site 11
BLUE (9)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (48)
1
1
1
2
1
6/48
(13%)
-
1
1
-
-
2/48
(4%)
-
-
-
-
1
1/48
(2%)
1
-
-
-
-
1/48
(2%)
6
6
8
6
7
32/48
(67%)
UV-cured Ink #U2 - Site 6
BLUE (15)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
2
1
1
2
1
7/70
(10%)
2
3
3
2
2
12/70
(17%)
3
3
3
3
4
16/70
(23%)
4
3
2
3
3
15/70
(21%)
3
4
2
3
3
15/70
(21%)
moderate
concern
1
2
1
1
1
6/48
(13%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/70
(7%)
No
exposure
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- .
No data
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
UV-cured Ink #U3 - Site 8
BLUE (9)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (46)
1
1
-
2
1
5/46
(11%)
-
1
2
-
-
3/46
(7%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
1
2/46
(4%)
5
5
7
5
5
27/46
(59%)
2
2
1
2
2
9/46
(20%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I i H5 HUH Ik/dO II1 Cdwl 1 \/Wlvii ill I wt i\svm 11 iw *iviii •••***• v« wi iwi nivwtw •-•»• ... • •——.--— • - •—-- — — — —• — — —
b Criteria for level of concern are presented in Table 3.15 (page 3-48).
CSAT concern levels are generated by the OPPT Structure Activity Team to predict toxicity based on analog data
and/or structure-activity considerations. SAT concern levels are provided for chemicals with insufficient systemic
hazard data available. Criteria for SAT concern levels are presented on page 3-49.
d Number of chemicals in the color.
3-K, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-K
OCCUPATIONAL SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN - DERMAL
This page is intentionally blank.
3-K, page 4
-------
Appendix 3-L (Risk Chapter)
Summary of Occupational
Systemic Toxicity Risk Concern — Inhalation3
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
Solvent-based Ink #S1 - Site 9B
BLUE (15)d
GREEN (12)
WHITE (13)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (63)
1
1
0
-
1
3/63
(5%)
1
1
1
1
2
6/63
(10%)
clear
concern
SAT-based evaluation °
low
concern
low-
moderate
concern
moderate
concern
No
exposure
No data
2
3
3
3
3
14/63
(22%)
-
1
-
-
-
1/63
(2%)
1
-
2
1
1
5/63
(8%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
10
6
7
4
6
33/63
(52%)
-
-
-
-
1
1/63
(2%)
Solvent-based Ink iS2 - Site 5
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/70
(7%)
3
3
2
3
3
14/70
(20%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
2
2
2
10/70
(14%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/70
(59%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 7
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (71)
-
-
-
.
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/71
(7%)
3
3
3
3
3
15/71
(21%)
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
2
2
2
10/71
(14%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/71
(58%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 10
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (16)
MAGENTA (16)
TOTALS (75)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/75
(7%)
3
3
3
4
4
17/75
(23%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
2
3
3
12/75
(16%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/75
(55%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
3-L, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-L
OCCUPATIONAL SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT-based evaluation c
low
concern
low-
moderate
concern
moderate
concern
No
exposure
No data
Water-based Ink #W1 - Site 4
BLUE (10)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (7)
TOTALS (43)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
2/43
(5%)
4
4
2
3
2
15/43
(35%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
5
5
6
5
26/43
(60%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Water-based Ink #W2 - Site 1
BLUE (16)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (6)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (48)
3
2
1
-
2
8/48
(17%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 2
BLUE (13)
GREEN (13)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (13)
TOTALS (62)
-
-
-
1
2
3/62
(5%)
1
-
-
1
1
3/48
(6%)
3
1
4
2
2
12/48
(25%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/62
(8%)
3
4
4
1
2
14/62
(23%)
*
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
6
2
3
5
25/48
(52%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
7
7
8
8
38/62
(61%)
1
1
-
-
-
2/62
(3%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 3
BLUE (10)
GREEN (11)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (12)
TOTALS (56)
-
1
-
1
2
4/56
(7%)
-
-
-
1
1
2/56
(4%)
3
3
4
1
1
12/56
(21%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
7
7
8
8
37/56
(66%)
-
-
1
-
-
1/56
(2%)
Water-based Ink #W4 - Site 9A
BLUE (14)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (17)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (66)
1
1
-
2
1
5/66
(8%)
3
2
-
2
1
8/66
(12%)
3
3
4
3
3
16/66
(24%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/66
(8%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
8
5
8
4
31/66
(47%)
-
-
-
1
-
1/66
(2%)
3-L, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-L
OCCUPATIONAL SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT-based evaluation6
low
concern
low-
moderate
concern
UV-cured Ink #U1 - Site 11
BLUE (9)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (48)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/48
(10%)
moderate
concern
No
exposure
No data
1
2
1
1
1
6/48
(13%)
7
7
9
7
7
37/48
(77%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
UV-cured Ink #U2 - Site 6
BLUE (15)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
-
1
-
1
1
3/70
(4%)
1
-
1
-
-
2/70
(3%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/70
(7%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/70
(7%)
12
12
9
11
11
55/70
(79%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
UV-cured ink #U3 - Site 8
BLUE (9)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (46)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/46
(11%)
2
2
1
2
2
9/46
(20%)
6
6
8
6
6
32/46
(70%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
The numbers in each column show the number of chemicals within each risk-based or SAT-based classification.
b Criteria for level of concern are presented in Table 3.15 (page 3-48).
0 SAT concern levels are generated by the OPPT Structure Activity Team to predict toxicity based on analog data
and/or structure-activity considerations. SAT concern levels are provided for chemicals with insufficient systemic
hazard data available. Criteria for SAT concern levels are presented on page 3-49.
d Number of chemicals in the color.
3-L, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-L
OCCUPATIONAL SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
This page is intentionally blank.
3-L, page 4
-------
Appendix 3-M (Risk Chapter)
Summary of Occupational
Developmental Toxicity Risk Concern — Dermal3
Ink system color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation11
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern0
No
exposure
No data
Solvent-based Ink #S1 - Site 9B
BLUE (15)d
GREEN (12)
WHITE (13)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (63)
3
4
2
1
2
12/63
(19%)
1
1
1
2
2
7/63
(11%)
1
1
1
1
2
6/63
(10%)
3
-
1
-
1
5/63
(8%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
6
8
5
7
33/63
(52%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 5
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
2
2
1
2
2
9/70
(13%)
2
2
2
2
3
11/70
(16%)
2
2
1
2
1
8/70
(11%)
1
-
-
-
1
2/70
(3%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
11
6
8
7
40/70
(57%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 7
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (71)
2
2
2
2
2
10/71
(14%)
3
3
2
3
3
14/71
(20%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/71
(7%)
1
-
-
-
1
2/71
(3%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
11
6
8
7
40/71
(56%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 1 0
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (16)
MAGENTA (16)
TOTALS (75)
2
2
2
3
2
11/75
(15%)
3
3
2
3
4 .
15/75
(20%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/75
(7%)
1
-
-
1
2
4/75
(5%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
11
6
8
7
40/75
(53%)
3-M, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-M
OCCUPATIONAL DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN - DERMAL
Ink system color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern c
No
exposure
No data
Water-based Ink #W1 - Site 4
BLUE (10)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (7)
TOTALS (43)
2
2
1
2
1
8/43
(19%)
-
-
1
1
1
3/43
(7%)
1
1
-
-
-
2/43
(5%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
7
5
6
5
30/43
(70%)
Water-based Ink #W2 - Site 1
BLUE (16)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (6)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (48)
6
2
3
1
3
15/48
(31%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10
7
4
5
7
33/48
(69%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 2
BLUE (13)
GREEN (13)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (13)
TOTALS (62)
2
3
3
1
3
12/62
(19%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/62
(8%)
1
1
1
-
1
4/62
(6%)
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
8
7
9
8
41/62
(66%)
Water-based Ink #W3- Site 3
BLUE (10)
GREEN (11)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (12)
TOTALS (56)
2
2
3
1
3
11/56
(20%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/56
(9%)
-
1
' -
-
-
1/56
(2%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Water-based Ink #W4 - Site 9A
BLUE (14)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (17)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (66)
4
2
2
5
3
16/66
(24%)
1
1
1
1
-
4/66
(6%)
1
1
1
1
2
6/66
(9%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
7
8
9
8
39/56
(70%)
8
11
6
10
5
40/66
(61%)
3-M, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-M
OCCUPATIONAL DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN - DERMAL
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern6
No
exposure
No data
UV-cured Ink #U1 - Site 1 1
BLUE (9)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (48)
1
1
1
1
2
6/48
(13%)
-
1
-
-
-
1/48
(2%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
4
2
2
12/48
(25%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
6
6
6
5
29/48
(60%)
UV-cured Ink #U2 - Site 6
BLUE (15)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
1
1
1
1
2
6/70
(9%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/70
(7%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
1
2
2
9/70
(13%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
11
11
9
10
9
50/70
(71%)
UV-cured Ink #U3 - Site 8
BLUE (9)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (46)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
3
4
3
3
16/46
(35%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
6
6
6
6
30/46
(65%)
The numbers in each column show the number of chemicals within each risk-based or SAT-based classification.
b Criteria for level of concern are presented in Table 3.15 (page 3-48).
CSAT concern levels are generated by the OPPT Structure Activity Team to predict toxicity based on analog data
and/or structure-activity considerations. SAT concern levels are provided for chemicals with insufficient systemic
hazard data available.
d Number of chemicals in the color.
3-M, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-M
OCCUPATIONAL DEVELOPMENTAL RiSK CONCERN - DERMAL
This page is intentionally blank.
3-M, page 4
-------
Appendix 3-N (Risk Chapter)
Summary of Occupational
Developmental Toxicity Risk Concern — Inhalation3
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation11
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern6
No
exposure
No data
Solvent-based Ink #S1 - Site 9B
BLUE (15)d
GREEN (12)
WHITE (13)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (63)
2
3
1
2
4
12/63
(19%)
1
2
2
2
1
8/63
(13%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10
6
7
4
6
33/63
(52%)
2
1
3
1
3
10/63
(16%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 5
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
2
2
-
2
2
8/70
(11%)
1
1
2
1
1
6/70
(9%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/70
(59%)
3
3
3
3
3
15/70
(21%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 7
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (71)
1
1
1
1
1
5/71
(7%)
2
2
2
2
2
10/71
(14%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/71
(58%)
3
3
3
3
3
15/71
(21%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 10
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (16)
MAGENTA (16)
TOTALS (75)
-
1
1
1
2
5/75
(7%)
2
2
2
3
2
11/75
(15%)
1
-
-
-
-
1/75
(1%)
-
-
-
1
1
2/75
(3%)
9
11
5
8
8
41/75
(55%)
3
3
3
3
3
15/75
(20%)
3-N, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-N
OCCUPATIONAL DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
Ink* Q\rcif*m color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern c
No
exposure
No data
Water-based Ink #W1 - Site 4
BLUE (10)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (7)
TOTALS (43)
3
3
1
2
1
10/43
(23%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
5
5
6
5
26/43
(60%)
2
2
1
1
1
7/43
(16%)
Water-based Ink #W2- Site 1
BLUE (16)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (6)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (48)
3
-
3
1
2
9/48
(19%)
1
1
-
-
-
2/48
(4%)
-
• -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
6
2
3
5
25/48
(52%)
3
2
2
2
3
12/48
(25%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 2
BLUE (13)
GREEN (13)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (13)
TOTALS (62)
2
3
3
-
2
10/62
(16%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
•
-
-
-
8
7
7
8
8
38/62
(61%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 3
BLUE (10)
GREEN (11)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (12)
TOTALS (56)
1
2
2
-
1
6/56
(11%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
6
7
8
8
36/56
(66%)
3
3
2
3
3
14/62
(23%)
2
3
3
3
3
14/56
(25%)
Water-based Ink #W4 - Site 9A
BLUE (14)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (17)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (66)
5
3
1
5
3
17/66
(26%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/66
(8%)
-
-
1
-
-
1/66
(2%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
8
5
7
4
30/66
(45%)
2
3
2
4
2
13/66
(20%)
3-N, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-N
OCCUPATIONAL DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern6
No
exposure
No data
UV-cured Ink #U1 - Site 11
BLUE (9)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (48)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
1/48
(2%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/48
(10%)
7
7
9
7
7
37/48
(77%)
UV-cured Ink #112 - Site 6
BLUE (15)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
-
-
-
-
-
-
UV-cured Ink #U3 - Site 8
BLUE (9)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (46)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
1
1
4/70
(6%)
-
-
1
-
- '
1/70
d%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
'
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
1
2
2
9/46
(19%)
12
12
9
11
11
55/70
(79%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/48
(10%)
2
2
2
2
2
10/70
(14%)
6
6
8
6
6
32/46
(70%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/46
(11%)
I I It? lIUIHUdO III t7Cll>l I WWIUIII1I OIIW«¥ UIC ll«lllt-"rfl VI Writes! IIIWW1W VTlhl til I wuwi » •
-------
APPENDIX 3-N OCCUPATIONAL DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
This page is intentionally blank.
3-N, page 4
-------
Appendix 3-O (Risk Chapter)
Summary of General Population
Systemic Toxicity Risk Concern— Inhalation3
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT-based evaluation6
low
concern
tow-
moderate
concern
moderate
concern
No
exposure
No data
Solvent-based Ink #S1 - Site 9B
BLUE (15)d
GREEN (12)
WHITE (13)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (63)
4
5
4
4
6
23/63
(37%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 5
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
4
4
2
3
3
16/70
(23%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 7
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (71)
4
4
4
4
4
20/71
(28%)
-
-
1
1
1
3/70
(4%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
2
1
1
6/63
(10%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
10
6
7
4
6
33/63
(52%)
-
-
-
-
1
1/63
(2%)
2
2
2
2
2
10/70
(14%)
-
-
- -
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/70
(59%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
2
2
2
10/71
(14%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/71
(58%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 10
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (16)
MAGENTA (16)
TOTALS (75)
4
4
4
5
5
22/75
(29%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
2
3
3
12/75
(16%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/75
(55%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
3-O, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-D
GENERAL POPULATION SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT-based evaluation c
low
concern
low-
moderate
concern
moderate
concern
No
exposure
No data
Water-based Ink #W1 - Site 4
BLUE (10)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (7)
TOTALS (43)
5
5
2
3
2
17/43
(40%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
5
5
6
5
26/43
(60%)
- ,
-
-
-
-
-
Water-based Ink #W2 - Site 1
BLUE (16)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (6)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (48)
7
3
4
3
5
22/48
(46%)
-
-
1
-
-
1/48
(2%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
6
2
3
5
25/48
(52%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 2
BLUE (13)
GREEN (13)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (13)
TOTALS (62)
4
6
4
3
5
22/62
(35%)
-
-
1
-
-
1/62
(2%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
, -
-
8
7
7
8
8
38/62
(61%)
1
-
-
-
-
1/62
(2%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 3
BLUE (10)
GREEN (11)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (12)
TOTALS (56)
3
4
3
3
4
17/56
(30%)
-
-
1
-
-
1/56
(2%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
7
8
8
8
38/56
(68%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Water-based Ink #W4 - Site 9A
BLUE (14)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (17)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (66)
7
6
4
7
5
29/66
(44%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/66
(8%)
-
-
-
-
-
6
8
5
8
4
31/66
(47%)
-
-
-
1
-
1/66
(2%)
3-O, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-D
GENERAL POPULATION SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concern
cigar
concern
SAT-based evaluation °
low -
concern
low-
moderate
concern
moderate
concern
No
exposure
No data
UV-cured Ink #U1 - Site 11
BLUE (9)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (48)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/48
(10%)
1
2
1
1
1
6/48
(13%)
7
7
9
7
7
37/48
(77%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
UV-cured Ink #U2 - Site 6
BLUE (15)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
2
2
1
2
2
9/70
(13%)
-
-
1
-
-
1/70
(1%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/70
(7%)
12
12
9
11
11
55/70
(70%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
UV-cured Ink #U3 - Site 8
BLUE (9)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (46)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/46
(11%)
2
2
1
2
2
9/46
(20%)
6
6
8
6
6
32/46
(70%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
*The numbers in each column show the number of chemicals within each risk-based or SAT-based classification.
b Criteria for level of concern are presented in Table 3.15 (page 3-48).
°SAT concern levels are generated by the OPPT Structure Activity Team to predict toxicity based on analog data
and/or structure-activity considerations. SAT concern levels are provided for chemicals with insufficient systemic
hazard data available. Criteria for SAT concern levels are presented on page 3-49.
d Number of chemicals in the color.
3-O, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-O
GENERAL POPULATION SYSTEMIC RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
This page is intentionally blank.
3-O, page 4
-------
Appendix 3-P (Risk Chapter)
Summary of General Population
Developmental Toxicity Risk Concern — Inhalation3
Ink system color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation"
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern c
No
exposure
No data
Solvent-based Ink #S1 - Site 9B
BLUE (15)d
GREEN (12)
WHITE (13)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (63)
3
5
3
4
5
20/63
(32%)
-
-
-
-
. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10
6
7
4
6
33/63
(52%)
2
1
3
1
3
10/63
(16%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 5
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
3
3
2
3
3
14/70
(20%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
•
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/70
(59%)
3
3
3
3
3
15/70
(21%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 7
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (71)
3
3
3
3
3
15/71
(21%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
•
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
11
5
8
8
41/71
(59%)
3
3
3
3
3
15/71
(21%)
Solvent-based Ink #S2 - Site 10
BLUE (15)
GREEN (17)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (16)
MAGENTA (16)
TOTALS (75)
3
3
3
4
4
17/75
(23%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
2/75
(3%)
9
11
5
8
8
41/75
(55%)
3
3
3
3
3
15/75
(20%)
3-P, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 3-P
GENERAL POPULATION DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
InR systsrn color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation "
low
concern
potential
concern
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern °
No
exposure
No data
Water-based Ink #W1 - Site 4
BLUE (10)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (7)
TOTALS (43)
3
3
1
2
1
10/43
(23%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
'
5
5
5
6
5
26/43
(60%)
2
2
1
1
1
7/43
(16%)
Water-based Ink #W2 - Site 1
BLUE (16)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (7)
CYAN (6)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (48)
4
1
3
2
3
13/48
(2-,%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
•
-
-
-
-
-
9
6
2
3
5
25/48
(52%)
3
2
2
1
2
10/48
(21%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 2
BLUE (13)
GREEN (13)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (13)
TOTALS (62)
2
4
3
-
2
11/62
(18%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
7
7
8
8
38/62
(61%)
Water-based Ink #W3 - Site 3
BLUE (10)
GREEN (11)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (11)
MAGENTA (12)
TOTALS (56)
1
2
2
-
1
6/56
(11%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Water-based Ink #W4 - Site 9A
BLUE (14)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (17)
MAGENTA (10)
TOTALS (66)
6
4
3
6
4
23/66
(35%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
7
7
8
8
37/56
(66%)
6
8
5
7
4
30/66
(45%)
3
2
2
3
3
13/62
(21%)
2
2
3
3
3
13/56
(23%)
2
3
2
4
2
13/66
(20%)
3-P, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 3-P
GENERAL POPULATION DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
Ink system, color
Number of chemicals
Risk-based evaluation b
low
concern
potential
concerh
clear
concern
SAT developmental
concern0
No
exposure
No data
UV-cured Ink #U1 - Site 11
BLUE (9)
GREEN (10)
WHITE (11)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (48)
-
1
-
-
-
1/48
(2%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
5/48
(10%)
7
7
9
7
7
37/48
(77%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/48
(10%)
UV-cured Ink #U2 - Site 6
BLUE (15)
GREEN (15)
WHITE (12)
CYAN (14)
MAGENTA (14)
TOTALS (70)
1
1
1
1
1
5/70
(7%)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12
12
9
11
11
55/70
(79%)
2
2
2
2
2
10/70
(14%)
UV-cured Ink #U3- Site 8
BLUE (9)
GREEN (9)
WHITE (10)
CYAN (9)
MAGENTA (9)
TOTALS (46)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
1
2
2
9/46
(20%)
6
6
8
6
6
32/46
(70%)
1
1
1
1
1
5/46
(10%)
aThe numbers in each column show the number of chemicals within each risk-based or SAT-based classification.
"Criteria for level of concern are presented in Table 3.15 (page 3-48).
CSAT concern levels are generated by the OPPT Structure Activity Team to predict toxicity based on analog data
and/or structure-activity considerations. SAT concern levels are provided for chemicals with insufficient systemic
hazard data available.
d Number of chemicals in the color.
3-P, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 3-P GENERAL POPULATION DEVELOPMENTAL RISK CONCERN - INHALATION
This page is intentionally blank.
3-P, page 4
-------
Appendix 4-A (Performance Chapter)
Overall Performance Demonstration Methodology
I. PERFORMANCE TESTING OVERVIEW
A. Goal
The objective of the performance demonstration is to collect specific information from flexographic
printing facilities about the print quality, costs, and environmental and human health risks associated
with different types of ink systems, as they are printed on different types of film substrates. This data will
be incorporated into the overall project report, called the Cleaner Technologies Substitutes Assessment
(CTSA).
B. Methodology Overview
The DfE Flexography Project will demonstrate the performance of three ink systems (solvent, water-
based, and UV) on three different film substrates (oriented polypropylene, low-density polyethylene, and
polyethylene/ethyl vinyl acetate). Each substrate/ink combination will be run on a wide web press in at
least two separate volunteer printing facilities. During each demonstration, the press will be run at
production speeds (300-500 ft/min) for approximately two hours to produce up to 60,000 feet of printed
product. The 20" x 16" image will include both process tone printing in various gradations and two-color
line printing. During and following the demonstration run, laboratory tests will be conducted to
determine how well each ink system performed the desired task. To allow a comparison of the different
ink systems, data will be collected on performance, cost, human health and environmental risks, and
energy and natural resources use for each ink system.
The materials used in the demonstrations are expected to be donated to the Project by industry
participants. Ink manufacturers will be asked to submit the required quantity of ink to the Project.
Substrate manufacturers will be asked to submit the required length of film substrate. And, finally,
printers will be donating their press time to the DfE Project.
Flexographic printing experts from Western Michigan University's (WMU) Department of Paper and
Printing Science and Engineering will oversee the on-site demonstrations to ensure that the performance
demonstration methodology outlined hi this documented is followed consistently at all demonstration
sites. Following the demonstrations, they will conduct laboratory tests to evaluate the print quality of the
printed substrate.
Project Participants
This performance demonstration methodology was developed by a group of volunteers from the
flexography industry with input from the DfE Flexography Project partners including representatives of:
California Film Extruders and Converters Association (CFECA), Film and Bag Federation (FBF,
previously the Plastic Bag Association), Flexible Packaging Association (FPA), Flexographic Technical
Association (FTA), Industrial Technology Institute (ITT), National Association of Printing Ink
Manufacturers (NAPIM), RadTech International, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
Tag and Label Manufacturers Institute (TLMI), University of Tennessee (UT), and Western Michigan
University (WMU).
4-A, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
H. INFORMATION TO BE COLLECTED
A. Performance Information
Performance data will provide printers with information on the effectiveness of the different ink systems
evaluated under comparable conditions. While the DfE Flexography Project has made every attempt to
ensure that these demonstrations will be run under consistent conditions, they are being conducted in
actual printing facilities nationwide. As no two printing facilities are identical, it should be noted that the
performance demonstrations are not rigorous scientific investigations. Instead, they couple the more
qualitative performance evaluations with quantitative laboratory testing results. This combination of
performance information in conjunction with the cost and risk data, will allow printers to compare the
trade-offs between the various ink systems.
B. Costing Information
A cost analysis for each ink system will be conducted using supplier data, industry statistics, and
information from the performance demonstration. Data collected during the performance demonstration
that will be used in the cost analysis includes: amount of ink used; labor requirements for makeready,
demonstration run, and clean-up; materials used; waste generated; energy and natural resources used;
waste management requirements; and clean-up products used.
C. Environmental and Human Health Risk Information
A third component of this project is a technical evaluation of the human health and environmental
concerns associated with each ink system. While much of this analysis will be based on the chemical
formulation of each ink system (to be submitted by the ink suppliers), information on the associated
occupational exposures will be collected through the performance demonstration.
m. PRODUCTS TO BE DEMONSTRATED
A. Ink Specifications
1. Eligibility of Inks
The performance demonstration is open to any commercially available flexographic ink system.
Ink manufacturers who would like to submit their ink as a candidate for the demonstrations will
be asked to supply a volume of their ink needed for the initial laboratory tests.
2. Number of Ink Systems
Inks are needed for printing on three substrates: Oriented Polypropylene (OPP), Low-density
polyethylene (LDPE), and Polyethylene/Ethyl Vinyl Acetate (PE/EVA)). A detailed
description of the substrates follows in section ELD. If each substrate requires a different ink
system, a maximum of nine different ink systems will be needed.
4-A, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
Nomenclature is as follows:
Ink System Name i; Ink i
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
S-OPP
W-OPP
UV-OPP
S-LDPE
W-LDPE
UV-LDPE
S-PE/EVA
W-PE/EVA
9. UV-PE/EVA
Solvent
Water
Ultra Violet Curable
Solvent
Water
Ultra Violet Curable
Solvent
Water
Ultra Violet Curable
Substrate
OPP
OPP
OPP
LDPE
LDPE
LDPE
PE/EVA
PE/EVA
PE/EVA
3. Colors to be Demonstrated
The demonstration will include printing line colors and process colors, as identified in the
Pantone Color Selector/Film Guide. For the OPP substrate, the film will be reverse printed and
used as a laminate. The colors printed will be:
Line colors
White - Opacity target (48-50), to be used with the OPP and LDPE
Reflex Blue
354 Green
Process colors
Magenta (rubine red)
Cyan (phthalocyanine blue)
B. Initial Laboratory Testing
Within the three ink systems (solvent-based, water-based, and UV-curable), one product line may be
selected for each of the three substrates (OPP, LPDE, PE/EVA), for a maximum of nine ink systems. If
certain product lines can be used on more than one substrate type, fewer product lines will be required.
If more than one product line within an ink system is submitted for the same substrate, the ink that most
closely matches the ink currently used by the volunteer facility will be selected. Prior to sending inks to
the field, WMU will test the inks in their Pilot Printing Plant as follows:
1. The ink suppliers will be asked to provide WMU with samples of white, cyan and green inks
for the initial laboratory testing.
2. At the WMU pilot plant, each ink sample will be mixed for color and viscosity at the press to
the manufacturer's specification, using solvents/additives provided by the ink supplier.
3. One printing station will be used for the tests. A 440 line anilox will be used to print the cyan
and green inks. A 220 line anilox will be used for printing the white inks.
4. One test plate will be used for evaluation of the cyan and green inks.
5. Non-UV curable inks will be assigned to either the solvent or water category, based on the
chemical and volatile organic compound (VOC) content information on each ink's MSDS. If the
press side VOC content of the water-based inks exceeds 25% of the volatile component (e.g.,
75% water, 25% VOC), the ink will be classified as solvent-based.
4-A, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
6. Each ink will be printed on each type of substrate (OPP, LPDE, PE/EVA) at the maximum
attainable press speed (up to 500 ft/min).
7. Once maximum attainable press speed is reached, total run time will not exceed 3 minutes.
8. A series of performance tests will be conducted to evaluate the quality of the printed samples.
C. Dry Run at WMU Pilot Plant
The inks selected for the field demonstrations will be "dry run" at the WMU Pilot Plant prior to sending
them to the volunteer facilities. The purpose of this one hour dry run is to determine if any problems are
likely to occur during a longer run. The dry run procedure will be:
1. Each substrate will be run with the selected ink using the following color combinations:
Solvent Inks (1-3 different inks)
Run 1 OPP White + Green
Run 2 LDPE White + Green
Run 3 PE/EVA Green + Cyan
Water Inks (1-3 different inks)
Run 4 OPP White + Green
Run 5 LDPE White + Green
Run 6 PE/EVA Green + Cyan
UVIhks (1-3 different inks)
Run 7 OPP White + Green
Run 8 LDPE White + Green
Run 9 PE/EVA Green -t- Cyan
2. Each ink sample will be mixed for color and viscosity at the press to the manufacturer's
specification, using solvents/additives supplied by the ink supplier.
3. Two printing stations will be used. A 440 line anilox will be used to print the cyan and green
inks. A 220 line anilox will be used for printing the white inks.
4. The plates used in initial laboratory test run will also be used for the dry run.
5. Each ink will be printed on each type of substrate (OPP, LPDE, PE/EVA) at the maximum
attainable press speed (up to 500 ft/min).
6. Once maximum attainable press speed is reached, total run time will be one hour.
7. During the dry run, exposure monitoring will be conducted in two testing zones — at the
operator consol and the dryer exhaust stream. In each zone, testing will be conducted for two
time periods: 0 to 15 minutes and 15 to 60 minutes.
8. During the dry run, data will be collected on energy used by the drying systems, corona treater,
UV lamps, ink pumps, press, and emission control devices.
9. For each printed substrate, a select series of performance tests will be conducted.
4-A, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
D. Substrates Used in Testing
Each ink system will be run on three different film substrates. These substrates were selected by the
Project Technical Committee to represent "typical" substrates uied in flexography.
1. Substrate Types
It is expected that the film will be donated by film substrate manufacturers and sent directly to
participating facilities. The three types of film that will be used are:
* OPP (Oriented Polypropylene) - 75 gauge - slip modified
Film to be reverse printed and used as a laminate. Typical products manufactured
from this film are snack food bags and candy bar wrappers.
> LDPE (Low-density polyethylene) - 7.25 mil - medium slip - clear - 0.2 to 0.5 C.O.F.
(ASTMD1984)
Film to be surface printed. Typical products manufactured from this film are
shopping bags and bread bags.
> PE/EVA (Polyethylene/Ethyl Vinyl Acetate co-extruded film) - 2.5 mil - white high
slip - 0.2 C.O.F. (ASTM D 1984) - print PE side
Film to be surface printed. Typical products manufactured from this film are frozen
food bags.
2. Substrate Quantities
For each substrate type, each of the three ink types will be printed during the initial laboratory tests
and for two hours in at least two different facilities during field demonstrations. Total substrate
quantities required are as follows:
Ink Type
Solvent-
based
Water-based
UV-curable
Total
footage*
atWMU
Laboratory
Testing
60,000 ft.
60,000 ft.
60,000 ft.
180,000ft.
at TEST FACILITIES
Run Time x Per
+ Make- Press Speed = Facility x 2 Facilities
ready + Run Footage Sub-Total =
+ 15,000ft. + 2 hrs. x 500 ft/min 75,000ft. x 2 facilities =
= 60,000 ft. 150,000ft.
+ 15,000ft. + 2 hrs. x 500 ft/min 75,000ft. x 2 facilities =
= 60,000 ft. 150,000ft.
+ 15,000ft. + 2 hrs. x 500 ft/min 75,000ft. x 2 facilities =
= 60,000 ft. 150,000ft.
+ 45,000ft. + 180,000ft. = 225,000ft. x 2 facilities =
450,000 ft.
Total
210,000ft.
210,000ft.
210,000ft.
630,000 ft.
'needed for each substrate
3. Other Substrate-related Requirements
*• All films are to be treated on press with corona treatment to a specified dyne level that
meets the specific ink manufacturer's specification. The exact treatment level will vary
for the different ink systems (solvent, water, UV) and will be recommended by the
printer. Target dyne levels may range from 38-45 dynes/cm2.
> Core specifications are press reel dependent and will be determined after the list of
participating facilities is finalized.
>• All demonstrations will be run on wide web presses. The target web width is 24".
» The identification number and the date of manufacture for the films will be recorded
during the performance demonstration. Substrate preferably will be manufactured no
later than 6 months prior to the press run.
4-A, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
E. Image and Plates
Each demonstration facility will receive a new set of plates to minimize the variables associated with
plate wear. The image will include both process tone printing in various gradations and two-color line
printing, as described below:
1. Image
The same test image will be used for all demonstrations. Image width will be 20" and length will
be 16". The image is designed so all required tests can be conducted on the printed substrate. A
black and white, size-reduced copy of the image used can be found hi Appendix 4-D.
2. Plate Manufacturing - recommended1
The plates will be manufactured according to the following specifications:
> All plates will be manufactured in the same lot by the same manufacturer to maximize
consistency.
> Plates will all be made of the same photopolymer material.
> Plate gauge is press dependent and will be finalized when the list of participating
facilities is finalized.
*• Plate cylinder circumference will be 16" to 18" (single repeat). Circumference will be
finalized when the list of facilities is finalized.
3. Plate Configuration
*• OPP will be reverse printed. LDPE and PE/EVA will be surface printed.
*• The unage will be a combination of line and halftone as follows:
Configuration 1: Magenta + Cyan
• Two color combination to include process tones, trap and tone scales.
• 120 line screen.
• Tone to be multiple gradations of 3, 10,15 ,20,25, 35,40,50,60,70, 80, and
100 percent.
• Magenta + cyan to meet with 50% trap of tones and solids.
Configuration 2: White Background with Reflex Blue and Green Overprinted
• The image will emphasize large solid formation and trap.
F. Press Configuration
While the specific make and model of press used will vary from one participating facility to the next, the
DfE Flexography Project partners have established some guidelines to maximize consistency hi the type
of press used. While the Project does not intend to exclude any printers who may be interested in
participating, an effort to maintain consistency hi the press type will provide more comparable data from
the demonstrations. All press configuration parameters will be documented for each printing facility.
1. Press Configuration - recommended
> Central impression press.
> Six-color.
>• Production speeds of 300 - 500 feet/minute or optimized for print quality.
> Wide web press with a target width of 24 inches.
»• Plate cylinder ckcumference of 16" to 18" (single repeat).
>• Inking system with chambered doctor blade units.
>• Target specifications for anilox rolls: (note these are target values only)
1 This is the recommended method for platemaking. However, if a participating facility has special requirements for
their plates, the plates for that facility may be manufactured on-site, using the same image.
~~ 4-A, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
- Process anilox rolls
Screen count = 600 to 700 lines per inch (LPT)
Volume = 1.5 billion cubic microns (BCM)
- Line anilox rolls -" "-?? ;
Screen count = 440 LPI
Volume = 4 to 6 BCM
- White
Screen count = 150 LPI
Volume = 6 to 8 BCM
or
Up to 15 BCM may be appropriate for UV applications.
2. Dryer configuration
- Temperature: substrate dependent; will be measured and recorded.
- Velocity: press dependent; will be measured and recorded.
- Web dwell: press dependent; will be measured and recorded.
- Balance: press dependent; will be measured and recorded.
IV. DEMONSTRATIONS
The observation team from WMU will oversee each of the demonstrations to insure that the methodology
is followed. The team will also record all relevant data regarding the press, the substrate, the ink, energy
use, and general information on the demonstration and the facility. To insure that consistent data are
collected among participating facilities, the observation team will complete a set of data collection forms
for each demonstration run. See Appendices 4-B and 4-C for blank copies of these forms. The DfE
Hexography Project highly recommends that a representative of the ink manufacturer be on site during
demonstration of the ink, if possible.
A. Pre-Makeready
Before ink and substrate impression starts, information will be recorded on the steps taken to prepare for
the print run and on the operating conditions under which the demonstration will take place:
1. Record background information on:
- Ink: ink system type, ink manufacturer name and ink name.
- Plate: plate gauge, plate mounting method.
- Press: manufacturer and model, press width, maximum web width, number of print
units, distance between color stations, drum diameter, anilox roll configuration (type,
lines per inch, volume, diameter, and condition), ink pumping system, type of doctor
blade system, and a description of adjacent equipment running during the performance
demonstration.
- Drying System: make and model of each drying (or UV) unit, drying area of each of the
interstation dryers (or UV lamps), dryer area of main tunnel dryer (or final UV-curing
lamp), air flow capacity hi cfm, and, if applicable, the make and model and location of
chillers.
- Energy Requirements: from the equipment nameplates or from facility maintenance
records, record the energy specifications for the drying systems (electrical or gas-fired
dryers), corona treater, UV lamps, chillers, ink pumps, press, and emissions control
devices.
- Substrate: identification number of the roll, date of manufacture, corona pre-treatment
level.
4-A, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
- Waste Treatment: description of on-site waste treatment capabilities (including
incineration), reliance on off-site waste treatment and disposal, annual or quarterly costs
and volumes for the facilities waste disposal and treatment, an estimate of the percentage
of these costs attributable to the facility's flexographic operations.
- History: the experience this facility and of the press operator assigned to help with the
demonstration. Include the length of time the facility and this operator have been running
this ink system and substrates, how frequently they run it, and the operator's opinion of
the ink system and substrates being demonstrated.
2. Web the press.
3. Measure and record the surface tension on the operator side and on the gear side of the web
following the procedure in Appendix 4-1.
4. Mount the printing plates.
5. Pre-align anilox cylinder to plate, and plate to impression cylinder.
6. For surface print runs, the desired sequence of colors is white, magenta, cyan, green blue. For
reverse printing, the desired color sequence is magenta, cyan, green, blue, white. Record the print
unit number for each color.
7. Add inks and pre-mix in sumps. Record the manufacturer name and number of each of the
components added. Components may include ink, extender, solvent, and any other additives.
Weigh each component and record the quantity used.
8. For each color, measure and record the viscosity of the ink using a #2 Zahn efflux cup. For
UV inks, record the manufacturer's reported viscosity.
9. Record any observations or occurrences during the pre-makeready step (e.g., any problem with
the ink, plates, or substrate that may influence the demonstration results).
B. Makeready
Prior to production, makeready activities (set-up operations to optimize image quality) will be performed.
For the performance demonstration, collect information on the makeready activities:
1. Record the start time for makeready.
2. Record (or zero) the meter reading for the length of substrate printed.
3. Record the treat level before and after corona discharge treatment. Also record the corona
treater power level.
4. Measure and record the surface tension on the operator side and on the gear side of the web
following the procedure described ha Appendix 4-1.
5. Complete the alignment of the anilox cylinders to the plates, and of the plates to the
impression cylinder.
4-A, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
6. Optimize the press speed. Record.
7. Optimize the ink viscosity and color by matching it to the Pantone color swatches. Weigh and
record the quantity of any components added to the ink to optimize viscosity and color. Record
the ink viscosity after each addition. Repeat for each color.
8. Optimize the dryer settings. For each interstation dryer and for the main tunnel, record the air
temperature and velocity.
9. When the print and color quality are acceptable, record the time the makeready is complete.
10. Record the meter reading for substrate length printed during the makeready.
11. Record the quantity of substrate waste generated during makeready.
12. Following the test procedure specified in Appendix 4-E, measure and record the print density
after acceptable color and print quality is achieved. If any additions are made to the ink, repeat
the measurement and record the print density.
13. Perform the tape adhesiveness test on all colors. Record the results. If any adhesion failure
occurs, record an estimate of the percentage of ink lifted from the substrate. A detailed
description of the test procedure can be found in Appendix 4-E.
14. Visually inspect the printed image for the following qualities and record a qualitative
assessment of each:
- Trap - Dimensional stability
- Blocking - Mottle
15. Record any other observations or occurrence during the makeready.
C. Demonstration Run
During the print run, information will be collected on any problems encountered and any changes made
to maintain constant print quality.
1. Record the start time of the demonstration run and run for 2 hours. If a problem is
encountered and the 2 hour run can not be completed, any run of 1 hour or longer will be
considered complete with sufficient data for the evaluation of performance, costs and risk.
