Employee
pressing shirts by using two pressing machines in series.
FEBRUARY 24, 2015
Drycleaning
There are about
36,000 commercial drycleaning shops in the United States. Most are
owner-operated small businesses with fewer than 10 employees. In addition, some
drycleaning shops may be owned and staffed by individuals with limited
English language skills and/or may be marginally profitable– factors that may
create additional barriers for the owner-operator to maintain a safe and
healthy workplace.
Drycleaning
Solvents
Environmental
regulatory requirements and an increased awareness of the potential
occupational hazards from using the drycleaning chemical perchloroethylene
(PERC) have resulted in some drycleaners switching to alternative chemicals.
Some of the PERC alternatives are promoted as safe and environmentally
friendly, although their effects on human health and the environment are not
well characterized. Some of the alternative drycleaning agents include:
- 1-bromopropane; (see blog 1-Bromopropane)
- high-flashpoint hydrocarbons;
- butylal;
- liquid silicone;
- dipropylene glycol t-butyl ether; and
- glycol ether cleaning liquid with liquid carbon dioxide.
Additionally,
professional wet washing using water and detergents has also been used along
with or to replace solvent-based drycleaning [EPA 2015].
Evaluating
Employees Exposures to New Drycleaning Solvents
In 2012,
investigators from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) began working with the Local Hazardous Waste Management Program
in King County, Washington (LHWMP)* to learn about occupational exposures to
two alternative solvents. We performed four Health Hazard Evaluations at
drycleaners that used either a high-flashpoint hydrocarbon mixture or butylal.
We collected personal
and area air samples for the drycleaning solvents, as well as for formaldehyde
and butanol, which are potential hydrolysis byproducts of butylal. We learned
that the highest air concentrations of the drycleaning solvents were during
loading and unloading of the machines and when pressing fabrics. Concentrations
of the high-flashpoint hydrocarbon mixture and butanol in air were well below
occupational exposure limits. However, there are no occupational exposure
limits for butylal, and the long-term human health effects of butylal are
unknown. We used control banding tools to assist in developing
control recommendations for this solvent. When measuring for the other
byproduct of butylal, formaldehyde, we did not find measurable levels or found
very low concentrations in the air. The shop owners added a manufacturer
recommended neutralizer to the drycleaning machine using butylal that
helps prevent hydrolysis of the solvent and release of formaldehyde and
butanol.
Because exposure to
these drycleaning solvents can occur through skin contact, we also took surface
patch samples on two employees to see if they were getting these solvents on
their hands during the machine cleaning process despite wearing gloves. We
found solvents on their hands that may have resulted from reusing gloves or not
selecting the proper glove material.
We saw employees
mixing the butylal-based solvent with a fabric pretreatment and spraying the
spot treatment mixture without personal protective equipment (such as gloves
and eye protection). We also saw employees cleaning the waste material from the
drycleaning machines without adequate personal protective equipment.
We provided
recommendations for the shop owners and employees to help reduce their
exposures to the drycleaning solvents and other chemicals. The recommendations
involved work practice changes, improved housekeeping, equipment maintenance,
and the proper selection and use of personal protective equipment. We also
recommended employees brush and not spray fabric spot treatments, and wear eye
and skin protection when cleaning the waste material from drycleaning machines.
These recommendations were consistent with those resulting from our control
banding assessment for butylal. See the reports below for complete prevention
guidelines.
These evaluations are
one step towards understanding the risks involved with alternative drycleaning
solvents. Further research is needed to investigate the long term health
effects of butylal. Independent evaluation of the toxicological properties of
these alternative drycleaning solvents is needed.
For more information,
see NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluations:
- Evaluation of Occupational Exposures at
Drycleaning Shops Using SolvonK4 and DF-2000
- Evaluation of Occupational Exposures at a Drycleaning
Shop Using SolvonK4
Help
Wanted
We would like to hear
from you. In the comment section below, please let us know:
- What other new drycleaning solvents are being used to replace PERC?
- Are airborne or skin exposures to new dry cleaning agents being measured in your workplace?
- Are employees experiencing any health concerns that you think may be associated with the use of new drycleaning solvents?
We would also like to
conduct more Health Hazard Evaluations in drycleaning establishments that use
alternatives to PERC. If you are interested, you can request an HHE at our website.
We can also provide technical assistance on requests to states and other
government organizations that may be interested in improving the health and
safety climate in the drycleaning industry.
Resources
- California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resource Board, drycleaning program webpage
- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), case study: wetcleaning systems for garment care webpage
- Local Hazardous Waste Management Program in King County, Washington drycleaning webpage
- New York State, Department of Environmental Conservation, approved alternative solvents for drycleaning webpage
- Toxic Use Reduction Institute (TURI), UMASS Lowell, drycleaning webpage
- TURI, PERC Alternatives Assessment Fact Sheet
