Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
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: 233-520-3 | CAS number: 10213-78-2
- 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
There is good quality skin irritation data which indicates moderate skin irritation potential based on read across to Ethanol, 2,2’-iminobis-,N-(hydrogenated tallow alkyl) derivs. CAS No 90367-28-5 (registered as 2,2’-(C16-18 (evennumbered), alkyl imino) diethanol CAS No 1218787-30-4). We have a Klimisch 1 in-vitro data on the same read across substance which has been interpreted as indicating eye irritation potential.
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:
- key study
- Study period:
- 20 April 2010 and 04 May 2010
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: see 'Remark'
- Remarks:
- 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. The study report was conclusive, done to a valid guideline and the study was conducted under GLP conditions.
- Justification for type of information:
- See section 13.2 for the read-across justification.
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 404 (Acute Dermal Irritation / Corrosion)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.4 (Acute Toxicity: Dermal Irritation / Corrosion)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Species:
- rabbit
- Strain:
- New Zealand White
- Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMAL
- Source:
One New Zealand White rabbit supplied by an accredited supplier.
- Age at study initiation:
Twelve to twenty weeks old.
- Weight at study initiation:
At the start of the study the animal weighed 2.44 kg.
- Housing:
The animal wasindividually housed in a suspended cage.
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum):
Certified Rabbit Diet. ad libitum.
- Water (e.g. ad libitum):
ad libitum
- Acclimation period:
At least Five days.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C):
17 to 23°C
- Humidity (%):
30 to 70%
- Air changes (per hr):
The rate of air exchange was at least fifteen changes per hour.
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light):
The lighting was controlled by a time switch to give twelve hours continuous light (06:00 to 18:00) and twelve hours darkness. - Type of coverage:
- semiocclusive
- Preparation of test site:
- shaved
- Vehicle:
- other: Moistened sufficiently with 0.5 ml of distilled water
- Controls:
- no
- Amount / concentration applied:
- TEST MATERIAL
- Amount(s) applied (volume or weight with unit):
0.5 g
- Concentration (if solution):
Not applicable.
VEHICLE
Not applicable.
- Concentration (if solution):
Not applicable.
- Lot/batch no. (if required):
Not given in study report. - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 3-minutes, 1-hour and 4 hours
- Observation period:
- 14 days
- Number of animals:
- 1
- Details on study design:
- TEST SITE
- Area of exposure:
On the day of the test a suitable test site was selected on the back of the rabbit.
- % coverage:
Not given in study report.
- Type of wrap if used:
Test material was introduced under a 2.5 cm x 2.5 cm cotton gauze patch and placed in position on the shorn skin.
REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Washing (if done):
Any residual test material removed by gentle swabbing with cotton wool soaked in distilled water.
- Time after start of exposure:
3-minute, 1-hour and 4 hours.
SCORING SYSTEM:
Approximately one hour following the removal of the patches, and 24, 48 and 72 hours later, the test sites were examined for evidence of primary irritation and scored according to the following scale (table below).
Additional observations were made on Days 7 and 14 to assess the reversibility of skin reactions. - Irritation parameter:
- erythema score
- Remarks:
- Erythema/Eschar Formation
- Basis:
- animal #1
- Time point:
- 24/48/72 h
- Score:
- 2
- Max. score:
- 4
- Reversibility:
- fully reversible
- Remarks:
- within 14 days
- Remarks on result:
- other: Brown discolouration of the epidermis, loss of skin elasticty and loss of skin flexibility noted at the 24, 48 and 72-Hour observations. A hardened light brown coloured scab was noted at the 7-Day observation.
- Irritation parameter:
- edema score
- Basis:
- animal #1
- Time point:
- 24/48/72 h
- Score:
- 2
- Max. score:
- 4
- Reversibility:
- fully reversible
- Remarks:
- Fully reversible in 14-days
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- RESULTS
Skin Reactions
3-Minute Exposure Period
The scores for erythema/eschar and oedema are given in Table 1.
