Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Data platform availability banner - registered substances factsheets
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.
The new ECHA CHEM database has been released by ECHA, and it now contains all REACH registration data. There are more details on the transition of ECHA's published data to ECHA CHEM here.
Diss Factsheets
Use of this information is subject to copyright laws and may require the permission of the owner of the information, as described in the ECHA Legal Notice.
EC number: 200-338-0 | CAS number: 57-55-6
- Life Cycle description
- Uses advised against
- Endpoint summary
- Appearance / physical state / colour
- Melting point / freezing point
- Boiling point
- Density
- Particle size distribution (Granulometry)
- Vapour pressure
- Partition coefficient
- Water solubility
- Solubility in organic solvents / fat solubility
- Surface tension
- Flash point
- Auto flammability
- Flammability
- Explosiveness
- Oxidising properties
- Oxidation reduction potential
- Stability in organic solvents and identity of relevant degradation products
- Storage stability and reactivity towards container material
- Stability: thermal, sunlight, metals
- pH
- Dissociation constant
- Viscosity
- Additional physico-chemical information
- Additional physico-chemical properties of nanomaterials
- Nanomaterial agglomeration / aggregation
- Nanomaterial crystalline phase
- Nanomaterial crystallite and grain size
- Nanomaterial aspect ratio / shape
- Nanomaterial specific surface area
- Nanomaterial Zeta potential
- Nanomaterial surface chemistry
- Nanomaterial dustiness
- Nanomaterial porosity
- Nanomaterial pour density
- Nanomaterial photocatalytic activity
- Nanomaterial radical formation potential
- Nanomaterial catalytic activity
- Endpoint summary
- Stability
- Biodegradation
- Bioaccumulation
- Transport and distribution
- Environmental data
- Additional information on environmental fate and behaviour
- Ecotoxicological Summary
- Aquatic toxicity
- Endpoint summary
- Short-term toxicity to fish
- Long-term toxicity to fish
- Short-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Long-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Toxicity to aquatic algae and cyanobacteria
- Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Toxicity to microorganisms
- Endocrine disrupter testing in aquatic vertebrates – in vivo
- Toxicity to other aquatic organisms
- Sediment toxicity
- Terrestrial toxicity
- Biological effects monitoring
- Biotransformation and kinetics
- Additional ecotoxological information
- Toxicological Summary
- Toxicokinetics, metabolism and distribution
- Acute Toxicity
- Irritation / corrosion
- Sensitisation
- Repeated dose toxicity
- Genetic toxicity
- Carcinogenicity
- Toxicity to reproduction
- Specific investigations
- Exposure related observations in humans
- Toxic effects on livestock and pets
- Additional toxicological data
Toxicological Summary
- Administrative data
- Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
- Workers - Hazard via dermal route
- Workers - Hazard for the eyes
- Additional information - workers
- General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
- General Population - Hazard via dermal route
- General Population - Hazard via oral route
- General Population - Hazard for the eyes
- Additional information - General Population
Administrative data
Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 168 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- By inhalation
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: See justification and comments and discussion section below for details.
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 3
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 502 mg/m³
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- Default
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 1
- Justification:
- See discussion below.
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- Not required for inhalation study.
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Not required according to ECETOC Technical Reports #86 and #110
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 3
- Justification:
- Scientifically justified according to ECETOC Technical Reports #86 and #110
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- Default
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Default
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 10 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: See justification and comments
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 9
- Dose descriptor:
- LOAEC
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 3
- Justification:
- Default LOAEL to NOAEL extrapolation factor
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 1
- Justification:
- see discussion below
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- Not required for inhalation route.
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- see discussion below
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 3
- Justification:
- see discussion below
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Workers - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Workers - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Additional information - workers
According to the REACH guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment a leading DN(M)EL needs to be derived for every relevant human population and every relevant route, duration and frequency of exposure, if feasible.
The available toxicokinetic study on the structural analogue of monopropylene glycol, tripropylene glycol, indicated an oral absorption of at least 86% of the total administered dose. As monopropropylene glycol has a significantly lower molecular weight, its absorption from the gut is expected to occur even faster. Toxicokinetic behavior of monopropylene glycol in humans and experimental animals was also evaluated by the NTP CERHR expert panel (National Toxicology Program, 2004a), which concluded that available data indicate rapid and extensive absorption. Therefore a value of 100% for oral absorption shall be used for risk assessment for monopropylene glycol.