2. Record (or zero) the meter measuring substrate length printed.
3. Mark the substrate roll to indicate the end of the makeready printing.
4. Mark the roll every 30 minutes for post-run laboratory testing.
5. Using a reflection densitometer and following the test procedure specified in Appendix 4-E,
measure the print density at the start of the run for each color. If any additions are made to the
ink, repeat the measurement and record the print density.
6. Measure and record the ink viscosity for each color every 15 minutes. Record the quantity of
any additions made to the ink.
4-A, page 9
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
7. Record the press speed.
8. Record the time the run is completed.
9. At the end of the run, record the meter reading for linear feet of substrate used.
10. Record the quantity of substrate waste generated during the demonstration run.
11. Record any other observations or occurrence during the demonstration run. Record any of
the practices of the facility that may have affected the demonstration results (e.g., equipment
malfunction, substrate problem).
12. Visually inspect the printed image for the following qualities and record a qualitative
assessment of each:
- Trap - Dimensional stability
- Blocking - Mottle
13. Wrap and secure the printed roll.
14. For the OPP, which will be reverse printed and used as a laminate, the adhesive and the
second substrate will be applied to approximately 200 feet of film taken from the middle of the
print run. If the demonstration facility has the capability to laminate in-house, the substrate will
be laminated on-site. The lamination equipment procedure, adhesive, and the second substrate
used will be recorded. If the facility does not have lamination capabilities, the substrate will be
sent off-site to a lamination facility. Once the volunteer facilities are finalized, every effort will
be made to standardize the lamination materials and procedures used.
V. CLEAN-UP
After the print run is complete, record information on the steps taken and products used to clean the press
in preparation for the next print job.
A. Clean-up Methods
Record the procedures used at each facility for clean-up. If the facility is unfamiliar with the clean-up
procedures for the type of ink used in the demonstration, follow manufacturer's recommendations.
1. Record start time for clean-up.
2. Allow the excess ink to drain into an empty container. Squeegee any remaining ink from the
pans into the same container. Weigh the excess ink and record.
3. Record the washing procedure for cleaning the ink pumps, ink rolls, ink and other components.
4. Record the time when cleaning is complete.
5. Record any procedures or occurrences that may influence clean-up time.
4-A, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
B. Clean-Up Chemicals
1. Record the manufacturer's name and the product name for all chemicals used. Make a copy of
the MSDS for each product used durin| cleanup.
2. Record all clean-up steps where water was used.
3. Record the quantity of each chemical used for clean-up.
4. If clean-up products are reused or recycled, document the technique used and the percentage of
product reclaimed or recycled.
4-A, page 11
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
VI. POST-RUN LABORATORY TESTS
After the demonstration run is complete, the roll of printed substrate should be wrapped and shipped
immediately back to WMU. At the WMU laboratory, a series of tests will be performed to assess the
print quality. These tests are listed in the table on the following page. While the tests checked off under
"Makeready" and "Press" will be conducted visually during the demonstration, more quantitative testing
will be conducted for the tests checked off under the "Laboratory" heading. The testing protocol for each
of these can be found in Appendix 4-E.
A. Location of Samples
All tests will be repeated at four different position in the printed roll:
W
X
Begin run
30min.
1 hour
End run
(2 hours)
B.
*• All samples will be collected from each location (W, X, Y, Z).
>• At each location (W, X, Y, Z) either 1 or 5 repeats will be taken, as indicated in the "# of
Samples" column of the table.
»• Test measurements will be conducted at 2 cross web points on each repeat.
>• For the Coat Weight test, 50 images will be pulled and weighed at each of the testing time
locations.
Colors to be Sampled
The "Colors" column of the table indicates the colors on which the results for this specified test
will be recorded. "White +1" indicates that test results will be recorded for the white ink and one
other color. In the case of PE/EVA printed substrate, only the results of the one color test will be
recorded since white ink will not be printed on this white substrate. If this column is Not
Applicable, as in the case of Coat Weight, "NA" is noted in the column.
4-A, page 12
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
C. Laboratory Tests List
1-A
1-B
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
TEST METHOD
Adhesion/Flexible Pack.
Adhesive Lamination
(laminate only)
Adhesiveness -Tape
Extrusion Lamination
(laminate only)
Sutherland Rub
(surface print only)
Block Resistance
Color L*a*b*
Density - Print
Image Analysis
(quantitatively - dot
structure)
Opacity (white only)
Gloss (Gardner 60°)
(not for reverse print)
Mottle/Lay (Tobias tester)
Dimensional Stability
Coat Weight (dry
lbs./ream)
Coefficient of Friction
(not reverse)
Heat Resistance - Heat
Seal (Sentinel - OPP only)
Ice Water Crinkle
Resistance (PE & PE/EVA)
Odor
Surface Tension - Film
(dynes)
Solvent Retention (MS)
UV- Uncured Residue
Trap
Initial
Lab Test
X
X
X
X
X
X
Dry
Run
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Mak
e-
ready
X
X
X
X
X
X
Press
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Lab
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
#of
Samples
5
5
5
5
5
5
1
1 .
1
1
1
1
1
50
5
5
5
5
1
5
5
1
Colors
white+1
NA
white+1
NA
white+1
white+1
all
all
all
white
all
all
all
NA
NA
white+1
white+1
NA
NA
all
all
cyan+
magenta
NA= Not Applicable
4-A, page 13
-------
APPENDIX 4-A
OVERALL PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION METHODOLOGY
This page is intentionally blank.
4-A, page 14
-------
Appendix 4-B (Performance Chapter)
Facility Background Questionnaire
BACKGROUND
Approximate total sales:
Percent of sales from
fiexographic-printed products:
Total flexographic output of facility
(by weight, surface area, or linear feet):
Type of product
Percent of total sales
Type of product
Percent of total sales
Flexible packaging
Folding cartons
Commercial printing
Gift wraps and papers
Corrugated containers
Newspapers
Tags and labels
Other:
Type of ink
Solvent-based
Water-based
UV-curable
Percent of total product
sales
Type of substrate
Film:
Film:
Film:
Other:
Percent of total product
sales
*"; *.*"«* - %
f A, f tX S" ,> T
>-"" r_--/;r;/<%;
1> V' - *v :^%-
/• $ v * '
-^v --" -"-*„- %
Production hours:
Daily
!-^,t'<'V? <. iA"v*
Average length of time
Average
length of time
ri i " ' ;*
Annually ^ ,'* \ <, \ " t ^
* * *. * rf^- ic ^ » ..
of job run
of makeready
3 ^ *>"* &?f *" *%. *• *v. ^}
• '*'»•> -"* *r , ,< • "...1
« t
-------
APPENDIX 4-B FACILITY BACKGROUND QUESTIONNAIRE
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
Ink disposal/treatment method (please describe):
Annual ink waste treatment and disposal costs:
Substrate recycling (please describe):
Annual costs or savings for substrate recycling:
Solid/hazardous waste treatment and disposal (please describe):
Annual costs for solid/hazardous waste treatment and disposal:
COSTS
Bulbs for drying lamps, annual cost and annual quantity used:
Doctor blades, annual cost and annual quantity used:
Ink cleaning equipment price and year of purchase:
Ink cleaning supplies, annual cost:
Explosion protection measures cost:
Ventilation/air filtering equipment price and year of purchase:
Annual cost for filters, etc.:
4-B, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 4-B
FACILITY BACKGROUND QUESTIONNAIRE
CLEANING PROCEDURE
What is the cleaning procedure for removing ink after a run?
How are used rags handled (industrial laundry or disposal):
What employee protective gear is used when cleaning (circle all that apply):
eye shields gloves apron respkator
Is the total volume of cleaning solution captured?
If yes, how is the captured solution disposed of?
Is the total volume of cleaning solution reused?
If yes, how often is the solution reused?
Is it processed in any way prior to reuse?
Is the used cleaning solution discharged directly to the sewer?
Is it pretreated?
PROCESS HISTORY
If you are using water-based or UV ink to print on film substrates, when did you switch from solvent-
based inks?
Why did you switch?
What changes were required to the equipment, the substrate, or your work practices to make this ink
work?
What costs or savings are associated with the switch?
4-B, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 4-B
FACILITY BACKGROUND QUESTIONNAIRE
This page is intentionally blank.
4-B, page 4
-------
Appendix 4-C (Performance Chapter)
Performance Demonstration Data Collection Form
I. Press Configuration
A. The press
Press manufacturer
Age of press
Press type (circle)
-, *••' .:-'-'-::. *:;-~
'^ t -f* '-^, ^'s
! ^ # ' , x ^t';.*-
^cr^M^y^--.
B. Print units
Number of print units
Distance between color stations
Drum diameter
: "r;s'>vi->^
< X >'\X ^
..•->*', >^v ,/•<
MnH(»1 '^&3y^'Z}^^i &f4>5&
Moael vr&^Sfcfie-:.' ^ :$»•?&&£
&"%£ ^h^^P''".'!'^^? ^-VM'^ ,'K'
m •11" 1 'sWy1**.*' *>^ !« •=: "- '"S *t^'' V-i^,*
Typical production speed .^|f |«SSM^sSM%
Maximum web width
^*<* ^* ' j*T/ 'H* V ^ ''"^^^
^ >•< 5- ^y1' ^ <" ?A ^ " -S-" '^" * ?V v^-* Sw*^^ £J'?l''~*'* ~
! ^*-,> >--«/ \ '"^Ji <- '° >;<»*? ^!- * f r" "?
*- *^ » -."»•**<., . f '*>v *\ , v"< ". 7' >
y^^tv
i* ^ f V> * C\*\ ^*J"> 4H^ ^'^^ <>•-
vi'^-v^'-Jr^sl^
-<•> ,:-;*--. • ^^t
C. Anilox
Print unit
Surface Type
Volume (BCM)
Screen count (LPI)
Diameter
Condition
D. Ink metering
Doctor blade
E. Ink pumping
Type
Description
, J ^ ^ ^ ^
f -^ V «t ^ 5.
<, 9 '%» *
!** " * « °»s»
V "^ ^ ^
^ ~* * *'* -^
* r*' \* ' *
"'*• ''.'/•*,-*
°'X ~^\^^
>""V :
-.? * \
V:^ »<-,
'-;'K\ •>»..
, * r* -;cs
%
«-, *> • -'' ',
/>••' -T:
-> ^ /-„ * s
" ^f# ^ ^
— *•' •;;
. ;* ; *'-/- " •'*• ^* >.
" ?~ ' ' • , '
V-- /,"-.*'< J*v:.
;^'t' ./-s^*Xf^
' ,, *» * ^ * "t ' >•
"jt * < T" ^ r
system
*?!5?i7xl'.:;^" ^''i'^Rvv^^^'A^^u j
and mixing system
~o> .V *\ *v.,r :,, , ~x\
'«,"> • f ' * " , ,~.
Manufacturer
1 -v , s,' ' ~\ '" \ ",,'•*
^Kli'v^;' ^:'^'-''^'%: ' '^-:'.:
4-C, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
F. Corona treater
Manufacturer
Maximum power output
•" .' :""^ •• /-''.Model fr \\_V" ,*_'.'"'>
* ' '' f - * > ' - V
"» < , ' j ^J/;-» *'
^ ' -% / ^ » •*>
: *' ,TI * - * -.''''•<*' <• * ' t **• ~ ^ y*'' *"»
- **^$< 1^*^^. x ^^ ^ *t ^ V "
- } ~~,\-
t fc*II\fi^ss*^S» ^ -. v" 5^ ss w<
or
... UV lamps
Interstation
Main
I. Blowers
Location and size
(sketch)
Location and size
(sketch)
K. VOC treatment
Type
K •* v
Efficiency
' / ^ / 'Vc-^ ^
Observations:
4-C, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
H. Set-Up (Pre-Makeready)
A. Substrate: (circle one) PE PE/EVA OPP
Roll ID
number
Manufacturer
Name
Date of
manufacture
B. Ink: (circle one) Water
UV
Solvent
Ink manufacturer
/ ^ 4
Ink manufacturer
on-site
Record the ink components on the Ink Set-up Sheet (Pre-Makeready)
C. Plate
Material
Gauge
W, vj f •***, -*l& ** *.x^ ~,~~*<^\
^ yl ^, S~v gif-y v4^X<»v" "*.•••
A,""^ ~ i;'"<". ^.-^ » ^ -^^^t ^*^^ ^ ^"
•^\ ** ^ V>
5^. «?>^v 'vmi! W * ^ > •>
-X 4^ V*^. X«X^ ^ WV
Manufacturer
Plate-mounting
method
~~ -"";. *"*»« »Sf»- ^, -sSr 5K " ^^«s S>!f^*- "" ~ < '^ " * '
"^ J ^-«r"** •'"- > - ^ S ^ ""* "- sf" "<
v f , *. ^5* "- -. " — - - ** - - >- <
^, ^v^/*^1^''^**,'- A^-V ""•«. "f •» «. - t, ^f -1'~ ^"S 1^ ."-«
'V, "" %~ *** ^* *C*^«- *1 --" " X"> » >- ;
- c -^^.j'O ^ ~v^Ri s "" ^rf^; •>. A '-"**• — r*:
v^, ^*^ ^.x^-^xs ^^, ^ ^ >!• ^ ^ ^ ^ >
D. Observations:
4-C, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
HI. Makeready
A. Substrate
Corona treatment specs
Power = kW
Current- * >A
1 £ * -g ** f *
Voltage s»-~A' x- ;y~
!a^j«cy4- 1;:^.''*^.
Surface Tension (dynes):
Across Web
Left
Right
Before corona treatment
Reading 1
Reading 2
f « »••
„ *• ^ ^ •'"-x, ^ ^
After corona treatment
Reading 1
* ^ ?i ^
~ ™ ', •" " * f
* * * * t- *- ~ ° *. ^
Reading 2
"^j^ /^r ^ v?^
*!• " -1
? - ^
~ > "sT ' ^ S
,"° „'„•*' ^»"-»
B. Record the ink compositions and adjustments on the Ink Setup Sheet (Makeready).
C. Start
Start time
Start footage (counter)
, *t -> * * ^
" t ^" - ^- %» :
"* /* ^ "^
D. Printing speed
Optimal printing speed obtained
Stop time
Stop footage (counter)
•> , J" «•?"*•>*' - **"
„ , -*- ^^ '/-«- /
F. Record the results of the ink densities on the Density Sheet (Makeready).
G. Record the results of the tape-adhesiveness test on the Tape-Adhesiveness Test Sheet.
H. Record the results of the visual tests (mottle/lay, trap, dimensional stability, blocking) on the Visual
Quality Test Sheet
I. Observations:
4-C, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
IV. Running Parameters
A. Start
Start time
Start footage (counter)
B. At the beginning of the run, record the ink densities on the Density Sheet.
C. Record the ink viscosity on the Running Viscosity Sheet every 15 minutes during the run.
Observations:
D. Press speed
Press speed obtained
Observations:
E. Dryers
Temperature:
Velocity:
Area:
Balance:
CI dryer #1
• „ st i~ ° <
«• % . ^ ~ "^ s c
.» • i ^ , x" *.** f
CI dryer #3
" ** "^ ^ •>•»
^^ «
j • s ?°
** ^
- "j? *. t-°?
-," *
' x * »t. » '
•c •» i v '««.»,?-«,»
* ^ A^i^X
* X "J
V, * f
CI dryer #4
/. *• ^ '*•
^ '
* " * „ » „ * *
'? •?<. '
\ ~,° "•*" ^
* • * < °r
Main dryer
•* v, ". ~> .„
y & * * -v
/• ^ * f ^ f- v-
k -. !t
V ^"^
" "_•»*'' ; «
4. ^ •* ^ K «^
\"v ^ "
Describe the number and type of adjacent presses. Note which were in operation during the performance
demonstration and record the type of ink they were running:
F. Energy consumption
Measure and record energy consumption during the demonstration run
Printing press
4-C, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Ink pumps
Corona treater
Interstation UV lamp
Final UV lamp
Interstation dryer
Final dryer
Blowers
Chillers
VOC incinerators/
recovery units
- - „ < •** ^ < '<• ' ° »" v , - ' -
<><•*'••' » > *,. s
4* ' ; i'< *--"<".,--*, *V
-: f —..** -V' /• ' ' "'
*",{-' *^ ' *.•> ^ "* * " *
, ' ' ' -' i ' ','/»,,
^ ^ '"Xji-^ V * v. _,
^ ^ ^ «* "*
V " / . v "~* % * ' ^
' % ^ $ ^rf - " ',
^x*» ° ~ ~- f £ •
"* , * i{ " f ~ " *> » ,
* " - ,> • ! * * 1 / <
£ " *<*" **»
' * ~- * « * •*/ '
, "" . ., >t \'-r, '"•'"' J* -v," >* «,v'» =
^ 5 *•.'«* ' fe V ~ / •*#"* ?v
C .•>'„,', x, < rf "V *" '' >*
G. Ambient Conditions
H. Stop
Stop time
Stop footage (counter)
Temperature
' V.
Humidity
•>.:< ,.,%
I. Record the results of the ink densities on the Density Sheet
J. Record the results of the tape-adhesiveness test on the Tape-Adhesiveness Test Sheet.
K. Record the results of the visual tests (mottle/lay, trap, dimensional stability, blocking) on the Visual
Quality Test Sheet.
L. Waste substrate
Quantity generated during the 2-hr
run (estimate)
4-C, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
V. Clean-Up
A. Start time
Start time
B. Cleaning chemical
Product name
Manufacturer
Type
$&?'?%:
Ifil
&
C. Clean-up procedure
D. Stop time
Stop time
4-C, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Ink Set-Up Sheet; REFLEX BLUE
Ink: (circle) I Water I UVI Solvent I -1PEIPE/EVAIOPPI I Print Unit
Pre-Makeready and Makeready
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other additive:
; ^Obs):,
. (B»>,
, ,\ ?h" "
11 " ! * • *' ' /' ^•"S"
T ^^ V X ^ ., ^> ~* ?>
. _ > < %* ^*° >.'..!
During Run
Record when added...
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
additive:
„ 0b$)
«
(Ibs)
abs)
(ibs)
Manufacturer's #
££S'»~£Mi*&j?<;/a'.
-Jtte^-^kk/l'
Manufacturer's #
Manufacturer's #
Manufacturer's #
i,^:^;r
• / ..„'..« «•
* * xC " ^ * ^
f •> "•-
<• ,« ?<
i .*<•. K •*«
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
•* '
x- /•,**" *• "i * ?
K- -> ' ^ y^ ,
v v ^ rf
/- " *» * ^^,^
^i ^, ^ ^x A
< ,^ "/ - ^V
«><; * '
'- ^V^,r ; -
Clean-Up
Ink remauiing in bucket
Cleaning solutions
added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and cleaning
solution removed
1 .-W
abs)
(Ibs)
.-> aH
^ ^ '
,.- ^ « - > •
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
f 'v * *~ S.
' '*' ,
r'*,' ,'• '
c " j >,( • ,
^ ~ Z "/
Comments:
Dry
rag
weight
, ' \ ffl»>
1 ^ <•
Rag weight
after cleaning
• ** ,, , - j$bs>
" s <., "
~s ^ ^
* ' ,3 * ' „ * " ?
Comments:
Calculate Total Ink Used
Calculate Ink Used
* -Clbs)'
For how many substrates?
t t V >' ' f,\
" f V4*
4-C, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Ink Set-Up Sheet: CYAN
;• - >%: -f-i
Ink: (circle) I Water I UV I Solvent I -1PEIPE/EVAIQPPf
?- :W' ' ''V- ::•'&
I Print Unit
Pre-Makeready and Makeready
Ink
Manufacturer's number
Water
Extender
Manufacturer's number
Solvent
Manufacturer's number
Other additive:
Manufacturer's number
During Run
Record when added...
Ink
Manufacturer's #
# impressions
•>*
-a
Water
# impressions
Extender
Manufacturer's #
# impressions
Solvent
Manufacturer's #
# impressions
Other
additive:
Manufacturer's #
# impressions
Clean-Up
Ink remaining in bucket
Cleaning solutions
added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and cleaning
solution removed
(Ibs)
(Ibs)
'•$, ^-I:«K.V"^;V*^^~^-U'^^A*
^^W'S/S^&f.V,
$«-fea$to-
i'&'S^X^'C'"!:!-*
a, ^-^^^v-^^^^I^
Comments:
Type
Type
£,V^/J#-
h'-;Miv??^i-
^* > < % s v ,^-& * A *•**?[ <. ^-^^ *
', -2?A VT <, *,*•*''' *•« '
=Sv ^ ^ >*>* * ^ * ** y>
J^^^"--*,,-;^^.^.
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
" •%, ~ t'*- > •
s *<^- * ;>
^ * i« ^,«
j -^
V~r ^^>- ^ ^ ^s A^ -?
' It -•.-*"
Comments:
Dry
rag
weight
C^v^-^tt^'
>s. ? *$f"^'*& !
•*-f^^< *-<™.^* ^^> ^o. >
^.X<^*-•''• -'•>,;
Rag weight
after cleaning
t' - ^%(lbs);
- „ ^*, #% »
•=• *« ** -" ~
j, .S-! V^i f.
Comments:
Calculate Total Ink Used
Calculate Ink Used
t ™'v(lbs)_
^ * ^ * <.
S •v)'
For how many substrates?
« i. *xf'£ - •> %'' „, •
>' * ; ^ -.« v' " v*v, • i
J^S ' , * >*•• j- « «» ,
„ , M « **i /<. ^,» ' ^ *
4-C, page 9
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Ink Set-Up Sheet: GREEN
Me: (circle) I Water I UV I Solvent I -1PE i PE/EVAI OPPI
Print Unit
Pre-Makeready and Makeready
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other additive:
^ " .ON)
, " , i Vv^fU
; ; dbs);
- . di*)<
_-'-^Ob0i
Manufacturer's number
Manufacturer's number
Manufacturer's number
Manufacturer's number
* ' •> ; - ^ '< *
- " "' '•>',,*<*' i,
" t ^ * ' «* ~ * <
* >
*« ~ ** * "^ " > *
& ^ ~
>", -•„ *'<•>.. ,** x* ' ,
" ' *• >V^. * ,- . "-,'»
During Run
Record when added...
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
additive:
,
Manufacturer's #
Manufacturer's #
Manufacturer's #
Manufacturer's #
•/*iX,''< '*',•* v'/ft-s
XfiV-.&T'f ',-^,8 '«f
. •* ','»•'. »«"> #?-2,'«,'
^A.^JK*?'*,!" SJ?"'^'S-
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
• ,-. --^ y
VS '*«•?•(, Kv
„' >
*"•'*'. > i\»
°*« \ ^ ^^
$ , ~ . ' " .
\-^\'-f '
V * * '*' x
\ ?-"< v* ' ^
* ^" ^ ^-^^J •. ^
" ^ ^
Clean-Up
Ink remaining in bucket
Cleaning solutions
added
Ink scraped out
Me wiped out
Me and cleaning
solution removed
dbs)
(Ibs)
(Ibs)
•>*•>*
* * ' ^
* _~ s.<; A
' ',C . J " "",
°> * *~.
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
^ ~ *i
~?
A /^
-4 '
» *" ! ff
f /
•X *r °
Comments:
Dry
rag
weight
\\' ^^
•^ ** *
"^ ,^ " , <
Rag weight
after cleaning
~ , (tbs)
•* v ^ ^ v
"• X- v>
/»
Comments:
Calculate Total Ink Used
Calculate Me Used
(Ibs), For how many substrates?
4-C, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Ink Set-Up heet:
:ir « - -
Ink: (circle) I Water I UV I Solvent 1 - 1 PE I PE/EVA I OPP I
Print Unit
Pre-Makeready and Makeready
Ink
Manufacturer's number
Water
Extender
Manufacturer's number
Solvent
Manufacturer's number
Other additive:
*v
Manufacturer's number
During Run
Record when added...
Ink
Manufacturer's #
# impressions
Water
<»t
# impressions
Extender
Manufacturer's #
# impressions
Solvent
Manufacturer's #
# impressions
Other
additive:
l%\v^?>-~ ...
- -"- -^ ^V'Sx. . ' , N^^"1^
.* x.* / ttf o? * **v-&..^s; _'
^^
Manufacturer's #
# impressions
Clean-Up
Ink remaining in bucket
Cleaning solutions
added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and cleaning
solution removed
(Ibs)
(Ibs)
?e-";t?W$V
.;<»» iiV. *> *„!<, •><
£i.v;^)C
•:-T*tH^'^^>'
t-?-t-.'<:;r>^
A 'tiK ',L''~j ,L
r^^db^;
;*.:^v."4>-
Comments:
Type
Type
**^ . *"
•* f _ -
" ' '-^ ~ * '
£ ^ A * \
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
• „ "\ '* - ( > ! ,
^ ^ v *
r'j^X""" J"
^ •*• >S °J p *
• ^ ^ - * * -<>•*•'
*• v.*f.* $¥• yS -*,
Comments:
Dry
rag
weight
-. r^ a^
* - t '-
*» •> v •
tf ^ v v ^ **
\ a ^
Rag weight
after cleaning
'- ' ,(lbs)
^ •>* i ^> «,'/
- - ^ « *• v
-^awKS, >ju '
Comments:
Calculate Total Ink Used
Calculate lok Used
iAVjIbs^
For how many substrates?
*•< AvSn^«- x >^K *** J y "*"** * ^ S
: .'**:'• ' ar"^'" / ?i >• >"
_ » " > * » <• ~i f >.,
4-C, page 11
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Ink Set-Up Sheet: WHITE
Me: (circle) I Water I UV I Solvent I -1PEIPE/EVA | OPPI
Print Unit
Pre-Makeready and Makeready
Me
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other additive:
- ' J¥>f
'••>' $»>,
*•* ^ .* *- Oks}
k < CM*^/
' abs)"~
Manufacturer's number
•*» ^ "• ft? * ^ * *'•
„ * ' ' « ' / > i
Manufacturer's number
Manufacturer's number
Manufacturer's number
r-^;i5r e% ^Hl, ft ! '
ZgS:*?} H^;«>--' v^-
||if||||§tj||
During Run
Record when added...
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
additive:
Obs)
-06s)
. Obs)
Obs)
O&s)
-
Manufacturer's #
Manufacturer's #
Manufacturer's #
Manufacturer's #
.- AAA " J ^^ ty
*.„+,' * ! >t? ^ *<<
^ 'J>^^ %^<^
*„ ^ !>4'>'t™?"' >^^ &^^-'
: 4 *.x;';vvf<
; '.J>"'»<' v-*
!. , * ^ A* * ^v' '
' v>«, >"?/ »fi»"',
"" '» "V "J'',f
,'• - „-<• >J*tx •
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
# impressions
v *
f » .* t * - „ !
'^-'. #• -*"•'
y* ' v ~i ^ # T
/ ^ s *
)
^ * * > '•
„ .< 4, ;i
, , > , r !
Clean-Up
Me remaining in bucket
Cleaning solutions
added
Me scraped out
Me wiped out
Me and cleaning
solution removed
ObjD-
(Ibs)
Obs)
«/
'- Obs)
Obs);
Comments:
Type
Type
•%'!* •^"t", V.*^, '• «£> /:,
"iS £&*£>'%{$& *I-s*
•3$'&~*;*3&'%&&
V ^0 '*&-* l^'^M^^r-f^^i
". &•;-' ^<^^?™%^y<>''"
''"'>4t'/'?iXffa ''^' '^ y ^ ^ /^f'^s.^
'Jp" ^^^^v^'f*-*-^'^'^
^5!^W.^ftf:'^>;«K
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
Manufacturer #
(attach MSDS)
!> V ^ *••
* * fs~ "':
> , >• «
^-,^\.t!
* s'4 '^ , *j
Comments:
Dry
rag
weight
• --'4;illl'*-^MB^te
l^tt^ll^^!
fte.' i '.--i'- , ? <;'-'-,y<3'->;< i *
"?'£.? sfe.frfjfeV-.f -g^V'^
Rag weight
after cleaning
', ' .-(Jbs)
/'' , ^
', ** ' V
Comments:
Calculate Total Ink Used
Calculate Me Used
(Ibs)* For how many substrates?
4-C, page 12
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Substrate: (circle one)
End of makeready
Tape-Adhesiveness Test Sheet
Record after makeready and jifter print run.
PE PE/EVA OPP "
End of run
4-C, page 13
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Visual Quality Test Sheet
Record at end of makeready and end of print run.
Makeready
A. Mottle/Lay - visual quality:
B. Trap:.
C. Dimensional Stability:.
D. Blocking:.
End of Run
A. Mottle/Lay:_
B. Trap:.
C. Dimensional Stability:.
D. Blocking:.
4-C, page 14
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Density Sheet
Record at the end of the makeready and end of the print run.
End of Makeready:
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Density 1
Density 2
Density 3
Density 4
Density 5
Average
Density
Standard
Deviation
End of run:
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Density 1
Density 2
Density 3
Density 4
Density 5
Average
Density
Standard
Deviation
Observations:
4-C, page 15
-------
APPENDIX 4-C
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION DATA COLLECTION FORM
Running Viscosity Sheet
Record every 15 minutes during the press run.
Me: (circle) I Water I UV I Solvent I - IPEIPE/EVA I OPPI
REFLEX BLUE
Time
Viscosity
Start
15 min.
SOmin.
-
45min.
*f
1 hour
_"V ,,^"J ~
Ihr. 15
^ „•
*" ^
Ihr. 30
a-' ^
1 hr. 45
^* •*
s f
2hrs.
a
CYAN
Time
Viscosity
Start
15min.
SOmin.
45 min.
, - ',"
«. i '
1 hour
- ~ '» v „
Ihr. 15
~ s,t ~,*
Ihr. 30
v ^ •*'
Ihr. 45
2hrs.
> „
>, f." r/~
GREEN
Time
Viscosity
Start
15 min.
SOmin.
'
45 min.
* y
1 hour
< ^
Ihr. 15
? 0
Ihr. 30
f •>
Ihr. 45
; < -?• ^"
2hrs.
' V)? j *" £
i'5 , v"
MAGENTA
Time
Viscosity
Start
15 min.
SOmin.
-
45 min.
<
•&
1 hour
5, <- *
Ihr. 15
•*- y
Ihr. 30
t f- ** ^
* « <^ '
1 hr. 45
•^ r
2hrs.
f
WHITE
Time
Viscosity
Start
15 min.
30 nun.
45 min.
r
1 hour
^ *
1 hr. 15
** " <
Ihr. 30
-^ x
Ihr. 45
2hrs.
* x i*
4-C, page 16
-------
Appendix 4-D (Performance Chapter)
Test Image Delign
4-D, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-D
TEST IMAGE DESIGN
This page is intentionally blank.
4-D, page 2
-------
Appendix 4-E (Performance Chapter)
Laboratory Test Procedures and ^Performance Data
Adhesive Lamination
Purpose
The purpose of this test is to measure the bond strength of the adhesive layer of the
lamination to the ink. The adhesive lamination test is based on methods developed by
Quality Assurance at Sun Chemical Corporation.
Equipment
Force measurement instrument
#6 Meyer bar
Oven
Adhesive (Morton's Lamal HSA or Adcote 333)
Procedure
1. Make a print of ink to be tested on designated stock using a #6 Meyer bar.
2. Dry print in oven at 180°F for 30 seconds.
3. Apply a second down of adhesive (Morton's Lamal HSA or Adcote 333) using a #6
bar.
. 4. Dry the adhesive at 120°F for 30 seconds.
5. Place the stock to which the ink is to be laminated in contact with the printed sample.
Use a flexographic hand proofer to apply pressure to the lamination and to remove any
trapped air.
6. Place the sample in a 180°F oven for 45 seconds to cure the adhesive.
7. Let sample age for a minimum of 24 hours before testing.
8. Cut a one-inch test strip from the laminated sample and use the force measurement
instrument to determine the force (in kilograms) which is necessary to separate the two
pieces of stock.
Results
Delamination tests were done in the machine direction of the laminated film. The
delamination force was the average of five measurements. Samples were cut from one
location during the run as indicated by the following symbol:
x = thirty minutes into run
Results appear in Chapter 4.
4-E, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
Block Resistance
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Purpose
The purpose of the block resistance test is to check the bond of the ink to the substrate
when heat and pressure are applied. The block resistance test is based on methods
developed by Quality Assurance at Sun Chemical Corporation.
Equipment
LC. Block Tester
Calibrated compression springs
Oven
Humidity-controlled environment (if not available, conditions should be reported)
Procedure
1. The adhesion of the ink is tested two ways: "face to face" (printed side to printed
side) and "face to back" (printed side to unprinted side). "Back to back" (unprinted
substrate on unprinted substrate) should be tested as the control.
Only surface printed samples are tested "face to face." The original protocol stated, "The
test should be conducted at 5 pounds per square inch (psi) for 16 hours at 80% relative
humidity. These humidity conditions must be met in order to properly interpret the
results." However, the actual tests were conducted at 100 psi for 8 hours at 43%
humidity in a 120°F oven.
Surface and lamination printed samples are tested "face to back." The original protocol
stated, "The standard test should be conducted at 50 psi for 16 hours at 80% relative
humidity. If 80% relative humidity cannot be met, use 125 psi at 120°F at ambient
humidity." However, the actual tests were conducted at 100 psi for 8 hours at 43%
humidity in a 120 °F oven.
2. Test prints should be two inches wide by six inches long. The minimum size is two
inches wide by two inches long.
3. Place test prints (face-to-face, face-to-back, or back-to-back) on the base of the block
tester immediately after printing and drying.
4. Insert the centering place without disturbing the position of the test prints.
5. Select a calibrated compression spring, depending on the pressure required.
6. Place the spring (bottom in centering plate opening) into the assembly and tighten to
the desired pressure (indicator and scale attached to spring).
7. Place the block tester in an environment with the specified humidity.
8. Remove the print and separate it carefully to observe the tendency to block.
9. When the test print is on vinyl or highly plasticized film, check the block test after the
recommended period of time, then place it back in the test chamber and check it again
after several days. Blocking may occur after a prolonged period of time due to
plasticizer migration.
4-E, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Results
The OPP substrate from sites 1,4,9, and 10 wa§ tested in the in the pre-laminated state,
to simulate rewind conditions that it would be subjected to prior to converting. The
results are reported on a scale from 0 to 5 as described in Table 4-E.l.
Table 4-E.1 Description of Block Resistance Results
Score
0
1
2
3
4
5
Block
Resistance
Result
No blocking
Slight cling
Cling
Slight
blocking
Considerable
blocking
Complete
blocking
Description
No adhesion or cohesion between contiguous surfaces, which
slide or peel freely upon one another. Surfaces of specimens
are not marred.
A slight "ticking" can be heard as the samples are carefully
peeled apart, but there is no visible marring of the surface.
There is a noticeable adhesion between adjacent surfaces or
a visual marring of the surfaces but no distortion of webs or
offset of printing inks, lacquers, or other coatings.
Slight adhesion, adjacent surfaces do not slide or peel freely,
but do with frictional pressure. Surface of specimen may
show very slight evidence of web distortion or marring of the
coating or transfer of ink or coating to the immediate contact
surface of next specimen.
Adhesion or cohesion of contiguous surfaces. Layers may be
separated with difficulty. Surfaces will be distorted, marred, or
partially destroyed showing ink, lacquer, or coating transfer to
the immediate contact surface of next specimen. Paper based
materials will show loss of fiber. Synthetics may or may not
display surface mar.
Blocking to the extent of a complete seal or weld between
adjacent surfaces which cannot be separated without
destructing the specimen.
For the testing of the samples printed at the performance demonstration facilities and at
Western Michigan University, samples were cut from two locations during the run length
as indicated by location identification symbols as follows:
w = beginning of run
z = end of run
Table 4-E.2 shows the block resistance of samples from each site. When a site number
begins with an "L," the data were taken from a laboratory run conducted at Western
Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.2 Block Resistance For Performance Demonstration Sites and
Laboratory Runs
Ink
1 System
1 Solvent-
based
Film
DPE
PE/EVA
OPP
Product
Line
#S2
#S2
#S1
#S2
Site
5
7
L5d
5
7
L7
9B
10
L4
Location
of
Sample3
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
F-F/
F-B"
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
Result0
light blocking
light blocking
light cling
light cling
onsiderable
locking on blue
onsiderable
blocking on blue
light blocking
onsiderable
blocking on blue
slight blocking
slight cling
slight blocking
slight blocking
slight cling
considerable
blocking
slight cling
slight blocking on
green
slight blocking
considerable
blocking on blue
slight blocking
considerable
blocking
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
considerable
blocking on blue
slight blocking
slight cling
slight cling
slight blocking
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
[I
Score0
3
3
1
1
4
4
3
4
3
1
3
3
1
4
1
3
3
4
3
4
I
1
1
1
4
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
4-E, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Ink
System
UV
uv
(no slip)
Water-
based
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
LDPE
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#U2 'k
#U2
#U3
#U1
#W3
#W3
Site
6
6
8
11
2
3
L1
2
3
L6
Location
of
Sample3
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
w
z
w
z
w
z
F-F/
F-B"
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
Result0
slight cling
considerable
blocking
slight cling
considerable
blocking
slight cling
considerable
blocking
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight blocking on
green
slight blocking
slight blocking
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight blocking on
blue
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight cling
slight blocking
slight cling
slight blocking
Score0
1
4
1
4
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
4-E, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Ink
System
Water-
based
Film
OPP
OPP
Product
Line
#W1
#W2
#W4
Site
4
1
L3
9A
L2
Location
of
Sample3
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
F-F/
F-Bb
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
F-F
F-B
Result0
considerable
slocking
considerable
blocking
considerable
blocking
considerable
blocking
considerable
blocking
slight blocking
considerable
blocking
slight cling
slight blocking
slight blocking
slight blocking
slight cling
considerable
blocking
slight cling
considerable
blocking
slight cling
slight blocking
slight cling
slight blocking
slight cling
Score0
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
1
3
3
3
1
4
1
4
1
3
1
3
1
"Samples were taken at two locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of run
z = end of run
bSamp!es were tested in two ways:
F-F = face to face (printed substrate to printed substrate)
F-B = face to back (printed substrate to unprinted substrate)
'The score is a number corresponding to the test result based on the following scale:
no blocking = 0
slight cling = 1
cling = 2
slight blocking = 3
considerable blocking = 4
complete blocking = 5
^L" indicates data from a laboratory run.
See Table 4-E.1 for a complete description.
4-E, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
CIE L*a*b*
Purpose
The purpose of the CIE (International Commission on Illumination) L*a*b* test is to
measure the reflected light and calculate a numerical value for the light/darkness, hue,
and chroma of a printed color. The CIE L*a*b* test is based on methods developed by
Western Michigan University.
Equipment
Spectrophotometer/colorimeter (Datacolor Spectraflash 600)
Procedure
1. Measure the CIE L*a*b* values using the Datacolor Spectraflash 600. Operate the
colorimeter in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
2. Measurements will be performed using the Small Area View (SAV) port, so
calibrations should also be made to this port size. Following the instructions on the
computer screen, calibrate to the black cavity holding it over the port. Then attach the
white standard 529 to the arm and calibrate according to the instructions.
3. Measure the samples using the SAV port size. Two samples are to be taken from four
locations of the run. All three substrates will be tested (LDPE, PE/EVA, and OPP).
Generally, select the mode for CIE L*a*b* and place the sample area at port. Follow the
instructions on the screen to proceed with the testing.
4. Take readings of solid ink densities at several areas of the specimen surface to obtain
an indication of uniformity.
5. Measure each sample on both sides of the sheet for each color. The instrument will
automatically take five measurements and report the average as one value.
