Registration Dossier
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: 939-253-5 | CAS number: 68424-85-1
- 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

Respiratory sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- respiratory sensitisation
- Data waiving:
- other justification
- Justification for data waiving:
- other:
Cross-referenceopen allclose all
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- data waiving: supporting information
Reference
- Endpoint:
- appearance / physical state / colour
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From November 21, 2006 to February 19, 2007
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 830.6303 (Physical State)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 830.6302 (Color)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 830.6304 (Odor)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- - Purity 94.4% (LC-MS/MS)
- Physical state at 20°C and 1013 hPa:
- solid
- Key result
- Form:
- solid: crystalline
- Remarks:
- tenacious and sticky
- Colour:
- white
- Odour:
- other: faint, marzipan-like odour
- Substance type:
- organic
- Conclusions:
- Under the study conditions, the substance was a crystalline, hygroscopic, sticky white solid with a faint marzipan-like odour at 20ºC.
- Executive summary:
A study was conducted to determine the appearance, physical state and colour of the test substance according to EPA OPPTS 830.6302, .6303 and .6304, in compliance with GLP. Under the study conditions, the substance was a crystalline, hygroscopic, sticky white solid with a faint marzipan-like odour at 20ºC (Schulze, 2007).
The test substance is hygroscopic
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- data waiving: supporting information
Reference
- Endpoint:
- vapour pressure
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From March 15, 2012 to March 19, 2012
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 104 (Vapour Pressure Curve)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method A.4 (Vapour Pressure)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 830.7950 (Vapor Pressure)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of method:
- effusion method: by loss of weight or by trapping vaporisate
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- - Molecular formula: Cn+9 H2n+14 N Cl (n=12-16)
- Molecular weight: 352.5
- Substance type: Solid
- Physical state: White powder with lumps (determined at NOTOX)
- Analytical purity: 99.24 ± 0.676 % w/w
- Method used for analysis: LC-MS/MS and GC-MS (external standard)
- Composition of test material, percentage of components: Refer to the attached background materail for details
- Purity test date: 26 October, 2011
- Lot/batch No.: 667S0002
- Expiration date of the lot/batch: 30 April, 2012
- Stability under test conditions: Stable
- Storage condition of test material: At room temperature in the dark in desiccator
- Study specific test substance information: Freeze dried Arquad sample MCB-50 EP, stored in desiccator above P2O5 and substance was handeled in nitrogen environment in glovebox
- Other:
- Chemical name: Benzyl(C12-C16-alkyl)dimethylazanium chloride - Key result
- Temp.:
- 20 °C
- Vapour pressure:
- 0.002 Pa
- Remarks on result:
- other: The value of vapour pressure is < 0.0015 Pa
- Temp.:
- 20 °C
- Vapour pressure:
- 0 mm Hg
- Remarks on result:
- other: The value of vapour pressure is < 0.000011 mm Hg
- Key result
- Temp.:
- 25 °C
- Vapour pressure:
- 0.006 Pa
- Remarks on result:
- other: The value of vapour pressure is < 0.0058 Pa
- Temp.:
- 25 °C
- Vapour pressure:
- 0 mm Hg
- Remarks on result:
- other: The value of vapour pressure is < 0.000043 mm Hg
- Conclusions:
- Under the study conditions, the vapour pressure of test substance was found to be <1.5E-03 Pa at 20°C and <5.8E-03 Pa at 25°C (isothermal thermo gravimetric effusion method).
- Executive summary:
A study was conducted to determine the vapour pressure of the test substance according to OECD Guideline 104, EU Method A.4 and EPA OPPTS 830.7950 (isothermal thermo gravimetric effusion method), in compliance with GLP. Approximately 14.5 or 15.2 mg of the test substance was applied to the surface of a roughened glass plate as a homogeneous layer. The plates were dried at 30°C under nitrogen in the thermogravimetric analyzer (TGA). The weight loss of the test substance was measured continuously as a function of time. Benzo(ghi)perylene, chrysene, hexachlorobenzene, naphthalene and water were used as reference substances for validation. The log Vt, 20 value which was obtained by extrapolation of the evaporation rate curve, fitted in the vapour pressure regression curve. Under the study conditions, the vapour pressure of test substance was found to be <1.5E-03 Pa at 20°C and <5.8E-03 Pa at 25°C (Brekelmans, 2012).
Formulas used:
Evaporation rate: (νT) =Dm/ F x t [g/cm /h]
where:
Dm = weight loss of the test substance [g]
F = surface of the sample plate [cm2]
t = elapsed time for the weight loss [h]
Vapour pressure equation log PT=c lognT+d
where:
c = constant specific for the experimental arrangement
d = constant specific for the experimental arrangement
Vapour pressure regression curve log PT=a 1/T+b
where:
T = temperature [K]
a = slope [K]
b = intercept
Results:
The isothermal TGA effusion method was applied for the determination of the vapour pressure of the test substance is:
The vapour pressure of the test substance at 20°C (293K) and 25°C (298K) was:
|
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- data waiving: supporting information
Reference
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Study 1. A study was conducted to determine the skin sensitisation potential of the test substance according to OECD Guideline 406 and US EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Buehler test), in compliance with GLP. The study was conducted in two phases, with induction and challenge exposures. To determine the highest non-irritating concentration (HNIC) for the challenge phase, a preliminary irritation study was performed with 8 guinea pigs. The concentrations used were 100, 75, 50, 25, 1.25, 1.0, 0.75, 0.25 and 0.10%. w/w in distilled water. After treatment, the application sites were evaluated and scored. During the induction phase of the main study, 0.4 mL of a 1% w/w mixture of the test substance in distilled water was applied to the left side of each animal, once per week for three weeks. Twenty-seven days after the first induction dose, 0.4 mL of a 0.25% w/w (HNIC) mixture of the test substance in distilled water was applied to a naïve site on the right side of each test animal for challenge exposure. Ten additional animals exposed with 0.25% w/w mixture of the test substance in distilled water served as naive control group in the challenge phase only. Approximately 24 and 48 h after each induction and challenge dose, the animals were scored for erythema. Very faint to faint erythema (0.5 to 1) was observed in all test animals during induction. None of the test animals exhibited a positive skin sensitisation response (score greater than 0.5) at 24 or 48 h after challenge. Under the test conditions, the test substance was determined to be non-sensitising when applied topically to albino Hartley guinea pigs (Durando, 2005).