Regarding dermal absorption, an available in vitro study indicated 0.14% dermal absorption, using an infinite exposure. Based on the results of the study, a value of 40% for dermal absorption has been chosen by expert judgment to be used in the risk assessment. This value has been chosen as an average value between the percentage of dermal absorption obtained in the study and the maximal oral absorption (corresponding to 100%), and is considered to represent a worst-case approach.
Acute toxicity
Monopropylene glycol is not classified for acute toxicity and therefore derivation of a DNELacute is not necessary.
Monopropylene glycol is not irritating to the skin and eyes and is not sensitising to the skin. Therefore, no DNELs are derived for these endpoints.
Long-term toxicity
Regarding repeated dose toxicity, a NOAEL of 1700 mg/kg bw/day was established in a chronic oral toxicity study with rats (Gaunt, 1972), corresponding to the highest tested dose. In the subchronic inhalation toxicity study with rats, reported by Suber, 1989, a LOAEC of 160 mg/m3 was established for local effects, based on the reported nasal hemorrhaging and ocular discharge in all test groups, while a NOAEC of 1000 mg/m3 was established, based on the decreased body weights of the high dose females. Long-term toxicity of monopropylene glycol by dermal route of exposure was assessed in the study of Stenbäck et al. (1974) of limited reliability with mice, treated twice a week with 0.02 ml of either neat monopropylene glycol or its 50% or 10% solution in acetone. The authors concluded that no substance-caused increase in tumor evidence was evidenced in any group; however, no further data on toxicity are presented. T his information is not sufficient for DNEL derivation, thus a route-to route extrapolation from the available oral toxicity data needs to be performed. However, as no effects were observed at the highest tested dose in the available chronic oral toxicity study, the DNEL for dermal route of exposure is considered to be not quantifiable and will not be derived.
Monoropylene glycol is assessed to be non-mutagenic and not carcinogenic. Based on this, no separate risk characterisation for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity is needed.
Monopropylene glycol did not cause effects on development or fertility in the continuous breeding study with mice administered the test substance in drinking water (Morrissey, 1989) and in the prenatal developmental toxicity study with mice (Bushy Run Research Center, 1993). The NOAEL for reproductive and developmental effects were set at 10100 and 10400 mg/kg bw/day. As these values are well above the NOAEL for repeated dose toxicity, no separate risk assessment for reproductive and developmental toxicity of monopropylene glycol needs to be performed.
DNEL calculation
The DNELs are derived using the scientifically based assessment factors as reported by ECETOC (2003).
Long term – inhalation, systemic effects
Description |
Value |
Remark |
|
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEL: 1000 mg/m3 |
Based on the decreased body weights of high dose females |
|
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
6/8
6.7 m3/10 m3 |
Correction of exposure duration in study (6 hrs/day, 5 days/week) to default worker exposure (8 hrs/day, 5 days/week); Correction for activity driven differences of respiratory volumes in active workers compared to workers in rest (6.7 m3/10 m3). |
|
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
|
Interspecies |
1 |
No allometric scaling is required in case of inhalation exposure |
|
Intraspecies |
3 |
The default assessment factor for workers, as proposed by ECETOC |
|
Exposure duration |
1 |
No correction for exposure duration has been applied, as available long-term oral toxicity studies indicate no adverse effects at the highest dose levels in case of chronic exposure. As oral absorption is expected to be much higher than inhalation absorption based on the available toxicokinetic data, the introduction of the additional assessment factor for the exposure duration is considered to be not warranted. |
|
Dose response |
1 |
|
|
Quality of database |
1 |
|
|
DNEL |
Value |
||
|
1000 x (6/8) x (6.7/10) / (1 x 3 x 1) = 168 mg/m3 |
Long term – inhalation, local effects*
Description |
Value |
Remark |
|
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
LOAEL: 160 mg/m3 |
Based on the reported nasal haemorrhaging and occular discharge at all dose levels |
|
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
none
|
Correction for exposure duration and correction for activity driven differences of respiratory volumes in active workers compared to workers in rest are not considered necessary as local effects on the respiratory tract will mainly depend on concentration of the substance in the air and not on duration of exposure nor on the tidal volume |
|
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
|
Interspecies |
1 |
No allometric scaling is needed in case of inhalation exposure or local effects |
|
Intraspecies |
3 |
The default assessment factor for workers, as proposed by ECETOC |
|
Exposure duration |
1 |
Correction for exposure duration from a 90 day exposure to chronic exposure is not considered necessary, as the critical effects (nose bleeding) were reversible over the weekend when animals were not exposed. |
|
Dose response |
3 |
extrapolation of LOAEC to NOAEC |
|
Quality of database |
1 |
|
|
DNEL |
Value |
||
|
160 / (1 x 3 x 1 x 3) = 18 mg/m3 |
* The obtained DNEL of 18 mg/m3 is higher than the limit concentration of 10 mg/m3 established for aerosols by AIHA. Therefore the latter value shall be regarded as a DNEL for local effects, as it has been established by credible authoritative body, is lower than the calculated DNEL and is adopted by industry.
