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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 214-901-3 | CAS number: 1208-67-9
- 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
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Skin Irritation:
Based on the available data for the various test chemicals and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the test chemical will also behave in similar manner. The test chemical was estimated to be not irritating to skin. Thus it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
Eye Irritation:
Based on the available data for the various test chemicals and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the test chemical will also behave in similar manner. The test chemical was estimated to be not irritating to eyes. Thus it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin irritation / corrosion
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin irritation: in vivo
- Type of information:
- read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- data from handbook or collection of data
- Remarks:
- Weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- Justification for type of information:
- Weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: Weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Species:
- other: 1. rats; 2,3. rabbits
- Strain:
- not specified
- Type of coverage:
- occlusive
- Preparation of test site:
- clipped
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- not specified
- Amount / concentration applied:
- 1. 2000mg/kg
2. 0.5 ml
3. 0.5g of 60% solution - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 1. 24 hours
2. 24 hours
3. 4 hours - Observation period:
- 1. 14 days
2. 48 hours
3. 4 hours - Number of animals:
- 1. 10 [5 male, 5 female]
2. 6 male
3. no data available - Details on study design:
- The data is based on weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- Irritation parameter:
- overall irritation score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- 14 d
- Score:
- 0
- Reversibility:
- not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- No signs of irritation observed
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not irritating
- Conclusions:
- Based on the available data for the various test chemicals and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the test chemical will also behave in similar manner. The test chemical was estimated to be not irritating to skin. Thus it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
- Executive summary:
The skin irritation potential of the test chemical was assessed based on the available results from the various test chemicals.
A study was designed and conducted to determine the dermal Irritation/corrosion potential of the test chemical in Sprague Dawley rats. This study was performed as per OECD guideline No. 402. Ten rats (5 male and 5 female) were used for conducting dermal irritation/ corrosion study.
The animals were kept in their cages for at least 5 days prior to administration for acclimatization to the laboratory condition and after acclimatization period, animals were randomly selected. Approximately 24 hours before application, the hair of each rat was closely clipped from the trunk (dorsal surface and sides from scapular to pelvic area) with an electric clipper, so as to expose at least 10% of the body surface area. The test item was moistened with distilled water. The test item was applied onto the exposed skin of the animal, taking care to spread the test item evenly over the entire area of approximately 10% of the total body surface area or as much of the area as can reasonably be covered. The test item was held in contact with the skin using a porous gauze dressing and non irritating tape around the animal to cover the exposure site for first 24 hours exposure period. Elizabethan collar was placed on each animal for first 24 hours after application of the test item. These collars prevent ingestion of test item. Following 24 hours of exposure, the wrapping was removed and the test site wiped free of excess test item. Distilled water was used to remove residual test item.
The test chemical was applied to shorn skin of 5 male and 5 female animals at 2000 mg/kg body weight. Administration of the test item at 2000 mg/kg did not result in any skin reaction at the site of application during the study period of 14 days. Also, the erythema and edema score of rats was calculated as 0. Administration of the test item did not result in any signs of toxicity and mortality during the study period of 14 days. Animals exhibited normal body weight gain through the study period of 14 days. Gross pathological examination did not reveal any abnormalities attributable to the treatment.
Hence, it was concluded that the test chemical was Non-Irritating to the skin of Sprague Dawley rats under the experimental conditions tested and Classified as “Category- Not Classified” as per CLP Classification.
This is supported by the results of a skin irritation study performed in rabbits to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. 0.5 ml of the undiluted test substance was applied to the shaved back skin of 6 male rabbits under occlusion for 24 hours. After 24 hours, the bandage was removed. Skin reactions were scored 1–2 and 48 hours after removal of the bandage. The mean scores of 6 animals (1–2 and 48 hours) for redness was 0.17 and 0.25 for edema. Based on the scores, the test chemical can be considered to be not irritating to rabbit skin.
The above studies are further supported by the results of a dermal irritation study performed in accordance with OECD 404 Guidelines. 0.5g of 60% solution of the test chemical was applied to the skin of rabbits and effects were observed till 4 hours.
No signs of irritation were observed in the rabbits when exposed to 60% solution of the test chemical for 4 hours.
Hence, the test chemical was not irritating to rabbit skin.
Based on the available data for the various test chemicals and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the test chemical will also behave in similar manner. The test chemical was estimated to be not irritating to skin. Thus it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Eye irritation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vivo
- Type of information:
- read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- data from handbook or collection of data
- Remarks:
- Weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- Justification for type of information:
- Weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: Weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Species:
- rabbit
- Strain:
- not specified
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- not specified
- Amount / concentration applied:
- undiluted
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- single
- Observation period (in vivo):
- 1. no data available
2. 24,48 and 72 hours - Duration of post- treatment incubation (in vitro):
- no data available
- Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
- no data available
- Details on study design:
- The data is based on weight of evidence approach based on various test chemicals
- Irritation parameter:
- overall irritation score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- 24/48/72 h
- Score:
- 0
- Reversibility:
- not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- No signs of irritation observed
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not irritating
- Conclusions:
Based on the available data for the various test chemicals and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the test chemical will also behave in similar manner. The test chemical was estimated to be not irritating to eyes. Thus it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.- Executive summary:
The eye irritation potential of the test chemical was assessed based on the available results from the various test chemicals.