Very slight erythema was noted at the treated skin site at the 24, 48 and 72 Hour observations.
The treated skin site appeared normal at the 7-Day observation.
1-Hour Exposure Period
The scores for erythema/eschar and oedema are given in Table 1.
Well-defined erythema and very slight oedema were noted at the treated skin site at the 24, 48 and 72 Hour observations. Crust formation, preventing accurate evaluation of erythema and oedema, was noted at the treated skin site at the 7 Day observation.
The treated skin site appeared normal at the 14 Day observation.
4-Hour Exposure Period
The scores for erythema/eschar and oedema are given in Table 2.
Very slight erythema was noted at the treated skin site one hour after patch removal. Well-defined erythema, slight oedema, light brown discolouration and loss of skin elasticity and flexibility were noted at the treated skin site at the 24, 48 and 72-Hour observations. A hardened, light brown coloured scab, preventing accurate evaluation of erythema and oedema, was noted at the treated skin site at the 7 Day observation.
The treated skin site appeared normal at the 14 Day observation. - Interpretation of results:
- moderately irritating
- Remarks:
- Migrated information EU - R38 "Irritating to skin". Criteria used for interpretation of results: other: EU and Draize
- Conclusions:
- The test material produced a primary irritation index of 4.0 and was classified as a MODERATE IRRITANT to rabbit skin according to the Draize classification scheme (based on one rabbit only). No corrosive effects were noted.
The test material produced positive criteria and was considered to be an irritant according to EU labelling regulations Commission Directive 2001/59/EC. The symbol “Xi”, the indication of danger “Irritant” and the risk phrase R 38 “IRRITATING TO SKIN” are therefore required. This corresponds to a CLP/GHS classification of Category 2 for skin irritation. - Executive summary:
Introduction.
The study was performed to assess the irritancy potential of the test material to the skin of the New Zealand White rabbit. The method was designed to meet the requirements of the following:
§ OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals No. 404 “Acute Dermal Irritation/Corrosion” (adopted 24 April 2002)
§ Method B4 Acute Toxicity (Skin Irritation) of Commission Regulation (EC) No. 440/2008
Results.
3-Minute and 1-Hour semi-occluded applications of the test material to the intact skin of one rabbit produced no corrosive effects.
A single 4-Hour, semi-occluded application of the test material to the intact skin of one rabbit produced well-defined erythema and slight oedema. Other skin reactions noted were light brown discolouration of the epidermis, loss of skin elasticity and flexibility and hardened, light brown coloured scab (preventing accurate evaluation of erythema and oedema). The treated skin site appeared normal at the 14‑Day observation.
Conclusion.
The test material produced a primary irritation index of 4.0 and was classified as a MODERATE IRRITANT to rabbit skin according to the Draize classification scheme (based on one rabbit only). No corrosive effects were noted.
The test material produced positive criteria and was considered to be an irritant according to EU labelling regulations Commission Directive 2001/59/EC. The symbol “Xi”, the indication of danger “Irritant” and the risk phrase R 38 “IRRITATING TO SKIN” are therefore required.
Reference
The individual scores for erythema/eschar and oedema are given in the folowing tables.