An over archiving review publication is available (Fowles et al. (2013)) which performs a toxicological review of monopropylene glycol (and other glycols) based on the available toxicity data. This publication details that monopropylene glycol did not present evidence of carcinogenicity, mutagenicity or reproductive/developmental effects to humans, and that monopropylene glycol poses a low risk to human health.
Reference:
Fowles, J. R., et al. (2013). A toxicological review of the propylene glycols. Critical reviews in toxicology 43(4): 363-390.
General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 50 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- By inhalation
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: See discussion below.
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 5
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 250 mg/m³
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- Default
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 1
- Justification:
- See discussion below.
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- Not required for inhalation study.
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Not required according to ECETOC Technical Reports #86 and #110
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Scientifically justified according to ECETOC Technical Reports #86 and #110
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- Default
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Default
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 10 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: See discussion section below for details.
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 15
- Dose descriptor:
- LOAEC
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 3
- Justification:
- Default LOAEL to NOAEL extrapolation factor
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 1
- Justification:
- See discussion below
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- Not required for inhalation route.
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- See discussion below
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- See discussion below
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
General Population - Hazard via oral route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Additional information - General Population
According to the REACH guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment a leading DN(M)EL needs to be derived for every relevant human population and every relevant route, duration and frequency of exposure, if feasible.
The available toxicokinetic study on the structural analogue of monopropylene glycol, tripropylene glycol, indicated an oral absorption of at least 86% of the total administered dose. As monopropropylene glycol has a significantly lower molecular weight, its absorption from the gut is expected to occur even faster. Toxicokinetic behavior of monopropylene glycol in humans and experimental animals was also evaluated by the NTP CERHR expert panel (National Toxicology Program, 2004a), which concluded that available data indicate rapid and extensive absorption. Therefore a value of 100% for oral absorption shall be used for risk assessment for monopropylene glycol.
Regarding dermal absorption, an available in vitro study indicated 0.14% dermal absorption, using an infinite exposure.Based on the results of the study, a value of 40% for dermal absorption has been chosen by expert judgment to be used in the risk assessment. This value has been chosen as an average value between the percentage of dermal absorption obtained in the study and the maximal oral absorption (corresponding to 100%), and is considered to represent a worst-case approach.
Acute toxicity
Monopropylene glycol is not classified for acute toxicity and therefore derivation of a DNELacute is not necessary.
Monopropylene glycol is not irritating to the skin and eyes and is not sensitising to the skin. Therefore, no DNELs are derived for these endpoints.
Long-term toxicity
Regarding repeated dose toxicity, a NOAEL of 1700 mg/kg bw/day was established in a chronic oral toxicity study with rats (Gaunt, 1972), corresponding to the highest tested dose. As no adverse effects were observed at the highest tested dose, DNEL for oral route of exposure is considered to be not quantifiable and will not be derived. In the subchronic inhalation toxicity study with rats, reported by Suber, 1989, a LOAEC of 160 mg/m3 was established for local effects, based on the reported nasal hemorrhaging and ocular discharge in all test groups, while a NOAEC of 1000 mg/m3 was established, based on the decreased body weights of the high dose females. Long-term toxicity of monopropylene glycol by dermal route of exposure was assessed in the study of Stenbäck et al. (1974) of limited reliability with mice, treated twice a week with 0.02 ml of either neat monopropylene glycol or its 50% or 10% solution in acetone. The authors concluded that no substance-caused increase in tumor evidence was evidenced in any group; however, no further data on toxicity are presented. This information is not sufficient for DNEL derivation, thus a route-to route extrapolation from the available oral toxicity data needs to be performed. However, as no effects were observed at the highest tested dose in the available chronic oral toxicity study, the DNEL for dermal route of exposure is also considered to be not quantifiable and will not be derived.
