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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Physical & Chemical properties

Vapour pressure

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Link to relevant study record(s)

Reference
Endpoint:
vapour pressure
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
1st July 2011 to 6th July 2011
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: A GLP compliant study conducted in compliance with agreed protocols, with no or minor deviations from standard test guidelines and/or minor methodological deficiencies, which do not affect the quality of the relevant results.
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 104 (Vapour Pressure Curve)
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
A first test had to be repeated as one of the determinations showed a deviation in the analytical concentrations compared to those after 4 h and 8 h, most likely due to a chromatographic incident. Only the results of the second, valid test are reported.
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EU Method A.4 (Vapour Pressure)
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
A first test had to be repeated as one of the determinations showed a deviation in the analytical concentrations compared to those after 4 h and 8 h, most likely due to a chromatographic incident. Only the results of the second, valid test are reported.
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EPA OPPTS 830.7950 (Vapor Pressure)
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
A first test had to be repeated as one of the determinations showed a deviation in the analytical concentrations compared to those after 4 h and 8 h, most likely due to a chromatographic incident. Only the results of the second, valid test are reported.
Principles of method if other than guideline:
Guidelines were adapted to the following literature:- Etzweiler et al. (1984) Phys. Chem. 88: 578-583- Neuner-Jehle and Etzweiler (1991) Perfumes: Art, Science and Technology. Müller and Lamparsky, eds. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, London. pp. 153-212.Sampling from the saturated headspace was performed using quasi-static sampling instead of dynamic sampling.
GLP compliance:
yes (incl. QA statement)
Type of method:
gas saturation method
Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): 1-phenylethyl acetate
- Physical state: colourless to pale yellow liquid
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): Gardenol
- Lot/batch No.: VE00123242
- Expiration date of the lot/batch: 14th January 2013
Temp.:
20 °C
Vapour pressure:
5.5 Pa

Headspace concentrations of the test substance were found to be 343 µg/L, 397 µg/L and 372 µg /L after 4, 6 and 8 hours of equilibration time at 20 ± 0.1 ºC respectively.

Conclusions:
Under the conditions of the test, the vapour pressure of the test substance was determined to be 5.5 Pa at 20 ºC.
Executive summary:

In a GLP compliant vapour pressure study conducted in line with standardised guidelines OECD 104, EU Method A.4 and EPA OPPTS 830.7950, the vapour pressure of the test substance was determined using the gas saturation method. The vapour pressure of the substance was determined to be 5.5 Pa at 20 ºC.

Description of key information

The vapour pressure of 1-phenylethyl acetate was determined to be 5.5 Pa at 20ºC according to a study performed in line with OECD Guideline 104, EU Method A.4 and EPA OPPTS 830.7950.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Vapour pressure:
5.5 Pa
at the temperature of:
20 °C

Additional information

The key study (Givaudan, 2011d) was conducted in line with GLP and standardised guidelines with a sufficient level of detail to assess the quality of the study. The study was performed to a good standard and was assigned a reliability score of 1 in accordance with Klimisch (1997).