IndividualSkin Reactions - 3 -Minute and 1 -Hour exposures
Skin Reaction |
Observation Time |
Individual Scores - Rabbit Number and Sex |
|
69116Male |
|||
3-Minute Exposure |
1-Hour Exposure |
||
Erythema/Eschar Formation |
Immediately |
0 |
0 |
1 Hour |
0 |
0 |
|
24 Hours |
1 |
2 |
|
48 Hours |
1 |
2 |
|
72 Hours |
1 |
2 |
|
7 Days |
0 |
?eCf |
|
14 Days |
0 |
0 |
|
Oedema Formation |
Immediately |
0 |
0 |
1 Hour |
0 |
0 |
|
24 Hours |
0 |
1 |
|
48 Hours |
0 |
1 |
|
72 Hours |
0 |
1 |
|
7 Days |
0 |
?od |
|
14 Days |
0 |
0 |
Cf= Crust formation
?e = Adverse skin reactions prevent accurate evaluation of erythema
?od = Adverse skin reactions prevent accurate evaluation of oedema
Table2 Skin ReactionsFollowing 4-Hour Exposure
Skin Reaction |
Observation Time |
Individual Scores – Rabbit Number and Sex |
69116Male |
||
Erythema/Eschar Formation |
Immediately |
0 |
1 Hour |
1 |
|
24 Hours |
2BrLeLf |
|
48 Hours |
2BrLeLf |
|
72 Hours |
2BrLeLf |
|
7 Days |
?eSp |
|
14 Days |
0 |
|
Oedema Formation |
Immediately |
0 |
1 Hour |
0 |
|
24 Hours |
2 |
|
48 Hours |
2 |
|
72 Hours |
2 |
|
7 Days |
?od |
|
14 Days |
0 |
|
Sum of 24 and 72-hour Readings (S) : 8 |
||
Primary Irritation Index (S/2) : 8/2 = 4.0 |
||
Classification : MODERATE IRRITANT |
Br= Light brown discolouration of the epidermis
Le = Loss of skin elasticity
Lf = Loss of skin flexibility
Sp = Hardened light dark brown coloured scab
?e = Adverse skin reactions prevent accurate evaluation of erythema
?od = Adverse skin reactions prevent accurate evaluation of oedema
The test material produced a primary irritation index of 4.0 and was classified as a MODERATE IRRITANT to rabbit skin according to the Draize classification scheme. No corrosive effects were noted.
Interpretation of Results
Calculation of Primary Irritation Index and Grading of Irritancy Potential Using the Draize Scheme
The scores for erythema and oedema at the 24 and 72-hour readings were totalled for the three test rabbits (12 values) and this total was divided by six to give the primary irritation index of the test material. The test material was classified according to the following scheme devised by Draize J H (1959) "Dermal Toxicity" In: Appraisal of the Safety of Chemicals in Foods, Drugs and Cosmetics. Association of Food and Drug Officials of the,,, p.47:
Primary Irritation Index |
Classification of Irritancy |
0 |
Non-irritant |
> 0 to 2 |
Mild irritant |
> 2 to 5 |
Moderate irritant |
> 5 to 8 |
Severe irritant |
If irreversible alteration of the dermal tissue is noted in any rabbit, as judged by the Study Director, which include ulceration and clear necrosis or signs of scar tissue, the test material is classified as corrosive to rabbit skin. Classification according to Draize may, therefore, not be applicable.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (irritating)
Eye irritation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- The study was performed between 22 June 2010 and 25 June 2010
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: see 'Remark'
- Remarks:
- 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. The study report was conclusive, done to a valid guideline and the study was conducted under GLP conditions.
- Justification for type of information:
- See section 13.2 for the read-across justification.
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Qualifier:
- no guideline available
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The protocol followed was considered to be a reliable alternative to the in vivo rabbit Draize eye irritation test in a pre-validation study. This study, using human derived keratinocytes which form a corneal epithelial tissue reconstruct, has been recommended by ECVAM for inclusion in a formal international validation study designed to offer a stand alone replacement to the in vivo test. Validation is expected to commence in 2010.
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Remarks:
- Date of inspection: 15-09-2009 Date of Signature: 26-11-2009
- Species:
- other: Reconstructed Human Corneal Model
- Strain:
- other: Reconstructed Human Corneal Model
- Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
- Not applicable
- Vehicle:
- other: No vehicle used
- Controls:
- no
- Amount / concentration applied:
- TEST MATERIAL
-The test Material was applied neat.
-Amounts(s) applied (volume or weight with unit):
Triplicate tissues were treated with 30 mg of the test material. To improve test material tissue contact 30 µl of PBS was applied to the tissue surface and aspirated prior to the application of the test material.
-Concentration (if solution):
The test material was used as supplied.
VEHICLE
No vehicle used. - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 60 Minutes and 16 post exposure incubation.