Results
CIE L*a*b* values were measured in the laboratory with samples collected from each
site. Samples were cut from four locations during the run length as indicated by the
following symbols:
w = beginning of run
x = 30 minutes into run
y = 60 minutes into run
z = end of run
Table 4-E.3 shows the CIE L*a*b* measurements for these samples. When a site
number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a laboratory run conducted at
Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 7
-------
o
1
DC
O
I
Q
|
Ul
cc
i
Ul
o
o
£
§
cc
o
m
(A
cc
!
CO
1
CO
.2
CO
c
co
o
CD
Q
CO
O
5
w
CO
CD
CC
Si
1o
UJ
o
CO
ui
iS-
J3
.2
Ul
X
c
u
Q.
Q.
1.
*C8
ll
k.
1
§ a
S= w. C
2 o E
j CC
3 w
i
*CB
•fc
b.
1
| 1
go £
1 c?
<
c
ts
11
Q.
j
i
i
<
(
o
«?
5
CO
in
•*
CO
CO
rr
co
•£
,
co
O)
in
CM
in
CO
o
T
co
•<*
o
CO
1
s
m
^
r»
f
5-
0
CO
1
N.
r>-
O)
CM
m
co
co
?
co
CO
CO
m
0)
2
D)
CO
CO
§
o
CM
CO
T
fe
S
c
CD
CD
D)
t^.
co
o
in
•*
CO
f-
co
•<*
CO
CO
CD
3
.Q
CO
O)
?
CM
CO
CO
C^
r--
co
CD
]5
i^-
o>
t
O)
•
CO
S
T—
CO
1
fe
c?
S
CO
«?
CM
CM
CO
1
05
CM
CO
CO
O)
O
•*
fe
CM
CO
c.
£
D)
S
*
S
T—
m
CM
3
D)
ce
N
S
co
in
0)
•*
in
o
co
o>
•*
S
1
>,
S
CM
CM
fe
CO
CO
CT>
CO
CO
1
co
co
3
l>~
CO
CD
CO
N.
co
o
co
i
o
§
%
•*
CO
?M
r>~
co
CD
£
D)
S
8
o
3
•*
O3
o
CO
(D
£
O)
co
CO
"3-
in
o
9
co
in
3
•<*•
S
"*•
CD
JQ
CM
in
?3
•*
in
CO
CO
!n
CO
CO
c
w
O)
X
(O
in
CO
CM
in
-*
^
•
CO
9
CD
O
S
1
O)
N
•D
CD
not samp
>»
0)
CD
CO
Q.
-------
<
Q
UJ
O
CC
£
cc
UJ
Q.
Q
•z.
CO
UJ
cc
o
UJ
u
g
Q.
UJ
cc
o
GO
Q)
C
1
,£>,
g
1
o
CO
•o
(0
CO
0)
.0
I
"5
o
0)
Q
0)
o
CO
-§
£
co
(0
CD
cc
*ffl
UJ
o
CO
ui
4
0)
UI
4
X
•5
m
Q.
O.
JQ
*co
ll
o
o
O
Z CO
to "5 §
O "
_I <0
«J
#
CO
o
"c
c «,
0 .2
8°£
3 «
0>
«s
CO
T°
3 «
•D C
S-"
o.
E
u.
E
£
CO
•?£
^
^-
CM
oo
CM
s
s
co
CD
CD
CO
E
X
O5
0
o
05
g
O5
in
5
CD
CD
CO
5
in
CM
m
£
III
m
a.
co
05
9
oo
CO
CM
5
CM
co
1
CM
O5
co
1
c^
CO
^^
c^
^Vl
CO
1
en
co
CO
CO
CM
CD
CD
in
CM
N.
in
CD
£
CO
^-
CM
CO
cS
co
1
CO
ai
in
c:
CD
£
CO
f*^
r*.
CO
CM
in
s
co
CO
CD
en
0
CO
in
€3
"^^
s
co
CO
CD
15
rr>
o
CO
in
o
o
05
in
CO
^
CD
I
N
[x.
^
*-
Si
**
oo
CD
in
as
1
>•
in
CO
9
"
CM
8
CM
CO
1
^_
05
8
CO
o
a>
O5
CO
1
co
CO
§
CO
in
CO
in
CM
o
CD
m
£
CO
on
S
CM
m
CO
i
oo
CO
in
in
CD
£
CO
€3
^^
«
f^
CO
2:
CT
CD
CO
•<*•
in
CO
o
co
CM
CO
in
CO
CD
3
.a
r; ,?, -
T3
a>
a.
c
co
CO
"5
c
X
O5 CM CM O5
CO T— O5 O>
CO CO T- CO
1 co co in
O5 OO h- CO
co 05 r~- r^
T- o co co
in co •<*• •>-
in t^ co i^.
O O5 CO T-
CM i-" r^ co
W CD CD CO
3
CD C
CT S S •
m •*
CM. N;
CM CO
co in
O5 CO
N- CM
t *~
X CO
r>- 05
CO CO
c.
CD CD
£ 3
CD -Q
CO
CO
in
CM
CO
CO
te
in
CO
CD
£
CO
X
T—
'i4
CO
in
O5
CO
CO
o
in"
CO
CD
£
CD
g
*l
O5
^^
CD
in
CM
O5
CM
O5
CM
CO
1
oo
o
oo
co
CO
co
CM
co
CD
CO
CD
c
CM
m
CD
T—
co
9
O5
o
m
CO
c
CD
£
CO
N
•Q
CD
Q.
F
CO
CO
o
>•
^"
9
in
CD
co
CM
^
s
1
CO
O)
CO
Q.
-------
Q
Ul
O
Z
tc
2
tc
Ul
a
a
•z.
to
Ul
tc
Q
Ul
O
O
tc
a.
fe
Ul
I
oc
o
m
eo
(O
CD
cc
Ul
o
co
ui
i
8
X
c.
V
a
2s
*«
n
1
• *
* t*. "5
S ° |
3 w
«
*«
*J
I
i *
i *" °
o
P
X
^>
f*»*
*
CO
N.
T—
in
CM
CM
r
las
§
c?
»
CQ
05
i
u
CL
0
I
1
CO
CM
CO
O5
CM
«
CO
CO
d
CD
1
in
CO
co
CD
i
CO
g
1
0
o
CO
"
in
cp
CO
CO
CO
c
CD
2
CO
o
CO
in
CD
m
cp
CO
CD
CD
£
TO
3
CO
CO
CM
CO
CO
CD
co
05
I
in
"?
o
oo
*
cu
~C5
T- in CM co
•* CO CO T-
co oo o T-
1 CM CO **
co co CM r~
•t— TJ- in o
CM N- •* ••*•
in co cp '
o co oo t-
^i* ^3 T™ *^i*
CM CD If) CD
in in co •*
1 e c:
D) £ CD CD
as £3 CD 3
E C3 D) S
N
T3
CD
Q.
as
CO
>•
g
in
o
05
CM
CO
'O
CD
C35
as
X
CO
"?
CO
O5
O5
CM
CO
CO
CO
H
CD
a>
as
5
o
CM
CO
*
CO
CM
i
CO
1
Q\J
f*»
1
co
CM
CM
i
T-
CO
§
p
as
CM
OO
CM
O5
in
T
!*»»
to
c
CD
£
D)
in
CD
CM
in
co
00
i
^VI
1^*
m
in
CD
£
o>
o
oo
*
05
m
CO
CM
CD
3
CM
t
oo
CM
CM
CO
O5
CO
1
T—
t
CM
CM
CO
co
in
CO
as
CD
O)
as
N
co
T
PI
oo
CM
CM
CM
00
CD
CD
D)
as
E
.»
CO
CO
m
o
05
O5
o
^^
f^
1
in
in
CM
05
oo
f**«
^VI
LO
c^
pi
1
00
CD
O5
CM
in
T
CO
CM
CO
m
CD
£
D)
00
O5
CM
05
r-.
^^
^^
CO
in
CD
£
O)
oo
O5
i
co
in
CO
CM
o
CD
la
CO
i
CD
m
CM
O5
05
co
cu
z
D
CO
CM
CM
in
9
cu
CD
N.
CD
£
O)
X
1—
T—
CO
in
CO
?
co
0
c
CD
£
o>
5
3
Li)
CD
CO
CO
CO
co
cp
•<*•
in
co
CO
CD
£
D)
N
•a
CD
a.
as
CO
0
-
iiT
-------
Q
Ul
U
DC
O
u.
DC
Ul
Q.
Q
Z
CO
Ul
DC
D
Ul
O
O
DC
Q.
fc
Ul
DC
O
m
o>
O
o
DC
o
o
•0
(0
CO
£
CO
§
i
§
CO
i
•i
s.
m
o>
DC
*B
UJ
o
CO
ui
4
£
S
ill
x
Q
Z
111
Q.
0.
-
cn
•<*•
T-
3
1
CD
O
OS
X
N.
^
CM
CO
3
j:
3
s
CD
TO
CO
E
5
co
CM
z>
*
LL1
Q-
Q
>
$
CO
CM
-a-
•<3-
9
in
CD
t—
CD
1
CD
r^
co
^
CD
9
3
8
1
in
co
CO
CO
CO
•<*
o
•9
CO
o
1C
CO
c
CD
£
D)
O>
O)
CM
CO
Ni
S
O
M-
in
CD
c
CD
£
D)
t>-
CO
•<*
•*
•*
oo
fS
§
CD
15
oo
CO
-*
f
s
CM
CO
CO
o
••a-
CD
25
CO
o
o
CM
oo
<*
N.
o>
?
CO
£
CD
CD
CO
E
N
CD
LO
*-
co
-*•
CD
•*
S
3
1
CD
0?
>,
oo
CO
•*
CM
•*
oo
CO
^
g
1
CM
IO
CO
C\l
^*
N.
9
oo
co
CO
1
o
CD
CM
CO
CD
O
O
If)
8
S
CD
CD
D)
O
05
8
CO
oo
o
IO
oo
c-
in
CO
c
CD
CD
0)
^
•*
T
oo
CM
CM
•*
in
§
CD
15
o
l>-
^
•*
CM
CM
CO
CD
§
CD
5
oo
oo
m
CO
CM
in
in
8
co
-si-
.2
1
X
T—
CO
03
CO
in
in
CM
OO
CO
•*
1
CD
O>
CO
5
CO
CM
*
PE/EVA
-d-
m
oo
9
CM
CM
O
9
CM
CO
1
§
oo
CO
en
h~
o
9
T—
CO
o
CO
1
in
U)
T*.
CO
in
CM
r*.
in
•*
cS
CD
CD
D5
CO
N.
co
CO
co
oo
10
S
eg
c
CD
£
D5
T-
O>
?
in
CO
T-
CO
O)
oo
CO
CO
5
CO
CM
K>
?
T—
O5
CO
CO
CO
CD
2
5
CM
s
CM
m
S
00
•*
1
CD
O>
CO
N
O>
in
•*
CO
en
S
•*
in
oo
<*
1
CD
I
>,
55
9
oo
oo
o
CO
CM
in
o
CO
1
?^
OO
9
£
9
t<~-
r^
o
CO
1
m
CO
en
en
En
co
T—
-a-
CD
CD
£
0)
CO
co
CO
s
K5
co
Tt-
CO
CD
£
D)
!£
?
1C
•t—
^
oo
m
oo
CO
CD
&
co
o
•9
m
o
CO
CO
en
CO
CD
25
•*
•*
T—
I
CO
T—
CO
m
$
5
1
CD
TO
CO
X
IT"
oo
CM
CO
CO
CM
in
•3-
"4-
in
1
CD
1
5
CO
CO
*:
S
9
CO
in
CO
CM
S
CM
co
1
en
CO
co
9
CO
0
$
00
"3-
CO
CD
1
oo
oo
CO
8
$
CM
T-
O
1^
CD
£
0>
in
oo
in
oo
CO
in
in
•si-
£
CD
£
D)
in
e»
3
s
00
-3-
o
00
•*
CD
3
-Q
r>~
en
CO
^r
oo
•*
oo
co
o
3
CD
25
fe
^
fi!
S
in
o
•*
in
1
CD
TO
CO
N
"8
Q.
CO
CO
|
>»
in
oo
9
CO
o
co
CM
"*
1—
T™
co
1
S
co
co
in
•*
in
CM
CM
S
c
CD
£
D)
00
CO
$
CD
CM
00
en
N.
oo
-a-
CD
25
CO
Q.
lif
4
-------
O
Ul
o
•z.
i
DC
2
oc
K
Q
i
CO
Ul
QC
3
Q
Ul
O
O
cc
o.
1
§
CO
OC
2b
*C8
Ul
o
"
Ul
CD
1
X
c
u
Q.
J,
*CB
It
Q
3
> £
_ i 0j
J2
*«
*
C
8
» •
a .<
_i «
(
"8
3 CO
•o i
22
0.
ii
•
^
™"
n
i
o
co
fo
CO
in
co
"r~
CD
TO
CO
X
o
^
CO
CD
00
s
f8
1
co
T—
— )
11.1
n.
Q
.. i
>
—
CO
c\i
1
CO
%
oo
o
o
CO
1
0
en
CM
co
o
CM
CO
•<*•
o
CO
1
g
"55
0
Y—
in
o
CO
CO
in
en
o
CO
CD
£
TO
CM
O
^^
^^
in
CO
in
cS
CD
£
rn
CM
CO
in
'
m
?
in
CO
CO
CD
3
n
OO
oo
o
in
s
in
0
O5
CD
"o
o
in
m
en
CO
5
CO
^
CD
TO
CO
N
^
in
00
o
in
CO
tn
CO
CD
8"
s
CM
'
in
CO
CO
C\l
(^
o
CO
1
oo
en
m
<*•
R
9
CO
O)
oo
in
1
CD
^^
£:
co
in
^^
CNI
CO
CD
C
CD
£
rn
CO
co
o
CO
o
oo
in
en
in
CO
CD
CD
£
TO
in
CO
CM
in
i
f\i
CO
co
3
CD
xS
co
en
%
8
m
CO
CO
CD
"o
n
T-
m
n
CM
5
f8,
r
CD
en
co
E
X
oo
o
:o
§
81
E
co
CD
8*
CM
CO
^*
*
111
Q.
q
_J
i
P
CO
5
oo
in
o
co
0)
in
m
m
CO
o
co
CO
co
CO
|*
in
in
CO
in
1
TJ
CO
m
.0
o
OS
in
CO
S
s
CO
CD
CO
co
c.
CD
£
TO
o
•>*•
CO
en
••a-
1—
in
CO
co
co
CD
£
TO
CO
O
co
in
in
5
CO
CD
o
%
in
CD
CM
CO
0)
T—
•<*•
co
o
in
co
co
CM
m
CO
^
CD
TO
CO
N
[^
^^
O
CD
CO
5
00
g
&
1
CM
CD
CO
CD
CM
CO
§
en
in
1
in
in
CO
CO
en
CO
in
oo
CO
in
in
1
in
CM
Eo
i
00
en
00
in
CD
£
TO
3J
CO
§
o
•9
oo
CM
oo
co
CD
£
TO
CO
CD
in
en
CO
T—
CD
CM
CO
co
CD
5
^Z
i
CO
in
cu
in
CO
CD
Zi
in
co
t
CO
g
in
CM
in
18
•r
CD
8"
X
S
CD
s
CO
in
CO
co
CM
in
co
c.
CD
C?
CO
CO
oo
co
St
?
o
co
CM
CO
c
^
CM
«
9
co
CO
CO
1
a
oo
CO
CO
0
in
in
CO
co
T—
co
CD
£
TO
^
CO
cvi
10
o
o
CM
CO
1
TO
CO
CD
O
in
^^
^^
IO
in
"
CD
3
J2
en
in
T—
in
en
CO
m
CO
CO
CD
3
.a
CO
-------
O
UJ
O
QC
2
QC
UJ
CL
Q
CO
111
QC
O
til
O
O
QC
0.
UJ
1
QC
O
CD
(0
QC
n
CO
m
&
CO
o
0)
o
0)
Q
I
CO
o
r
£
w
"5
CO
0)
QC
«°
UJ
O
UJ
4
£
.n
fl
UJ
4
x
c
u
Q.
O.
2)
TO
ll
C
5
Location
of
Sample8
i
*«
«
Color
Location
of
Sample8
t
0
Product
Line
E
iZ
j
4
1
c
j
CO
9
•*
CO
•*
-3-
CM
V.
in
•§
CD
O>
CO
X
co
o
s
CM
IO
co
•*
m
1
CD
OS
CO
5
CM
CO
1
PE/EVA
•*
10
f
«a-
CO
CO
CM
s
CO
in
1
co
CO
f
9
CM
^
R!
CO
u>
1
o
•*
in
CO
o>
05
O5
K5
co
in
CO
CO
2
O5
C$
8
O3
CO
fe
s
CO
co
c
0)
E
05
T—
CO
s
CO
T
S
S
®
CD
5
CO
h~
co
T
CO
CO
CO
O)
CO
N.
CO
CO
3
co
r-.
o
CO
CM
§
N.
CO
in
in
3
CD
o>
co
N
CO
o>
^
CO
s
CM
CM
•*
in
1
CD
O)
co
>>
it
co
9
o
r>-
S
h~
O)
CO
U5
1
05
O)
O
•
CO
S
s
%
CO
s
**
CO
*
CM
m
m
in
O)
CO
m
1
CO
c?
X
8
""i"
§
CO
in
5
CM
in
1
CD
C?
5
CO
CO
!
1
Q-
i
Si
to
£
fe
«
co
co
CO
«*
K
CM
CO
1
P3
O)
9
co
m
?
it
T™
CD
1
o
T3
CD
to
CO
_Q
CM
?
in
co
CO
>P
CO
O)
CM
CO
CD
CO
D)
C^
in
CO
co
?
o
CO
T—
co
|
O)
CO
CM
g
§
O)
CO
T—
in
CO
CD
Zi
•
co
N
O)
m
CM
fe
-a-
in
•*
>^-
^
in
i
CD
O)
co
>.
co
CO
CT>
9
£
oo
CM
co
05
CO
1
CO
l-~-
o>
CO
CO
co
^
in
in
S
1
co
o
in
CO
3
O5
in
co
O}
CM
co
c
CD
£
D)
S
s
m
co
05
in
CO
CO
CD
£
D>
5
CO
K3
-*
PI
co
T—
CM
CO
CO
CO
CO
5
s
?
m
CM
05
CO
0)
•«*-
co
CO
~Q
CO
CM
CO
CM
r~
CO
0
in
CO
CM
g
c
CO
£
D)
X
3
§
£
s
CO
t^-
o>
CO
CO
£
C3J
5
s
$
co
CO
CM
!•*-
co
«?
R
in
CO
1
CO
05
CO
>
co
o
9
T—
co
CO
<*•
co
CO
8
1
I
Q.
-------
o
o
cc
CO
1
Cfl
CO
to
O
I
CD
O
•g
CD
Q.
&
CO
co
&
CC
ll
UJ
O
CO
ui
j>
§
ui
X
5
z
UI
8:
k
*«
ll
1.
o
o
O
§ 3s
go!
S S
JQ
lo
i
i»
c
"c
Location
of
Sample0
S
en
Product
Line
E
LL
1 Ink System
CM
O5
•*
1
CD
OS
CO
E
Z
•*
1
Q.
a.
O
8
?
CO
CM
CO
fe
O
CO
1
CO
in
^
en
o
°?
CD
in
§
1
CD
CO
O)
CM
"4-
in
5
CO
in
0)
£
03
S
CO
co
CM
•<*•
•9
o
tn
CO
in
CO
CD
S
S
-a-
CO
m
CO
in
S
CD
•*
«
CD
C3)
CO
E
N
CO
0)
9
o
CM
O
in
in
o
o
in
co
c
CD
8*
>>
•*
CO
r>-
^
£
m
CO
^
CO
m
1
8
in
^
in
o
CO
9
CM
O
CO
1
S
CO
S
in
in
CO
CO
CO
in
CD
£
D)
CO
O
CO
CO
CO
-*
in
o
o>
CM
in
c
CD
£
ra
CO
o>
m
•*
fe
CM
in
•*
0)
CO
CD
S
CO
5
ff
0
CM
in
o
•<*
CD
3
.Q
CO
CD
CO
CO
O
5?
co
r^-
3
03
"c
CD
S"
X
CO
CM
9
co
O
m
CO
in
o
in
1
CD
0)
co
E
$
-
CM
1
in
in
CO
CM
5
CO
N.
co
co
in
1
CM
CM
$
in
cp
CO
CO
CO
in
1
in
o
-*
•
in
CO
CO
CM
5
§
o
in
S
1
N
CO
CO
CM
§
$
co
0)
5
CO
"c
CD
O>
co
>.
in
in
co
^
•*
CO
S
CO
m
1
•*
T—
r»-
^
co
O
CD
^
CO
CO
IS
1
in
CD
5
CO
-a-
§
S
S
CD
£
D)
in
5
co
•3-
«9
S
•*
CO
c
CD
£
03
CD
•<3-
CD
•«?
0
O
in
co
o
CO
§
.0
S
9
in
o
m
CO
**
O
CO
CD
S
CO
CO
m
CM
CO
CO
3
co1
S
CD
£
O)
X
CO
in
CM
5
3
o
CO
!•>•
CD
£
O3
5
CO
^
in
CM
•*
o
CO
9
CO
CM
r>-
CD
£
0)
N
"O
CD
Q.
CO
CO
O
CD
C?
Q.
Ill
•4-
-------
K-
O
Ul
O
oc
o
u.
oc
Ul
a.
Q
i
ul
oc
a
ui
o
o
cc
D.
Ul
OC
I
oc
o
m
CD
c
o
^»,
(O
oc
o
S
E
CO
CO
CO
s,
CO
.0
«
w
o
CD
o
I
CO
o
•c
s.
o
CO
CO
a>
OC
*co
UJ
O
CO
ui
S.
A
ff
ui
4
x
5
ui
a.
a.
*
a
co
~J
o
o
o
JJ «
o J*
p!
1
G
,_
o
3
C «
0 .2
^°1
° CO
5
•ii t
2 J
0.
E
E
0)
(0
JO
-V^
—
05
o
CO
CO
ro
in
CO
Is,,
^*
s
§>
CC
X
ro'
o
ro
in
oo
co
S
CD
C?
5
S
I
a.
a.
O
P
CB
5
^
O
CO
3
CO
CO
s
js^
U)
1
s
o
co
CO
CO
CO
fS
J»s,
in
1
•a
CO
.a
CO
CM
CO
t:
^-
in
IN.
o
CO
CD
£
D)
CO
CO
T-
co
8
cvi
m
00
CM
co
CD
£
o>
00
in
in
^
£
.^
in
T»
*
CD
in
CO
^"
m
cvi
CO
CO
CM
CD
r- CM o> IN.
CD T- IN. N.
CM 05 CM CO
CO fN. CM IN.
CO C^ GO 00
o in CM o
in co in '
oo oo co f*-
O O CM i-
O) 00 T- CM
•* in co •<*•
1
CD C
O) g CD CD
g §, S =
E O D) S3
H
•a
CD
a.
E
co
CO
o
>•
m
en
CM
CM
T—
CO
t
8
co
CO
CD
£
D)
X
0
O)
co
CVI
M-
O)
•^*
§
CO
CO
CD
£
a>
z
3
CO
0)
CO
CM
o
CM
1
oo
oo
eo
CO
green
Nl
T3
a
Q
co
CO
0
m
I
a.
uf
4
Q.
-a
o
CO
.c
S
0
(0
£1
o
1
_o
1_
»*—
c
3
i ®
CO *-
c
s
CD
.c
c
5
£»
0
'ffl
1
CO
c o — ~
E £
co
* S o o c S.
03 •" CO CD . N c
CO = ,
co r1
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Coating Weight
Purpose
The purpose of this test was to evaluate the coaling weight of the printed substrate.
Coating weight is the weight of the ink film layer coverage on a substrate. The coating
weight test was based on methods developed by Western Michigan University.
Equipment
Conventional laboratory oven
Scale (accurate to 0.001 ounces)
Procedure
1. Scan each color separation to determine the percent of ink coverage per square
centimeter of one printed repeat (16" x 20").
2. Determine the total area of printed substrate (hi square centimeters).
3. Take 50 samples from the middle of the run (30 minutes into the run).
4. Cut 25 samples of the solid 100% ink coverage test blocks for each color printed.
Measure and record the area of the ink blocks in square centimeters.
5. Cut equal areas of imprinted film (matching the areas to those cut out in step 4
above).
6. Dry the solvent-based and water-based ink samples hi the oven at 150°F for one hour
to remove any remaining solvents. The UV ink samples do not need to be dried in the
oven.
7. For each color, weigh the two groups of 25 samples (printed and unprinted)
separately. Divide the total weights of each group by 25 to determine the weight of the
ink per area for each signature. Using the weight per square centimeter, calculate the
total dry ink coat weight for the total linear footage for the press run.
Results
Samples were cut from a standard location during the run length as indicated by the
following symbol:
x = 30 minutes into run
Only one location was needed for testing, since there was no significant difference
between the various locations (e.g., the beginning, middle, and end of the run). The solid
100% ink coverage blocks that served as test samples were printed with green, blue, and
white inks. Table 4-E.4 shows the coating weights for these ink colors at different sites.
When a site number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a laboratory run
conducted at Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 16
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.4 Coating Weight Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs
Ink System
Solvent-
based
UV
UV (no slip)
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
Product
Line
#S2
#S2
#S1
#S2
#U2
#U2
#U3
#U1
Site
5
7
L5*
5
L7
9B
10
L4
6
6
8
11
Color
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
green
white
blue
green
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
white
Weight Per Area
dxlO^q/cm2)
1.88
2.99
2.33
1.65
0.97
2.08
4.33
6.68
1.22
1.39
4.33
1.33
0.94
2.75
1.15
1.47
1.73
1.05
1.79
1.92
2.77
3.51
4.50
3.00
1.64
1.20
1.94
2.98
3.71
4-E, page 17
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.4 Coating Weight Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink System
Water-based
Water-based
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
Product
Line
#W3
#W3
#W1
#W2
#W4
Site
2
3
L1
2
3
L6
4
1
L3
9A
L2
Color
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
green
white
blue
green
blue
green
green
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
green
white
blue
green
white
green
white
Weight Per Area
{1x10-4q/cm2)
1.79
1.58
2.39
1.43
1.20
2.32
2.14
2.42
1.80
1.77
2.23
1.52
4.71
1.59
2.05
3.90
1.70
2.04
3.58
1.03
1.35
0.87
0.83
2.31
0.88
1.21
* "L" indicates data from a laboratory run.
Coefficient of Friction
Purpose
The purpose of the coefficient of friction (COF) test is to determine the resistance to
slide of a printed sample. The COF of printed ink on film is important when converting
the printed rolls and meeting the requirements of the end product. This test is based on
methods developed by Quality Assurance at Sun Chemical Corporation.
Equipment
Friction/Peel Tester Thwing Albert
Sled (standard weight block — 200 grams)
Procedure
1. Press the COF button on the display unit to select the friction test.
2. Press the sled button repeatedly until the sled weight at display matches the weight of
the sled used.
4-E, page 18
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
3. Press the time button repeatedly until the desired duration of tune is displayed (20
seconds).
4. Press the zero load switch to provide zero reading.
5. Use the test, stop, and return switches to position the load cell at the starting point for
the test. Loosen the Left Limit Switch Actuator and slide it next to the load cell to set
the left-hand limit motion.
6. Press the return switch to place the load cell at the starting point.
7. Secure one strip of material to the test sled (face up).
8. Secure a second piece of material (face up) to the top plate of the lower chassis.
9. Attach the sled to the load cell and align it in the direction of travel.
10. Initiate the test by depressing the test switch. When a test is completed, the test
results are displayed.
11. Record the static COF. Repeat the measurement five times.
12. Calculate the average COF measurements and use the standard Tappi T548 pm-90
test procedure to covert COF to angle of inclination.
Results
COF was measured in the laboratory using an Instron Tensile tester equipped with a
friction sled. Sites 1,4,9, and 10 were not tested because the OPP substrate printed at
these sites were laminated to another substrate. The COF was measured from samples
taken from only one location (at the beginning of the run), as the COF was not expected
to differ throughout the length of the run or across the web. The COF values were
converted to angle of inclination.
Table 4-E.5 presents the data from all of the performance demonstration sites and
laboratory runs. When a site number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a run
conducted at Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 19
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.5 Coefficient of Friction Results for
Performance Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
Solvent-
based
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#S2
#S2
#S2
Site
5
7
L5C
5
7
L7
Condition8
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
green/clear
green/green
control
Average Angle of
Inclination
(deqrees)
26.6
33.0
30.1
40.0
22.3
24.2
35.0
26.1
35.8
23.3
20.8
30.6
23.3
19.8
32.2
31.4
44.2
16.7
19.6
19.2
27.4
25.2
16.7
4-E, page 20
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.5 Coefficient of Friction Results for
Performance Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
UV
uv
(no slip)
Water-
based
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
LDPE
Product
Line
#U2
#U2
#U3
#U1
#W3
Site
6
6
8
11
2
3
L1
Condition8
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
green/clear
green/green
control
Average Angle of
Inclination
(degrees)
30.1
50.5
32.2
57.2
23.3
20.8
21.8
20.8
20.8
16.7
24.2
24.2
27.6
25.2
16.7
44.2
60+b
29.6
60+"
45.0
29.2
32.2
26.1
33.8
23.2
22.3
31.4
23.3
27.4
23.3
34.2
34.2
23.3
4-E, page 21
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.5 Coefficient of Friction Results for
Performance Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Water-
based
Film
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#W3
Site
2
3
L6
Condition8
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
blue/clear
blue/blue
green/clear
green/green
control
green/clear
green/green
control
Average Angle of
Inclination
(degrees)
27.4
40.0
22.3
25.2
16.7
23.3
30.6
19.8
35.0
17.2
26.6
40.0
16.7
a Samples were tested under five different conditions:
blue/clear = printed substrate (blue ink) against unprinted substrate
blue/blue = printed substrate (blue ink) against printed substrate (blue ink)
green/clear = printed substrate (green ink) against unprinted substrate
green/green = printed substrate (green ink) against printed substrate (green ink)
control = unprinted substrate against unprinted substrate
"The angle of inclination was higher than 60 degrees.
°"L" indicates data from a laboratory run.
Density
Purpose
The purpose of the density test is to evaluate the degree of darkness (light-absorption) of
a printed solid. The density test is based on methods developed by Western Michigan
University.
Equipment
X-Rite 418 reflection densitometer
Procedure
1. Calibrate the densitometer. For all color references, follow calibration instructions
obtained by pressing the function key and color key together. Using instructions on the
instrument, set low (white standard) and high values (black standard) for each color, then
read individual color patches as determined by the instrument. Verify calibration values
for each standard patch and make adjustments as necessary.
2. Take two samples of each substrate (LDPE, PE/EVA, and OPP) from four locations
on the press run.
3. The DEN function of the densitometer is used to take measurements. Take readings
at 10 locations of the sample for each of the 5 colors in solid ink density areas.
4-E, page 22
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Results
Density was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from each site. Five
samples were cut from each of ifour locatioM during the run length as indicated by the
following symbols:
w
x
y
z
beginning of run
30 minutes into run
60 minutes into run
end of run
Density measurements were taken for areas of the test images printed with magenta,
cyan, green, and blue. Table 4-E.6 shows the results of the density measurements. The
amounts listed in the "Density" column are the averages of five measurements taken at
each location. The table also presents the standard deviation of these five measurements.
When a site number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a laboratory run
conducted at Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 23
-------
Q
11]
O
Z
CC
2
cc
UJ
a.
Q
•z.
CO
UJ
cc
g
UJ
cc
a.
fe
Ul
H
tr
1
o
CO
CO
CC
abora
CO
i
CO
c
§
CD
a
CD
O
I
S
§
CD
CC
CO
§
Q
111
•.*«
•S CO
co .2
*1
c
o
U
O
C £
0 C
"5 £
o c?
o cr
-"s
CD
0)
1.
•a c
O Jj
D.
E
u.
E
= $
CO
0
0
in
in
CD
en
co
X
o
o
CO
in
«
CD
CT
CO
F
;»
in
r\i
rn
*
111
D.
n
•£
Q
r
CC
co
o
o
T-
1
S
O
co
in
1
T3
CD
CO
o
CO
o
o
T-
c
CD
£
m
3
o
O)
CO
c
CD
£
rr
CM
O
O
IS.
CD
"n
Tf
o
o
°
a
"n
§
o
CM
in
1
CD
D)
CO
F
N
O
O
I?
1
CD
C7
CO
>
in
o
o
o
in
1
o
o
CD
c
o
o
CO
CO
CD
£
m
CM
O
co
CM
CD
£
IT
CO
O
o
o
CM
CD
S
o
s
a
S
S
o
CO
magenta
X
^VI
^^
o
CO
CO
CD
1
^
r«»
CM
o
o
,
1
o
o
C5
CM
1
CM
O
O
CD
0)
o
CD
£
O)
CM
o
o
CD
co
CD
£
o-
CM
o
o
co
co
CD
s
^M
^^
o
CD
a
z
0
o
0>
magenta
N
3
o
«
magenta
>
^1
^3
o
CM
CM
1
S
O
CM
CM
1
k
O
O
s
o
CD
£
ra
0
o
0
CD
£
a
•s
o
§
CD
CO
O
O
0
CO
a
o
o
IS
o
c
CD
£
ra
X
C\J
f^
o
^3
^s^
c_>
c
CD
a
&
5
a
10
0
o
s
o
c
CD
£
C3)
N
CD
not samp
^^
§
o
CM
m
magenta
X
s
o
5
OS
CD
O1
co
5
m
CM
u.
*
CD
S
S
o
ra
i CD
II
CO
o
o
CM
CD
ra
co
N
s
o
CO
T-
03
1
>
CO
o
o
in
1
^M
^^
o
co
m
1
t
•
CD
25
O)
o
o
cc
a
Z
ca
I
a.
tif
•*}•
-------
o
u
o
DC
2
cc
111
Q.
Q
(O
Ui
DC
Q
111
O
O
DC
Q.
K-
111
DC
O
DC
O
•o
0)
O
CO
3
DC
O
£1
(0
(0
CO
CO
o
I
o
0)
u
(0
I
£
<0
0)
DC
CO
CD
o
UI
Q)
X
a
UJ
Q.
Q.
•o c
>- o
•§ 'is
i S
CO Q
^ «
0) .2
C •*•*
w
o
o
u
o "Q
* 1
0 OT
•o c
>-> OS
Si
*S 0)
(O Q
"55 .2
0 'c
o
o
O
CO
o a.
"|
J<5
&
(0
ts
3 0
•a c
S-«
Q.
E
u.
E
= •55
CO
u
CD
Q.
fc
co
CO
0
X
o
0
8
T—
magenta
5
AI
CO
*
£
UJ
m
0.
.•— •
s?
o
CO
o
0
co
CO
T™
c
1
m
CO
CO
JD
O
0
co
co
o
£Z
CD
TO
O
O
O
^^
^~
CJ
3
J2
S
o
CM
CO
CD
TO
CO
N
CD
Q.
CO
CO
"o
>.
^\J
^^
O
^
1
S
O
S
o
£Z
CD
2
TO
§
O
•^
CD
_3
S
O
CO
o
1
X
o
o
co
o>
0
1
5
.n
J
0
o
CO
o
CD
£
TO
^VI
^^
o
in
0
CD
£
TO
S
o
O3
00
o
1
N
CD
Q.
CO
CO
1
>•
0
o
S
o
CD
£
TO
^M
^3
o
O)
CM
co
CD
I
X
o
o
cvi
T™
magenta
5
CO
a>
T—
CO
=8=
n
n.
o
§
o
CO
1
ro
o
O
§
V
1
O
o
CO
o
CD
£
TO
Q.
1
"o
>-
in
C\J
-------
<
a
ui
o
'Z,
cc
o
u.
cc
UJ
a.
Q
•z.
CO
UI
cc
g
UI
o
o
cc
a.
fc
IU
cc
o
cc
o
00
f
CL
§
CO
CD
cc
CO
I
CO
ui
J2
£1
&
U
§
"Z,
UJ
CL
"2 §
si
CO Q
ism
CO .£
CD °J-
I.
O
0
O
u *B
O CO
"2 i
•§15
5 •>
CO Q
s-.'ST
c *•*
CD "E
o
o
O
c-S
o c
3= g
U B
OCT
-"5
^g
CO
t>
3 CD
O ""
Jl — •
OL
E
u.
E
— 1
CO
o
o
.n
o
CO
f**
CD
1
X
0
o
CO
-3-
O
m
•s
CD
co
E
j,
^
o
r\
cr
0
o
CO
CO
o
1
o
o
CD
in
o
I
o
CM
<^i
O
0
CD
£
0)
O
O
CO
T—
CD
£
^VI
1!?
o
CO
CD
3
0
0
£
"
tt
Zi
CVJ
^^
o
CM
O
CO
J—
CD
1
N
O
O
00
o
m
.•£
CD
Q
rt
E
•>
o
o
o
o
1
g
o
CO
o
1
0
0
in
c
CD
£
O)
g
o
CO
CD
£
a
o
o
-
(D
S
O
CVl
l^»
a
Zi
0
o
f^>
^^
o
CD
£
O)
X
co
o
o
o
CO
0
a
a
ra
^
^
o
o
S
o
CD
£
D)
N
CD
C
E
cc
CO
•5
c
,„
§
o
X)
Fi
(-
CD
CTJ
CO
X
0
o
CO
CO
c
§
;>
CO
CM
13
UJ
LL
C
_i
'^
0
o
oo
CM
1
0
o
CO
co
1
o
o
oo
CD
£
D)
o
o
^
I
CT
CO
o
0
N.
oo
CD
Zi
s
o
00
a
Z
in
o
o
%
S
(-
CD
O)
co
N
in
o
o
CO
00
CO
maqenl
>
CO
o
o
TJ;
1
co
o
o
§
1
i
o
o
CO
CD
£
OS
g
o
£
CD
£
a
co
o
o
T-
o
Zi
S
o
CO
00
a
Z
§
o
o
co
<-
CD
1
X
0
o
m
CO
c
CD
OI
co
3
CO
CM
_)
||
D]
LL
^
ZJ
g
O
O
1
fe
O
m
1
o
o
o
CO
CD
£
0)
CM
o
o
CO
CM
CD
£
a
CO
o
o
CO
CD
o
o
N.
oo
Z
CO
o
o
0
CO
C"
CD
O)
co
N
eS
o
CO
co
CO
c
CD
CT
co
>
o
o
5
1
o
0
o
fe
1
I
o
o
oo
CM
c
CD
£
O)
0
o
co
CM
T—
CD
£
CT
s
o
CO
oo
CD
Zi
o
o
oo
a
Z
CO
CM
CD
a>
CO
a.
-------
H
0
Ul
U
cc
2
cc
Ul
Q.
Q
CO
Ul
CC
Q
111
U
§
O.
Ul
CC
o
cc
o
m
0)
IT
Q
CO
CO
o
1
I
o
i
I
CO
S.
CO
0)
cc
CO
CD
O
co
ui
_JD
•9
X
D
Q.
Q.
II
"O {Q
lr>
CO Q
"3 J3>
E .-5;
° S
g
o
o
<0
Jg.
« i
32
•u c
>- o
CO —
CO Q
"55 CD
C »5
o
o
u
.2 ~°
*± E
Q CO
-"5
4-1
CO
•5
3 0>
•o .=
O _j
Q.
E
w!
u.