Study 2. A study was conducted to determine the skin sensitisation potential of the test substance according to EU Method B.6 (modified Draize test). For the induction phase, 0.1 mL of 0.1% test substance in water was injected intradermally into the back of each six guinea pigs. This procedure was repeated every other day, using a different injection site on each occasion, until a total of nine injections had been given. Injection sites were examined 24 h after each injection and scored for erythema and oedema using the Draize scale. After a two week interval, a single challenge intradermal injection of the same concentration and volume was given as for induction. Injection sites were examined 24 h after this challenge dose as before for erythema and oedema. The effects were compared to those produced by the priming doses in order to determine whether sensitisation had been produced. The priming injections elicited very slight to well defined erythema, and very slight to slight oedema on all occasions. The challenge dose produced a well-defined erythema and very slight oedema in all occasions. However, the challenge doses did not produce any greater reaction in any animal. Under the study conditions, the test substance was not considered sensitizing to guinea pig skin (Thomas, 1974).
Study 3. A study was conducted to determine the skin sensitisation potential of the test substance according to the Magnusson and Kligman method (guinea pigs maximisation test). Female albino guinea pigs received on Day 1 an intracutaneous injection of 0.1 mL of 0.1% test substance in isotonic saline with Freund's complete adjuvant (1:1) on the shaved part of the flank (approximately 6 x 4 cm). On Day 7, animas were applied an epicutaneous occlusive application for 48 h with 0.3 mL of 0.1% test substance in ethylene glycol monomethylether, water, Tween 80 (180/180/40) v/v. Finally, on Day 21, guinea pigs were challenged epicutaneously (open application) with 0.05 mL of test substance in water at the shaved ventral side of the animal. The response was monitored after 24 and 48 h next to a control group of 10 animals. Concentrations were previously ascertained by both intracutaneous and epicutaneous applications to determine irritation potential in three animals at 24 and 48 h, respectively. In all cases non-irritating concentrations were chosen. At 24 h after challenge, 4/20 animals showed a positive response consisting of slight erythema. After 48 h, 2/20 animals showed a slight macular erythema. Under the conditions of this study, the test substance was negative for skin sensitization (Schallreuter, 1996).
Study 4. A study was conducted to determine the skin sensitisation potential of the test substance in albino guinea pigs. Five test animals were used for the study. The concentration of the test substance for the induction and challenge phases were an intradermal induction with 10 injections of 0.1% in water every alternate intradermal and a challenge with 1 injection of 0.1% in water two weeks after the 10th induction injection. Very slight erythema and oedema were noted 24 h after challenge, but these reactions after challenge were not substantially different from those after the induction injections. Under the study conditions and although the number of test animals was limited, the test substance was considered as a non-sensitising to guinea pig skin (Anonymous, 1969).
Study 5. A study was performed to assess the skin sensitisation potential of the test substance in the albino guinea pig. Ten male test animals were used for the study. The concentration of the test substance for the induction and challenge phases were first an epicutaneous induction of 8 applications of 0.1% in water every day and then an epicutaneous challenge of 1 application of 0.1% in water two weeks after the 8th induction application. No skin reactions were noted 24 h after the first induction application and 24 h after challenge. Under the study conditions and although the number of test animals was limited, the test substance was considered as a non-sensitising to guinea pig skin (Hixson, 1968).
Study 6. Studies were conducted to determine the skin sensitisation potential of the test substance. Basketter (1996) compared the results obtained with various substances, including the present test substance, in an LLNA assay, a guinea pig maximisation test (GMPT) and a Buehler test. Although the test substance was evaluated as non-sensitising in the guinea pig test, the LLNA result was positive. The LLNA test however, can give false positive results for strong irritants (as does the GPMT test), as was demonstrated by the non-sensitising irritant sodium dodecyl sulphate which was tested positive in the LLNA. In order to evaluate possible false-positive results, a range of non-sensitising irritant chemicals, including the test substance were tested in the LLNA. The stimulation index for the test substance did not exceed the factor 3 and thus the outcome was considered negative (Basketter, 1998). Under the study conditions and based on the literature data of LLNA, the test substance was not considered to be a skin sensitiser (Basketter, 1996 and 1998).
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
The test substance is not considered to be sensitising.
The available in vivo skin sensitisation studies suggest that the test substance is not a skin sensitiser and therefore no classification is required for this endpoint according to CLP (EC 1272/2008) criteria.
Data source
Materials and methods
Results and discussion
Applicant's summary and conclusion
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.

Route: .live2