- Observation period (in vivo):
- Not applicable
- Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
- Not applicable
- Details on study design:
- TEST SITE
-Area of exposure:
Triplicate tissues were treated with 30 mg of the test material for an exposure period of 60 minutes. To improve test material tissue contact 30 µl of PBS was applied to the tissue surface and aspirated prior to the application of the test material.
-% coverage:
The test material was applied topically to ensure uniform covering of the tissues.
-Type of wrap used:
None used.
REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
-Washing (if done):
At the end of the exposure period, each tissue insert was removed from the well using forceps and rinsed using a wash bottle containing Phosphate Buffered Saline Dulbeccos (PBS) without Ca++ and Mg++. Rinsing was achieved by filling and emptying each tissue insert at least ten times using a constant stream of PBS.
-Time after start of exposure:
60 Minutes post exposure.
SCORING SYSTEM:
The relative mean tissue viability (percentage of the negative control) was calculated as follows:
The mean tissue viability for the test material was compared to the respective untreated negative control and classified according to the following:
Tissue viability ≤ 50 = Irritant
Tissue viability > 50 = Non-Irritant - Irritation parameter:
- other: Viability of tissue %
- Value:
- 50.2
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Conclusions:
- According to the protocol followed the test material was considered to be a Non-Irritant (NI). However the viability of 50.2 is extremely close to the classification cut off of 50% for eye irritation and the in-vitro skin irritation the data indicates less sensitivity for this chemistry than in-vivo. Therefore Ethanol, 2,2’-iminobis-,N-(hydrogenated tallow alkyl) derivs. CAS No 90367-28-5 (registered as 2,2’-(C16-18 (evennumbered), alkyl imino) diethanol CAS No 1218787-30-4) will be classified as EU CLP(GHS) Category 2 for eye irritation with Hazard statement H319 Causes serious eye irritation.
- Executive summary:
Introduction.
The purpose of this study was to determine the eye irritation potential of the test material, using the SkinEthic Reconstituted Human Corneal Epithelial (HCE) model. The principle of the assay is based on the measurement of cytotoxicity in reconstituted human corneal epithelium cultures after topical exposure to the test material by means of the colourimetric MTT reduction assay.
The endpoint, cytotoxicity in the MTT assay, expressed as percent viability of treated cultures in comparison to negative controls, was evaluated.
The test material was classified based on MTT viability analysis according to the following prediction model after a 60-Minute exposure period and 16-Hour post exposure incubation period:
i) The test material was considered to be non-irritant to the eye if the tissue viability was >50%
ii) The test material was considered to be irritant to the eye if the tissue viability was ≤50%.Results.
The relative mean viability of the test material treated tissues after the 60‑Minute exposure period and a 16‑Hour post exposure incubation period was 50.2%.
Conclusion. According to the protocol followed the test material was considered to be a Non-Irritant (NI).
Reference
RESULTS
Assessment of Direct Test Material Reduction of MTT
An assessment found the test material was able to directly reduce MTT. Therefore, an additional procedure using freeze-killed tissues was performed during the determination of ocular irritation potential. However the results obtained showed that no degree of interference due to direct reduction of MTT occurred indicating the test material was adequately rinsed from the tissues. It was therefore considered unnecessary to use the results of the freeze-killed tissues for quantitative correction of results or for reporting purposes.
Assessment of Eye Irritation Potential
The mean OD540 values and the relative mean tissue viability of the test material, and negative and positive control treatment groups are given in Table 1.
The relative mean viability of the test material treated tissues after the 60 -Minute exposure period and a 16-Hour post exposure incubation period was 50.2
Qualitative Evaluation of Tissue Viability (MTT Uptake Visual Assessment)
The qualitative evaluation of tissue viability is presented in Table 2.