E
.^ Q)
C CO
CO
§
o
a
rt
"p
CD
D)
CO
X
§
O
o
T— '
T_
&
CO
E
>
en
CO
4fc
8
o
CO
o
1
o
o
&
Y—
1
CO
o
o
CO
o
c
CD
£
O)
o
o
g
o
c
CD
£
D)
cvi
^^
o
CO
CO
25
cvi
^^
o
B
T—
CO
§CM T- T-
o o o
o o o o
i- O h- O
CM T- en i-
t:
1 1 1 §
E o 05 .0.
N
"D
CD
Q.
co
CO
^
o
o
fe
%
CO
I
X
o
o
CM
o
7s
CO
D)
co
E
>
T_
,—
3
=tt:
11.1
n
Q
^.^
=5
o
o
»
1
O
o
CM
1
*-*
.^r
CO
o
co
o
0
o
o
9
1
^^
^5
o
co
CM
1
o
o
O)
us
c
CD
1
cS
o
O)
c
QJ
o
cb
fe
o
o
CD
CO
3
.Q
CM
t—
O
eo
CO
25
%
o
CM
CO
C
CO
CO
X
c^
^^
o
CD
"F
CO
O)
co
^
CM
CO
«^
*
HI
Q.
Q
l-_
JD
01
%
o
o
oo
CO
1
^M
^^
o
^
1
•n
Cl)
CO
10
JQ
s
O
U3
CM
C
CO
£
O)
o
o
CM
co
CD
£
D)
§
O
CO
CD
25
§
o
CO
CD
25
o
o
cli
05
"c
8,
CO
N
O
O
00
CM
S
CO
CT
CO
E
•>
o
o
CO
1
o
o
CM
1
cS
o
CM
CO
£
D)
CO
o
o
CM
CM
c
CD
£
CT
g
O
oo
o>
CD
25
o
0
CO
CM
CD
25
t1-.
-------
Q
Ul
U
CC
o
u.
cc
UI
a.
to
ui
cc
P
o
UI
8
cc
a.
ui
I
cc
o
CO
•a
o
S-
co
CC
•p
i
i
(O
JO
I
I
D
CD
O
ca
3
•c
CD
a.
co
3
cc
CO
CD
O
CO
ui
CD
3
ra
ui
>
c
u
Q.
CL
re s
S >
fl
§1
i_
o
3
a
§G)
Q.
5 P
o ™
g w
"o
T3 C
>- O
•§ 75
re ">
<5> a
To .2
Q 3
"5
O
0 D
1§ 1
-"5
0)
CO
t;
•Q C
2 J
a.
E
u.
E
£2
c a
V)
o
o
CM
*"
CO
'~—
CD
CD
X
^\J
£J
O
o
CM
*"
magenta
5
CO
CO
3fc
111
u.
c
i
Qj
co
o
o
CM
1
S
O
05
O5
O
1
TJ
CO
:CO
JD
CO
O
O
«
C
CD
2
CO
CO
o
o
u,
"
CD
2
cr
CM
o
o
CM
CM
CD
15
O
o
O)
CM
CD
s
O
O5
CM
P?
j-
CD
S1
N
0
O
CO
CM
magenta
>
S
o
O5
0
1
T—
O
co
o
1
S
0
CO
CD
2
CO
co
0
o
CO
CD
2
CO
o
o
in
CM
CD
in
o
o
V
CM
1
O
O
K
o
c
CD
2
CO
X
in
o
o
^Vl
O3
o
CD
2
0)
5
i
S
o
co
C5
O
c
CD
2
CO
N
CD
Q.
E
cc
CO
1
>
CO
o
o
0
T-
P?
r
CD
1
X
in
o
o
CO
CD
CO
CO
5
CM
CO
^>
5t
II
23
a.
S
o
co
CM
1
^1
^5
o
o
CO
cz
1
S
o
,
c:
CO
^1
^5
o
05
CO
CD
2
cr
S
o
CO
CM
CD
O
0
CO
CD
_c
S
o
CM
CO
f-
CD
CO
co
E
N
CO
O
O
O
magenta
>
o
o
o
1
o
co
o
o
s
1
in
o
o
o>
CO
CD
2
CO
o
o
.
c
CD
2
CO
S
o
£
CD
co
o
o
5
cc
o
o
CM
CO
r
1
X
§
o
co
magenta
5
CO
CO
o
o
o
T™
1
§
o
CO
CO
1
S
o
%
CD
2
0)
CVI
^^
o
in
m
CD
2
cr
cS
o
O5
co
CD
CO
0
o
in
O5
CD
O
O
C3
^1
co
c
CD
CO
CO
E
N
CO
O
O
Si
1
CD
O!
CO
>
CM
O
£
1
O
o
CM
t—
1
§
O
CO
CO
CD
2
CO
o
o
in
c.
CD
2
CO
8
o
^VI
O3
CD
S
s
o
cS
a
Z
CO
CM
CD
D)
CO
a.
UJ
-------
Q
Ul
O
OC
O
LU
CC
111
Q.
Q
CO
111
CC
o
Ul
o
o
oc
0.
£
Ul
cc
o
oc
o
m
CD
o
,0,
CO
oc
i
o
8
•o
re
01
CO
S
|
o
0)
Q
(I)
o
re
E
I
£
s±
CO
OC
'w
CD
Q
CO
LU
4
CD
X
Q
•z.
LU
0.
D.
•o g
•g to
a >
J5 fl>
CO Q
||
°I
cS
0
O
a
o "3.
to 2
u re
0 CO
J o
re 53
•a to
C 'Z
£ CD
co a
Is »
c 33
o
o
u
o "5
II
-"5
'if.
•*••
T3 C
2 J
Q.
E
LL.
E
.* «
c to
5>
U5
O
O
co
0
c
X
8
o
to
T"
t™
1
5
3
T—
O
o
CD
co
0
CD
£
CT
CM
O
co
CO
o
a
£
0)
g 0
o o
CO CO
T- OJ
i- 0
C Q)
CO CD
J? fe
N
~co
co
W
i
^
g
o
CM
CM
1
CD
D)
co
X
T-
o
O
CM
magenta
5
-
>
3t
n
a.
O
i
(T
O
O
CM
1
0
o
CM
1
Tl
CD
(H
co
g
o
CO
c
CD
£
0
o
CO
co
CD
£
D3
CO
o
o
CO
co
CD
^2
C\I
o
CO
co
s
0
CO
1
8
0
^^
^^
1
1
o
o
co
CD
CD
£
ra
o
0
CO
co
CD
£
D)
O
O
„
CD
In
CO
o
o
s
CD
3
S3
8
o
,
jO
CD
I
X
N.
O
o
CO
magenta
5
-
CM
>
#
in
o
o
CO
1
CO
o
o
o
1
m
o
o
CM
CO
c
D)
CM
O
O
CD
£
CT
O
O
O>
CM
CM
CD
O
O
05
CM
CO
f^
U5
O
O
CO
1
CD
ra
co
N
8
o
CM
magenta
>
CO
o
o
T£
1
s
o
3
1
8
O
CO
CD
£
O)
8
o
R
CD
£
o
o
CO
CM
CD
~Q
8
o
CO
<.M
CD
Zi
O
O
T—
CD
O
C
CD
£
0)
X
g
o
in
o
c
CD
£
D)
5
3
§
o
^|
|^
o
CD
£
O)
N
CD
not samp
CO
CM
CD
D)
CO
Q.
-------
a
ui
o
<
2
DC
Ul
O.
Q
•z
CO
Ul
CC
Ul
o
o
£
fe
Ul
CC
o
§
m
•o
CD
O
,0^
CO
2
o
S
•o
(0
I
CO
c
co
I
CD
a
Q)
O
i
!
a.
CO
CO
UI
jg
S
><
C
1
"S i
CB 53
Ǥ
CO Q
& $
C 33
O
O
o
j§ "3.
** E
CB «
§Cu
CO
J o
•o c
SS
"O CB
ro >
CO Q
£? "
co .2
to "S
V.
C
o I
gS
-1 o
c7
o
e
o j
i. •—
OL
E
u.
i
"?• **
«
§
o
CO
«
CD
I
X
CM
O
O
CM
1
CD
CT
b
^.
$
•<*
5
o
o
V
in
1
CO
o
o
CO
in
1
b
CM
0
in
CM
CD
S
g
o
o
CM
CD
O
O
O
CO
CD
CD
15
o
0
co
cc
a
JD
§ § 0 S
o o o o
CM co in o
•* m CM r^
1
0 C.
D) c CD CD
CO £0 CD 3
E CJ 0) S
N
CD
a.
CO
0}
•£
..^
^|
^J
0
0)
O)
c
CD
CD
O)
X
CO
o
0
p
£Z
CD
CD
C7
^
3
§
O
00
O)
o
CD
CD
O>
N
ot sample;
c
>,
CO
CD
u
Q.
ca
co
O
ca
.g
O C C 2
° «= 2 2 o
CD ca
- e
llll§i
g> £. to co *~ >fc
it. O> CD CO CO JQ
Hill*
ifllii
CO CO CD Q 03
^2 I' II II II =
g- 3 X >* N c
ca =.
co r1
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Dimensional Stability
Purpose J
The purpose of the dimensional stability test is to measure how the substrate responds
structurally during printing. The dimensional stability test is based on methods
developed by Western Michigan University.
Equipment
Accurate 10 inch x 10 inch template for cutting sample sheets
Steel measuring scale graduated in divisions of 0.01 inches and at least 12 inches in
height
Controlled temperature and humidity in a room or convection oven
Procedure
1. Using the 10 inch x 10 inch template, cut three samples from the test web: one from
each edge and one from the center. On very wide webs, more than three locations may
be advisable.
2. Mark each sample with the location and directional information before cutting it from
the original web or sheet to avoid any possibility of error in subsequent identification.
3. The standard test reference is A.S.T.M. designation D-1204.
4. Record the results in thousandths of an inch (0.001 inch) per the standard test
reference.
Results
Dimensional stability for width and length was measured on samples cut from four
locations during the run length as indicated by the following symbols:
w = beginning of run
x = 30 minutes into run
y = 60 minutes into run
z = end of run
Green and blue printed samples were tested for dimensional stability. Samples from the
left and right sides of the web were tested for each color also. Table 4-E.7 presents the
complete data from each of the performance demonstration sites.
4-E, page 31
-------
Ul
Ul
•p"
e
£
£
0)
_i
' E,
.c
S
>
JC
7
a
3
t2 c
£ a>
S £
cc o
I*
E CD
4± S
^|
=5 3
_j 5
JC (U
£ ej
is
E m
iC S
a, g
-1 a
S S
-
5
h-
[^
3
!••»
r-
CO
U)
en
r>-
o
in
m
O)
o
10
O)
CD
in
o
r<-
t^-
IO
5
in
CM
£
ai
a.
Q
Solvent-
Cn
r»
r^
-
8
in
in
CO
in
in
r--
CO
in
r>-
C7)
CM
m
co
in
0
O)
CO
in
CO
co
m
>
T-
1^
N.
O
N-
t>~
§
s
5
s
•*
o
in
CO
in
m
en
CO
in
CO
i in
co
in
N
•^
£
8
S
03
S
CM
CO
1*.
1".
CM
in
CM
T—
in
•*
r-
in
co
T—
CO
in
5
r^
o
r«-
K
en
CO
S
g
fe
co
CM
S
CM
CO
in
Si
m
?^
CD
in
8
co
m
X
CO
CO
se
o
r^.
K
g
}5
CM
fc
CO
in
in
co
CM
m
CM
N.
in
5!
co
in
>*
co
r*-
}2
i-~
CO
}2
•*
05
12
co
00
fc
CO
in
in
CM
in
•*
i—
In
CM
CM
00
in
N
5
f~.
r>-
15
f»-
N.
S
fc
CO
O)
en
N-
S
m
^~
in
CO
•*
CO
in
CM
o
OO
in
5
m
CM
co
*
PE/EVA
in
en
co
[^
£
N.
r~.
•<*
CO
fc
co
CO
en
i^
CM
in
CO
m
m
N.
h-
CD
in
en
co
i^
in
X
g
co
r>.
o
t—
r-.
N.
co
co
i^.
r>.
co
co
en
r-~
**
CO
in
en
in
en
co
CO
in
S
In
>.
r^
r«.
N.
S
i-.
i^-
CM
co
t^
h~
in
o
o
co
CO
CO
in
co
CM
in
S
CO
in
§
CO
in
N
CM
in
CO
r-
S
CO
1^
en
CO
co
h«-
r^
S
in
o
in
en
ao
in
CM
o
CO
in
S
in
5
r-.
o
o
N.
h-
o
T—
N.
h-
•*
T—
r^-
r-
CO
CO
S
in
o
in
CO
o
in
3
CO
in
r^
r>-
r^
m
N
S
S
s
s
s
s
CO
oo
S
CM
en
o
in
in
CM
in
co
o
CO
in
Tf
•*
r>-
m
5
m
en
5
*
Q_
D.
O
co
CO
S
s
s
en
•*
S
s
a>
h-
o
co
£
CO
in
in
en
in
in
o
in
h~
in
X
CM
CM
CO
r-.
in
in
CO
h-
CM
CM
s
g
co
h-
co
ft
•<*•
o
in
CM
CO
co
in
fc
Jn
N
CM
•*
N.
r>-
o
in
N.
h-
n-
o
fc
S
en
h-
en
en
ft
R
m
o
•*
CO
in
CO
•*
D;
5
o
CM
CO
*
in
CM
r-
r-
o
co
N.
h~
t»-
CO
rs.
r^
S
o
co
co
o
in
co
o
in
r^
r^
co
in
CD
co
5n
X
Ti-
in
t^.
i^
en
en
r~-
h~
CM
co
r-.
r>-
S
o
co
o
m
**
in
CD
CO
in
CD
en
i^
m
>,
S
>.
t^.
en
in
N.
h-
co
CM
i^
r^
in
CO
en
h~
in
o
in
S
ft
S
CO
in
co
co
r^
in
N
CM
CO
!>
SL
UJ
4-
-------
I
111
o
CC
2
cc
ui
Q.
O
0)
111
CC
Q
111
O
O
CC
0.
111
QC
1
CC
o
CO
1
7
i
(0
o
I
to
o
0>
Q
0>
u
n
I
s.
CO
"5
o
Q
u
<3-
0)
.Q
(0
111
4
X
c
u
a.
Q.
*£"
c
l>
tt>
_1
£j
TJ
>
C
1
c
*- c
.C 0
cc o
1,3
Em
si
^5
=
Em
c §
Jo
S *
^m
of
Sample9
&
tn
Product
Line
£
iZ
Ink
II System
3
!2
co
•st-
s
CO
co
E
oo
"3-
oo
co
o>
g
co
-a-
in
§
!•>.
m
5
co
m
5
co
CM
*
LU
Q.
O
>
ID
co
CO
s
CO
CD
r^
tn
o
h»
N.
§
O5
ff
o
U)
8
LO
m
CO
co
m
8
co
m
X
co
s
fe
l^~
rv
S
co
N.
r*
T—
0>
3
o
tn
co
in
s
co
in
§
CO
in
>,
in
CM
s
§
N-
1^
1—
CD
f-
N-
U
P
g
O
in
CO
CM
in
O)
co
co
in
g
CO
in
N
CD
fc
05
1^
1^.
r>-
co
N.
h-
CO
CM
O
in
o
in
0)
t—
tn
§
CO
in
en
fe
$
CO
CM
*
PE/EVA
CO
0)
s
o
N-
N.
o
o
N-
h-
s
p*
co
CM
in
CM
CM
in
s
1^
in
o>
r^
fe
X
CO
CO
CO
h-
8
l>~
1^
CO
•.
CD
N.
r^-
•<*•
CO
i^-
t^
tn
CO
r>-
I--
£
f»
CO
CO
in
§
in
fe
Jn
O5
Is*.
N-
in
N
co*
CM
£
co
CO
tn
i^
§
in
r-
&
{>
S
o
m
CO
co
&
o
CO
CO
in
^
r»-
m
5
CO
CO
*
PE/EVA
>
J
-*
S
o>
CO
in
N.
§
in
r»
g
r-
o
S
•*
in
in
in
co
in
CO
•*
r^
in
X
S
S
o
O)
s
$
ie
CO
J>
CM
CM
5
fe
#
•*
O)
co
in
t^
co
i^
in
N
s
CO
r^
cli
t-*
i^
S
fc
CM
tn
O5
CM
o
5
CO
in
S
co
m
CO
CO
i^
in
5
-
5
*
UI
Q_
a
>
m
o
r*.
t^
co
O)
f-
N.
o
^
a>
•*
O)
-*
CO
g
•*
o
tn
PI
CO
tn
in
T-
co
tn
X
|5I
"w
0
£
S
5
(^
r>-
co
co
fc
co
CM
a>
CM
O)
g
CO
in
8
En
§
S
>,
s!
IV.
r^
CD
CO
fc
CO
CO
r>.
h-
o
o>
a>
o
in
S
in
§
CD
in
fc
fe
N
•*
CO
s
N.
^
s
O)
a>
K
CM
CO
co
s
in
•*
in
in
S
co
tn
en
0
oo
in
5
CM
CO
1
LU
a.
Q
iL
CD
13
**
M-
£
o
CO
K
N-
CD
N.
S
CO
tv
tn
10
CM
in
CM
T—
CO
in
8
fe
X
TJ
.
S
S
3
£
^t
o
CO
r>-
$
r°
00
r-
LO
s
tn
5
co
in
CM
o
co
tn
N
S
£
co
CD
CD
1^
E5
tn
i-.
cn
CM
r°
co
0
o
m
m
CO
in
CM
CM
in
co
a>
N-
in
5
CO
co
o>
!2
CO
s
en
co
CO
N-
tn
CM
?
k
o
in
co
m
CO
co
in
co
r*.
h»
tn
X
o
O)
E
g
CD
1^
co
CO
CD
f-
•*
in
r°
o
co
o
in
&
o
m
o
CD
co
in
co
O)
r^
in
>*
CO
a>
£
co
m
CD
t^
in
CO
S
en
r°
co
S
in
co
m
tn
en
CO
in
CO
CM
CO
in
N
CO
CO
CO
o>
CO
a.
-------
Q
Ul
O
Z
I
cc
UJ
o.
Q
Z
(0
UJ
cc
Q
Ul
O
§
Q.
CO
Ul
i
o
cc
1
co
1
O
ea
w
o
a
CD
U
o
I
Q.
a
CO
g
o
Q
ui
M
!§
UJ
X
c
u
Q.
D.
0)
_
E
£
C
JC
It
c
c
£ S
cc (5
£ »
is
*: §
^§
n! •*
_J5
CC o
*^
•§> 3
CC DQ
« §
• li.
as s>
CD
CO
o
£
§
CO
co
£
S3
in
^^
{^
in
8
in
8
m
N
co
£
05
CD
CO
^^
CXI
CO
CO
CM
£
5>
o
m
O5
CO
o
in
T—
CO
co
in
co
in
*
-
1
0.
CL
O
in
JN^
to
CD
CO
O
fc
CO
f5
co
O5
o
in
S
o
in
CM
CO
in
CO
o
CO
in
X
CO
CO
£
CO"
CD
co
CO
S3
£
CO
oo
o
m
oo
5
in
oo
CD
10
O5
oo
m
>
CO
£
£
co
N.
o
co
CO
O5
1^^
£
CM
O>
O
in
o
5
o
CO
in
co
CO
In
N
§
r-.
00
CO
CO
Tf
N.
o>
co
£
co
S
CM
Y—
in
in
co
co
in
£
(n
•
-
CM
*
05
CO
S
oo
oo
CO
^^
^^
co
£
O5
O
O5
CO
5
§
o
m
oo
in
in
fe
In
X
CO
co
£
O5
0
k
o>
fp
^^
8
O5
f^
^^
CD
g
co
O
m
CO
O5
CO
in
c»
tn
>,
co
in
£
CM
N.
O5
CO
^^
S
O5
co
g
8
in
co
O5
CO
in
S
in
N
£
fc
^^
^^
^^
^^
^^
m
CO
^^
cS
co
T—
5
co
T™
in
CM
CO
CO
in
§J
m
5
o>
1
DL
Q.
O
1
CM
m
CO
CD
CO
£
to
^^
f^
CD
CO
O5
§
O
in
m
o
in
CO
CO
CD
m
S
in
X
CD
1
co
T—
co
N.
o
CM
£
S
co
05
£
CO
CO
LO
CO
co
o
in
co
CO
in
oo
m
N
3
CO
D)
CO
a.
LU
a.
CO
(0
•a
CD
Q.
CD
s
_o
II
- ~
CO •*-* *"~ (—
lllll
'
to
.2
Q-
CO
co
-g
£ 'to co
u u
x >
u
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Gloss
Purpose
The purpose of the gloss test is to evaluate the light that is reflected off the ink surface
when a light is shined at that surface from an angle. The gloss test is based on methods
developed by Western Michigan University.
Equipment
Gardner Micrometer (60° angle)
Procedure
1. Light energy is applied to a surface through a special aperture and reflected back
through a photocell. The reflected light is converted into electrical energy to drive a
meter reading from 0 to 100 (the greater the reflective light, the greater the meter
reading). For this experiment, the Gardner Micrometer will be used.
2. Follow the manufacturer's recommended procedure for calibration to the standard
tiles. Clean the tile standards before calibration to increase accuracy. Place the
glossmeter port over the center of the black tile (note that the direction of the arrows
should align). Verify the instrument while holding the meter in position and adjusting
the control knob to the indicated number on the black standard. Do the same with the
white tile using the white standard calibration number.
3. Take measurements of five samples from four locations of the run. The selected area
for the readings should be consistent in ink coverage or solid ink densities. On LDPE,
the gloss was measured for magenta, cyan, blue, and green over a white ink background,
and also for white, green, and blue on clear film. On PE/EVA, the gloss was measured
for magenta, cyan, blue, and green on white film.
4. Place the glossmeter over the sample area (at least 3 readings on a 3 inch x 6 inch
area) and press the operate button. For each sample there will be 10 readings, 5 each
side across the sheet. Repeat the readings for all five colors.
Results
Gloss was measured hi the laboratory with samples collected from each site. Five
readings are taken from each of four locations on the run, and the average of these
readings is what is recorded for each location. Samples were cut for four locations
during the run length as indicated by the following symbols:
w = beginning of run
x = 30 minutes into run
y = 60 minutes into run
z = end of run
For LDPE, magenta, cyan, green, and blue samples were tested on a white ink
background; white, green, and blue samples were tested on clear LDPE film. Magenta,
cyan, green, and blue samples were also tested on a white PE/EVA substrate. Table 4-
E.8 presents the complete data from each of the performance demonstration sites and
laboratory runs. When a site number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a
laboratory run conducted at Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing
facility.
4-E, page 35
-------
I
Ul
o
CC
£
CC
Ul
a.
Q
CO
Ul
CC
o
Ul
Q
§
a.
te
UJ
I
CC
o
CD
CO
c
CC
2
CO
s
3
•o
ca
u
t^
§
1
"5
CD
o
cl
I
£
CO
CO
o
3
CO
ui
^2
a.
a.
S
o
(3
§ 3s
»= «- n.
g o E
3 CO
(0
CO
o
O
£ „_ Q.
§o E
S «o
o co
CO
CO
O
C3
3 —
I'D E
3 «
CO
CO
0
0
n .0
o .2
'•5 *- °-
g o E
S co
7:
*;
CO
•s
3 CD
15
Q.
E
u.
E
£ *
^i
CO
a
N
CM
in
>»
CO
in
X
in
5
1
CD
CT
CO
£
in
CM
Ul
CL
c
t
s
CC
CO
CM
m
o
8
CO
•*
c
i
CD
m
.a
en
in
co
En
CO
oi
in
c
CC
D
in
o
in
05
CD
in
in
CD"
CM
m
2
J2
in
co
CO
i^
5
3
o
o
CM
CO
CD
O
O
Z
^
CD
CO
CM
O
in
0)
in
CO
m
CO
co
CD
o
o
CD
CD
D
CD
CM
O
3
CO
CO
CM
^
CI
a
o
c
a
Z
co
in
N
,_
i?
>•
CO
X
o
CO
in
5
co
CD
1
r^
CO
CO
in
in
ro
CO
CM
in
CO
3
c
S
o
co
CM
CO
m
CO
0
in
o
5
CD
E
0
in
?
co
a>
o
CM
in
CD
in
CD
ZJ
S
[s.
in
CM
co
m
^.
^
co
CD
o
c
o
f
CM
&
|^
CO
in
CM
CO
h-
m
CM
CO
co
CD
13
C.
o
c
o
CO
in
CO
co
co
oi
co
m
fe
a
a
o
c
a
Z
CM
55
N
^
-*•
CM
X
in
CO
5
CD
CD
0
o
m(
CM
S
71
.2
m
CO
a>
CO
co
CO
CO
CD
O
C
o
.•i
"1
0
o>
CM
CO
in
CO
in
S
ct
CD
O
C
c
CI
a
cr
l^
CO
co
N
CO
CM
CO
***
o
in
r--
X
_
CM
CO
5
1
a
1
in
CM
*
<
rf
Ul
a
CM
CM
in
,-
m
in
o>
CM
co
_
co
m
c
1
^
in
o
CO
in
co
0
CO
CM
OS
in
CD
E
0
co
*
co
in
O3
^.
o
CO
a
Z
CO f- CO CM
co co in h~
CD CD Is- in
N
T3
CD
"o "a.
i E
co
CO
"*•
T3
CD
It
CO
CO
X
in -* o oo
CD T- CM CM
in co r^ •*
5
5
§ _ c
O3 c CD CD
g §. £ =
E 0 C3) £1
r^
CM
CO
CO
N
•s
*•**
1
X
CD
CO
5
1
1
co
CO
TJ
CD
O
ca
CO
O5
CO
in
CO
CD
E
D)
CO
CO
CD
I
-------
Q
Ul
O
OC
£
oc
Ul
Q.
Q
Z
CO
Ul
oc
Q
Ul
u
O
oc
0.
co
Ul
oc
o
5
•o
CD
o
Q
CO
DC
O
o
J2
•o
CO
CO
s
CO
o
1
I
o
i
I
CO
1
»
CO
r^
X
CM
cn
CM
5
magenta
CO
fM
*
in
n
n
^
Z)
oo
in
CO
CM
in
cn
S
CO
CO
1
^
m
0
cn
co
oo
CO
CM
CO
c
CD
CT
O
•st-
T-
§J
cn
N.
CO
oo
CO
N-
O5
in
CO
o
in
co
•*
cn
o
CD
0
O
S
in
0
in
cn
co
O)
CO
CO
in
in
CO
CD
O
O
CD
2
O3
O
^«
CO
cn
CO
in
o
t*-
o
o
in
co
CD
o
0
cc
T_
0
CO
N
CO
CO
CM
>•
CO
N.
X
^.
co
5
magenta
CO
CM
D
£
uu
LL
O
^_
CO
CO
!?
in
N.
_
?
1
o
O5
"*"(
CO
in
^
00
CM
C
co
2
CT
^.
^f
in
CO
CM
T_
T—
in
s
CO
CO
fs».
CO
N
*-
O
>»
_
h-
X
T_
5
5
magenta
oo
CO
~i
*
CO
rr»
T3
.CD
co
w
o
«
CM
in
in
I
co
•
o
CO
X
^
cn
CM
5
magenta
1
ID
*
I,U
0.
Q
— 1
«^
=3
cn
fM
CM
CO
CM
1
cH
cn
S;
1
"FT
CO
o
^.
o
CO
CM
Si
CO
CJ
CO
CM
CO
2
ra
^.
co
CO
CO
CM
^
CO
T—
CM
CD
CO
Of)
CO
CO
CO
co
CM
co
CO
in
CO
1
o
c
o
&
-CZ
N.
CO
T-
5
cn
oo
5
CO
CD
U
O
CD
2
0
m
in
CO
•3-
Si
co
•*
CM
en
CM
CO
CD
o
0
CD
_3
^
Of)
CM
N
CO
CO
>*
cn
CO
X
cn
oo
co
5
magenta
CM
co
^
=tt
UJ
fX
o
— 1
Qj
m
-------
Q
UI
O
•z.
E
I
CC
UI
a.
Q
•z.
ul
cc
Q
Ul
O
g
a.
%
ui
cc
1
cc
o
ffl
•o
§
g
o
s
cc
s
1
3
•o
c
ca
1
CO
_o
15
o
I
8
I
•§
S.
CO
U)
2
a
UI
_2
•§
X
c
u
ft
0
0
5 a>
^
co
•<*•
X
m
0)
CM
5
CD
tr
co
E
CO
CO
^>
*
UJ
Q.
n
,
a
cc
£
Tj-
CO
co
N-
o
co
fe
o
15
I
CD
CO
CO
0
m
CM
,_
CO
CO
in
CO
oo
CO
CO
c.
CD
2
CT
O>
O>
r^.
CO
CM
_
CO
co
CO
CD
25
0
CM
T-
1?
_
5
^
^
CO
05
o
c
o
.2
IE
o
co
in
o
CO
co
T—
CO
o
CD
CO
co
CD
o
0
CD
2
CT
T-
co
CO
oo
5
^
co
in
^.
CD
in
cc
01
u
c
S
CO
CM
CM
IM
<_
O
>•
O)
Si
X
CO
CM
5
CD
2
ra
CO
o
co
TJ
_CD
CO
CO
^
EM
^
5
CO
CD
O
0
S
"Jc
co
^
co
o>
^.
o
1~
cc
CD
O
c
c
CD
2
O)
CO
^
N
co
"
>«
o
in
in
X
^.
T—
co
g
CO
CD
O1
CO
CM
CO
^*
*
<
>
ui
a.
CO
^
0
CO
CM
?
^_
CO
in
1
T—
CO
in
T-
fe
^
co
in
0
CO
CD
2
CT
O
5
CM
CD
^_
CO
in
^
in
m
a
O3
co
N
r«.
o>
>•
CO
CM
CO
X
05
a>
in
5
B
CD
CT
CO
CO
CM
CM
O
O
If)
00
&
co
Jo
c.
8
h«
CM
CO
a
in
co
in
^
in
CD
2
a-
o
05
CD
OO
in
o
CO
in
00
co
in
a
f-
CO
N
j_.
O
•*•
^
co
in
X
,s.
Si
g
CD
2
a
co
^
s
T3
J2
co
CO
.,_
9
CM
CO
m
a
Z
£
CO
T3
CO
J J
UJ <
Q UJ
-"iD
jg DL
-5 £
£ i
CD 5
s-g
•o «
co c
r^ °J
c^ O
CD t.
CD O)
C
5 §,
CO CD
•o. 75
CD CD
=• ' ^>
S.SI
T> i^ CO
CO
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Heat Resistance/Heat Seal
Purpose
The purpose of this test was to determine the heat resistance of the printed product. Heat
resistance is the degree to which a printed substrate will resist transfer to itself or to an
unprinted surface when heated. The heat resistance/heat seal test is based on methods
developed by Quality Assurance at Sun Chemical Corporation.
Equipment
A Sentinel Heat Sealer was used to measure heat resistance.
Procedure
1. Preheat the jaws of the heat sealer until the desired temperature is obtained. Record
the temperature.
2. Set the desired pressure and dwell time. Record.
3. Sandwich the sample between aluminum foil or paper and place the sample between
the jaws of the heat sealer.
4. Depress the foot pedal to activate machine.
5. When dwell time is completed, remove the samples and allow them to cool.
6. Test the heat seal.
Results
This test was accomplished by checking for ink transfer upon peeling apart the heated
samples. Results are recorded as "pass" (no ink transfer), or "fail" (transfer of ink). In
the case of a failure, the percent of ink transferred is evaluated and recorded. Samples
were tested for both printed substrate to unprinted substrate and printed substrate to
printed substrate.
Heat resistance was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from the four
sites (Sites 1,4, 9, and 10) which laminated the printed OPP substrate. Samples were cut
from up to four locations during the run as indicated by the following symbols:
w
X
y
z
beginning of run
30 minutes into run
60 minutes into run
end of run
The images used in the heat resistance/heat seal tests had areas printed with blue, green,
and white ink. Table 4-E.9 shows the heat resistance test results for each site. When a
site number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a laboratory run conducted at
Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 39
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.9 Heat Resistance/Heat Seal Results for
Performance Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
Water-
based
Film
OPP
OPP
Product Line
#S1
#S2
#W1
Site
9B
10
L4d
4
Location
of
Sample*
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
Color
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
green
white
green
white
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
Ink-Un"
Pass/
Fail
P
P
F
F
P
F
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
P
P
F
P
P
F
P
P
F
Ink-Un
Result
10%
10%
10%
20%
40%
40%
30%
30%
40%
40%
30%
40%
40%
10%
10%
10%
20%
Ink-Ink0
Pass/
Fail
F
P
F
F
P
F
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Ink-Ink
Result
10%
10%
10%
10%
20%
50%
50%
50%
40%
40%
30%
40%
40%
30%
20%
20%
20%
20%
20%
40%
20%
20%
20%
20%
20%
30%
4-E, page 40
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.9 Heat Resistance/Heat Seal Results for
Performance Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Film
Product Line
#W2
#W4
Site
1
L3
9A
L2
Location
of
Sample*
W
X
y
z
W
X
z
W
X
z
W
X
z
Color
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
green
white
green
white
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
blue
green
white
green
white
green
white
green
white
Ink-Unb
Pass/
Fail
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
F
F
P
F
F
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
Ink-Un
Result
20%
20%
10%
10%
20%
10%
20%
20%
10%
20%
20%
20%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
5%
5%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
30%
30%
10%
10%
Ink-Ink'
Pass/
Fail
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
F
F
P
F
F
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
Ink-Ink
Result
20%
30%
50%
20%
40%
50%
20%
50%
50%
20%
20%
60%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
20%
20%
20%
20%
40%
40%
aSamples were taken at four locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of the run
x = 30 minutes into the run
y = 60 minutes into the run
z = end of the run
b"lnk-Un" represents ink transferred from a printed substrate to an unprinted substrate.
c"lnk-lnk" represents ink transferred from a printed substrate to a printed substrate.
T" indicates data from a laboratory run.
4-E, page 41
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Ice Water Crinkle Adhesion
Purpose
The purpose of the ice water crinkle adhesion test is to evaluate the integrity and
flexibility of the ink on the substrate when exposed to refrigerator and freezer conditions.
This test measures a combination of the ink's adhesive and flexibility properties. The ice
water crinkle adhesion test is based on methods developed by Quality Assurance at Sun
Chemical Corporation.
Equipment
Rollout of ink on appropriate substrate
Four-ounce jar
Ice water
Freezer
Procedure
1. Roll out the standard and batch side by side.
2. Submerge the split roll-out into ice water for thirty minutes.
3. Remove the print.
4. While the print is still wet, firmly grasp the print between the thumb and forefinger of
each hand with about one inch of print between the two thumbs.
5. Bring the hands together and rub hi opposite directions fairly rapidly ten times. One
complete cycle consists of both a back and forward motion of the wrists.
6. Inspect the proof for ink removal.
Results
The ice water crinkle adhesion test was measured in the laboratory with samples
collected from each site. Sites 1,4,9, and 10 were not tested in the laboratory because
the OPP substrate printed at these sites were laminated to another substrate. Samples for
testing were cut from four locations during the run as indicated by the following
symbols:
w = beginning of run
x = 30 minutes into run
y = 60 minutes into run
z = end of run
Due to the aborted run using the PE/EVA substrate at Site 7, samples were only taken
from the beginning (w) and the end (z) of the run for testing in the laboratory. Site 8 also
had a shorter run for the PE/EVA substrate, so samples were only taken from the
beginning (w), thirty minutes into run (x), and the end of the run (z). The laboratory runs
conducted at Western Michigan were shorter in duration than the demonstration runs, so
samples for testing were only cut from three locations (w, x, and z).
Table 4-E. 10 presents the data from all of the performance demonstration sites and
laboratory runs. When a site number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a run
conducted at Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 42
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.10 Ice Water Crinkle Adhesion Results for Performance Demonstration
Sites and Laboratory Runs
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
UV
UV
(no slip)
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
Product
Line
#S2
#S2
#1)2
#U2
#U3
#1)1
Site
5
7
L5b
5
7
L7
6
6
8
11
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y = z
w
X
y
z
Any Ink Removal?
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
yes, less than 15%
yes, less than 15%
yes, less than 15%
yes, less than 15%
yes, less than 15%
yes, less than 15%
yes, less than 15%
yes, less than 15%
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
4-E, page 43
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.10 Ice Water Crinkle Adhesion Results for Performance Demonstration
Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Water-
based
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#W3
#W3
Site
2
3
L1
2
3
L6
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
Any Ink Removal?
no
no
no
no
yes, less than 5%
yes, less than 5%
yes, less than 5%
yes, less than 5%
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
yes, less than 5%
no
no
yes, about 30% of the green ink
and less than 15% of the blue ink
yes, about 30% of the green ink
and less than 15% of the blue ink
yes, about 30% of the green ink
and less than 15% of the blue ink
aSamp!es were taken at four locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of the run
x = 30 minutes into the run
y = 60 minutes into the run
z = end of the run
b"L" indicates data from a laboratory run.
4-E, page 44
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Image Analysis
Purpose
The purpose of the image analysis test is to measure how well the image is formed as it
appears under magnification. The image analysis test is based on methods developed by
Western Michigan University.
Equipment
High resolution optics
RGB digital frame grabber
Computer with Image ProPlus Analysis software
Procedure
1. Using the equipment listed above, quantify the following dot characteristics:
• maximum and minimum dot area
• maximum and minimum perimeter
2. Take readings from five random places of each sample color. A minimum of 50 dots
per sample must be measured. Record the average and standard deviation.
Results
Image analysis was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from each site.
Samples were cut from four locations during the run length as indicated by the following
symbols:
w = beginning of run
x = 30 minutes into run
y = 60 minutes into run
z = end of run
Since the purpose of this test was to evaluate screened dot detail as used in process color
reproduction, only the magenta and cyan process inks were analyzed. Table 4-E.l 1
shows the results of the image analysis measurements. The results for dot area and
perimeter are the averages of two scans; each scan measured 50 dots. The standard
deviation is also shown in Table 4-E.l 1. When a site number begins with an "L," the
data were taken from a laboratory run conducted at Western Michigan University, not
from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 45
-------
I
Ul
o
cc
o
u.
cc
Ul
0.
Q
z
CO
Ul
cc
a
ui
o
o
£
Ul
H
£
I
CC
o
m
CO
c
CC
S
o
CO
I
co
CO
CO
c
I
I
o
£
CD
Q
CD
o
ro
I
0>
T5
co
CD
CC
(0
"35
"5
CD
en
i
ui
CD
I
Ill
T IS C
c M.S
s g s
CO Q Q.
v. ^-.
CD CO
° -1.2
g c
ra £ co
•O *£ CD
E CO l-
•5 1 <
_«!
3 0 g
5
O
O
«•—
3, "c
Sl
ow
a.
CO
t>
3 a
o !j
£. — *
a.
g
u.
E
±z t
E '{n
CO
m
co
CM
M
m
co
o
ro
co
a
cc
in
CM
rn
LU
a
c
a
>
r
V.
in
CM
in
in
CM
co
o
0
en
in
CO
in
in
o
1
•o
• CO
^"p
m
N'
o
CO
55
in
ro
^3
J^«
o
co
i
CO
a
ct
X
m
*
to
O5
o
o
CO
CO
"3-
in
CO
ro
co
c.
in
en
CO
o
CO
S!
