Registration Dossier

Administrative data

Description of key information

Substance irritation/corrosion is driven by the characteristics of the individual UVCB constituents.
Relevant information on the individual UVCB constituents is reported in Section 7 Summary.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin irritation / corrosion

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
skin irritation / corrosion, other
Remarks:
other: prediction from hazard class
Type of information:
calculation (if not (Q)SAR)
Adequacy of study:
key study
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: Automatic calculation with MeCLas tool
Reason / purpose:
reference to same study
Principles of method if other than guideline:
Skin irritation/corrosion potential of the UVCB potential was determined by classifying based on Mixture rules from EU CLP (additivity formula of classified components to derive hazard class). The classification criteria were used to estimate effects.
Remarks on result:
no indication of irritation
Remarks:
Skin irritation/corrosion potential of the UVCB potential was determined by classifying based on Mixture rules from EU CLP (additivity formula of classified components to derive hazard class). The classification criteria were used to estimate effects.

According to MeClas, the substance is not classified as Skin corrosive/irritant.

Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
Good quality study with result derived on basis of the Classification outcome (Mixture toxicity rules) from the reasinable worst case sample of the substance (maximum of typicals across industry as defined in IUCLID section 1.2/1.4). The analysed UVCB sample is not classified for skin irritation/corrosion.
Executive summary:

The study provided a conservative estimate, derived on basis of the classification outcome (mixture toxicity rules) from a reasonable worst-case sample of the substance using mineralogical information from the representative sample. 

 

Validity of the model used:

1. Defined endpoint: the endpoint is a REACH compliant defined endpoint

2. Unambiguous algorithm: EU CLP guidance based summation formula to determine classification, followed by back-calculation to related hazard criteria

3. Applicability domain: applicable to classify complex metal containing materials. 

4. Mechanistic interpretation - metal species: the tool translates the elemental composition into a mineralogical composition relevant for classification.

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not irritating)

Eye irritation

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
eye irritation, other
Remarks:
other: prediction from hazard class
Type of information:
calculation (if not (Q)SAR)
Adequacy of study:
key study
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: Automatic calculation with MeCLas tool.
Reason / purpose:
reference to same study
Reason / purpose:
reference to other study
Principles of method if other than guideline:
Eye irritation/corrosion potential of the UVCB potential was determined by classifying based on Mixture rules from EU CLP (additivity formula of classified components to derive hazard class). The classification criteria were used to estimate effects.
Remarks on result:
not measured/tested
Remarks:
prediction based on information on individual constituents and mixture rules from EU CLP (additivity formula of classified components to derive hazard class)

According to MeClas, the substance is classified as Eye corrosive Cat. 1 - H318.

Interpretation of results:
Category 1 (irreversible effects on the eye)
Conclusions:
Good quality study with result derived on basis of the Classification outcome (Mixture toxicity rules) from the reasinable worst case sample of the substance (maximum of typicals across industry as defined in IUCLID section 1.2/1.4). The analysed UVCB sample is classified for eye corrosive.
Executive summary:

The study provided a conservative estimate, derived on basis of the classification outcome (mixture toxicity rules) from a reasonable worst-case sample of the substance using mineralogical information from the representative sample. 

 

Validity of the model used:

1. Defined endpoint: the endpoint is a REACH compliant defined endpoint

2. Unambiguous algorithm: EU CLP guidance based summation formula to determine classification, followed by back-calculation to related hazard criteria

3. Applicability domain: applicable to classify complex metal containing materials. 

4. Mechanistic interpretation - metal species: the tool translates the elemental composition into a mineralogical composition relevant for classification.

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
adverse effect observed (irreversible damage)

Respiratory irritation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no study available

Additional information

Justification for classification or non-classification