The test material treated tissues appeared blue/white which was considered to be indicative of semi-viable tissue. The negative control material treated tissues appeared blue which was considered to be indicative of viable tissue and the positive control material treated tissues appeared white which was considered to be indicative of dead tissue.Assay Acceptance Criterion
The quality criterion required for the acceptance of results in the test was satisfied.Table 1 Assessment of Eye Irritation Potential – Viability of RHC Tissues
Material |
Mean Tissue Viability |
Mean OD 540 |
Viability (%) |
Negative Control |
0.917 |
0.934 |
100* |
0.944 |
|||
0.942 |
|||
Positive Control |
0.028 |
0.023 |
2.5 |
0.020 |
|||
0.022 |
|||
Test Material |
0.457 |
0.469 |
50.2 |
0.507 |
|||
0.442 |
*= The mean viability of the negative control tissues is set at 100%
Table 2 Qualitative Evaluation of Tissue Viability (MTT uptake visual evaluation)
Material |
Score |
||
Tissue 1 |
Tissue 2 |
Tissue 2 |
|
Negative Control |
- |
- |
- |
Positive Control |
++ |
++ |
++ |
Test Material |
+ |
+ |
+ |
MTT Visual Scoring Scheme of SkinEthic Tissues
- = Blue tissue (viable)
+ = Blue/White tissue (semi viable)
++ = Tissue completely white (dead)
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (irritating)
Respiratory irritation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Additional information
There is good quality skin irritation data which indicates moderate skin irritation potential for Ethanol, 2,2’-iminobis-,N-(hydrogenated tallow alkyl) derivs. CAS No 90367-28-5 (registered as 2,2’-(C16-18 (evennumbered), alkyl imino) diethanol CAS No 1218787-30-4) which is an appropriate substance to read across to 2,2’-(Octadecylimino)bisethanol) CAS No 10213-78-2. We also have in-vitro data which has been interpreted as indicating eye irritation potential which can be used for read across, based on the knowledge that for this chemical class, in-vitro studies tend to underestimate irritation potential. It is considered not to be scientifically justified on animal welfare grounds to do an in-vivo study. The available information is sufficient for classification and labelling purposes.
Justification for selection of skin irritation / corrosion endpoint:
This study is a Klimisch 1 GLP study to current guidelines, it is read across to 2,2’-iminobis-,N-(hydrogenated tallow alkyl) derivs. CAS No 90367-28-5 (registered as 2,2’-(C16-18 (evennumbered), alkyl imino) diethanol CAS No 1218787-30-4, the result is consistent with an earlier less compliant study (Guest 1991) where the test substance was not so clearly specified.
Justification for selection of eye irritation endpoint:
The available study is an in-vitro study it is read across to 2,2’-iminobis-,N-(hydrogenated tallow alkyl) derivs. CAS No 90367-28-5 (registered as 2,2’-(C16-18 (evennumbered), alkyl imino) diethanol CAS No 1218787-30-4, which is interpreted as indicating eye irritation potential, supported by the skin irritation data, where the in-vitro test was shown to significantly underestimate the skin irritation potential. It is not scientifically justified to carry out an animal study to confirm the in-vitro data given the weight of evidence of irritation data for this substance.
Effects on skin irritation/corrosion: moderately irritating
Effects on eye irritation: moderately irritating
Justification for classification or non-classification
This is good quality skin irritation data for 2,2’-(Octadecylimino)bisethanol) CAS No 10213-78-2, which indicates moderate to severe skin irritation potential, based on read across to Ethanol, 2,2’-iminobis-,N-(hydrogenated tallow alkyl) derivs. CAS No 90367-28-5 (registered as 2,2’-(C16-18 (evennumbered), alkyl imino) diethanol CAS No 1218787-30-4). This results in an EU CLP (GHS) classification as a Category 2 Skin irritant with hazard phrase H315. The in-vitro eye irritation study, was interpreted as positive as the viability of 50.2% was so close to the 50% threshold and we have good evidence that our fatty amine chemistry is less active in-vitro than in the rabbit. Based on this it is justified to also classify as Category 2 for Eye irritation with Hazard statement H319. These classifications are appropriate to read across to 2,2’-(Octadecylimino)bisethanol) CAS No 10213-78-2.
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.