}n
m
12
co
ro
CO
a
cc
>
in
"*
o
00
o
o
CD
8
8
1
»
0
in
in
CO
in
ro
^^
f**^
co1
o
ro
CO
cc
CC
N
g
"*
m
o
&
in
co
CO
in
8
CO
c
1
in
00
^
0
CO
LO
\£}
ro
^^
CO
ro
CM
CO
a
CC
5
^
m
in
o
CO
V-
m
m
o
CO
^^
1
m
co
ro
o
co
CO
CM
in
ro
f-
o
S
ro
CO
c
cc
cc
X
o
CO
CO
o
in
CM
o
0
o
co
CO
0
o
CO
1
in
CO
OO
in
ro
ro
CM
0
o
OJ
fs^
in
i
?°
a
ce
>
o
ro
ro
o
00
£1
IO
^VI
^^
f^
in
CO
CO
co
1
0
CO
^i
|*^
CM
8
ro
co
o
ro
in
ro
co
c
cc
cc
N
in
CM
CM
£
o
in
o
CO
in
in
CO
in
1
D
co
8
co
•<*•
o
ro
ro
r*.
in
CO
S
CO
T—
co
cc
. cc
E
m
c\
<£
44=
II
UJ
a.
m
co
CO
o
ro
ro
in
ro
co
S
ro
CO
co
1
in
CO
in
o
CM
in
^^
IO
CM
O
ro
CO
cc
cc
X
in
co
"*
o
"3-
CM
0
CO
fe
8
m
CM
oo
1
g
co
o
CO
en
1^5
CV|
CO
CO
o
CO
co
ro
in
CO
c:
CD
O)
CC
>
in
CM
"*
o
CO
o
K
CM
in
in
oo
CO
in
co
1
in
CD
in
o
CO
o
o
co
in
CO
o
o
S
S
1 magen
N
8
CO
o
CO
0
in
o
ro
co
o
T—
in
1
in
ro
in
8
CM
T-
in
o
m
m
o
ro
CO
CO
0)
CC
5
N
in
o
CM
8
o
ro
o
co
3
co
CM
1
o
CM
T—
m
CM
CO
0
ro
^^
^^
1
8
co
CO
o
a
CO
en
cc
E
X
LO
^^
00
1 —
in
oo
CO
0
in
CO
co
o
CO
CO
c
1
a
D)
co
a.
til"
-------
o
Ul
o
oc
2
oc
Ul
a,
a
z
CO
Ul
oc
Q
Ul
O
O
OC
a.
ui
oc
I
oc
o
5
CO
Ul
0)
Ul
X
Q
z
Ul
a.
a.
"O e <5
•o *• e
c ™ e
co "S »-
JS o °>
wgo.
1_ ^»
0) g
o e °
Q-l"
QL ^^^
CO O (g
° "3 £
« '> <
OT Q
*- B5 O
O CD S
O
O
U
«*-.
c "a
.2 o
CO
*••
o
3 ffi
•a c
S -J
Q.
E
«L
E
c a
CO
in
co
in
o
m
m
oo
o
T—
CO
8
S
in
CO
CT
E
5
m
05
^_
CO
a.
a.
U
c
CD
"o
CO
o
co
o
o
o
oo
o
o
CM
oo
o
O3
S
1-
1
T3
<1>
CO
CO
m
CO
o
CO
•st-
0
£
CM
in
o
S
co
co
c:
1
X
in
co
o
05
co
^5
f^
CO
cS
O5
CO
in
1
o
CO
o
o
^-
1—
CM
¥f
l*«^.
CVI
O5
CO
CO
c
CD
D)
CO
N
O
CO
CM
m
co
C^
CO
g
co
1
m
CO
o
T—
CO
o
in
CO
CM
i-
§
CO
CO
c
CD
O>
CO
E
5
o
CM
CO
O
CM
CO
in
in
T«
CO
S
00
T-
IS
g
1
m"
co
CM
S
co
CM
0>
0)
CM
ro
§
in
CO
c
CD
O>
CO
X
m
CM
CM
o
m
.,_
CO
in
o
CO
•«—
in
o
$5
CD
1
in
CM
-5J-
§
o
CO
o
oo
0
i
CO
c
CD
O)
CO
^
in
CD
in
CM
O
in
co
in
o
in
•«—
m
CM
CO
1
1
o
CO
N-
o
CO
Tt-
CM
in
m
CM
en
o
co
co
CO"
CO
C
CD
a>
CO
N
10
^^
CM
§
•st-
o
CM
•«-
in
co
S
1
o
oo
IS
CO
in
O)
oo
CO
o
o
co
c.
CD
a>
co
5
CO
CM
^1
*
III
n
n
>
-*
in
oo
in
o
T—
0
CM
in
co
m
m
in
CD
§
1
*
in
co
in
o
T—
^ —
CM
O
IS
in
CO
CO
co
c
CD
C?
X
o
O)
o
o
0
CO
in
r--
co
co
o
co
o
T—
1
O
O)
o
CO
T—
CM
O
CO
§
m
co
CD
co
c
co
1
^
in
O)
05
§
CD
CM
^^
f^.
r-
in
CO
CO
oo
o>
1
§
18
CM
CD
O
OO
N-
^3
^^
§
CO
CO
c.
§>
CO
N
O
CO
CM
o
05
in
!?
in
in
•r-
S
CO
^^
1
I
S.
Llf
-------
Q
Ul
O
z
1
u.
cc
Ul
a.
a
co
ui
cc
1
p
o
cc
a.
ui
i
p
§
ca
ui
_CD
£*.
Ul
1
>
c
u
c
a.
P c co
m o •Jg
T> ti C
c .2 £
5 -" <5
M Q Q.
„
_co
CO
13
S a
TJ n
O j
ex
£
E
£
JE «
CO
n
CO
in
CM
§
T-
8
in
CO
o
5
CO
co
•j±
cc
cc
3
CO
CM
-
2
141
u
a.
o
co
m
in
o
T"
0
in
o
oo
in
m
co
CO
1
in
O5
*3>
in
CM
CO
o
in
in
0
CO
co
m
cc
cc
£
X
o
CO
05
8
lO
^^
in
o
1
c.
S
8
in
0
in
O5
05
0
o
o
CO
o
CO
O5
J^
CO
ca
-££
cc
cc
>
CO
f^
o
CM
CO
O
C
^^
f*«»
l«O
1
k
O
in
o
m
o
o
CO
CO
in
o
in
CO
^
cc
cc
Nl
in
CM
f~.
T~
O
in
co
CO
3
f^
lO
05
CD
1
3
oo
n
T~
co
3
co
£
CO
CO
CO
T"
cc
cc
3
oo
cc
-
*
£
LU
u]
a
>
in
o
m
o
oo
in
CO
W
in
co
^^
^^
1
o
CO
O)
in
CO
o
o
T—
in
o
in
3
CO
CO
co
f-
cc
cc
X
1°.
CO
o
CM
CO
w
CM
o
o
c
CC
in
in
O5
o
in
co
CD
S
CO
in
in
co
CO
S
CO
c
cc
N
in
in
*^-
o
CO
m
8
CO
1
o
^>
CM
O5
CO
s
S
CO
c
cc
cc
3
^_
i—
_
*
II
a.
Q
_J
>
£:
CO
CM
in
CO
oo
o
CO
3;
1
1
a.
"55
o
S
!n
T^-
CM
CO
CM
00
O
CO
O
in
§
T-
oo
CO
c
a>
O)
CQ
X
S
^J-
00
in
O5
O5
0
co
in
oo
CO
T-
CO
1
co
^~
CM
in
CO
oo
05
in
0
in
co
o
§
CO
c
cc
cc
>
oo
CD
CM
CM
CD
O
CO
S
in
1
*
CO
in
CO
CO
oo
CM
CO
in
CO
"
CO
c
CO
O)
co
N
p;
"3-
CO
00
CD
in
CO
in
in
S
CO
c.
cc
CO
Q.
ui
•*
-------
Q
Ul
O
cc
o
u.
cc
Ul
a.
Q
CO
Ul
cc
o
Ul
u
O
cc
a.
ui
S
cc
o
0)
O
at
3
oc
O
.£>
(0
CO
s
CO
CO
w
o
a>
a
u
ca
€
Q)
a.
(0
(0
£
co
'«
15
0)
O)
co
ui
a>
ui
X
Q
Z
Ul
a.
a.
1 ^
EC 0)
CO .2 m
"° "S P
C J5 .S
5* o) ®
V. ^-^
•S ® §
01 C»
Q. £
1
c5 o eg
** CO O
° 2 o
0
o
0
oa
o "5
'•i §
O Cw
£
CO
§ 0)
•o c.
2 J
Q.
E
U_
E
c *"
%
o
00
in
m
CO
CO
Cn
^5
^^
^^
CO
Cn
in
CO
•g
D
CO
£
CM
CO
^>
=tt
111
Q.
3
CD
«
^
O
•*
0
en
CO
in
CM
CO
CO
8
en
1
o
ID
CO
(T!
.a
S
in
in
oo
CO
o
CM
in
o
o
in
in
03
•£
(D
TO
CO
X
in
CO
•*
o
O)
CM
CM
O
S
O
CO
CO
oo
en
1
in
oo
-*
S
in
en
m
CM
fc
o
CO
m
1
>•
in
oo
co
m
m
CO
in
£
in
co
en
o
1
3
in
in
co
S
o
^
S
s
CO
cd
r~
1
N
m
CO
o
05
o
S
CO
co
g
E
1
o
CD
O
cn
00
o
CO
-
8
CO
o
T-
co
f-
Q)
TO
CO
*
CO
m
T—
•>*
in
CO
in
0)
§
*
S
CO
J^
l^
1
o
CO
o
in
o
CO
CO
in
T-
T-
8
CO
oo
co
CO
T:
CD
TO
CO
X
s
CO
o
05
CO
§
CO
CO
^^
^^
o
CO
in
1
s
m
o
CO
o
S
CO
m
8
£
co
"£
(D
0?
>"
^^
^^
•*
in
§
o
*
in
CO
co
1
§
cn
in
m
o
CM
in
o
S
00
co
'c
S.
CO
N
f
§
in
in
CO
cn
s
o
^1
O5
|^^
in
1
a>
D)
as
D-
ul
-------
Q
at
Q
cc
o
11.
a.
a
i
n ,'
I a
1-2
1 ~
in
05
i*-
in
CO
Si
in
in
CM
CO
o
o
CM
C\l
o
a
ci
»
1
5 u
1 %
)• j(_
3
O>
in
co
CO
in
m
§
0
CO
co
a
ci
X
o
T—
N.
U)
CM
in
in
CO
CO
o
T™-
0
o
05
1
*
co
0
CO
O5
in
CM
CO
in
o
•>*•
in
in
CO
c
CD
i a
a
E
>
o
CO
in
o
05
CO
o
CD
CM
in
CD
c
c
a
o
•>
n
T—
O
CO
CM
in
in
05
o
CM
CO
CO
a
a
N
o
O
o
o
in
o
CO
O5
05
g
S
c
S
§
co
35
g
o
co
co
m
o
o
§
CO
c
a
a
£
3
co
g
CD
in
CM
£
m
CM
CO
in
CO
05
CO
c
a
o
H
'
O
tf
in
O5
o
o
co
in
^1
^1
oa
CO
a
ci
X
K
co
in
co
CM
o
5
in
CO
00
O5
c.
a
C5
S
^*
1^5
^5
a>
^^
U
in
CO
T—
CO
CO
a
a
E
>
o
05
CO
0
O5
O
g
in
S
co
i
c
',
i
*
•
in
in
CO
o
CO
CO
in
co
CO
o
^
co
a
a
£
N
in
o
in
in
CM
o
in
r--
CO
co
o
CO
g
c
O
co
S
CM
$
I*
in
CM
r
CO
a
CI
3
•<*
i
a
a
S
co
$
?
^^
J^
in
g
O5
CM
CO
C.
a
o
)
35
m
o
t
o
CO
co
in
co
O5
CM
co
cc
c
a
a
E
X
in
-a-
in
O5
£
o
co
5
o
^^
c
1
s
in
g
CO
g
i?
o
CD
g
co
n
a
c
a
E
>
g
in
o
CO
o
in
CO
CO
in
CO
oo
in
r-
c
a
o
•k
in
CO
m
o
CM
£
o
O5
O5
^2
(^
o
co
CI
c
a
CI
E
N
in
in
in
in
m
in
5
m
co
CO
CO
c
c
c
05
J?
a.
uf
-------
Q
Ul
O
CC
2
cc
Ul
D.
Q
CO
Ul
CC
a
Ul
o
o
cc
a.
ui
cc
o
cc
O
CD
o
(0
c
o
2
o
A
CO
CO
CO
s
Tn
o
i
I
CO
E
1
CO
±±
2
CO
a>
CC
co
"55
"5
d>
O)
ca
ui
4
£
a
ca
X
Q
•z.
UI
a.
a.
•g c »
« o -5
"° "to E
5 '> "E
IM> *"-s
§11
5 "5
Q. S
,
(5 .2 J-
o
o
o
•s-
o "3
35 e
£
CO
ts
•o c
2-J
ou
E
u.
E
x> a
= to
OT
S
oo
in
f^
o
8
CD
CO
o
o
in
NT
on
T
3J:
m
CM
•*
in
in
oo
^^
f^
^\i
en
^^
§
1
o
in
CO
in
*:
§
CD
§
.r_
CO
m
(D
1
X
in
OO
•*
m
CO
S
o
0}
CD
CM
18
^-
CO
1
in
CM
CD
in
1—
S
o
CD
O
fs^
CO
CO
r
CD
c?
>i
in
oo
N-
0
CO
S
in
CO
S
CM
05
CM
1
in
CM
CO
IT)
oo
in
CO
CO
§
CO
CO
c:
CD
CO
E
N
in
o
CM
CO
CM
00
o
in
CO
to
CD
S
CO
O
O5
CO
o
o
o
CD
CM
in
CO
T_
^
CO
c
co
CO
O)
>
*
Q.
Q.
o
y
CO
in
CM
CM
IT)
in
o
en
3
CD
O
in
CD
in
CO
in
1
T3
0
5
"
•*.
in
^*
£
g
*
in
oo
CO
CO
c
CD
co
CO
X
0
o
•*
^^
f^
CM
oo
0
f—
0
o
o
T-
co
00
1
o
oo
oo
o
CD
CM
o
5
CO
CM
00
CO
c
CD
C?
N
CO
oo
m
?
18
o
in
co
o>
oo
1
1O
. N
ca
co
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Jar Odor
Purpose
The purpose of this test is to evaluate the type and strength of the odor produced by the
ink film on the substrate. The jar odor test is based on methods developed by Western
Michigan University.
Equipment
Glass jars (eight ounces) with screw caps having foil liners.
Oven
Procedure
1. Clean the jars and dry them in an oven.
2. Collect samples from the interior of the rolls.
3. Place the printed sample in ajar and seal the jar with the screw cap.
4. Place the jar in the oven at 100°F for two hours.
5. Repeat the procedure for a sample of imprinted substrate as the test control.
6. Open the jar and sniff immediately. Record qualitative assessment of odor.
Results
The jar odor test was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from each site.
Samples for testing were cut from two locations as indicated by the following symbols:
c = imprinted area (control)
x = printed area
Results are presented in Chapter 4.
Mottle/Lay
Purpose
The purpose of this test was to evaluate the mottle of the printed substrate. Mottle is the
non-uniformity in appearance, or variation in density, of an ink film layer. The
mottle/lay test is based on methods developed by Western Michigan University.
Equipment
The Tobias Associates Model MTI Mottle Tester is used to measure mottle. The MTI
Model is made up of four main component: a probe or measurement head, a rotating
drum that carries the sample, a microprocessor that performs all control and analysis
functions, and a video display monitor.
Procedure
1. Calibrate the Mottle Tester before use. Calibrate by placing the calibration standard
on the scanning drum with the "center line" marks aligned with the "scan start" mark!
Follow the instructions through the main menu of computer. There are two standards for
4-E, page 52
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
calibration: a white area for setting the ZERO (high reflectivity) and a black area for
setting CAL (gain adjustment).
2. For testing, use samples of all substrates (LDPE, PE/EVA, OPP) with two samples
from each of the front, middle, and end of the runs. Perform testing on all five colors.
Use approximate sample widths of 38 mm (2 inches) with a scannable length of 100 mm
(4 niches). This will produce 500 data points, 0.2 mm per point. The scannable length is
the length of the sample that is free from any marks or obstructions. Samples must be
cut from solid (100% coverage) area.
3. Samples should be mounted to the drum with masking tape, making sure that the tape
is out of the scanning area.
4. Set the scan parameters and then select operating functions from the main menu.
Follow the instructions manual for an explanation of menu options.
Results
This test was accomplished by using a Mottle Tester (a device specifically designed for
this test) to measure the difference in reflective density of a printed sample. For this test,
a twelve inch square sample was attached to the Mottle Tester and scanned. Multiple
density measurement points (250 - 500) were collected during twenty linear scans over
the sample area. The result is a Mottle Index which is derived from these measurement
points.
Mottle was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from each site. Samples
were cut from three locations during the run as indicated by the following symbols:
w = beginning of run
x = 30 minutes into run
z = end of run
The test image had areas printed with green and blue which were used to test for mottle.
Table 4-E. 12 shows the Mottle Index and standard deviation for these two ink colors
from each site. When a site number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a
laboratory run conducted at Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing
facility.
4-E, page 53
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.12 Mottle Index for Performance Demonstration Sites and
Laboratory Runs
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
Solvent-
based
Film
LDPE
LDPE
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#S2
#S2
#S2
Site
5
7
L5b
5
7
L7
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
z
w
X
z
Color
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
green
green
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
green
green
Mottle
Index
59.0
302.5
93.5
286.5
64.5
875.0
45.5
216.5
46.0
311.0
34.5
258.5
219.5
193.0
262.0
71.5
288.5
87.5
276.5
74.0
306.0
89.5
410.0
45.5
349.0
362.5
357.5
349.4
Standard
Deviation
3.5
46.5
17.0
36.0
7.0
535.5
4.0
18.5
6.5
26.0
3.5
28.5
9.0
15.0
62.0
5.5
25.5
28.0
49.0
9.5
30.5
4.0
63.0
3.5
27.0
26.0
31.9
21.7
4-E, page 54
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.12 Mottle Index for Performance Demonstration Sites and
Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
uv
uv
uv
(no slip)
Film
OPP
LDPE
PBEVA
PE/EVA
LDPE
Product
Line
#S1
#S2
fU2
#1)2
#U3
#U1
Site
9B
10
L4
6
6
8
11
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
Color
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
green
green
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
Mottle
Index
43.0
257.0
44.5
353.0
43.5
408.5
79.5
380.5
111.5
420.5
97.5
401.5
107.5
137.5
116.5
87.5
320.5
73.0
281.0
58.5
251.5
62.5
312.5
56.5
474.0
57.0
424.5
48.0
379.0
50.5
508.0
53.0
599.5
68.5
629.0
47.0
382.5
51.0
446.0
Standard
Deviation
4.0
20.5
6.0
35.5
5.0
37.5
4.5
27.0
7.5
33.0
7.5
32.0
10.0
13.0
11.0
7.0
24.0
5.5
28.0
3.5
30.5
11.0
57.0
3.0
93.5
4.0
101.5
3.5
29.0
6.0
57.5
6.0
74.0
5.5
106.0
5.0
43.0
5.0
50.0
4-E, page 55
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.12 Mottle Index for Performance Demonstration Sites and
Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Water-
based
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#W3
#W3
Site
2
3
L1
2
3
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
Color
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
green
green
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
Mottle
Index
122.0
1144.0
114.5
999.0
155.0
763.0
82.0
491.5
87.5
588.5
79.0
605.5
389.0
399.0
379.0
90.0
1324.0
75.0
658.5
107.5
1116.5
87.0
793.5
95.0
966.0
95.5
838.5
Standard
Deviation
7.5
84.5
6.5
50.5
11.0
42.5
9.5
34.0
5.5
50.5
7.5
49.0
27.0
26.0
28.0
5.0
89.5
6.5
74.5
9.0
99.0
5.5
45.5
6.0
57.7
5.5
71.5
4-E, page 56
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.12 Mottle Index for Performance Demonstration Sites and
Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Water-
based
Film
PE/EVA
OPP
Product
Line
#W3
#W1
#W2
#W4
Site
L6
4
1
L3
9A
L2
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
Color
green
green
green
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
green
green
green
blue
green
blue
green
blue
green
green
green
Mottle
Index
227.0
203.0
88.0
206.0
1063.0
193.0
1004.5
116.0
967.5
44.5
219.5
54.5
402.5
50.5
343.0
169.0
131.0
262.0
38.0
174.5
40.5
187.5
36.5
212.5
99.0
128.5
251.5
Standard
Deviation
14.0
12.0
8.0
27.0
98.0
50.0
156.5
8.5
134.5
3.5
48.0
3.0
61.5
4.0
40.5
9.5
19.5
62.0
3.0
17.0
7.5
19.5
3.5
15.5
15.5
10.5
22.0
aSamples were taken at three locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of the run
x = 30 minutes into the run
z = end of the run
'""L" indicates data from a laboratory run.
4-E, page 57
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Opacity
Purpose
The purpose of this test is to measure the opacity of an ink film. Opacity is the degree to
which light can pass through an object. It is expressed as the percentage of light
transmitted through both the ink film and substrate. The opacity test is based on methods
developed by Western Michigan University.
Equipment
Datacolor Spectrafiash 600
Diano-BLN opacity meter
Procedure
1. Adjust the standard and batch reflectance by magnesium oxide factors, and then
calculate the A/2 degrees Y Tristimulus values.
2. Samples should be measured using the Small Area View (SAV) port size and
calibrated to this size before use. Calibration procedures are noted in the CD?, L* a* b*
test method.
3. Take five samples from four locations of the run for both LDPE and OPP substrates.
4. Take readings for white color samples only.
5. Select the mode for Opacity from the indexes menu and choose Tappi 425 Opacity.
Follow the instructions on the screen to proceed with testing. Back each sample with a
standard and read 5 times in random places.
Results
Opacity was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from each site. Samples
were cut from four locations during the run length as indicated by the following symbols:
w = beginning of run
x = 30 minutes into run
y = 60 minutes into run
z = end of run
Only white printed samples were tested. Table 4-E. 13 shows the opacity measurements
and standard deviations for these samples. When a site number begins with an "L," the
data were taken from a laboratory run conducted at Western Michigan University, not
from a volunteer printing'facility.
4-E, page 58
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.13 Opacity Results for Performance Demonstration Sites
and Laboratory Runs
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
Solvent-
based
UV
UV
(no slip)
Film
LDPE
OPP
OPP
LDPE
LDPE
Product
Line
fS2
#S1
#S2
#U2
#U1
Site
5
7
L5b
9B
10
L4
6
11
Location of
Sample8
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
Average Opacity
{%)
46.66
48.50
47.62
48.28
51.76
51.22
51.40
48.72
55.52
50.40
56.34
50.74
51.44
53.90
49.24
47.34
47.94
48.24
40.60
38.38
38.62
52.68
52.92
55.36
57.60
55.42
56.90
56.52
56.74
Standard
Deviation
0.27
0.40
0.33
0.53
0.41
0.21
0.43
0.19
4.20
2.02
4.57
0.37
1.93
0.49
0.34
0.26
0.16
0.14
0.76
1.05
0.41
0.85
0.36
0.46
1.13
1.00
0.54
0.50
0.48
4-E, page 59
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.13 Opacity Results for Performance Demonstration Sites
and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Water-
based
Film
LDPE
OPP
Product
Line
#W3
#W1
#W2
#W4
Site
2
3
L1
4
L2
1
L3
9A
Location of
Sample8
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z .
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
Average Opacity
(%)
47.34
46.62
46.34
46.62
57.14
54.84
55.00
52.92
43.12
43.06
43.66
51.52
52.86
53.46
52.82
29.10
28.68
27.86
57.52
58.20
. 56.92
57.22
36.74
37.70
37.84
54.74
54.22
53.98
Standard
Deviation
0.08
0.55
1.15
0.50
0.24
0.38
0.35
0.38
0.95
0.30
L 0.74
0.34
0.31
1.71
0.33
0.91
0.80
0.81
0.34
0.06
0.29
0.37
0.42
1.64
0.54
0.34
0.30
0.17
"Samples were taken at four locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of the run
x = 30 minutes into the run
y = 60 minutes into the run
z = end of the run
""L." indicates data from a laboratory run.
4-E, page 60
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Rub Resistance
Purpose
The purpose of the dry and wet rub resistance tests is to check the ink's ability to resist
being rubbed off of its substrate. The dry and wet rub resistance tests were based on
methods developed by Quality Assurance at Sun Chemical Corporation.
Equipment
Sutherland Ink Rub Tester and attachments.
Scoring device (included with the Rub Tester).
Supply of 80 x 80 count bleached muslin cloth which has been found useful hi testing
wet smear, wet rub, and wet bleed.
Procedure
1. Obtain a 6 inch x 3 inch printed sample which is representative of the rub in ink lay
and coverage. When the printed area permits, the 6-inch direction should be cut across
the grain of the sheet, but must not cross wrinkles, scores, creases, or other imperfections
that would distort the results. Unprinted stock from the same run should be provided in
IVz inch x 2 inch sizes (for dry rub) and 5Vz inch x 2 inch sizes (for wet rub). In both
cases, cut the longer dimension across the grain of the flexible material.
2. For dry rub resistances Clip a TVz inch x 2 inch test strip (with a solid printed
image 1 inch x \Vz inch centered on the sample) to the 4-pound testing block, with the
printing surface away from the rubber pads. Mount the test specimen securely, print side
up, on the rubber pad of the base plate. Place the weight over the sample, making sure
that one of the 1 inch x 2 inch rubber pads of the test block is over the ink area being
tested, and that both surfaces are free of dirt. Preset the tester for 100 strokes, or less if a
failure occurs, for a particular printed surface. When the rubs have been completed,
examine both the hiked surface and the plain surface on the test block for signs of
transfer.
3. For wet rub resistance: Mount the strips hi the same manner as for the dry rub test,
using the 2-pound test block. Preset the tester for one rub. Place 2 to 6 drops of distilled
water on the printed surface so that they will be covered by the test block. Place the
block in position and press the "start" button. After one stroke, examine both surfaces
for color transfer. Repeat single strokes until ink failure is noted and record the number
of strokes.
4. Record the appearance of the hiked surface and/or (as appropriate) the blotter surface.
Record the percent of ink transferred, the weight of the test block, and the number of
strokes that cause total failure.
Table 4-E. 14 summarizes the different conditions for these tests.
4-E, page 61
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.14 Summary of Test Conditions for Dry and Wet Rub Resistance
Test
Dry Rub
Wet Rub
Test
Block
(pounds)
4
2
Size of
Strip
(inches)
2 x 7%
2 x 51/2
Suggested
Number
of Strokes
100
1 (until
failure)
Strip
Material
test sheet
test sheet
Contact
Time
Before Rub
0.00
0.00
Results
Dry and wet rub resistance was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from
each site. Sites 1,4,9, and 10 were not tested hi the laboratory because the OPP
substrate printed at these sites was laminated to another substrate. Samples were cut
from four locations during the run length as indicated by the following symbols:
w = beginning of run
x = 30 minutes into run
y = 60 minutes into run
z = end of run
Table 4-E. 15 present the results for the dry rub resistance test for the performance
demonstration sites and laboratory runs, and Table 4-E.16 presents the results for the wet
rub resistance test. When a site number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a
laboratory run conducted at Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing
facility.
Table 4-E.15 Dry Rub Resistance Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
Film
LDPE
Product
Line
#S2
Site
5
7
L5b
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
Original
Density
(unitless)
2.06
2.06
2.05
2.12
1.81
1.77
1.77
1.76
1.35
0.79
0.91
Density
After 50
Strokes
(unitless)
1.95
1.96
1.95
1.96
1.75
1.65
1.75
1.65
1.28
0.78
0.90
Percent
Retained
Density
(%)
94.7
95.1
95.1
92.5
96.6
93.2
98.8
93.7
94.8
98.7
98.9
4-E, page 62
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.15 Dry Rub Resistance Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
UV
UV
(no slip)
Water-
based
Film
PE/EVA
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
LDPE
Product
Line
#S2
#1)2
#U2
#U3
#U1
#W3
Site
5
7
L7
6
6
8
11
2
3
L1
Location
of
Sample9
w
X
y
z
w
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
. z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
Original
Density
(unitless)
2.08
2.03
2.08
2.05
1.65
1.64
0.75
0.78
0.82
2.13
2.02
2.00
1.99
1.99
1.97
1.88
1.89
1.13
1.08
1.10
2.18
1.96
2.14
2.20
1.97
1.95
1.98
2.02
2.15
2.16
2.12
2.03
1.03
1.06
1.04
Density
After 50
Strokes
(unitless)
2.00
1.91
1.94
1.96
1.59
1.59
0.71
0.75
0.79
1.95
1.88
1.80
1.88
1.89
1.80
1.84
1.84
1.11
1.10
1.07
1.88
1.80
1.86
1.91
1.82
1.80
1.86
1.93
1.94
2.00
1.93
1.89
1.02
1.05
1.04
Percent
Retained
Density
(%)
96.2
94.1
93.3
95.6
96.3
96.9
94.0
96.0
97.0
91.5
93.6
94.5
94.5
95.5
91.4
97.8
97.3
98.2
100.0
97.3
86.2
91.8
86.9
86.8
92.3
92.3
93.9
95.5
90.2
92.6
91.0
93.0
99.0
99.1
100.0
4-E, page 63
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.15 Dry Rub Resistance Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Water-
based
Film
PE/EVA
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#W3
#W3
Site
2
3
L6
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
Original
Density
(unitless)
1.67
2.14
2.08
2.04
1.95
1.88
1.82
1.87
0.93
0.80
0.88
Density
After 50
Strokes
(unitless)
1.63
2.02
1.97
1.89
1.90
1.75
1.75
1.80
0.88
0.79
0.85
Percent
Retained
Density
(%)
97.6
94.4
94.7
92.6
97.4
93.0
96.1
96.2
94.6
98.8
96.6
"Samples were taken at four locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of the run
x = 30 minutes into the run
y = 60 minutes into the run
z = end of the run
b"L" indicates data from a laboratory run.
Table 4-E.16 Wet Rub Resistance Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#S2
#S2
Site
5,
7
L5C
5
7
Location of
Sample8
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
z
Failure at Number of
Strokes"
5
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
no failure at 10 strokes
no failure at 10 strokes
no failure at 10 strokes
3
2
2
2
5
5
4-E, page 64
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.16 Wet Rub Resistance Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
UV
uv
(no slip)
Water-
based
===^^=
Film
LDPE
PBEVA
LDPE
LDPE
Product
Line
#U2
#U2
#U3
#U1
#W3
Site
L7
6
6
8
11
2
3
L1
Location of
Sample8
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
Failure at Number of
Strokes"
5
6
6
6
5
5
5
3
4
5
5
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
8
8
8
8
no failure at 10 strokes
no failure at 10 strokes
no failure at 10 strokes
no failure at 10 strokes
no failure at 10 strokes
no failure at 10 strokes
no failure at 10 strokes
4-E, page 65
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.16 Wet Rub Resistance Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
Film
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#W3
Site
2
3
L6
Location of
Sample3
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
Failure at Number of
Strokes"
3
3
2
2
4
3
3
3
7
6
no failure at 10 strokes
'Samples were taken at four locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of the run
x = 30 minutes into the run
y = 60 minutes into the run
z = end of the run
bA failure represents ink color transferred from the printed substrate to the unprinted substrate.
A maximum of 10 strokes were used for the wet rub resistance test.
°"ir indicates data from a laboratory run.
Tape Adhesiveness
Purpose
The purpose of the tape adhesiveness test is to check the bond of the dry ink to the
substrate. Adequate ink adhesion is critical, because if the ink doesn't adhere well
enough, it will not be able to stand up to the normal demands placed on the finished
product. The tape adhesiveness test was based on methods developed by Quality
Assurance at Sun Chemical Corporation.
Equipment
Printed sample of ink
Adhesive tape (3M — #610)
Procedure
1. Air dry or oven dry the print per standard test procedure.
2. Place a length of adhesive tape (3M — #610) along the length of the print.
3. Hold the print down with one hand and quickly pull the tape off the print. The tape
should be pulled at a 90 degree angle to the print, upwards, not against the tape.
4. Observe the tape; there should be no ink removal.
5. Observe the print. Again, there should be no signs of ink removal.
6. If 100% ink removal occurs, verify that the print has been made on the correct side of
the substrate.
4-E, page 66
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
7. Record the degree of ink removal by estimating the percentage of ink removed.
Results
Tape adhesiveness was measured on site during the demonstration runs, and in the
laboratory with samples collected from each site. Sites 1,4, 9, and 10 were not tested in
the laboratory because the OPP substrate printed at these sites was laminated to another
substrate. This lamination trapped the ink between the two substrate layers, making it
unnecessary to test the ink on the OPP substrate with this method.
Samples for testing were cut from four locations during the run length as indicated by the
following symbols:
w
X
y
z
beginning of run
30 minutes into run
60 minutes into run
end of run
Due to the aborted run using the PE/EVA substrate at Site 7, samples were only taken
from the beginning (w) and the end (z) of the run for testing in the laboratory. Site 8 also
had a shorter run for the PE/EVA substrate, so samples were only available at the
beginning (w), 30 minutes into run (x), and the end of the run (z).
The laboratory runs at Western Michigan University were shorter in duration than the
demonstration runs, so samples for testing were only cut from three locations (w, x, and
z).
All ink colors that were printed on each substrate were tested. (White ink was not
printed on the white PE/EVA). In the case of a failure, the color(s) of ink removed were
listed hi the "Comments" column, along with an indication of how much ink was
removed.
Table 4-E. 17 shows the tape adhesiveness results of samples from each site. When a site
number begins with an "L," the data were taken from a laboratory run conducted at
Western Michigan University, not from a volunteer printing facility.
4-E, page 67
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.17 Tape Adhesiveness Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs
Ink
System
Solvent-
jased
UV
UV
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
LDPE
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#S2
#S2
#S2
#1)2
#U2
#U3
Site
5
7
L5b
5
7
L7
L4
6
6
8
Location
of
Sample8
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
Pass/
Fail
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
F
P
P
F
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
F
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
P
F
Comments
outline of cyan and magenta was
removed
outline of cyan and magenta was
removed
cyan and magenta were slightly
removed
cyan, magenta, and blue were
removed
white and magenta were removed
magenta was slightly removed
blue, green, and magenta were
removed
cyan, magenta, and blue were
removed
cyan, magenta, and blue were
removed
all colors were removed
cyan was slightly removed
cyan and green were slightly
removed
4-E, page 68
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.17 Tape Adhesiveness Results for Performance
Demonstration Sites and Laboratory Runs (continued)
Ink
System
UV
[no slip)
Water-
based
Water-
based
Film
LDPE
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
Product
Line
#U1
#W3
#W3
#W2
#W4
Site
11
2
3
L1
2
3
L6
L3
L2
Location
of
Sample3
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
w
X
z
Pass/
Fail
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
F
P
P
P
P
F
F
F
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
Comments
blue was removed
blue was removed
green was removed
all colors were removed
all colors were removed
all colors were removed
aSamples were taken at four locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of the run
x = 30 minutes into the run
y = 60 minutes into the run
z = end of the run
T indicates data from a laboratory run.
4-E, page 69
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Trap
Purpose
The purpose of the trap test is to evaluate the efficiency of one ink printed over the top of
the next. The trap test was based on methods developed by Western Michigan
University.
Equipment
X-Rite 418 densitometer
Procedure
The procedure for measuring trap requires samples to be printed with solid ink densities
of magenta, cyan, white, and blue. The trap combinations to be measured were magenta
and cyan, and white and blue. However, the densitometer did not get viable results from
the white and blue combination. Trap was measured for both 100% tone (solid) and 80%
tone samples printed with magenta and cyan.
1. Calibrate the densitometer according to the manufacturer's instructions. For all color
references, follow the calibration instructions obtained by pressing the function key and
color key together. Using instructions on the instrument, set low (white standard) and
high values (black standard) for each color; then read the individual color patches as
determined by the instrument. Verify calibration values for each standard patch and
make adjustments as necessary.
2. Two samples will be taken from four locations on the press runs for all substrates
(LDPE, PE/EVA, OPP).
3. Follow the densitometer instructions for the order in which readings should be
performed.
4. The apparent trap is calculated from densitometer readings using the GATF/Preucil
trap formula:
Apparent trap [%] = (Dop - D! ) X 100 / D2
where Dop = density of two-color overprint
DI = density of first ink down
D2 = density of second ink down
Dop, Dj, and D2 are measured using the complimentary filter of the second ink
down minus the paper.
Results
Trap was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from each site. Samples on
samples cut from two locations during the run length as indicated by the following
symbols:
w = beginning of ran
z = end of run
Table 4-E.18 shows the percent trap for these samples. Trap was measured for 100%
tone (solid) and 80% tone areas. The results in Table 4-E.18 are the averages of five
4-E, page 70
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
measurements taken at each location during the run length. The standard deviation of
those five measurements is also shown in the table. The laboratory runs did not have any
overprinting using the process colors referred to above, so they were not measured for
trap.
Table 4-E.18 Trap Results for Performance Demonstration Sites
Ink
System
Solvent-
based
UV
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
LDPE
PE/EVA
Product
Line
#S2
#S2
#S1
#S2
#U2
#U2
#U3
Site
5
7
5
7
9B
10
6
6
8
Location
of
Sample8
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
Tone of
Sample
(%)
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
Average
Trap
(%)
96.6
99.8
100.0
99.8
100.2
101.6
98.2
98.8
104.2
100.0
97.4
97.2
93.2
93.8
92.4
90.2
102.6
99.0
104.6
103.8
93.4
107.6
98.2
95.8
88.8
88.0
89.4
87.6
95.0
91.2
90.2
90.4
91.4
94.6
96.2
97.2
Standard
Deviation
1.62
2.79
2.61
3.71
1.17
1.36
1.17
1.17
1.72
3.52
1.74
2.64
3.82
3.06
1.36
1.33
1.36
3.29
2.24
2.04
6.65
4.84
4.40
2.71
1.72
1.10
2.80
3.20
4.47
0.75
2.14
0.49
2.50
1.62
1.94
3.60
4-E, page 71
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.18 Trap Results for Performance Demonstration Sites (continued)
Ink
System
UV
(no slip)
Water-
based
Film
LDPE
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
Product
Line
#U1
#W3
#W3
#W1
#W2
#W4
Site
11
2
3
2
3
4
1
9A
Location
of
Sample3
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
w
z
Tone of
Sample
(%)
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
100
80
Average
Trap
(%)
85.2
80.6
80.8
81.0
93.2
88.0
92.6
89.6
116.4
105.2
111.6
109.0
76.2
79.6
73.4
76.8
97.6
105.4
88.4
78.4
87.4
96.8
87.6
87.6
87.6
82.0
91.4
88.4
88.4
91.0
87.2
89.2
Standard
Deviation
4.53
2.58
1.47
2.10
5.15
4.20
2.06
4.22
4.08
3.31
2.58
4.05
1.94
2.24
3.93
5.04
1.36
2.24
1.02
0.80
1.20
3.60
1.85
1.62
3.56
3.29
1.96
1.50
2.50
5.44
1.47
1.47
aSamples were taken at two locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of run
z = end of run
Uncured Residue — UV Ink
Purpose
The purpose of the uncured residue test is to determine if uncured residue from UV ink
remains on the printed substrate after the final UV curing station. The uncured residue
test for UV inks is based on methods developed by Maine Poly Inc.