An ocular irritation study in rabbits was performed to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. The test was performed in accordance with OECD 405 Guidelines.
Undiluted test chemical instilled in to the rabbit eyes and effects were observed (dose and duration not specified)
No signs of irritation were observed in treated rabbits. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to rabbit eyes.
This is supported by the results of another eye irritation study performed in rabbits according to USA Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group Testing Standards and Guidelines Work Group to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. The test chemical was instilled into the eyes of rabbits and observed for signs of irritation. The reactions were scored at 24,48 and 72 hours post-instillation.
The mean irritation score in 6 animals after 72 hours was 0.33/110
Also the scores as the mean of 6 animals at 24, 48 and 72 hours were as follows: cornea: 0.06, iris: 0.0, conjunctiva: redness: 0.5, chemosis: 0.3
Based on the scores, the test chemical can be considered not irritating to rabbit eyes.
Based on the available data for the various test chemicals and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the test chemical will also behave in similar manner. The test chemical was estimated to be not irritating to eyes. Thus it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Respiratory irritation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Additional information
Skin Irritation
The skin irritation potential of the test chemical was assessed based on the available results from the various test chemicals.
A study was designed and conducted to determine the dermal Irritation/corrosion potential of the test chemical in Sprague Dawley rats. This study was performed as per OECD guideline No. 402. Ten rats (5 male and 5 female) were used for conducting dermal irritation/ corrosion study.
The animals were kept in their cages for at least 5 days prior to administration for acclimatization to the laboratory condition and after acclimatization period, animals were randomly selected. Approximately 24 hours before application, the hair of each rat was closely clipped from the trunk (dorsal surface and sides from scapular to pelvic area) with an electric clipper, so as to expose at least 10% of the body surface area. The test item was moistened with distilled water. The test item was applied onto the exposed skin of the animal, taking care to spread the test item evenly over the entire area of approximately 10% of the total body surface area or as much of the area as can reasonably be covered. The test item was held in contact with the skin using a porous gauze dressing and non irritating tape around the animal to cover the exposure site for first 24 hours exposure period. Elizabethan collar was placed on each animal for first 24 hours after application of the test item. These collars prevent ingestion of test item. Following 24 hours of exposure, the wrapping was removed and the test site wiped free of excess test item. Distilled water was used to remove residual test item.
The test chemical was applied to shorn skin of 5 male and 5 female animals at 2000 mg/kg body weight. Administration of the test item at 2000 mg/kg did not result in any skin reaction at the site of application during the study period of 14 days. Also, the erythema and edema score of rats was calculated as 0. Administration of the test item did not result in any signs of toxicity and mortality during the study period of 14 days. Animals exhibited normal body weight gain through the study period of 14 days. Gross pathological examination did not reveal any abnormalities attributable to the treatment.
Hence, it was concluded that the test chemical was Non-Irritating to the skin of Sprague Dawley rats under the experimental conditions tested and Classified as “Category- Not Classified” as per CLP Classification.
This is supported by the results of a skin irritation study performed in rabbits to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. 0.5 ml of the undiluted test substance was applied to the shaved back skin of 6 male rabbits under occlusion for 24 hours. After 24 hours, the bandage was removed. Skin reactions were scored 1–2 and 48 hours after removal of the bandage. The mean scores of 6 animals (1–2 and 48 hours) for redness was 0.17 and 0.25 for edema. Based on the scores, the test chemical can be considered to be not irritating to rabbit skin.
The above studies are further supported by the results of a dermal irritation study performed in accordance with OECD 404 Guidelines. 0.5g of 60% solution of the test chemical was applied to the skin of rabbits and effects were observed till 4 hours.
No signs of irritation were observed in the rabbits when exposed to 60% solution of the test chemical for 4 hours.
Hence, the test chemical was not irritating to rabbit skin.
Based on the available data for the various test chemicals and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the test chemical will also behave in similar manner. The test chemical was estimated to be not irritating to skin. Thus it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
Eye Irritation:
The eye irritation potential of the test chemical was assessed based on the available results from the various test chemicals.
An ocular irritation study in rabbits was performed to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. The test was performed in accordance with OECD 405 Guidelines.
Undiluted test chemical instilled in to the rabbit eyes and effects were observed (dose and duration not specified)
No signs of irritation were observed in treated rabbits. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to rabbit eyes.
This is supported by the results of another eye irritation study performed in rabbits according to USA Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group Testing Standards and Guidelines Work Group to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. The test chemical was instilled into the eyes of rabbits and observed for signs of irritation. The reactions were scored at 24,48 and 72 hours post-instillation.
The mean irritation score in 6 animals after 72 hours was 0.33/110
Also the scores as the mean of 6 animals at 24, 48 and 72 hours were as follows: cornea: 0.06, iris: 0.0, conjunctiva: redness: 0.5, chemosis: 0.3
Based on the scores, the test chemical can be considered not irritating to rabbit eyes.
Based on the available data for the various test chemicals and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the test chemical will also behave in similar manner. The test chemical was estimated to be not irritating to eyes. Thus it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
Justification for classification or non-classification
The results of the experimental studies from the various test chemicals indicate a possibility thatthe test chemicalcan be not irritating to skin and eyes.
Hence, by applying the weight of evidence approach,the test chemicalcan be considered to be not irritating to skin and eyes. It can be classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
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.