Monoropylene glycol is assessed to be non-mutagenic and not carcinogenic. Based on this, no separate risk characterisation for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity is needed.
Monopropylene glycol did not cause effects on development or fertility in the continuous breeding study with mice administered the test substance in drinking water (Morrissey, 1989) and in the prenatal developmental toxicity study with mice (Bushy Run Research Center, 1993). The NOAEL for reproductive and developmental effects were set at 10100 and 10400 mg/kg bw/day. As these values are well above the NOAEL for repeated dose toxicity, no separate risk assessment for reproductive and developmental toxicity of monopropylene glycol needs to be performed.
DNEL calculation
The DNELs are derived using the scientifically based assessment factors as reported by ECETOC (2003).
Long term – inhalation, systemic effects
Description |
Value |
Remark |
|
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEL: 1000 mg/m3 |
Based on the decreased body weights of high dose females |
|
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
6/24
|
Correction of exposure duration in study (6 hrs/day, 5 days/week) to default general population exposure (24 hrs/day, 7 days/week); |
|
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
|
Interspecies |
1 |
No allometric scaling is required in case of inhalation exposure |
|
Intraspecies |
5 |
The default assessment factor for general population, as proposed by ECETOC |
|
Exposure duration |
1 |
No correction for exposure duration has been applied, as available long-term oral toxicity studies indicate no adverse effects at the highest dose levels in case of chronic exposure. As oral absorption is expected to be much higher than inhalation absorption based on the available toxicokinetic data, the introduction of the additional assessment factor for the exposure duration is considered to be not warranted. |
|
Dose response |
1 |
|
|
Quality of database |
1 |
|
|
DNEL |
Value |
||
|
1000 x (6/24) / (1 x 5 x 1) = 50 mg/m3 |
Long term – inhalation, local effects*
Description |
Value |
Remark |
|
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
LOAEL: 160 mg/m3 |
Based on the reported nasal haemorrhaging and occular discharge at all dose levels |
|
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
none
|
Correction for exposure duration and correction for activity driven differences of respiratory volumes in active workers compared to workers in rest are not considered necessary as local effects on the respiratory tract will mainly depend on concentration of the substance in the air and not on duration of exposure nor on the tidal volume |
|
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
|
Interspecies |
1 |
No allometric scaling is needed in case of inhalation exposure or local effects |
|
Intraspecies |
5 |
The default assessment factor for general population, as proposed by ECETOC |
|
Exposure duration |
1 |
Correction for exposure duration from a 90 day exposure to chronic exposure is not considered necessary, as the critical effects (nose bleeding) were reversible over the weekend when animals were not exposed. |
|
Dose response |
3 |
extrapolation of LOAEC to NOAEC |
|
Quality of database |
1 |
|
|
DNEL |
Value |
||
|
160 / (1 x 5 x 1 x 3) = 11 mg/m3 |
* The obtained DNEL of 11 mg/m3 is higher than the limit concentration of 10 mg/m3 for workers exposure established for aerosols by AIHA. Therefore the latter value shall be regarded as a DNEL for local effects for general population, as it has been established by credible authoritative body, is lower than the calculated DNEL and is considered to be sufficient to protect both workers and general population.
An over archiving review publication is available (Fowles et al. (2013)) which performs a toxicological review of monopropylene glycol (and other glycols) based on the available toxicity data. This publication details that monopropylene glycol did not present evidence of carcinogenicity, mutagenicity or reproductive/developmental effects to humans, and that monopropylene glycol poses a low risk to human health.
Reference:
Fowles, J. R., et al. (2013). A toxicological review of the propylene glycols. Critical reviews in toxicology 43(4): 363-390.
Information on Registered Substances comes from registration dossiers which have been assigned a registration number. The assignment of a registration number does however not guarantee that the information in the dossier is correct or that the dossier is compliant with Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (the REACH Regulation). This information has not been reviewed or verified by the Agency or any other authority. The content is subject to change without prior notice.
Reproduction or further distribution of this information may be subject to copyright protection. Use of the information without obtaining the permission from the owner(s) of the respective information might violate the rights of the owner.