4-E, page 72
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Equipment *
Three glass jars (approximately eight ounces) with lids
Alcohol
Procedure
1. Cut three samples from the roll of printed product.
2. Fill each of the three jars with enough alcohol to fully immerse the printed sample.
3. Place one sample in each jar.
4. After 24 hours, check jar #1. Note if there is any discoloration of the alcohol
indicating uncured residue is present.
5. After 48 hours, check jar #2. Note if there is any discoloration of the alcohol.
6. After 72 hours, check jar #3. Note if there is any discoloration of the alcohol.
Results
The uncured residue test was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from
Sites 6, 8 and 11. UV ink was not run at any other sites, nor was it used in the laboratory
runs performed at Western Michigan University.
The uncured residue test was measured in the laboratory with samples collected from
each site. Samples for testing were cut from four locations during the run length as
indicated by the following symbols:
w = beginning of ran
x = 30 minutes into run
y = 60 minutes into run
z = end of run
Table 4-E. 19 presents the results of the uncured residue test for each of the sites.
Uncured residue was only measured for green, blue, and white ink, as these colors had
the largest areas of coverage. However, uncured residue was only found in blue print.
There was no evidence of uncured residue for green and white print. Therefore, the
results in Table 4-E. 19 are only for blue ink.
4-E, page 73
-------
APPENDIX 4-E
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Table 4-E.19 Uncured Residue Results for Performance Demonstration Sites
Ink System
uv
UV (no slip)
Film
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
Product
Line
#U2
#U2
#U3
#U1
Site
6
6
8
11
Location
of
Sample9
w
X
y
z
w
X
y
z
w.
X
z
w
X
y
z
Percent
of Ink Removed
(by weight)"
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.78
7.00
7.14
11.27
9.82
11.51
9.09
"Samples were taken at four locations from the printed sample:
w = beginning of the run
x = 30 minutes into the run
y at 60 minutes into the run
z = end of the run
bUncured residue was found in blue print only. No uncured residue was found in green and white
print.
4-E, page 74
-------
Appendix 4-F (Performance Chapter)
Anilox Configuration Data from
the Performance Demonstrations
See Site Profiles in Chapter 4 for color sequence.
blue
green
white
cyan
magenta
Sitel
water-based
OPP
Ipi bcm
280 7.0
280 6.4
280 7.5
800 1.7
800 1.7
Site 2
water-based
LDPE, PE/EVA1
Ipi bcm
280 6.0
300 6.9
360 5.0
360 4.9
360 5.1
SiteS
water-based
LDPE, PE/EVA1
Ipi bcm
240 7.8
240 7.8
300 5.2
500 3.2
500 3.2
Site 4
water-based
OPP
Ipi bcm
250 6.1
250 6.8
250 6.3
800 2.2
600 2.7
Site 5
solvent-based
LDPE, PE/EVA1
Ipi bcm
240 4.2
240 4.2
300 6.2
550 2.0
550 2.0
Site6
UV
LDPE, PE/EVA1,
OPP
Ipi bcm
360 4.7
360 4.7
250 7.5
600 2.8
600 2.8
Dlue
green
white
cyan
magenta
Site 7
solvent-
based
LDPE,
PE/EVA1
Ipi bcm
500 4.0
500 4.0
200 8.5
700 2.0
700 2.0
SiteS
UV
LDPE,
PE/EVA1, OPP2
Ipi bcm
724 4.5
724 4.5
200 8.4
724 4.5
724 4.5
SiteSA
water-based
OPP
Ipi bcm
400 4.0
400 4.0
300 5.5
550 2.7
550 2.7
SiteSB
solvent-based
OPP
Ipi bcm
400 4.0
400 4.0
300 5.5
550 2.7
550 2.7
Site 10
solvent-based
OPP
Ipi bcm
250 10.1
250 9.8
250 9.0
800 1.8
800 1.6
Site 11
UV
LDPE
Ipi bcm
360 5.6
360 5.6
300 6.0
500 2.7
500 2.7
1white not used on PE/EVA
2magenta not used on LDPE, OPP
4-F, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-F ANILOX CONFIGURATION DATA FROM THE PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATIONS
This page is intentionally blank.
4-F, page 2
-------
Appendix 4-G (Performance Chapter)
Surface Tension Data From the Performance Demonstrations
Site
Sitel
Site 2
SiteS
Site 4
SiteS
Site6
Site 7
SiteS
Site 9A
Site 9B
Site 10
Site 11
Ink System
Water-based
Water-based
Water-based
Water-based
Solvent-based
UV
Solvent-based
UV
Water-based
Water-based
Solvent-based
UV
Substrates
OPP
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
PE/EVA
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
OPP
OPP
LDPE
Surface Tension (dynes)
before corona treatment
42
39
40
41
41
44
42
42
41
41
41
41
41
41
43
43
43
40
after corona treatment
42
41
41
41
41
44+*
41
41
41
41
42
42
42
41
44
44
43
40
*dyne pens only go up to 44 dynes
4-G, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-G SURFACE TENSION DATA FROM THE PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATIONS
This page is intentionally blank.
4-G, page 2
-------
t/5
O
1
/— s «>
;n -
il
S «
B
4 I
•"* r_
3 ^
g £
CA
to
•o
o
CO
&
CO
CO
>
0
o
o
C i
4= !
CD /
N
CO
(O
t>
3
1:
O.
E
E
to
(O
w
o
£
CM
O™* c
•= E
"*" in
3
O
CO
£
•* i
E
£
§ i
E
CO
a
0 i
E
SL
&.
o>
Si
z
co
r-.
CM
co
CM
o
^^
CV!
05
CO
C3>
CO
S
CM
*
m
Si
UJ
D-
n
CO
_a
c
CD
>
0
CO
•
-------
CO
cc
111
Q
Ul
O
<
1
u.
cc
Ul
o
cc
u.
X
c
£
CO
3
g
O
CD
CO
15
P
V)
Js
"o
o
1,
&
33
Product 1
Jj
ul
!
c
Si
3
1
CM
CO 1
CD j
3 5
o ,~||
*"•»!
I
O H
t~ 1.1
*~
CO
•2 II
in 3!
cl]
CO
« n
H
COJ!
° cl
cl
Q.
3
P JP
o
in
CM
o
CM
CM
CO
CM
CM
CO
CM
CM
N.
TO
^
CD
3
CM
o
CM
CL
CL
O
O
CM
CM
en
CO
ro
oo
oo
CO
•«*•
*
1
O
in
CM
0
in
m
CM
0
in
CM
O
CJ
oo
CO
c
o>
2
D)
CO
oo
co
oo
oo
r-.
or>
00
o
CO
o>
o
magenta
o
CM
CM
CM
CM
CO
CO
CM
(M
CM
1
CO
co
CO
o
CO
CO
in
CO
oo
CO
K
oo
CM
CD
a
CO
o>
*
CL
CL
O
1 Solvent-based
co
CM
t*-
cS
•*
CO
•*
in
CO
CM
1
CO
O)
CM
co
•<3-
oo
co
CO
^
CO
CO
CD
£
O)
co
co
CM
in
CM
CO
co
in
CO
CO
CO
CD
c?
O)
CM
in
CO
^
CO
CO
CO
JC
o
o
o
T—
o
1-
o
CM
o
CM
CD
3
8
CM
CO
*
LJLl
CL
Q
^^
03
£
"3
o
CO
0
CO
o
CD
O
•*
o
•«*•
CO
u
o
m
o
•*
o
•*
o
•*
o
"*
<0
0)
o
T-
0
•*
o
l1^
o
CO
o
in
magenta
O
£^
CM
o
05
O
CO
O
co
O
CO
&
Ic
o
en
Al
O
o
Al
o
O)
Al
o
en
Al
CD
s
CM
CO
0
Al
0
cn
Al
O
1?
o
o
1
o
cn
Al
O
Al
O
O)
Al
o
CD
Al
C
CD
£
O)
o
cn
Al
O
cn
Al
O
in
CO
o
o
CO
as
CD
I
o
co
CM
0
CM
O
CM
O
in
CM
1
CM
CD'
c?
CL
-------
CO
O
g
tr
Ul
Q
111
O
<
tr
tr
ui
a,
ui
X
o
oc
LU
I
O
o
co
4
x
a
z
Ul
a.
Q.
CO
UT
•o
8
1
5"
(0
o
o
(0
>
S
o
o
Is
flc
a
CO
Product
i :«~
s
E
Ink System
i
o
CM
(0
sl
CJ =
^ E
*" S
^>
i.
Q
(0
«!
E
(0
ol
S i
E
0)
1
0 i
E
i
3
L.IIIC
Number
>,
ca
o
o
2
0
in
CD
S
€
CM
CO
*
PE/EVA
t
co
o
o
°
0
in
01
1
!•
co
,0
o
o
o
CO
CO
£
o>
>.
co
.55
§
o
si
eg
c
CD
I
^
Z
^
<
z
^
z
s.
IE
O
c»
Al
O
o
AJ
o
CD
Al
O
CO
Al
CO
Zi
CM
*
CO
o
CD
Al
O
o
Al
o
CD
Al
O
CO
Al
1
O
O5
Al
O
Al
0
O)
A)
o
O5
AI
0}
£
OJ
o
05
Al
Al
0
o>
Al
O
p
i
»
o
•*
1
o
S
o
h-
CM
O
S
0
CD
OJ
O
s
o
CM
T—
o
•*
*s
CD
D>
as
o
c4
o
oo
CM
o
fe
s.
J=
r
§
o
0
o
o>
o
!>>.
CO
s
s
T—
CM
%
t
CO
o
o
0
q
CM
O
CO
1
o
>*
co
o
o
o
o
m
CD
S.
D)
>.
ca
o
o
o
0
£
o
1-
5
i
>,
co
o
o
o
o
co
aj
IE
o
CM
•*
CM"
•*
CM
CM'
CD
JQ
CO
=tt=
<
o>
^
o>
aj
o
o
o
o
o
CD
1
CO
U5
CO
CO
CO
co
c
a>
£
CO
h«.
CO
•*
CO
O)
•*
CO
m'
£
CD
D)
CO
*^-
^
i-
co
3
IE
CO
CD
cf
a.
-------
APPENDIX 4-H
VISCOSITY DATA FROM THE PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATIONS
This page is intentionally blank.
4-H, page 4
-------
Appendix 4-1 (Performance Chapter)
Descriptions and Test Data for Performance Demonstration Sites
PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATIONS
The inks, substrates, and test plates were shipped to each facility approximately two weeks
prior to each test run. The five ink colors were delivered at press hi sealed five-gallon
containers. A press crew from the facility, and a team from the DfE Project was present at
each performance demonstration. The DfE team consisted of John Serafano (WMU),
accompanied by one or more individuals from either the DfE staff, WMU, or DfE contractor
Abt Associates Inc.
Anilox placement and cylinder mounting were done prior to the arrival of the DfE team.
The DfE team and the facility press crews then monitored the press runs, from makeready
through clean-up. During each demonstration, the press was run at production speeds (300
to 500 feet per minute) for approximately two hours to produce up to 60,000 feet of printed
product (exceptions are described hi "Deviations from the Project Methodology").
During the runs, the necessary data was collected, and on-site tests were conducted. After
each run, substrates were shipped to WMU, where more performance testing was conducted.
SITE1: WATER-BASED INK #2 ON OPP
There was one pre-makeready, one makeready, and one demonstration run performed.
Makeready: OPP
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H), and the doctor blade
systems were pressurized, delivering ink to the anilox rolls. At this point, the press drive
was engaged and the initial running makeready began. Impression was set for each color
and registration was achieved. The press speed ranged from 148 to 412 feet per minute
(ft/min). Most of the makeready was run on a similar substrate supplied by the site to ensure
adequate supply of the control film for the run. A flag was inserted to mark a print for
inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample was made. The samples had good lay and trap,
there appeared to be no problems with web stability, and there was no evidence of blocking.
The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed the test. Density
measurements were taken and recorded on each color of the sample pull. The results of the
visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.1. The makeready process lasted 64 minutes and
consumed 8,975 feet of film. The site-supplied substrate was used first for the makeready,
which lasted 27 minutes and consumed 2,783 feet of film. The makeready on the DfE
control substrate lasted 37 minutes and consumed 6,192 feet of film.
4-1, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.1 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Makeready
Ink Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.590
2.218
1.596
1.500
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blockina.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: OPP
Viscosity measurements were to have been taken and logged every 15 minutes during the
run. However the inks became too foamy, making this impossible. At 30 minutes, the green
and white could no longer be measured, and at 45 minutes the blue, cyan, and magenta could
no longer be measured. Markers were used to identify the timed locations of start, 30
minutes, and end of the run within the rolls for sample removal during the laboratory testing
procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the full data table of viscosity measurements.
The press was initially ramped to 412 ft/min for the demonstration run. It was determined
that higher speeds were possible and the speed was increased to 430 ft/min after 10,000
impressions. The run was completed after 129 minutes, with 51,000 feet of film consumed.
A sample was taken at the end of the run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and
visual quality inspection. The results are listed in Table 4-1.2.
4-1, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.2 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.64
2.43
1.19
1.53
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
SITE 2: WATER-BASED INK #3 ON LDPE AND PE/EVA
Since the same product line was used for both substrates, only one pre-makeready and one
makeready were necessary. However, a "makeready check" was performed at the beginning
of the second demonstration run, before the PE/EVA. The only change made between the
two demonstration runs was that Deck #1 (white ink) was disengaged because the PE/EVA
is a white substrate and white is typically not printed over a white film.
Makeready: LDPE
To ensure adequate substrate supply for the run, a substrate similar to the control was
substituted during the makeready.
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H), and the doctor blade
systems were pressurized, delivering ink to the anilox rolls. At this point, the press drive
was engaged and the initial running makeready began. Once impression was set for each
color and registration was achieved, the press was ramped up to 118 ft/min and a flag was
inserted to mark a print for inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed pinholing in all colors. There
appeared to be no problems with web stability, and there was no evidence of blocking. The
impression was adjusted to correct the pinholing. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted,
and all colors passed the test. Density measurements were taken and recorded on each color
of the sample pull. The results of the visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.3. The
4-1, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
makeready process lasted a total of 40 minutes (25 minutes with in-house substrate, and 15
minutes wi th DfE substrate), and consumed 6,050 feet of film (4,645 feet of in-house film,
and 1,405 feet of DfE film.)
Table 4-1.3 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.46
1.98
1.23
1.74
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: LDPE
During the run, viscosity measurements were taken and logged every 15 minutes. Markers
were used to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the ran within the
rolls for sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the
full data table of viscosity measurements.
The press was ramped to 500 ft/min for the demonstration ran, but the speed had to be
reduced to 403 ft/min because of poor drying and trap. The ran was completed after 93
minutes because of an inadequate supply of DfE substrate. 37,053 feet of film were
consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the ran for density measurements,
adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results are listed in Table 4-1.4.
4-1, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.4 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.592
2.250
1.608
1.594
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Pinholing. Poor trap. No problems
with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: PE/EVA
As stated previously, there was no makeready for the PE/EVA because the press was already
set up from the LDPE production run; however, a "makeready check" was performed after
6,000 feet of film were consumed. It was also necessary to disengage Deck #1 (white ink)
because the PE/EVA film was white.
The PE/EVA film was mounted on the press unwind reel. The press drive and color decks
were engaged and the press was ramped to 403 ft/min where a marker was inserted for
sample identification. The press was stopped and a sample was taken for inspection.
Density measurements and an adhesiveness test were performed on each color, and a visual
quality inspection was made. The results are listed in Table 4-1.5.
Viscosity measurements were taken 15 minutes into the run. Subsequent viscosity
measurements were not possible due to foaming of the ink. Markers were used to identify
the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the rolls for sample
removal during the laboratory testing procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the full data table
of viscosity measurements.
It was necessary to stop the press at 16,000 feet to wipe the plates clean. The ran was ended
after 37,868 feet of film consumed (102 minutes of run time) in order to match the run
length of the LDPE substrate. A sample was taken at the end of the run for density
measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results are listed in
Table 4-1.6.
4-1, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.5 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Makeready
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Fail
Fail
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.55
2.17
1.04
1.54
Visual Quality
Poor print quality. Trap variable.
No problems with dimensional
stability or blocking.
Poor print quality. Trap variable.
No problems with dimensional
stability or blocking.
Poor print quality. Trap variable.
No problems with dimensional
stability or blocking.
Poor print quality. Trap variable.
No problems with dimensional
stability or blocking.
White was not used.
Table 4-1.6 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Run
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass / fail)
Fail
Fail
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.25
2.05
1.16
1.12
Visual Quality
Poor print quality. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Poor print quality. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Poor print quality. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Poor print quality. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
White was not used.
SITE 3: WATER-BASED INK #3 ON LDPE AND PE/EVA
Since the same product line was used for both substrates, only one pre-makeready and one
makeready were necessary. However, a "makeready check" was performed at the beginning
of the demonstration run for the PE/EVA. TWO demonstration runs were performed, one
for each substrate. The only change made between the two runs was that Deck #1 (white
ink) was disengaged because the PE/EVA is a white substrate.
4-1, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Makeready: LDPE
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H) and the doctor blade systems
were pressurized, deliveringink to the anilox rolls. Once impression was set for each color
and registration was achieved, the press was ramped up to 250 ft/min and a flag was inserted
to mark a print for inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed that the lay of the blue over the white
was marginal, and the lay of the green over the white was good, but over the film was
marginal. The printability of the other colors was good. Trap was acceptable for all colors
and there appeared to be no problems with web stability. There was no evidence of
blocking. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed the test, with
some light dusting noted on the green and the blue. Density measurements were taken and
recorded on each color of the sample pull. The results of the visual inspection are noted in
Table 4-1.7. The makeready process lasted 63 minutes and consumed 4,220 feet of film.
The press was stopped 43 minutes into the makeready, after 3,568 feet of film had been
consumed, in order to clean the plates.
Table 4-1.7 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
(light dusting)
Pass
(light dusting)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements}
1.706
2.234
1.676
1.830
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Lay over white is good, over film is
marginal. Good trap and
dimensional stability. No blocking.
Lay over white is marginal, over
film is good. Good trap and
dimensional stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
4-I, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Demonstration Run: LDPE
Viscosity measurements were attempted, but the viscosity was too high to measure with
equipment on site.
The press was initially ramped to 250 ft/min for the demonstration run. There were
problems drying the white, and to compensate, the temperature of the dryers was increased.
Press speed was reduced to 218 ft/min to improve drying. The run was completed after 126
minutes, with 26,927 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the run for
density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results are
listed in Table 4-1.8.
Table 4-1.8 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
(improved —
no dusting)
Pass
(improved —
no dusting)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.830
2.022
1.504
1.774
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Pinholing. Very good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Pinholing. Very good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Very good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Very good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Very good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: PE/EVA
As stated previously, there was no makeready for the PE/EVA because the press was already
set up from the LDPE production run, but a "makeready check" was performed. It was
necessary to disengage Deck #1 (white ink) because the PE/EVA film was white.
The PE/EVA film was mounted on the press unwind reel. The press drive and color decks
were engaged and the press was ramped to 350 ft/min. The speed was increased to 430
ft/min. During the run, 6,300 feet of film were consumed. The demonstration team noted
that there was a problem with the gearing on the magenta ink station which was causing
poor register.
4-1, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
A marker was inserted for sample identification. The press was stopped and a sample was
taken for inspection. Density measurements and an adhesiveness test were performed on
each color, and a visual quality inspection was also made. The results are listed hi Table 4-
1.9. : ;
Viscosity measurements were attempted but the viscosity was too high and over the
recommended range of the viscosity cup. See Appendix 4-H for the full data table of
viscosity measurements.
The run was completed after 131 minutes, with 47,884 feet of film consumed. A sample
was taken at the end of the run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual
quality inspection. The results are listed in Table 4-1.10.
Table 4-1.9 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Makeready
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
(light dusting)
Pass
(light dusting)
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.606
2.028
1.342
1.534
Visual Quality
Poor wetting of green on white.
Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blocking.
Pinholing of blue on white. Good
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
Good printability and trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Good printability and trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
White was not used.
Table 4-1.10 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Run
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Fail
Fail
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.440
1.768
1.256
1.384
Visual Quality
Increased pinholing. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Increased pinholing. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blockina.
4-I, page 9
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
1White was not used.
SITE 4: WATER-BASED INK #1 ON OPP
There was one pre-makeready, one makeready, and one demonstration run performed.
Makeready: OPP
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H) and the doctor blade systems
were pressurized, delivering ink to the anilox rolls. At this point, the press drive was
engaged and the initial running makeready began. The start of the makeready was run on
a site-supplied substrate similar to the DfE control film.
The press achieved an optimal speed of 200 ft/min, and it was stopped twice during the
makeready due to low printed opacity. The first time the press was stopped (after running
for 14 minutes) was to replace the white ink. It was determined that the first white ink used
had a very low percentage of solids. It was replaced with another ink of the same type
which had a higher percentage of solids. Changing the ink did not adequately correct the
low opacity. The press was stopped a second time (after running for 11 more minutes) to
replace the white anilox roll, again in an effort to improve opacity. The press crew and DfE
team decided to continue despite low opacity.
Once impression was set for each color and registration was achieved, a flag was inserted
to mark a print for inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed slight pinholing of the green over the
white, and moderate pinholing of the blue over the white. All other ink colors achieved
good printability. Trap was acceptable and there appeared to be no problems with web
stability. There was no evidence of blocking. The impression was adjusted in an effort to
correct pinholing. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed the test
except cyan. The failure of the cyan was thought to be due to the foaminess of the ink, but
was not proven. Alcohol was added in an effort to reduce the foam. Density measurements
were taken and recorded on each color of the sample pull. The results of the visual
inspection are noted in Table 4-1.11.
The makeready process lasted 136 minutes (45 minutes of actual press run time, and 91
minutes of down time for problems noted previously) and consumed 6,600 feet of film.
4-1, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.11 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fail (possibly
due to foam;
alcohol was
added to reduce
foam)
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.962
2.114
1.358
1.448
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Slight pinholing over white. Good
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blocking.
Moderate pinholing over white.
Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: OPP
During the run, viscosity measurements were taken and logged every 60 minutes. Markers
were used to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the
rolls for sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the
full data table of viscosity measurements.
The press was initially ramped to 400 ft/min for the demonstration run. The speed was then
increased to 450 ft/min, after 7,500 feet of film had been consumed. Press speed was later
slowed to 435 ft/min, and then to 415 ft/min for the last roll of substrate because of drying
concerns. Samples printed at the last three speeds were used for the performance tests. The
run was completed after 123 minutes, with 13,160 feet of film consumed. A sample was
taken at the end of the run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality
inspection. The results are listed in Table 4-1.12.
4-1, page 11
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.12 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fail, but
improved
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements}
1.930
2.152
1.328
1.174
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Increased pinholing. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Plugging and pinholing. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Slight pinholing. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Slight pinholing. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Slight pinholing. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
SITE 5: SOLVENT-BASED INK #2 ON LDPE AND PE/EVA
Since the same product line was used for both substrates, only one pre-makeready and one
makeready were necessary. However, a "makeready check" was performed at the beginning
of the second demonstration run, the one for the PE/EVA. Two demonstration runs were
performed, one for each substrate. The only change made between the two runs was that
Deck #1 (white ink) was disengaged because the PE/EVA is a white substrate.
Makeready: LDPE
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H) and the doctor blade systems
were pressurized, delivering ink to the anilox rolls. Once impression was set for each color
and registration was achieved, the press was ramped up to 400 ft/min and a flag was inserted
to mark a print for inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed pinholing on the operator side of the
image hi the green and blue solid blocks. Trap was acceptable and there appeared to be no
problems with web stability. There was no evidence of blocking. The impression was
adjusted to correct the pinholing. The tones were inspected for cleanliness and transfer.
4-1, page 12
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Solvent was added as needed to adjust viscosity in each of the colors to improve printability.
The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed the test. Density
measurements were taken and recorded on each color of the sample pull. The results of the
visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.13. The makeready process lasted 59 minutes and
consumed 1,933 feet of film.
Table 4-1.13 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.590
2.218
1.596
1.500
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Pinholing on one side. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Pinholing on one side. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blockina.
1 The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: LDPE
During the run, viscosity measurements were taken and logged every 15 minutes, with
solvent and ink additions noted at each occurrence. Markers were used to identify the timed
locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the rolls for sample removal during
the laboratory testing procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the full data table of viscosity
measurements.
The press was ramped to 400 ft/min for the demonstration run, and the run was completed
after 57 minutes, with 21,924 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the
run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results
are listed in Table 4-1.14.
4-1, page 13
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.14 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.592
2.250
1.608
1.594
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Pinholing on one side. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Plate contamination. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: PE/EVA
As stated previously, there was no makeready for the PE/EVA because the press was already
set up from the LDPE production run. It was necessary to disengage Deck #1 (white ink)
because the PE/EVA film was white.
The press drive and color decks were engaged and the press was ramped to 400 ft/min where
a marker was inserted for sample identification. The press was stopped and a sample was
taken for inspection. Density measurements and an adhesiveness test were performed on
each color, and a visual quality inspection was made. The results are listed in Table 4-1.15.
During the run, viscosity measurements were taken and logged every 15 minutes, with
solvent and ink additions noted at each occurrence. Markers were used to identify the timed
locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the rolls for sample removal during
the laboratory testing procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the full data table of viscosity
measurements.
The run was completed after 56 minutes, with 20,858 feet of film consumed. A sample was
taken at the end of the run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality
inspection. The results are listed in Table 4-1.16.
4-1, page 14
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.15 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Makeready
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.31
1.72
1.51
1.46
Visual Quality
Good printability and trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Good printability and trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Good printability and trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Good printability and trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
1White was not used.
Table 4-1.16 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Run
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.51
1.94
1.21
1.57
Visual Quality
Uneven impression in the trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Uneven impression in the trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Tones plugging. Uneven
impression in the trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or
blocking.
Tones plugging. Uneven
impression in the trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or
blockina.
1White was not used.
SITE6: WINK#2ONLDPE,PE/EVA,ANDOPP
Since the same product line was used for all three substrates, only one pre-makeready and
one makeready were necessary. However, a "makeready check" was performed at the
beginning of the second demonstration run, for the PE/EVA, and the third, for the OPP. The
4-I, page 15
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
only change made between the demonstration runs was that Deck #1 (white ink) was
disengaged to run the PE/EVA, because it is a white substrate, and re-engaged to run the
clear OPP substrate.
Makeready: LDPE
Viscosity measurements were not taken for UV inks at press because of the thixotropic
nature of the inks. Once impression was set for each color and registration was achieved,
the press was ramped up to 310 ft/min and a flag was inserted to mark a print for inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed slight pinholing in the white, the print
quality appeared dirty, and there was evidence of plate contamination. There was
acceptable printability in all other colors. Some wrinkling of the substrate was noted and
attributed to the heat of the UV lamps. Trap was acceptable and there was no evidence of
blocking. The impression was adjusted to correct the pinholing. The tones were inspected
for cleanliness and transfer. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed
the test. Density measurements were taken and recorded on each color of the sample pull.
The results of the visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.17. The makeready process lasted
80 minutes and consumed 3,964 feet of film.
Table 4-1.17 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.54
2.15
1.75
1.45
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap.
Some wrinkling of substrate from
heat. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap.
Some wrinkling of substrate from
heat. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap.
Some wrinkling of substrate from
heat. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap.
Some wrinkling of substrate from
heat. No blocking.
Pinholing. Dirty printing. Plate
contamination. Good trap. Some
wrinkling of substrate from heat.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
4-I, page 16
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Demonstration Run: LDPE
Viscosity measurements were not taken for the UV inks, and no adjustments were made to
the inks. 4
The press was ramped to 338 ft/min for the first roll of LDPE for the demonstration run, and
351 ft/min for the second roll. The run was completed after 92 minutes, with 32,431 feet
of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the run for density measurements,
adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results are listed in Table 4-1.18. The
LDPE film was unmounted in preparation for the PE/EVA run.
Table 4-1.18 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.46
2.10
1.77
1.50
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap.
Some wrinkling of substrate from
heat. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap.
Some wrinkling of substrate from
heat. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap.
Some wrinkling of substrate from
heat. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap.
Some wrinkling of substrate from
heat. No blocking.
Pinholing. Dirty printing. Plate
contamination. Good trap. Some
wrinkling of substrate from heat.
No blockina.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: PE/EVA
As stated previously, there was no makeready for the PE/EVA because the press was already
set up from the LDPE production run, however a "makeready check" was performed. It was
necessary to disengage Deck #1 (white ink) because the PE/EVA film was white.
The PE/EVA film was mounted on the press unwind reel. The press drive and color decks
were engaged and the press was ramped to 354 ft/min where a marker was inserted for
sample identification. The press was stopped and a sample was taken for inspection.
Density measurements and an adhesiveness test were performed on each color, and a visual
quality inspection was made. The results are listed in Table 4-1.19.
Again, viscosity measurements were not taken for the UV inks, and no adjustments were
made to the inks.
4-1, page 17
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.19 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Makeready "Check"
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass / fail)
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.41
2.14
1.26
1.54
Visual Quality
Good ink lay. Dirty printing. Fair
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
Good ink lay. Dirty printing. Fair
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
Good ink lay. Dirty printing. Fair
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
Good ink lay. Dirty printing. Fair
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
1White was not used.
The run was completed after 95 minutes, with 27,691 feet of film consumed. A sample was
taken at the end of the run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality
inspection. The results are listed in Table 4-1.20.
Table 4-1.20 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Run
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Fail
Fail
Fail
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.43
1.92
1.53
1.53
Visual Quality
Good ink lay. Dirty printing. Good
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
Good ink lay. Dirty printing. Good
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
Good ink lay. Dirty printing.
Density high — unable to reduce.
Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
Good ink lay. Dirty printing. Good
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
'White was not used.
4-1, page 18
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Demonstration Run: OPP
As stated previously, there was ho makeready for the OPP because the press was already set
up from the PE/EVA production run, however a "makeready check" was performed. Deck
#1 (white ink) was re-engaged because the OPP film was a clear film.
The press drive and color decks were engaged and the press was ramped to 344 ft/min where
a marker was inserted for sample identification. The press was stopped and a sample was
taken for inspection. Density measurements and an adhesiveness test were performed on
each color, and a visual quality inspection was made. The results are listed in Table 4-1.21.
Viscosity measurements were not taken for the UV inks, and no adjustments were made.
The run was stopped prematurely due to overheating of the chill roller by the UV lamp.
This occurred after 38 minutes of run time, with 6,583 feet of film consumed. No samples
were taken, and no measurements made for the end of the run, as shown in Table 4-1.22.
Table 4-1.21 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Fail
Fail
No data
Fail
Fail
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
0.60
0.65
1.51
1.32
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Good printabiiity. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability
or blocking.
Pinholing. Dirty printing. Low
opacity on visual inspection. Fair
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability or blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
4-I, page 19
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.22 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass / fail)
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Visual Quality
No samples taken — run stopped
prematui^y due to overheating of
chill roller by U V lamp.
No samples taken — run stopped
prematurely due to overheating of
chill roller by UV lamp.
No samples taken — run stopped
prematurely due to overheating of
chill roller by UV lamp.
No samples taken — run stopped
prematurely due to overheating of
chill roller by UV lamp.
No samples taken — run stopped
prematurely due to overheating of
chill roller by UV lamp.
SITE 7: SOLVENT-BASED INK #2 ON LDPE AND PE/EVA
Makeready: LDPE
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H) and the doctor blade systems
were pressurized, delivering ink to the anilox rolls. After the press drive was engaged, the
makeready began. Once impression was set for each color and registration was achieved,
the press was ramped up to 450 ft/min. There was a web break 35 minutes into the
makeready due to press and operator conditions.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed that the printing quality of the tones
appeared duty, but the lay was good, trap was very good, and there appeared to be no
problems with web stability. There was also no evidence of blocking. The demonstration
team noted that the ink looked "a little too fast" (in the ink appeared to be drying on the
plate).
The tones were inspected for cleanliness and transfer. The tape adhesiveness test was
conducted, and all colors passed the test. Density measurements were taken and recorded
on each color of the sample pull. The results of the visual inspection are noted in Table 4-
1.23. The makeready process lasted 58 minutes and consumed 2,350 feet of film.
4-1, page 20
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.23 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
0.988
1.784
1.406
1.264
Not measured1
Visual Quality
"Dirty" printing in tones on one
side. Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blocking.
"Dirty" printing in tones on one
side. Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blocking.
"Dirty" printing in tones on one
side. Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blocking.
"Dirty" printing in tones on one
side. Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blocking.
"Dirty" printing in tones on one
side. Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blockinq.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: LDPE
During the ran, viscosity measurements were taken and logged at 15,30, and 120 minutes
into the ran. Markers were used to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end
of the ran within the rolls for sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure. See
Appendix 4-H for the full data table of viscosity measurements.
The press was ramped to 450 ft/min for the demonstration run, and the ran was completed
after 148 minutes, with 42,000 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the
ran for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results
are listed in Table 4-1.24.
4-1, page 21
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.24 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
0.840
1.742
1.302
1.150
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Tones improved. Mottle/lay good.
Very good trap. No blocking. No
problems with dimensional stability.
Tones improved. Mottle/lay good.
Very good trap. No blocking. No
problems with dimensional stability.
Tones improved. Mottle/lay good.
Very good trap. No blocking. No
problems with dimensional stability.
Tones improved. Mottle/lay good.
Very good trap. No blocking. No
problems with dimensional stability.
Tones improved. Mottle/lay good.
Very good trap. No blocking. No
problems with dimensional stability.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are nottypically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: PE/EVA
As stated previously, it was intended that the PE/EVA substrate also be run at this location.
The substrate was mounted on the press, and the "makeready check" was begun. After only
8,069 feet of film were consumed, the run was aborted. The demonstration team decided
that the roll of substrate they were running was not the correct project control film, due to
a supplier mix-up. In addition, the substrate had wrinkles from poor extrusion, the cores
were not the correct size, and the cores were crushed.
No samples were taken from the PE/EVA run, and no measurements made.
SITE 8: UV INK #3 ON LDPE, PE/EVA, AND OPP
The PE/EVA substrate (a white substrate) was run first, followed by the LDPE, and finally
the OPP. Since this was run on a four-color press, it was necessary to make a complete
change on Deck #1 between the PE/EVA and LDPE substrates, changing from magenta ink
and a process plate, to white ink and a line plate. No change was necessary between the
LDPE and the OPP. There was only one pre-makeready, and the makeready was performed
before the demonstration team arrived at the plant for the run. There were no "makeready
checks" performed when the substrates were changed.
4-1, page 22
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Makeready: PE/EVA
The makeready was performed before the demonstration team arrived. The press crew
reported that the makeready took between 60 and 120 minutes, achieved a press speed of
262 ft/min, and consumed §00 feet of film.
Two samples were taken from the roll for analysis. A visual inspection revealed that the
print quality of the green was good, and the quality of the process tones was excellent. It
was noted, however, that the print quality of the blue solid appeared dirty. The trap was
very good, there appeared to be no problems with web stability, and there was no evidence
of blocking. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed the test.
Density measurements were taken and recorded on each color of the sample pull. The
results of the visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.25.
Table 4-1.25 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Makeready
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.066
1.200
1.150
1.312
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Dirty printing. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1White was not used.
Demonstration Run: PE/EVA
No viscosity measurements were taken on the UV inks during the run. Markers were used
to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the rolls for
sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure.
The press was ramped to 262 ft/min for the demonstration run, and the run was completed
after 63 minutes, with 15,912 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the
run for density measurements, and visual quality inspection. The results are listed in Table
4-1.26.
4-1, page 23
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.26 Results of Tests Performed on PE/EVA at End of Run
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.096
1.280
1.332
1.410
Visual Quality
Dirty printing. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Dirty printing in solid. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blockina.
1White was not used.
Demonstration Run: LDPE
As stated previously, Deck #1 was changed from magenta to white ink, and the plate was
also changed from a process plate to a line plate. No "makeready check" was performed.
The press drive and color decks were engaged and the press was ramped to 262 ft/min. The
run was completed after 65 minutes, with 2,559 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken
at the end of the run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality
inspection. The results are listed in Table 4-1.27. The LDPE film was unmounted in
preparation for the OPP run.
No viscosity measurements were taken of the UV inks during the run. Markers were used
to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the rolls for
sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure.
4-1, page 24
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.27 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Run
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
0.994
0.976
1.136
Not measured2
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Dirty printing in solid. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional
stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1 Magenta was not used.
2The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: OPP
As stated previously, no "makeready check" was performed for the OPP.
A limited amount of OPP was available due to shipping concerns between the U.S. and
Germany. The OPP film was mounted on the press unwind reel. The press was ramped to
262 ft/min, The run was completed after 15 minutes, with 4,265 feet of film consumed. The
run was shortened due to the limited quantity of OPP. A sample was taken at the end of the
run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results
are listed hi Table 4-1.28.
No viscosity measurements were taken during the run. Markers were used to identify the
timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the rolls for sample removal
during the laboratory testing procedure.
4-1, page 25
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.28 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Run
Ink
Color1
Green
Blue
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Fail
Fail
Fail
Fail
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.058
1.116
1.174
Not measured2
Visual Quality
Slight dirty printing. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Dirty printing. Good trap. No prob-
lems with dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1 Magenta not used.
^he white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
SITE 9A: WATER-BASED INK #4 ON OPP
One pre-makeready, one makeready, and one demonstration run were performed.
Makeready: OPP
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H) and the doctor blade systems
were pressurized, delivering ink to the anilox rolls. Once impression was set for each color
and registration was achieved, the press was ramped up to 680 ft/min and a flag was inserted
to mark a print for inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed very good printability. Trap was
acceptable and there appeared to be no problems with web stability. There was no evidence
of blocking. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed the test.
Density measurements were taken and recorded on each color of the sample pull. The
results of the visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.29. The makeready process lasted 120
minutes and consumed 1,250 feet of film.
4-1, page 26
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.29 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.422
2.064
1.434
1.710
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printabiiity. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocHsig.
Good printabiiity. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printabiiity. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printabiiity. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printabiiity. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: OPP
During the run, viscosity measurements were taken and logged every 15 minutes. Markers
were used to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the
rolls for sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the
full data table of viscosity measurements.
The press was ramped to 425 ft/min for the demonstration run, and the run was completed
after 66 minutes, with 34,434 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the
run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results
are listed in Table 4-1.30.
4-1, page 27
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.30 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.494
2.068
1.460
1.756
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
SITE 9B: SOLVENT-BASED INK #4 ON OPP
There was one pre-makeready, one makeready, and one demonstration run performed.
Makeready: OPP
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H) and the doctor blade systems
were pressurized, delivering ink to the anilox rolls. Once impression was set for each color
and registration was achieved, the press was ramped up to 680 ft/min and a flag was inserted
to mark a print for inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed poor printability hi the blue, and
acceptable printing hi the other colors. It was suggested by the demonstration team and
press crew that the blue ink and doctor blade be replaced. After the changes were made, trap
was acceptable and there appeared to be no problems with web stability. There was no
evidence of blocking. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed the
test. Density measurements were taken and recorded on each color of the sample pull. The
results of the visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.31. The makeready process lasted 135
minutes and consumed 1,930 feet of film.
4-1, page 28
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.31 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.074
1.686
1.286
1.534
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Poor printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: OPP
During the run, viscosity measurements were taken and logged every 15 minutes. Markers
were used to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the
rolls for sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the
, full data table of viscosity measurements.
The press was ramped to 415 ft/min for the demonstration run, and the run was completed
after 80 minutes, with 33,641 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the
run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results
are listed in Table 4-1.32.
4-1, page 29
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.32 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Run
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.062
1.730
1.568
1.870
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
SITE 10: SOLVENT-BASED INK #2 ON OPP
One pre-makeready, one makeready, and one demonstration run was performed.
Makeready: OPP
The ink was mixed to the desired viscosity (see Appendix 4-H). Once impression was set
for each color and registration was achieved, the press was ramped up to 800 ft/min and a
flag was inserted to mark a print for inspection.
The press was stopped after insertion of the marker and two samples were taken for analysis.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed poor solid formation in the magenta,
with good printability in all other colors. Trap was acceptable and there appeared to be no
problems with web stability.
There was no evidence of blocking. The press crew and demonstration team felt that the
problem with the magenta was due to the system being too fast, so slow solvent was added
to the red ink fountain to compensate. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all
colors passed the test. Density measurements were taken and recorded on each color of the
sample pull. The results of the visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.33. The makeready
process lasted 120 minutes and consumed 10,950 feet of film.
4-1, page 30
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST, DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.33 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.35
1.93
0.81
1.03
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Poor solid formation. Good trap.
No problems with dimensional sta-
bility. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: OPP
During the run, viscosity measurements were taken and logged every 15 minutes. Markers
were used to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of the run within the
rolls for sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure. See Appendix 4-H for the
full data table of viscosity measurements.
The press was ramped to 600 ft/nun for the demonstration run, and the run was completed
after 90 minutes, with 56,700 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the
run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results
are listed in Table 4-1.34.
4-i, page 31
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.34 Results of Tests Performed on OPP at End of Rum
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.36
1.83
0.85
1.10
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Still poor solid formation. Good
trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Good trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blockina.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
SITE 11: UVJCNK#1ONLDPE(NOSLIP)
One pre-makeready, one makeready, and one demonstration ran was performed.
Makeready: LDPE
Once impression was set for each color and registration was achieved, the press was ramped
up to 700 ft/min and a flag was inserted to mark a print for inspection.
A visual inspection of the makeready sample revealed good ink lay hi all colors, however
there was blade streaking in the cyan image. There was also dry ink on the blue anilox
roller. Trap was fair, and there were no problems with dimensional stability. There was no
evidence of blocking. The tape adhesiveness test was conducted, and all colors passed the
test. Density measurements were taken and recorded on each color of the sample pull.
The results of the visual inspection are noted in Table 4-1.35. The makeready process lasted
75 minutes and consumed 7,200 feet of film.
4-1, page 32
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.35 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Makeready
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness •
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements)
1.408
1.792
1.074
1.036
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability, with blade streak-
ing. Fair trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blockina.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
Demonstration Run: LDPE
Viscosity measurements were not taken for the UV inks, and no adjustments were made to
the inks. Markers were used to identify the timed locations of start, 30 minutes, and end of
the run within the rolls for sample removal during the laboratory testing procedure.
The press was ramped to 400 ft/min for the demonstration run, and the run was completed
after 153 minutes, with 38,400 feet of film consumed. A sample was taken at the end of the
run for density measurements, adhesiveness tests, and visual quality inspection. The results
are listed hi Table 4-1.36.
4-1, page 33
-------
APPENDIX 4-1 DESCRIPTIONS AND TEST DATA FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Table 4-1.36 Results of Tests Performed on LDPE at End of Ruin
Ink
Color
Green
Blue
Magenta
Cyan
White
Tape
Adhesiveness
Test (pass /fail)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Density
[unitless]
(average of five
measurements')
1.495
2.170
1.093
1.248
Not measured1
Visual Quality
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blocking.
Good printability, with blade streak-
ing. Good trap. No problems with
dimensional stability. No
blocking.
Good printability. Fair trap. No
problems with dimensional stability.
No blockina.
1The white ink was not measured for density because the efficiency of white ink is measured by
an opacity test. Opacity measurements are not typically an "at press" test and were measured
during the laboratory testing portion of the project.
4-I, page 34
-------
Appendix 4-J (Performance Chapter)
Descriptions and Performance Test Data
for the Laboratory Runs
Pre-makeready
Plates, substrates, and inks were delivered to the facility approximately two weeks prior to
the print run. Each of the ink colors was delivered at press in sealed five-gallon containers.
Anilox placement and cylinder mounting were done by the laboratory personnel.
Makeready
The inks were reduced to 25 seconds using a Zahn cup. The press was ramped up to its
optimal speed for the ink/substrate combination. Two samples were collected for inspection
to verify optimum conditions.
Laboratory Runs
A total of seven laboratory runs were conducted.
Printing viscosities were maintained at 25 seconds using a Zahn #2 efflux cup, for all colors
on all runs. Since these press runs were performed at Western Michigan University
(WMU), all performance testing was conducted after completion of the runs. The results
of the tape adhesiveness test, density measurements, and visual quality inspection for each
print run are listed in Table 4-J.l. The dryer temperatures are listed in Table 4-J.2.
4-J, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-J
DESCRIPTIONS AND ON-SiTE PERF. TEST DATA FOR LABORATORY RUNS
Table 4-J.1. Performance Test Results (At Press) of Laboratory Runs
Run
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
Ink
Color
Grenn
White
Green
White
Green
White
Green
White
Green
White
Green
Cyan
Green
Cyan
Scotch Tape
Adhesiveness
Test
(Pass /Fail)
P
P
F
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
F
P
P
Density
0.95
0.99
0.70
0.72
0.90
0.90
1.09
1.12
1.30
Opacity
43%
29%
37%
38%
54%
Visual Quality
mottled, poor wetting, weak
color
pinholing
slightly mottled, color weak
pinholing, low opacity
color weak, slight mottle
low opacity
weak color, slight mottle
acceptable coverage
slight mottle
good opacity coverage
mottle, poor coverage
slight mottle
good color and coverage
slight mottle
Table 4-J.2. Dryer Temperatures for Laboratory Runs
Run
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
Temperature
Deck#1 (°FJ
162
170
160
120
122
162
125
Temperature
Deck#2(°F)
145
165
155
110
118
160
120
4-J, page 2
-------
Appendix 4-K (Performance Chapter)
Performance Test Data from Laboratory Runs for Inks Not Used in
the Performance Demonstrations
Five ink manufacturers submitted six product lines to be tested in the lab that were not printed at the
performance demonstration sites. The lines were as follows:
(Ink manufacturer #1)
1 solvent product line - cyan, 354 green, and white
(Ink manufacturer #2, #3) 3 water product lines - cyan, 354 green, and white
ink manufacturer #3 supplied two product lines, one for lamination and one for surface printing
(Ink manufacturer #4, #5) 2 UV product lines - cyan, 354 green and white
the UV product lines were not printed due to lack of equipment capabilities on the lab press
The following is used to identify the ink product lines:
IM#1-PE
IM #1 - EVA
EVI #2 - EVA
IM#2-PE
IM#3-EVA
M#3-PE
IM#3L-OPP
IM #4 - not run
IM #5 - not run
Ink sets #1, #2, and #3 were printed as two press runs listed below:
Run A - Deck #1 220 anliox white ink and, Deck #2 440 anilox cyan ink (two colors)
Run B - Deck #2 440 anliox 354 green (one color)
A combination plate containing both line and half tones was used for both the 354 green and cyan color inks
in Deck #2.
Only run EVI#3L was printed with the OPP substrate since this product line was specified as a lamination ink.
BVI #1, M#2 and IM#3 was printed with both LDPE and LDPE/EVA substrates. IM #4 and IM #5 were not
printed.
All inks were reduced to 25 seconds #2 Zahn cup. Each set was printed for 3 to 5 minutes to stabilize the
press conditions and obtain registration. The dryers were set to 140° F. All inks dried adequately at speed
up to 350 ft/min.
4-K, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 4-K PERF. TEST DATA FROM LAB RUNS FOR INKS NOT USED IN PERF. DEMOS
Table 4-K reports the qualitative performance of each ink. Each ink was evaluated for scotch tape adhesion,
and -general visual print quality.
Table 4-K Qualitative Performance of Inks Not Used in Performance Demonstrations
Product Line
IM #1 - PE
Cyan & White
IM #1 - EVA
Green
IM#2-PE
Cyan & White
IM#2-EVA
Green
IM #3 - PE
Cyan & White
IM #3 - EVA
Green
IM#3L-OPP
Cyan & White
Tape Adhesion
Test
pass all colors
pass all colors
pass all colors
pass all colors
pass all colors
pass all colors
pass all colors
Visual Quality
white opacity low; slight mottle; no pinholing; trap acceptable
slight mottle all colors; trap acceptable
mottle in cyan from poor wetting, pinholing in cyan and
white; cyan color weak; poor wetting and trap
slight mottle;, no pinholing
slight mottle all colors; trap good; slight pinholing; color good
slight mottle all colors; no pinholing
slight mottle all colors; trap acceptable; no pinholing
4-K, page 2
-------
Appendix 5-A (Cost Chapter)
Cost Analysis Methodology
i.
INTRODUCTION
The methodology will be employed to estimate the cost of using three inks: solvent-based, water-based, and
UV-cured. The cost research will focus on identifying those cost elements that are different for the three ink
processes. It will not only identify traditional costs, but also costs that are typically "hidden" in printing
operations.
The primary source for the cost information will be the performance demonstrations. These costs will be
gathered at the printing sites. (Sample data collection sheets are provided in Appendices 4-B and 4-C.) This
information will be supplemented with information from industry statistics, supplier information, and other
sources. The cost estimation is intended to reflect standard industry practices and provide representative data
for the given ink process.
Besides determining and categorizing the costs incurred while using the three inks, the less tangible benefits
or costs that can result from the implementation of each ink will be identified in a qualitative manner with
annual or quarterly costs as supporting documentation (if available).
In order to normalize the cost data for comparative purposes, two standards were chosen: 6,000 images and
6,000 square feet of image.
The final cost estimates for each ink system will consist of four major cost elements: materials, labor, capital,
and energy use.
H. MATERIAL COSTS
Material costs will consist of those costs that differ between the three ink types (ink and additives). The
performance demonstrations will be the main avenue for retrieval of these costs, but suppliers and industry
experts will also be consulted. Costs associated with special storage requirements of the inks, such as
additional fire protection, ventilation, or regulatory requirements will not be considered quantitatively in the
cost analysis. For example, solvent-based ink storage requires a local fire inspection, registration, and
storage room ventilation, whereas water-based and UV-cured may not require the same precautions. These
cost differentials will be difficult to quantify hi the performance demonstrations and hard to acquire from
industry.
The main components of the material costs will be ink and additives. For these costs, the quantity used will
be gathered during the performance demonstrations and multiplied by an industry average cost, garnered from
manufacturers and industry reports. The cost differences associated with cleaning for each ink type, if
substantial, will be discussed in a qualitative fashion.
1. Ink costs:
a) Manufacturer's price for all three inks and for four or five colors/three substrates (based on a
given volume purchased [110-500 Ib allotment])
b) Amount of ink used to come up with a similar appearance for all three inks during start-up and
run-time
2. Diluent or reducer (usage and price); price will be based on a given volume purchased
For ink and additives, prices will be collected and presented to the project design subcommittee for review
and confirmation. The following items will be dealt with in a qualitative manner if the differences among
the ink processes are substantial.
5-A, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 5-A
COST ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
• Doctor blades
• Plates
• Bulbs for drying lamps
• Clean-up procedures and industry recommendations
TJI. LABOR COSTS
Labor costs will include the time spent on press (start-up, run-time, and clean-up), the hourly wage rate for
a press person and assistant, fringe costs per person, and overhead expenses per person. Because wage rates
vary throughout the country and are dependent on union versus non-union shops, wage rates from the
performance demonstration and from industry reports will be used to determine a fixed rate. This cost will
then be multiplied by a fringe and overhead rate (from industry studies) to establish a reasonably inclusive
cost of labor.
IV. CAPITAL COSTS
Equipment costs for the inks will be considered, but equipment costs common to all inks will be excluded
from analysis. The capital costs will be amortized, and an average rate of return on capital will be used.
Costs scenarios will be developed for both new equipment purchases and for retrofitting existing presses.
The equipment costs will take into account the costs of purchasing both new equipment and retrofitting
existing equipment. The equipment costs will be gathered from manufacturer's prices and industry averages.
A yearly equipment cost will be determined, which then will be divided by total production hours per year
to get an hourly equipment rate.
A. Capital Costs for New Equipment
Costs above a baseline for the press equipment will include, when applicable, the following factors for each
ink system:
1) Control technologies
2) Process equipment
3) Installation
4) Project engineering
B. Capital Costs for Retrofitting Equipment
Retrofitting costs will be estimated for all the auxiliary equipment. Retrofitting costs will reflect an average
retrofit package that will identify the relevant equipment for four retrofits:
1. Solvent-based to water-based press:
a) Dryer capacity enhancement: using enlarged exhaust and supply fans
b) Additional ductwork and noise abatement equipment (possible)
c) Ink handling equipment upgrade (ink metering rolls were replaced to facilitate drying; pumps
may need to be replaced; press roller modification)
d) Install an in-line corona treatment system
2. Solvent-based to UV-cured press:
a) Remove inter-deck dryers
b) Shut-off gas
c) Turn off air blowers
d) Install interdeck UV lamps
5-A, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 5-A
COST ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
e) Install chiller
f) Install blowers for lamps
g) Miscellaneous: may also require chambered doctor blades, peristaltic pumps, a corona treater,
and web scrubber. These may be present on a riiwef solvent-based press.
3. Water-based to UV-cured press
4. UV-cured to water-based press
C. Depreciation Rate
The depreciation rate will be based on that used for standard industry accounting practices.
D. Depreciation Period
The depreciation period, or average lifetime of a press, can vary substantially depending on whether the
equipment is upgraded or a retrofit is performed. The depreciation period for this calculation will be based
on estimates of the lifetime of a press with no modifications or upgrades other than routine maintenance.
V. ENERGY COSTS
The energy usage differences associated with the three inks will be quantified, including that resulting from
the use of dryers, corona treaters, exhaust air blowers, and the presses on standby.
A. Energy consumption
Energy consumption calculations will include the following considerations:
1. Process equipment (dryers, corona)
2. Exhaust air purification (measure the gas used to operate and then divide by the total # of
presses)
3. Temperature conditioning
B. Cost of Electricity and Natural Gas
The average cost of electricity is about .05-.06 per unit, yet this varies considerably depending on the state.
For example, in Michigan electricity costs .08 per unit, while hi Ohio, electricity costs .30 per unit. Natural
gas prices experience similar ranges. This type of variation will be noted in the cost analysis, and readers
will be directed to adjust their calculations accordingly.
VI. WASTE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL COSTS
Differences hi the costs associated with safety equipment, waste treatment, insurance, liability, and
regulatory compliance for the three ink processes will be dealt with in a qualitative manner. For example,
costs associated with on-site treatment or shipping and off-site treatment may be difficult to quantify in the
performance demonstrations for the three inks. Yet, there are some clear differences in the amount and type
of disposal or treatment associated with solvent, water-based, and UV-cured inks. From the performance
demonstrations and from industry reports and articles, these differences will be identified and presented hi
a qualitative manner.
5-A, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 5-A
COST ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
This page is intentionally blank.
5-A, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
Appendix 5-B (Cost Chapter)
Supplemental Cost Analysis Information
This appendix provides details of costs provided in the text of the chapter. Sample calculations are included
to more clearly illustrate the equations shown in Section 5.2. Tables showing cost estimates for the
individual performance demonstrations also are provided.
SAMPLE CALCULATION FOR INK COSTS
For Site 5, solvent-based ink on LDPE:
Ink price (white) =
Ink price (color) =
Amount of white ink used =
Amount of colored ink used =
Substrate area covered (white) =
Substrate area covered (color) =
Image area =
Ink cost per 6,000 images (white) =
Ink cost per 6,000 images (color) =
Ink cost per 6,000 images (total)
$1.40 per pound
$2.80 per pound
26.6 pounds
75.8 pounds
39,762ft2
74,515 ft2
2.22 ftVimage
ink price ($/lb) x (amount of ink used [Ib] / substrate area covered
[ft2]) x 2.22 fWimage x 6,000 images
($1.40/lb) x (26.6 Ibs / 39,762 ft2) x 2.22 ftVimage x 6,000 images
$12.48 per 6,000 images
ink price ($/lb) x (amount of ink used [Ib] / substrate area covered
[ft2]) x 2.22 ftMmage x 6,000 images
($2.80/lb) x (75.8 Ibs / 74,515 ft2) x 2.22 ftMmage x 6,000 images
$37.60 per 6,000 images
= $12.47+ $37.60
= $50.07 per 6,000 images
DETERMINATION OF OVERHEAD RATE
The overhead rate was calculated with data from the National Association of Printers and Lithographers'
NAPLHeatsetandNon-Heatset Web Press Operations Cost Study of 1989-1990, which is presented below,
and with information presented in the chapter. The overhead rate is used in labor cost calculations.
5-B, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
Table 5-B.1 Overhead Costs of an Average Printing Facility
Component
Rent and heat
Fire and sprinkler
insurance
Indirect labor
Direct supplies
Repair to equipment
Subtotal
General factory
Administrative and
selling overhead
Comment
$2.50 per square feet; use 1 ,000 square feet for model facility
$4.00 per $1 ,000 of equipment investment cost
1 0% of direct labor ($1 56,398)
3% of equipment costs for three shifts
10% of subtotal
32% of subtotal
Total overhead costs
Cost
$2,500
$2,426
$15,640
$6,000
$18,195
$44,761
$4,476
$14,324
$63.561
Source: NAPL, 1990.
The overhead rate was calculated using the formula shown below. The overhead factor is based on data from
the NAPL study, and the derivation of the wage and fringe are presented in the chapter.
Overhead rate =
where
Overhead factor =
Overhead rate =
Overhead factor x (wage + fringe)
Total overhead costs / direct labor cost
$63,5617 $156,398
0.41
Overhead factor x (wage + fringe)
0.41 x ($11.49+ $4.14)
$6.41
SAMPLE CALCULATION FOR LABOR COSTS
For Site 5, solvent-based ink on LDPE:
Labor rate, including overhead = $44.08 per hour (two workers)
linage width
Image area
Press speed
Labor cost per 6,000 images
= 1.67 feet
= 2.22 ftVimage
= 400 feet per minute, 24,000 feet per hour
= labor cost per hour ($/hour) / ft2 printed per hour x 2.22 ftVimage x
6,000 images
= ($44.08/hour) / (24,000 feet/hour x 1.67 feet) x 2.22 ft2/image x
6,000 images
= $14.69 per 6,000 images
5-B, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
Labor cost per 6,000 ft2 of image = labor cost per ft2 (S/ft2) x 6,000 ft2
= ($44.08/hr) / (24,000 feet/hour x 1.67 feet) x 6,000 ft2
= $6.61 p6r 6,000 ft2 of image
SAMPLE CALCULATION FOR CAPITAL COSTS
For Site 5, solvent-based ink on LDPE,
Average press speed (solvent-based inks) = 400 feet per minute
A = T*-
Annual capital cost ($/yr) =
T = total cost (price of press) = $2,600,000
i = interest or depreciation rate = 15%
n = lifetime of equipment = 20 years
A = annual capital cost = $415,000
The hourly capital cost estimates were based on the following calculation:
Capital cost per 6,000 images = C x 2.22 fWimage x 6,000 images
Capital cost per 6,000 ft2 of image = Cx 6,000 ft2
where
C = capital cost per ft2 ($/ft2)
= hourly capital cost ($/hr) x repeat length per ft2 of image (ft/ft2) / average press speed (ft/hr)
and
Annual operating hours = 4,200 hours per year
Hourly capital cost ($/hr) = A ($/yr) / annual operating hours (hr/yr)
= $415,000 per year / 4,200 hours per year
= $99 per hour
C = $99perhourx(1.33ft/2.22ft2)/(400fVminx60min/hr)
= $0.0025 per ft2
Capital cost per 6,000 images = C x 2.22 ftVimage x 6,000 images
= $0.0025 per ft2 x 2.22 ftfVimage x 6,000 images
= $33 per 6,000 images
Capital cost per 6,000 ft2 of image = C x 6,000 ft2
= $0.0025 per ft2 x 6,000 ft2
= $15 per 6,000 ft2 of image
5-B, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
SAMPLE CALCULATION FOR ENERGY COSTS
For Site 5, solvent-based ink on LDPE,
Electricity consumption
Natural gas consumption
Electricity cost
Natural gas cost
Image area
Press speed
55 kW
650,000 Btu per hour
$0.0448 per kWh
$3.05 per million Btu
2.22 ftMmage
400 feet per minute
E = electricity cost ($/kWh) x [electricity consumption (kWh/hour) / press speed (ft/hour)] x repeat
length per ft2 of image (ft/ft?)
= electricity cost per ft2 (S/ft2)
= $0.000062 per ft2
G = natural gas cost ($/Btu) x [natural gas consumption (Btu/hour) /press speed (ft/hour)] x repeat length
per ft2 of image (ft/ft2)
= natural gas cost per ft2 ($/«?)
= $0.000050 per ft2
Energy cost per 6,000 images
= (E + G) x 2.22 ftVimage x 6,000 images
= ($0.000062 + $0.000050) x 2.22 ftVimage x 6,000 images
= $ 1.48 per 6,000 images
Energy cost per 6,000 ft2 of image = (E + G) x 6,000 ft2
= $0.67 per 6,000 ft2 of image
5-B, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
COST ESTIMATES FOR PERFORMANCE DEMONSTRATION SITES
Tables 5-B. 1 through 5-B. 13 present the calculated labor, material, capital, and energy costs
for each performance demonstration site. Tables 5-B. 14 and 5-B. 15 present the ink costs
and additive costs, respectively, for each site. Table 5-B. 16 presents the labor costs for each
site.
Table 5-B.2 Cost Summary for Water-based Ink at Site 1*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images
for OPP
$13.67
$11.49
$9.69
$0.44
$29.46
$0.91
$65.65
Cost per 6,000 Sq.
Feet
for OPP
$6.15
$5.17
$4.35
$0.22
$13.27
$0.41
$29.56
*Water-based ink #2; 55-inch press at 430 feet per minute
Table 5-B.3 Cost Summary for Water-based Ink at Site 2*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per
for LDPE
$14.59
$8.61
$16.80
$0.22
$31.43
$0.97
$72.62
6,000 images
for PE/EVA
$14.59
$0.00
$16.80
$0.12
$31.83
$0.97
$63.91
Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for LDPE for
PE/EVA
$6.56 $6.56
$3.87 $0.00
$7.53 $7.53
$0.10 $0.05
$14.16 $14.16
$0.44 $0.44
$32.66 $28.74
*Water-based ink #3; 54-inch press at 403 feet per minute
5-B, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
Table 5-B.4 Cost Summary for Water-based Ink at Site 3*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per
for LDPE
$26.96
$12.27
$8.76
$1.51
$58.10
$1.79
$109.40
6,000 images
for PE/EVA
$13.67
$0.00
$8.76
$0.34
$29.46
$0.91
$53.14
Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for LDPE for
PE/EVA
$12.13 $6.15
$5.52 $0.00
$3.90 $3.90
$0.67 $0.16
$26.17 $13.27
$0.81 $0.41
$49.21 $23.89
*Water-based ink #3; 50-inch press at 218 feet per minute (LDPE) and 430 feet per minute
(PE/EVA)
Table 5-B.5 Cost Summary for Water-based Ink at Site 4*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images
for OPP
$13.06
$12.58
$15.69
$0.60
$28.15
$0.87
$70.95
Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for OPP
$5.88
$5.66
$7.05
$0.28
$12.68
$0.39
$31.94
*Water-based ink #1; 46-inch press at 450 feet per minute
Table 5-B.6 Cost Summary for Solvent-based Ink at Site 5*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images
for LDPE for PE/EVA
$14.69 $14.69
$12.52 $0.00
$37.94 $37.94
$2.73 $1.79
$32.93 $32.93
$1.48 $1.48
$102.29 $88.84
Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for LDPE for
PE/EVA
$6.61 $6.61
$5.63 $0.00
$17.08 $17.08
$1.23 $0.81
$14.83 $14.83
$0.67 $0.67
$46.05 $40.00
*Solvent-based ink #2; 24.5-inch press at 400 feet per minute
5-B, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
Table 5-B.7 Cost Summary for UV-cured Ink at Site 6*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images
for LDPE for PE/EVA
$17.09 $16.60
$27.12 $0.00
$25.60 $25.60
$0.00 $0.00
$38.29 $37.21
$3.33 $3.23
$111.42 $82.65
Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for LDPE for
PE/EVA
$7.69 $7.47
$12.18 $0.00
$11.50 $11.50
$0.00 $0.00
$17.25 $16.76
$1.50 $1.46
$50.12 $37.19
*UV-cured ink #2; 32-inch press at 344 feet per minute (LDPE) and 354 feet per minute
(PE/EVA)
Table 5-B.8 Cost Summary for Solvent-based Ink at Site 7*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images
for LDPE for PE/EVA
$13.06 $13.06
$8.11 $0.00
$21.73 $56.26
$8.49 $5.76
$29.27 $29.27
$1.31 $1.31
$81.97 $105.67
Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for LDPE for
PE/EVA
$5.88 $5.88
$3.65 $0.00
$9.80 $3.50
$3.82 $2.59
$13.19 $13.19
$0.59 $0.59
$36.93 $25.75
*Solvent-based ink #2; 45.5-inch press at 450 feet per minute
Table 5-B.9 Cost Summary for UV-cured Ink at Site 8*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images
for PE/EVA
$22.43
$0.00
$12.10
$0.00
$50.28
$4.37
$89.18
Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for PE/EVA
$10.10
$0.00
$5.50
$0.00
$22.65
$1.97
$40.21
*UV-cured ink #3; 25-inch press at 262 feet per minute
5-B, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
Table 5-B.10 Cost Summary for Water-based Ink at Site 9A*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
inlc additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for OPP for OPP
$13.83 $6.22
$8.50 $3.82
$6.81 $3.03
$0.71 $0.32
$29.80 $13.43
$0.92 $0.41
$60.57 $27.24
*Water-based ink #4; 55-inch press at 425 feet per minute
Table 5-B.11 Cost Summary for Solvent-based Ink at Site 9B*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for OPP for OPP
$14.16 $6.37
$14.84 $7.63
$11.48 $5.55
$2.24 $1.02
$31.74 $14.30
$1.43 $0.64
$75.89 $35.52
*So!vent-faased ink #1 ; 45.5-inch press at 415 feet per minute
Table 5-B.12 Cost Summary for Solvent-based Ink at Site 10*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per 6,000 images Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for OPP for OPP
$9.80 $4.41
$7.15 $3.68
$19.54 $9.39
$7.98 $3.60
$21.96 $9-89
$0.99 $0.44
$67.42 $31.41
*Solvent-based ink #2; 61-inch press at 600 feet per minute
5-B, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
Table 5-B.13 Cost Summary for UV-cured Ink at Site 11*
Cost Category
Labor
Materials ink (white)
ink (other colors)
ink additives
Capital
Energy
Total
Cost per BjQQQ images
for LDPE
$14.69
$48.07
$24.80
$0.00
$32.93
$2.86
$123.36
Cost per 6,000 sq. feet
for LDPE
$6.61
$21.61
$11.20
$0.00
$14.83
$1.29
$55.55
*UV-cured ink #1; 61 -inch press at 400 feet per minute
5-B, page 9
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
m
0
CD
1
!
<
s
c
Q
£
a
5
<
C
1
O
O
E
I
O
0 a>
R. S)
co <8
I- E
9 0) —
£o
8fc
0
0
*™ CD
B"i
*2g
o 2
o
. co"
•ft
*- o
IS 0 «'
Sgl
cb~
co
0)
If
So
"§
CO
JH ^
cu££
%t_
CO °
0.3; a
co
co
!!
co ~~
o o
o §
CO
li
S
CO
c
TJ
CD
CO
.Q
^
C.
"o
CO
h-
CM
CM
•93-
CO
O
in
93-
CO
O
r-
§
6
o
CO
w-
§
in
CO
CM
te-
cs
«•
in
LU
0_
Q
rj-
CO
T-
•93-
CO
m
CM
£
o>
te-
^>
^^
ft
§
w-
8
CO
T—
CO
o
te-
^
CO
o
^
93-
03
r>-
co
te-
§
£
s
i
g
CM
•ffl-
8
S
o
0
s
o
te-
w
s
D.
N-
O)
£3
f^
1—
ft
fc
05
93-
^^
^^
CM
te-
o
co
CM
te-
cs
o
te-
0
o
o
5
93-
N.
CO
CO
T-
93-
CO
"
co
S
CO
s
co
8
CO
8
o
te-
o
0
o
93
O
co
•93
CO
CM
m
O5
to
T—
^
3
3
CO
CO
O5
o
o
CO
te-
N.
U5
O5
T-
o
CO
t»
*"
Q.
0.
o
•^J-
r^-
CM
93-
O
CO
co
co
o
fe
^M
|^
IO
o
o
CO
93-
CO
CO
in
te-
co
in
CM
o
CO
93-
-a-
co
co
CO
CO
CM
in
te
CO
o
CO
93-
s
CO
o
o
CO
te-
CM
co
CO
o
in
CO
§
te-
en
c.
1
o
CD
C3
CO
co
CO
CM
^J
^^
CM
to
te-
o
in
T"
O
CO
in
CM
te-
8
o
co
T—
CM
T—
•93
CM
5
O
in
co
93
CO
LU
Q.
Q
•r-
co
CM
CO
93
co
^|
f^w,
•93
^^
cvi
T~
w
CO
5
o
o
o
CO
CM
te-
o
CO
0
in
^
o
in
T-
T™
•93-
O
CO
IO
CM
te-
o
in
T—
O
co
S
to-
CD
O
O
•93
O
O
O
0
o
o
te-
0
iq
93-
to
^^
>
LU
Q.
O
in
in
te
°
CM
te
o
in
10
93
O
CM
93
O
O
O
93
C
9=
C
9:
If
•93
CO
(0
CO
o
1
to
I
(D
O
g
s
<
o
tn
"m
o
U
e
•<*
GO
in
5-B, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
D)
2
1
m S-S 1
mi
< 0 CO O
0> Jj m
2 ^" S" c
g "S
I til
a S w
a> .—.
u -Q
0.^
.-s
C
•^
1
c
CO
CO
CM
te
i
P
8
cs
te
in
Tf
E
co
CM
te-
«
te
o
o
te
3
8
cs
te
c
c\
te
tn
LU
Q_
Q
S
CO
te
CO
te
o
0
d
te-
o
0
d
ta-
in
•*
CM
CO
te
s»
CO
te-
cs
o
te
p
o
o
d
te
c
cv
•^
CO
p
33
te-
cs
1
o
p
1
CO
te
£
te-
cs
o
<*
o
d
te
o
o
d
c
CM
tn
PE/EVA
8
.
in
o
p
0
p
d
te
e»
in
CM
te-
CC
JQ
a
'a
o
p
CM
CM
p
O
E
fe
d
CD
0
o
2
te
o
0
te
d
te
o
o
d
te
o
o
CM
te
CM
LU
a.
Q
D
p
tn
CM
CM
E
d
in
£
o
te
CO
CO
o
te
o
o
te
CM
CO.
o
o
c\
CO
n
CM
p
S
p
8
d
te
tn
•<*
CO
o
te
CO
o
o
te
o
o
te-
o
d
te
o
p
c
Si
CM
PE/EVA
CO
T"-
I
CO
d
te
d
te
m
§
E
&
E
o
o
te
o
d
te
0
o
d
•ee-
8
w-
CO
CM
CM
D
I
in
p
0
I
d
te
S
E
o
E
8
te-
d
te
d
te
o
o
CM
te
•«-
Q.
CL
o
CO
CM
P
I
O
o
d
te
o
o
E
d
te
S
o
te
S
E
o
0
•ee
CM
E
CO
in
E
o
o
cv
*
s
p
8
0
o
E
o
E
in
d
•ee
CO
o
•ee
CO
CO
o
te
o
o
te
i
CO
E
o
o
4e
O)
_c
1
Z
g
p
o
=e
3
I
0
O
E
in
d
te
o
o
E
8
E
8
te
o
d
te-
cs
o
d
te-
8
4fl
CO
Ul
D.
Q
g
se-
es
p
se-
o
o
E
o
0
E
o
p
•ee-
E
o
o
d
te
o
o
CM
te
-
g
p
o
o
d
te
I
8
d
te
I
0
o
E
o
o
o
te
o
p
E
o
0
E
o
o
CM
te
CO
PE/EVA
g
o
o
o
d
te
8
E
8
V.
E
s
E
c
o
te
c
te
o
p
«
c
I
o
o
CM
«
CO
3
to
3
i.
03
£
3
D
13
5
i
X
"o
monomer is n
that extra
CD
CQ
cturers st
c
CO
1
JS
-a
c
not determ
i
•C"
1
o
§
=5
CO
rs
,0
CD
0
~
a.
(0
£
(0
o
1
to
S
1
a
1
<
|
O
a>
>
U)
T-
DQ
in
a>
A
re
5-B, page 11
_
-------
APPENDIX 5-B
SUPPLEMENTAL COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION
Table 5-B.16 Labor Costs for All Performance Demonstration Sites
Ink
Solvent-
based
Water-
based
UV-
cured
Substrate
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
LDPE
PE/EVA
Formulation
Number
#S2
#S2
#S1
#S2
#W3
#W3
#W1
#W2
#W4
#U1
#U2
#U2
#U3
Site
5
7
5
7
9B
10
2
3
2
3
4
1
9A
11
6
6
8
Press Speed
(ft/min)
400
450
400
450a
415
600
403
218
403
430
450
430
425
400
344
354
262
Cost per
6,000 images
$14.69
$13.06
$14.69
$13.06
$14.16
$9.80
$14.59
$26.96
$14.59
$13.67
$13.06
$13.67
$13.83
$9.80
$17.09
$16.60
$22.43
Cost per
6,000 ft2 of
$6.61
$5.88
$6.61
$5.88
$6.37
$4.41
$6.56
$12.13
$6.56
$6.15
$5.88
$6.15
$6.22
$4.41
$7.69
$7.47
$10.10
aThe PE/EVA run for Site 7 was aborted. Fot this analysis, the press speed was assumed to be
the same as the LDPE run for Site 7. ;
5-B, page 12
-------
Appendix 6-A (Energy Chapter)
Supplemental Resource and Energy Conservation Information
Table 6-A.1 Ink Consumption for All Performance Demonstration Sites
Substrate
Site
Solvent-based ink
LDPE, PE/EVA
OPP
5
7
9B
10
Ink (Ibs)
Blue
Green
White8
Cyan
Magenta
Total
(Ibs)
14.8
13.3
4.8
13.9
18.8
12.5
5.2
16.4
26.6
32.1
47.7
43.2
23.1
11.1
5.0
13.8
19.1
13.9
3.3
14.9
102.4
82.9
66.0
102.2
Water-based ink
LDPE, PE/EVA
OPP
2
3
1
4
9A
15.3
10.6
11.4
13.1
2.7
19.1
10.0
8.6
11.1
2.7
29.0
29.9
56.5
56.4
23.7
10.3
4.8
2.7
6.6
2.4
11.8
3.3
2.6
6.8
2.3
85.5
58.6
81.8
94.0
33.8
UV-cured ink
LDPE, PE/EVA
LDPE
PE/EVA
6
11
8
8.8
5.1
1.1
4.6
5.5
1.0
20.4
37.8
3.6
3.6
1.9
0.8
5.8
1.8
0.6
43.2
52.1
7.1
aWhite ink was not printed on PE/EVA.
Table 6-A.2 Substrate Consumption for All Performance Demonstration Sites
Substrate
OitA
oils
Makeready (feet)
LDPE
PE/EVA
OPP
Solvent-based ink
LDPE,
PE/EVA
OPP
5
7
9B
10
1,933
2,350
1,930
10,950
Finished (feet)
LDPE
21,924
42,000
PE/EVA
OPP
Total
inc. mkrdy
(ft)
Total
not inc.
mkrdy (ft)
20,852
8,069
33,641
56,700
44,709
52,419
35,571
67,650
42,776
50,069
33,641
56,700
Water-based ink
LDPE,
PE/EVA
OPP
2
3
1
4
9A
6,050
4,220
600
11,892
6,600
1,250
37,053
26,297
37,132
47,884
51,000
50,760
3-V+34
80,835
78,401
62,892
57,360
35,684
74,185
74,181
51,000
50,760
34,434
UV-cured ink
LDPE,
PE/EVA
LDPE
PE/EVA
6
11
8
3,964
7,200
800
650
32,432
38,400
2,559
27,261
15,912
6,583
4.265
70,890
45,600
23,536
66,276
38,400
22,736
6-A, page 1
_
-------
o
I
tr
o
u.
§
g
ui
to
I
Q.
CO
(O
X
c
u
a,
o.
m1
0)
o
O
CD
3:
m
_CD
CO
C
13
§
CD
O
CO
o
•c
£
CD
cc
I
<*••
a.
I
I
CD
•a
•a
1
CO
CT
2
jg
?
^•k ^5>
M. tO CO
?c T_ ®
Hi
.a
Sub-total:
ink additives
(Ibs per 6,000
images)
Sub-total:
ink
(Ibs per 6,000
images)
«
CD
D>
ffl «
Ink additive
(Ibs per 6,000 im
ur
§>
i
*§
C 0
~~ CO
CD
Q.
n
SVIT
Other
additives I
Solvent
Extender
1
§>
CO
!
s
£
c
CD
0)
O
CD
3
m
s
55
1
£
CO
.n
OT
^
E
^
CO
CO
JD
I
o
C71
CM
CM
in
CM
K
CM
O>
•<*
CM
CM
O
O
O
s
CM
0
O
0
«
CO
CO
•*
•
co
CO
CO
CO
Tt-
CD
CM
in
•<*
o
CM
CM
0)
TT
co
in
in
CO
8
o
a>
•*
co
o
o
o
CO
CM
05
CO
••-
S
in
o
a>
*~
•<3-
O
CM
N-
LJJ
Q.
Q
•*
CO
in
O)
r»;
T—
in
in
CO
o
0
o
en
r*-
o
0
o
3
CO
CO
T—
•*
o
o
o
co
CO
CO
•*
CD
CM
m
CM
in
CO
£
in
£
r^
8
o
£
in
o
o
0
CO
CM
cn
CO
T-
O
0
0
o
en
"
s
CM
N.
PE/EVA
CM
CO
CD
CM
en
R
•*
o
0
o
o
co
v-
CM
CO
0
•<*
1^-
o
CM
••"
O
CO
o
CO
"
co
o
1—
CO
C7>
co
en
d
CM
•*
CO
co
en
o
CM
CO
in
CM
fs.
0
O
o
•g
CO
co
••"
T—
T—
in
M-
cn
T™
in
co
•^
o
Q-
a.
o
**.
CD
CO
CO
XJ
1
§
T—
CM
CO
d
CO
cn
d
T—
co
o
•*
d
o
o
o
N.
S
t—
co
CO
in
cn
cq
CM
m
CM
CO
CO
CM
T—
o>
N.
T—
O)
in
d
§
co
CO
d
S!
o
•*
CO
d
cn
•*
0
N-
CD
t^
CD
co
o
CO
LU
a.
O
cn
N.
in
cn
T—
d
§
in
CO
o
CO
o
d
0
o
0
r»-
•v—
s
••"
0
o
d
0)
CO
CM
in
CM
o
CO
CO
CO
CO
0
%
cvi
CO
o
s
d
8
o
S
CD
$
O
O
O
d
q
CO
o
CO
PE/EVA
in
CO
d
5
d
T-
•*
d
CM
CM
o
o
d
CM
T-
o
CO
CO
d
s
o
co
1^
o
co
•*
*—
5
CO
$
d
0)
o
CO
0
o
o
•*
o
d
CO
CM
o
3
d
3
o
co
co
r^
in
in
CM
CO
•*
CO
CO
in
in
d
co
in
N:
S
o
co
CO
d
r»-
o
CM
in
d
CO
m
o
CO
in
CO
d
co
o
<
en
Q.
0.
o
1
3
O
:>
Z3
8
CO
o
o
d
8
co
o
0
d
0
o
d
0
o
d
•<*
CO
d
5-
d
it
CO
CM
in
d
Cn
0)
d
CO
CO
OJ
CM
O
d
t—
o>
s
d
8
d
8
d
8
d
CO
CO
d
CO
CD
co
ct
d
O5
co
d
T—
HI
Q.
Q
CO
in
CM
o
o
d
CO
m
c\i
o
o
d
o
0
d
o
o
d
3
d
5-
d
o
o
d
CM
m
d
05
O)
d
co
£
••*
o
o
d
cS
•*
c
d
o
0
d
c
c
CM
CV
d
CM
d
"4-
N.
cr
in
e
d
i^
c.
a.
'o
^
c
&
p
CM
CD
i
-------
cc
I
cc
III
CO
UI
Ul
£L
Q.
CO
to
X
c
u
Q.
c
al
»2g
0
N«
.. 8
Sub-total
inkadditiv
2
fl
CO
oT
I
(o -
C i_
CO
Q
(0
£
"3T
a
a
•5
**
•* _
= 0
0
(O
s.
0>
JO
i "^i?"
J-l
;i
i-1*
ifc
O 0)
(Ibs per 6,0
ft2 of Imag
(Ibs per 6,000
ft2 of Image) |
<0
v- 0>
» >
£ S
ss
(0
4-«
c
Si
o
(0
s
T3
.1
X
uu
1
0)
en
(0
5
cf
s
.tr
£
o
o>
ffl
2
w
1
i
CO
.*:
T5
CO
CC
.Q
1
CC
W
CO
T-
CO
CM
CM
O
O
O
0
CO
CM
O
O
O
M-
in
V
0
£
o
8
o
co
oo
o
8
o
1^
o>
"t
l^»
1^
CO
0
CM
co
co
o
o
0
S!
o
LO
o
cS
o
o
in
o
N.
h-
rl-
CM
in
o
o>
•<*•
o
CD
o>
Q.
DL
O
5
0)
§5
CO
CO
•<*•
in
o
N.
o
CO
CM
CO
8
o
o
I*.
o
CO
1^-
o
o
CO
CM
h~
co
o
s
o
o
T-
^
03
_^
30
CM
O
0
O
CO
oo
c\i
8
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
en
CM
o
CO
o
oo
CO
T""
CO
CM
o
in
•*
o
CO
LJJ
CL
Q
^
t
o
o
o
•^
o
o
o
o
o
8
o
•*
0
in
o
oo
en
CM
CO
•*
o
o
-3-
O
-
m
T—
O
0
o
in
o
o
o
8
o
8
0
en
CM
0
00
o
g
0
8
o
$
o
CO
PE/EVA
CO
CM
CM
O
O
O
CO
CM
c\i
o
o
o
c
o
c
o
o
0
CM
O
oo
CO
T"
co
T—
o
f-
o
CO
$
LQ
a.
c
o
•o
a>
'c
a.
0
^
c
B
JZ
CO
CD
a.
<
co
_
-------
3
DC
2
§
cc
Ul
0)
§
o
i
l
(0
o
"5
O
i
(0
co
£
cc
o
co
o
O
CD
CO
•tJ
CD
CO
CO
XI
«!.
I
i
CD
t
X
c
a
a.
Q.
; colors
CO
o
1
il
o
o
?
_1
C8
n
O)
m
S
"ffl
f
CO
£
O
CD
m
«•
t
c
c
c
1
C
j
S
a
|
*
j
o
O Q|
5 D
§ 2
t. E
&i
It
ca
n
« °
£t
en
o
SET
CO
s-^
s
§co
S
«- J
8--S
It
01
13. g
fi~
§ S
Ibs per 60
tfoflma!
0!
C
t. Q
CO CO
<=•£
en —
£
s s
Ibs per 60
ft2 of Ima
§
Ibs per 60
Images
r
i
L.
i
|
2
i
5
i
3
J
Tl-
in
^
CO
cS
CO
Tf
s
CO
in
T~
CO
CO
CO
o>
•*
CO
CM
Jtf
4C
in
uf
Q.
Q
CM
O
£M
0
CO
CM
O
CM
CO
o
$
o
«*
o>
o
co
T-
o
o
CO
o
S3
o
CO
o
1
c
CO
a
LJLJ
n
CO
CO
en
CO
CO
CO
f—
CM
E
•*
Th
rr
•*
s
o>
in
CO
T~"
CO
CO
CO
§
T-"
m
CM
CO
£
c
CO
0}
o
CO
CM
s
o
O5
CO
^~
T"
CO
CM
S
m
CO
CO
o
§
3?
o
•*
o
CM
^.
C
t--
£
o
CO
U)
V—
m
m
o
CM
•t™
CO
CM
s
CM
0
CO
O
co
in
T—
(O
CO
0
CO
•<3-
1
c
CO
£
O)
CO
CO
o
CO
o
CT>
CM
CO
CO
co
5
CO
•*
in
co
•*
CO
fe
0
in
CO
7c
2
s
o
s
o
o
in
o
CM
N.
I-.
•*
§
O
CM
in
o
CO
V"*
T~
CD
•*
O
§
21
C
CD
0>
CL
Q.
o
li)
O
&
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
s
o
8
o
§
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
s
o
extender
N.
o
i^
CO
o
CM
O
CO
CM
O
§
O
"*
^*-
o
8
p
in
m
o
co
T-T
O
8
o
1
c
CO
in
CO
o
3
3
0
CO
CO
s
*t
s
o
^w
fc
o
?I
CO
o
CO
CO
"co
c
0>
^.
o
CO
f~
V—
CO
1^
o
CO
CO
§
CM
T—
in
CO
o
s
s
o
in
CO
*£
_c
o
1^
o
CO
in
T—
o>
CM
o
m
CO
o
CO
T—
CO
m
CM
CO
in
o
0>
CM
CO
in
o
CO
1
c
CO
fe
o
m
o
§
o
in
CO
o
CO
o
O)
CM
o
CO
o
o
-a-
0
CO
o
o
CO
o
0>
cc
1
CO
!n
S
CO
5-
CO
CO
o>
in
CO
CO
en
f«-
S
fe
CO
s
CO
o>
CM
"5
_c
..:
S
ft
QL
c
TJ
0>
_C
Q.
B
CO
1
_c
&
p
"*
CD
O.
-------
O
I
DC
2
o
I
cc
Ul
CO
I
I
uu
Ul
Q.
a
co
_
o
O
8.
CO
a.
to
I
c
•o
CB
JC
."8
«
I
<5
i
(O
(0
(O
X
a
a.
a.
n
5
8
(0
a
CL
2
a
c
_I
&
O>
c
o
«0
£
C
o
£
o
0)
a
4
1
1
(
1
C
c
•
.
c
2 ^
°-o
Jjt
0
o a
o-E
£~
Ibs per 6000
ft2 of Image
Ibs per 6000
Images
a «>
Ibs per 601
ft2 of Imacj
0
O 0
i. C
0> 0
££
A
Ibs per 6000
ft2 of Image
Ibs per 6000
Images
5
3
i.
5
3
5
»
9
i
5
co
in
o
^
9
o
g
§
CM
CO
cc
in
in
00
0
ffi
§
0
s
c:
C\
U.
a
C
CO
CM
O
CO
CD
o
3
0
in
0
0
s
m
CO
o
15
o
S3
0
If
53
§
-s
is1
o
o
o
o
o
o
8
0
§
0
s
o
CO
a
o
o
o
CM
O
o
g
o
T:
o
o
'c
(
"o
o
o
o
8
o
o
0
o
8
o
5
o
o
o
g
o
0
o
c
o
o
o
ammonia
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
g
0
o
o
o
o
o
d
o
o
o
o
o
o
c
d
g
o
1
•i
c
0
o
g
0
o
o
o
o
g
o
s
o
s
o
8
o
c
o
g
o
<
j
c
r~
so
CO
o
s
s
o
co
r*~
o
co'
g
CD
8
s
CM
in
c\
s
cv
7
c
m
o
8
0
CM
CM
O
CO
•*
O
O
in
CO
o
9
o
X
9
0
CO
c
m
c
CO
a
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
CM
CM
0
§
O
o
o
0
g
o
c
o
c
o
<
£
o
o
o
o
o
g
0
0
o
0
•tf
•f—
0
$
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
c
d
0
o
o
extender
o
o
o
o
o
8
0
g
0
•*
T"-
d
1
o
o
o
o
o
o
CO
c
o
fe
o
I
~i
CO
01
o
§
o
g
0
s
0
N
o
§
d
0
o
CO
o
CO
o
CD
c\
o
ammonia
o
o
g
o
o
0
o
g
o
o
o
d
o
o
d
o
o
g
o
o
d
Cf
o
o
a
.>£
c
c
c
u
^
o
g
o
Si
o
s
o
N
•*
s
o>
s
o
CM
g
d
s
"e
If)
o
s?
o
in
o
s
o
N
CO
co
9
T—
g
d
-------
§
DC
£
DC
HI
CO
1
i
3
s
§
to
CO
X
c
UJ
Q.
Q.
2
o
o
o
m
s
e
Q.
S
o
o
CD
^
CD
ra
c
I
«
CD
=S
S
o
CJ
a
m
§0
(X
II
=•0
St
5 en
CD 0>
If
to —
XI
11
g.-g
.at
s
l§
S
o a,
||
«°
.gt
o 01
CD ra
0.£
0) —
||
m —
n ,?
S *
O 09
fl-1
(0 —
i §
5rt ^
c5 —
J>t
CO
^8
o cc
to"—
XI
•g
g
0
Q.
1
O
55
2
2
to
XI
CO
CD
CM
o"
^.
CD
CO
CD
5
CD
CO
CO
js:
CO
CO
CM
CD
CM
V)
O
^
CD
CD
CD
CD
_C
CO
^f
"jg
_I Q.
S
CD
CM
O
in
CD
CO
CO
CD
CO
O)
CM
S
CO
CO
CD
CD
CD
§
CD
CO
CD
^
o
o
o
o
0
CD
8
o
o
o
CD
8
0
o
0
o
o
CD
CM
O
d
8
CD
8
CD
if!
£
CD
CM
CD
m
o
CO
CO
o
§
CM
CO
CO
CO
5
o
CO
CD
CD
O
CD
CD
CO
c>
"cc
c
^~
tu
Q.
O
^
CD
CM
CM
CD
CM
CD
CM
O
8
o
8
CD
CO
O
c?
CD
J±
CD
CO
O
^
00
^
LL
Hi
D.
^
IjJ
a
p.
c.
o
•a
*J
a.
c
ca
i
«
1
l«
Q.
CO
-------
APPENDIX 6-A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSERVATION INFORMATION
Table 6-A.8 Ink and Additive Consumption for Water-based Ink on OPP at Site 1
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up.
Total ink used
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Total excluding bearer bars
Line (Ibs)
Blue
35.90
0.40
4.00
2.80
0.10
43.20
11.70
11.70
29.00
18.00
20.50
23.40
13.21
Green
32.80
2.90
1.00
36.70
14.30
15.50
18.60
19.30
9.64
White
45.70
2.00
0.20
2.20
50.10
45.22a
45.22
24.70
16.70
19.80
67.52
58.17
Process (Ibs)
Cyan
24.70
0.20
0.60
25.60
2.00
2.00
10.00
18.20
21.90
13.90
2.75
Magenta
24.90
0.20
0.50
25.60
8.80
16.40
19.60
13.60
2.69
Total
(Ibs)
164.00
5.50
4.00
3.20
4.40
181.20
13.70
58.92
86.80
84.80
100.40
137.72
86.46
"estimated
Table 6-A.9 Ink and Additive Consumption for Water-based Ink
on LDPE and PE/EVA at Site 2
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Total ink used
Line (Ibs)
Blue
21.00
2.50
0.50
0.70
24.70
13.40
13.40
10.30
27.80
Green
19.00
2.00
21.00
13.25
11.20
0.40
0.10
0.55
25.50
18.95
27.55
White"
22.50
1.00
23.50
21.20
9.85
0.65
0.10
0.30
32.10
17.85
0.70
1.60
36.85
Process (Ibs)
Cyan
21.60
1.00
22.60
2.25
0.30
2.55
13.15
12.00
Magenta
21.60
21.60
11.65
0.25
0.30
12.20
15.35
18.45
Total
(Ibs)
105.70
6.50
0.50
0.70
113.40
34.45
48.35
1.05
0.75
1.15
85.75
75.60
0.70
1.60
122.65
"White ink was not printed on PE/EVA.
6-A, page 7
-------
APPENDIX G-A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSERVATION INFORMATION
Table 6-A.10 Ink and Additive Consumption for Water-based Ink
on LDPE and PE/EVA at Site 3
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Total ink used
Total excluding bearer bars
Line (Ibs)
Blue
26.80
0.90
1.50
29.20
0.60
5.60
0.80
7.00
17.00
14.80
14.65
19.35
14.40
Green
34.60
0.50
35.10
5.60
0.60
6.20
25.40
15.55"
15.40"
15.90
11.80
White"
88.60
6.60
2.20
97.40
3.70
3.60
3.20
10.50
68.80
3.50
4.10
38.50
36.00
Process (Ibs)
Cyan
43.00
1.10
44.10
3.60
3.60
35.80
13.40
13.65
11.65
5.36
Magenta
35.50
0.20
35.70
5.20
5.20
31.00
14.35"
14.10b
9.90
3.62
Total
(Ibs)
228.50
6.60
1.10
5.30
241.50
3.70
9.40
18.00
1.40
32.50
178.00
31.70
32.40
95.30
71.18
White ink was not printed on PE/EVA.
bnot included in calculation
Table 6-A.11 Ink and Additive Consumption for Water-based Ink on OPP at Site 4
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Total ink used
Line (Ibs)
Blue | Green
35.20
0.80
36.00
0.60
0.60
19.20
32.40a
36.20
13.60
45.00
0.80
45.80
0.20
0.10
0.30
31.00
26.20*
29.90
11.40
White
45.90
0.80
1.60
48.30
43.00
0.80
1.60
45.40
31.60
20.40a
23.10
59.40
Process (Ibs)
Cyan | Magenta
42.40
0.80
43.20
0.00
34.00
29.90a
32.40
6.70
41.40
0.80
42.20
0.00
32.20
23.1 Oa
26.20
6.90
Total
(Ibs)
209.90
4.00
1.60
215.50
43.00
0.80
1.60
0.80
0.10
46.30
148.00
132.00
147.80
98.00
"water
6-A, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 6-A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSERVATION INFORMATION
Table 6-A.12 Ink and Additive Consumption for Solvent-based Ink
on LDPE and PE/EVA at Site 5
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Total ink used
Line (Ibs)
Blue
20.90
2.01
22.91
2.80
2.80
7.55
18.16
Green
22.70
2.01
24.71
0.00
4.25
20.46
White*
45.00
2.25
47.25
8.25
3.35
11.60
29.40
29.45
Process (Ibs)
Cyan | Magenta
29.55
2.01
31.56
2.40
2.40
7.45
26.51
25.55
2.00
27.55
0.00
4.95
22.60
Total
(Ibs)
143.70
10.28
153.98
8.25
8.55
16.80
53.60
117.18
aWhite ink was not printed on PE/EVA.
6-A, page 9
-------
APPENDIX G-A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSERVATION INFORMATION
Table 6-A.13 Ink and Additive Consumption for UV-cured Ink
on LDPE and PE/EVA at Site 6
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Total ink used
Line (Ibs)
Blue
37.65
37.65
28.80
8.85
Green
36.50
36.50
31.90
4.60
White8
50.70
50.70
30.31
20.39
Process (Ibs)
Cyan | Magenta
25.00
25.00
21.35
3.65
35.65
35.65
29.90
5.75
Total
(Ibs)
185.50
185.50
142.26
43.24
"White ink was not printed on PE/EVA.
6-A, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 6-A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSERVATION INFORMATION
Table 6-A.14 Ink and Additive Consumption for Solvent-based Ink
on LDPE and PE/EVA at Site 7
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Component *
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Total ink used
Line(lbs)
Blue
27.90
27.90
20.00
20.00
25.00
11.23
11.23
22.90
Green
24.85
24.85
20.00
20.00
22.40
11.23
11.23
22.45
White
47.40
47.40
22.30
22.30
22.50
11.23
11.23
47.20
Process (Ibs)
Cyan
25.90
25.90
18.60
18.60
25.50
11.23
11.23
19.00
Magenta
25.25
25.25
18.60
18.60
19.70
11.23
11.23
24.15
Total
(Ibs)
151.30
151.30
99.50
99.50
115.10
56.15
56.15
135.70
Table 6-A.15 Ink and Additive Consumption for UV-cured Ink on PE/EVA at Site 8
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Total ink used
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Line (Ibs)
Blue
9.02
9.02
7.34
1.68
Green
7.10
7.10
6.08
1.02
White'
9.82
9.82
6.26
3.56
Process (Ibs)
Cyan
10.08
10.08
9.28
0.80
Magenta
6.07
6.07
5.42
0.65
Total
(Ibs)
42.09
42.09
34.38
7.71
"White ink was not printed on PE/EVA.
6-A, page 11
-------
APPENDIX 6-A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSERVATION INFORMATION
Table 6-A.16 Ink and Additive Consumption for Water-based Ink on OPP at Site 9A
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Total ink used
Line (Ibs)
Blue
25.60
4.60
30.20
0.10
0.10
26.90
14.10?
0.20
13.80"
3.20
Green
14.60
2.00
0.10
16.70
11.70
14.10
1.20
14.80
3.10
White
60.20
4.20
0.10
64.50
34.70
26.10
2.50
28.00
25.40
Process (Ibs)
Cyan
14.60
4.60
3.60
0.10
22.90
19.20
14.20a
0.40
14.00a
3.30
Magenta
15.60
1.20
0.10
16.90
12.10
14.10
1.40
15.00
2.50
Total
(Ibs)
130.60
4.20
4.60
11.40
0.40
151.20
0.10
0.10
104.60
54.30
5.70
57.80
37.50
"excluded from calculation
Table 6-A.17 Ink and Additive Consumption for Solvent-based Ink on OPP
at Site 9B
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Total ink used
Component
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Line (Ibs)
Blue
10.80
2.80
13.60
5.54a
5.20
1.00
6.20
6.06
Green
12.20
5.80
18.00
6.20
5.00
2.00
7.20
7.60
White
74.40
1.00
75.40
19.60
12.60
4.20
16.40
47.80
Process (Ibs)
Cyan | Magenta
10.00
2.30
12.30
5.40
5.00
0.40
5.40
6.10
9.20
4.00
4.60
17.80
7.80
5.00
1.60
6.60
6.80
Total
(Ibs)
116.60
4.00
16.50
137.10
44.54
32.80
9.20
41.80
74.36
Estimated
6-A, page 12
-------
APPENDIX 6-A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSERVATION INFORMATION
Table 6-A.18 Ink and Additive Consumption for Solvent-based ink on OPP at Site 10
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Total ink used
Component .
Ink '
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Line (Ibs)
Blue | Green
19.00
16.20
1.80
37.00
10.50
4.95
0.55
16.00
26.00
4.00
2.00
4.00
25.00
26'.50
7.20
0.80
34.50
7.50
15.30
1.70
24.50
28.50
4.00
2.00
4.00
28.50
White
90.00
15.30
1.70
107.00
30.15
3.35
33.50
73.00
4.00
4.00
67.50
Process (Ibs)
Cyan | Magenta
19.60
6.50
7.00
33.10
12.00
6.00
9.50
27.50
32.00
4.00
2.00
4.00
26.60
19.00
11.50
2.50
33.00
11.00
15.50
26.50
30.00
4.00
4.00
Total
(Ibs)
174.10
56.70
13.80
244.60
41.00
71.90
15.10
128.00
189.50
20.00
6.00
20.00
Table 6-A.19 Ink and Additive Consumption for UV-cured Ink on LDPE at Site 11
Stage
Makeready
Print run
Clean-up
Total ink used
Component
nk
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Sub-total
Ink
Water
Extender
Solvent
Other
Other
Sub-total
Ink remaining
Solution added
Ink scraped out
Ink wiped out
Ink and solution
removed
Line (Ibs)
Blue | Green
42.87
42.87
37.80
1.00a
5.07
46.10
46.10
1.00
1.00
39.60
1.00a
2.00
5.50
White
51.35
51.35
13.52
1.00a
37.83
Process (Ibs)
Cyan | Magenta
42.86
42.86
41.00
1.00a
1.86
42.82
42.82
41.00
1.00a
Total
(Ibs)
226.00
226.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
2.00
aexcluded from calculation
6-A, page 13
-------
APPENDIX 6-A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSERVATION INFORMATION
This page is intentionally blank.
6-A, page 14
-------
Appendix 6-B (Energy Chapter)
Clean-Up and Waste Disposal Procedures for Each Site
Site 1
Use the pump to circulate water through the system for each color. After 10 minutes, pump clean water
through once, without recirculating wipe down doctor blade with rag. Remove plastic liner from pan under
doctor blade.
• Employees wear gloves.
• Rags handled by industrial laundry.
• Cleaning solution: water
• Ink is filtered; water sent to POTW and solids are incinerated.
• Annual costs: -$30,000 for ink treatment and disposal costs
$50,000 for solid/hazardous waste treatment and disposal
Retrofit: done internally — changed dryers to increase air flow; new higher anilox rolls. Do not recognize
cost savings associated with using water-based inks. The cost is actually higher with lower press speeds and
more complex color separations for process printing.
Site 2
Wipe out ink pans with water and alcohol mixture, pushing excess into drain. Scrape ink off of blade; wipe
blade dampened with solution; scrape ink out of ink pan into drain; allow any ink/ink residue in pan to dry
and scrape out later.
Employees wear gloves.
Rags handled by industrial laundry.
Cleaning solution: water and alcohol
Waste ink placed in waste drum and hauled away; off-site incineration.
Annual costs: $10,000 for ink treatment and disposal costs (-40 drums @ $250/drum)
$15,210 for solid/hazardous waste treatment and disposal
Retrofit: done internally — upgraded dryers to get more air flow through the ovens. Already had doctor
blades that were sufficient. Operators trained on-the-job. It took Wz years to switch all colors and get
acceptable print quality. They didn't lose product, it was just their own internal standards.
Site 3
Flush system with ammonium and water blend. Wipe off remaining ink with towels soaked in the same
blend.
• Employees wear gloves.
• Rags handled by industrial laundry.
• Collect waste ink/press clean-up water in containers for pick-up from waste hauler
approximately four times a year. Hauler takes it to the incinerator.
« Nothing is discharged to sewer.
• Annual costs: $6,400 for ink treatment and disposal costs
Retrofit: done internally — they had a press that was previously used for solvent ink. They had to add a
treater, increase the volume of the anilox rolls, and increase/improve the dryer capacity.
Site 4 . .
Fill 5-gallon bucket half-way with water. Pump water from bucket through the white print station for 5 mm.
Stop pumping water. Wipe down anilox rolls, doctor blade with rag soaked in clean water. Move water
bucket (now with white ink in it also) to the magenta station and repeat pumping followed by wiping process
6-B, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 6-B
CLEAN-UP AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROCEDURES
Reuse water bucket for green, cyan, and blue stations.
• Employees wear no personal protective equipment.
• Rags handled by industrial laundry.
• Water/ink mixture is shipped off-site for recovery and incineration; separates water and
solids and incinerates the solids.
• Nothing is discharged to sewer.
• Annual costs: $15,390 for ink treatment and disposal costs
Retrofit: done internally—they upgraded a press that had been used for solvent-based inks by replacing the
anilox rolls.
SiteS
Drain ink pans and scrape down. Flush with solvent, using 5 gallon sumps—four times—send to scrap.
Some rags used for wiping. Sent to waste handling facility (cement kilns). Reutilize usable ink: 35% of ink
issued is returned for reuse. Reclaim some of the solvent for in-house reuse.
• Employees wear recommended eye shields and gloves.
• Rags disposed of in landfill.
• Cleaning solution: solvent cleaning solution (n-propyl alcohol)
No retrofit.
Site 6
Solvent cleaning tank used for UV systems. Dry wipe with rags. Parts and rags are cleaned with spent,
recycled solvent.
• Employees wear eye shields, gloves, and arm protectors.
• Rags washed in spent alcohol and then laundered for reuse.
• Cleaning solution: solvents; sent off-site to cement kilns.
• Nothing is discharged to sewer.
Retrofit done internally—UV lamps and power supplies; increased working capacity, web cleaner and pre-
treater.
Site?
Flush out with solvent; drain before laundry.
• Employees wear eye shields and gloves.
• Rags handled by industrial laundry.
• Cleaning solution: solvent; reused about three times, then sent out as hazardous waste.
• Nothing is discharged to sewer.
• Annual costs: $80 per job
No retrofit.
SiteS
Site 8 was a UV press manufacturer's demonstration press in Germany.
• Employees wear gloves.
6-B, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 6-B
CLEAN-UP AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROCEDURES
Site 9A
Pump clean with water; wipe anilox with rag of cleaning blend; dispose of waste clean-up water; waste water
disposed through waste hauler.
• Employees wear no personal protective equipment.
• Rags handled by industrial laundry.
! • Cleaning solution: water; water/ NPA/ ammonia (80%/17%/3%)
• Press wash water-based ink; diluted then discharged to sewer/POTW.
Retrofit: done internally — improve drying oven and blowers.
Site 9B
Sarnie as above except the cleaning solution is solvent (acetate [n-propyl] and alcohol [n-propyl]).
Site 10
In-h6usebatch distillation. Solvent recaptured andreused(inkblend, cleaning). Thickpumpable still bottom
goes to kiln for burning. Color wash: flush and wipe out; solvent goes to distiller; rags go to drain tank.
Dratn each color down. Pour 4 Ibs solvent into chamber and circulate. Drain clean-up solvent down. Wipe
out systems using five solvent soaked rags. 5-7 minutes each color.
; • Employees wear eye shields and gloves.
i • Rags handled by industrial laundry.
' • Cleaning solution: solvent (blend made in-house); 100% reused until it loses its efficiency.
' • Nothing is discharged to sewer.
• Annual costs: $8,000 for ink treatment/distillation
i $ 15,000 for waste disposal and transportation
No retrofit.
Site; 11
Purtip ink back to 5 gallon containers. Wipe excess ink off with rags.
! • Employees wear eye shields, gloves, and apron.
• Rags handled by industrial laundry
' « Cleaning solution: solvent (alcohol); after several cleanings, the dirty wash is run through
the distilling unit. Solids are taken out.
• Nothing is discharged to sewer.
Bulbs for UV lamps: $300 each
Doctor blades: ~$300/month; $3,600 annually
! • Ink cleaning equipment: distillation still purchased in 1992; ~ $30,000
• Ink cleaning supplies: -$500/month; $6,000 annually
No'retrofit: brand new machine.
6-B, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 6-B
CLEAN-UP AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROCEDURES
This page is intentionally blank.
6-B, page 4
-------
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
Appendix 6-C (Energy Chapter)
Pollution Generation Reports
POLLUTION GENERATED—SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Solvent
Press Speed 453 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
1. Pollution
Generated per Unit-of -Use of product —
by Pollution Category
Pollution prevented for:
Overall environment
Human health, impacts
Use impairment impacts
Disposal cap'cty impacts
All
Media Water
11. Kg 5.2
87. g
10. Kg 5.2
630. g
and by Medium
Soil/
Grdwater
g 630. g
g
630. g
:================
Air
10. Kg(
87. g(
10. Kg(
Indoor
Air
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 1
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED—SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Solvent
Press Speed 453 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
2. Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product—
by Pollution Category, by Pollutant and by Medium
Pollution prevented for:
*Overall environment
Carbon dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Dissolved solids
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Particulates
Solid wastes
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
*Human health impacts
Carbon monoxide*
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
*Use impairment impacts
Carbon dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Dissolved solids
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Particulates
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
*Disposal cap'cty impacts 630.
Solid wastes
All
Medic
11.
10.
9.6
1.4
60.
29.
8.8
630.
48.
3.8
87.
9.6
29.
48.
10.
10.
9.6
1.4
60.
29.
8.8
48.
3.8
630.
630.
Soil/
i Water Grdwater
Kg 5.2 g 630. g
Kg
g
g 1-4 g
g
g
g
g 630. g
g
g 3.8 g
g
g
g
g
Kg 5.2 g
Kg
g
g 1.4 g
g
g
g
g
g 3.8 g
g 630. g
g 630. g
Air
10.
10.
9.6
60.
29.
8.8
48.
87.
9.6
29.
48.
10.
10.
9.6
60.
29.
8.8
48.
Indoor
Air
Kg(
Kg{
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
Kg(
Kg(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 2
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Solvent
Press Speed 453 fpm •:-•
6000 sq ft processed
3. Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product —
by Pollution Category, Pollutant Class, and Pollutant for Overall Environment
Pollution j Pollutant Amount Amount
Category Class Prevented Pollutant Prevented
Human / Toxic Inorganics 77 . g
Health
impacts
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Toxic Organics 9.6 g
\ Carbon monoxide
/ Acid Rain Precursors 77. g
Use
impairment
impacts
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Corrosives 81. g
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
Dissolved Solids 5.2 g
Dissolved solids
Sulfuric acid
Global Warmers 10. Kg
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Odorants 60. g
Hydrocarbons
Particulates 8.8 g
Particulates
Smog Formers 99. g
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
\ Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Disposal / Solid Wastes 630. g
capacity
Solid wastes
impacts \
29.
48.
9.6
29.
48.
29.
48.
3.8
1.4
3.8
10.
29.
60.
8.8
9.6
60.
29.
630.
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
Kg
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 3
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Solvent
Press Speed 500 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
1. Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product-
by Pollution Category and by Medium
Pollution prevented for:
Overall environment
Human health impacts
Use impairment impacts
All
Media
Water
Soil/
Grdwater
10. Kg
7.9 g
9.5 Kg
4.7 g
4.7 g
570.
Disposal cap'cty impacts 570.
570.
Air
Indoor
Air
9.5 Kg(
79. g(
9.5 Kg(
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 4
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
POLLUTION-GENERATED SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
Solvent
Press Speed 500 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
2. Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product
by Pollution Category, by Pollutant and by Medium
*Overall environment
Carbon dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Dissolved solids
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides
Particulates
Solid wastes
Sulfur oxides (
Sulfuric acid
ited for:
iment
;
(NOx)
3Ox)
npacts
(NOx)
SOx)
impacts
3
(NOx)
SOx)
ty impacts
All
Media
10.
9.4
8.7
1.3
55.
26.
8.0
570.
44.
3.4
79.
8.7
26.
44.
9.5
9.4
8.7
1.3
55.
26.
8.0
44.
3.4
570.
570.
Water
Kg 4 . 7 g
Kg
g
g 1-3 g
g
g
g
g
g
g 3.4 g
g
g
g
g
Kg 4 „ 7 g
Kg
g
g 1-3 g
g
g
g
g
g 3.4 g
g
g
Soil/
Grdwater Air
570. g 9.5
9.4
8.7
55.
26.
8.0
570. g
44.
79.
8.7
26.
44.
9.5
9.4
8.7
55.
26.
8.0
44.
570. g
570. g
Indoor
Air
Kg(
Kg(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
Kg(
Kg(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
sulfur oxides (SOx)
*Use impairment
Carbon dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Dissolved solids
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxi<
Particulates
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
*Disposal cap
Solid wastes
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 5
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED—SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Solvent
Press Speed 500 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
3 . Pollution Generated
by Pollution Category, Pollutant
Pollution
Category
Pollutant
per Unit-of-Use of product —
Class, and Pollutant for Overall Environment
Amount
Class Prevented
Human / Toxic Inorganics
Health
impacts
Toxic Organics
\
70. g
8.7 g
Pollutant
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Carbon monoxide
Amount
Prevented
26.
44.
8.7
g
g
g
/ Acid Rain Precursors 70. g
Use
impairment
impacts
Corrosives
Dissolved Solids
Global Warmers
Odorants
Particulates
Smog Formers
\
Disposal / Solid Wastes
capacity
impacts \
73. g
4.7 g
9 . 4 Kg
55. g
8.0 g
90. g
570. g
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
Dissolved solids
Sulfuric acid
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Hydrocarbons
Particulates
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Solid wastes
26.
44.
26.
44.
3.4
1.3
3.4
9.4
26.
55.
8.0
8.7
55.
26.
570.
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
Kg
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 6
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED-SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Water . ., -
Press Speed 50ti fpm
6000 sq ft processed
1. Pollution
Generated
per Unit-of-Use of product-
by Pollution Category and by Medium
.
Pollution prevented for:
Overall environment
Human health impacts
Use impairment impacts
Disposal cap'cty impacts
All
Media
6.8 Kg
48. g
6.5 Kg
340. g
Soil/
Water Grdwater Air
2.8 g 340. g 6.5 Kg(
48. g(
2.8 g 6.5 Kg (
340. g
Indoor
Air
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 7
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED — SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Water
Press Speed 500 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
2. Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product
by Pollution Category, by Pollutant and by medium
*Overall environment
Carbon dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Dissolved solids
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Particulates
Solid wastes
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
*Human health impacts
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Carbon dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Dissolved solids
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides
Particulates
Sulfur oxides (S
Sulfuric acid
Solid wastes
.ted for:
ment
(NOx)
Ox)
ipacts
(NOx)
:Ox)
impacts
(NOx)
iOx)
.y impacts
All
Media
6.8
6.4
5.5
0.81
41.
16.
4.8
340.
26.
2.0
48.
5.5
16.
26.
6.5
6.4
5.5
0.81
41.
16.
4.8
26.
2.0
340.
340.
Water
Kg 2 . 8 g
Kg
g
g 0.81 g
g
g
g
g
g
g 2.0 g
g
g
g
g
Kg 2 . 8 g
Kg
g
g 0.81 g
g
g
g
g
g 2.0 g
g
g
Soil/
Grdwater A
340. g 6.
6.
5.
41.
16.
4.
340. g
26.
48.
5.
16.
26.
6.
6.
5.
41.
16.
4.
26.
340. g
340. g
.ir
5
4
5
8
5
5
4
5
8
Indoor
Air
Kg(
Kg(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
Kg(
Kg(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 8
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED—SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Water
Press Speed 500 fprti ' =
6000 sq ft processed
3 . Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product —
by Pollution Category, Pollutant Class, and Pollutant for Overall Environment
Pollution
Pollutant Amount
Category | Class Prevented
Human / Toxic Inorganics 43 . g
Health
impacts
Toxic Organics 5.5 g
\
/ Acid Rain Precursors 43 . g
Use
impairment
impacts
Corrosives 45 . g
Dissolved Solids 2.8 g
Global Warmers 6 . 4 Kg
Odorants 41 . g
Particulates 4 . 8 g
Smog Formers 63. g
\
Disposal / Solid Wastes 340 . g
capacity
impacts \
Pollutant
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
Dissolved solids
Sulfuric acid
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Hydrocarbons
Particulates
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Solid wastes
Amount
Prevented
16.
26.
5.5
16.
26.
16.
. 26.
2.0
0.81
2.0
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
6. 4 Kg
16.
41.
4.8
5.5
41.
16.
340.
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 9
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED—SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Water
Press Speed 394 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
1 . Pollutior
by I
Pollution prevented for:
Overall environment
Human health impacts
Use impairment impacts
Disposal cap'cty impacts
L Generated per Unit-of-Use of product —
>ollution Category and by Medium
•All Soil/ Indoor
Media Water Grdwater Air Air
8.5 Kg 3.5 g 410. g 8.1 Kg (
60. g 60. g(
8.1 Kg 3.5 g 8.1 Kg (
410. g 410. g
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 10
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED—SUMMARY REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Water .
Press Speed 394 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
2. Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product-
by Pollution Category, by Pollutant and by Medium
Pollution prevented for:
*Overall environment
Carbon dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Dissolved solids
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Particulates
Solid wastes
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
*Human health impacts
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
*Use impairment impacts
Carbon dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Dissolved solids
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Particulates
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
*Disposal cap'cty impacts
Solid wastes
All
Media
8.5
8.0
6.8
1.0
52.
20.
5.9
410.
33.
2.5
60.
6.8
20.
33.
8.1
8.0
6.8
1.0
52.
20.
5.9
33.
2.5
410.
410.
Water
Kg 3.5 g
Kg
g
g 1-0 g
g
g
g
g
g
g 2.5 g
g
g
g
g
Kg 3 . 5 g
Kg
g
g l-O g
g
g
g
g
g 2.5 g
g
g
Soil/
Grdwater Air
410. g 8.1
8.0
6.8
52.
20.
5.9
410. g
33.
60.
6.8
20.
33.
8.1
8.0
6.8
52.
20.
5.9
33.
410. g
410. g
:===================
Indoor
Air
Kg(
Kg(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
Kg(
Kg(
g(
g(
g(
g(
g(
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may-appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 11
_
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED—SUMMARY. REPORT FOR
All Previously Selected Stage(s)
Water
Press Speed 394 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
3. Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product—
by Pollution Category, Pollutant Class, and Pollutant for Overall Environment
Pollution
Category
Pollutant Amount Amount
Class Prevented Pollutant Prevented
Human / Toxic Inorganics 53 . g
Health
impacts
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Toxic Organics 6.8 g
\ Carbon monoxide
/ Acid Rain Precursors 53 . g
Use
impairment
impacts
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Corrosives 56. g
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Sulfuric acid
Dissolved Solids 3.5 g
Dissolved solids
Sulfuric acid
Global Warmers 8 . 0 Kg
Carbon dioxide
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Odorants 52 . g
Hydrocarbons
Particulates 5.9 g
Particulates
Smog Formers 79 . g
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
\ Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Disposal / Solid Wastes 410. g
capacity
Solid wastes
impacts \
20.
33.
6.8
20.
33.
20.
33.
2.5
1.0
2.5
8.0
20.
52.
5.9
6.8
52.
20.
410.
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
Kg
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incorrect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 12
-------
APPENDIX 6-C
POLLUTION GENERATION REPORTS
Product:
Unit-of-Use:
Product Life:
POLLUTION GENERATED—SUMMARY REPORT FOR
Use STAGE(S)
UV
Press Speed 500 fpm
6000 sq ft processed
1. Pollution Generated per Unit-of-Use of product-
by Pollution Category and by Medium
Pollution prevented for:
Overall environment
Human health impacts
Use impairment impacts
Disposal cap'cty impacts
All
Media
18.
230.
16.
2.0
Water
Kg 15 . g
g
Kg 15 . g
Kg
Soil/
Grdwater Air
2.0 Kg 16. Kg(
230. g(
16. Kg(
2 . 0 Kg
Indoor
Air
NOTE: Some totals in these reports may appear incor.rect since all numbers
displayed have been rounded to two significant figures.
6-C, page 13
-------
Wi f
H 5
Ill*
.
••• •;.'« I!-'1
I
llll'lll i
"Ill 111
If I
------- |