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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 237-926-1 | CAS number: 14073-97-3
- 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
Biodegradation in water: screening tests
Administrative data
Link to relevant study record(s)
Description of key information
Substance is readily biodegradable.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
- Biodegradation in water:
- readily biodegradable
Additional information
Four studies on ready biodegradability are available. Caspers & Müller (2000) and Eisner (2012) used a test item which is very closely related to the submission item, i.e. ca. 85% L-menthan-3 -one and ca. 15% D-isomenthone. In the study of King (1996) a test item was used containing 41% L-menthan-3-one and 8.5% D-isomenthone (i.e. the natural menthones), plus 41% D-menthone and 8.5% L-isomenthone (i.e. the synthetic menthones). Müller (1999) used a test item containing 17.6% L-menthan-3-one and 32.25% D-isomenthone (i.e. the natural menthones), plus 17.6% D-menthone and 32.25% L-isomenthone (i.e. the synthetic menthones). All in all it is to be considered that the variety of test items used in these studies are describing the different varieties of the registration item as laid out in section 1.2.
According to ECHA "Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment Chapter R.7b: Endpoint specific guidance" (2012), page 209, for substances where a range of degradation data is available, a Weight of Evidence approach should be employed. Two studies applying the Closed Bottle Test are available. While in the study of Caspers and Müller (2000) the 60% pass level has been failed (46%), in the Closed Bottle Test of Müller (1999) the pass level has been reached (63%). In the manometric respirometry test following OECD 301F of Eisner (2012) the pass level has been missed. It should however be stressed that it is conceivable that during the test runs a volatile substance such as L-menthane-3-one might be expelled to a certain extent from the aqueous phase into the gas head space of the respirometer cell via the violent stirring action of the test water. As the portion of the test item in the gas phase cannot be accessible anymore for biodegradation by the dispersed inoculum, this may offer a possible explanation why the 60% pass level has been missed closely (52%). Taking further into account the fast degradation rate before eventually reaching the plateau level of 52%, these observations at least provide strong supporting indication for ready biodegradability of the test item, even though strictly speaking only inherent biodegradability criteria have been fulfilled in this study. In a CO2 Evolution Test of King (1996) the 60% pass level has also been reached (99.5%). This study however is of lower reliability as the CO2 Evolution Test design is not considered as suitable for volatile substances according to OECD TG 301.
When interpreting these data, again it shall be referred to ECHA Guidance R.7b (2012). On page 179 the guidance is stating that ready biodegradability tests may sometimes fail because of the stringent test conditions, in general, and the differences among the individual tests in terms of their stringency. Consistent positive test results from tests therefore should generally supersede negative test results. Furthermore, according to page194 of this guidance, when conflicting results in ready biodegradability tests are obtained the positive results could be considered valid irrespective of negative results, when the scientific quality of the former is good and the positive test results are well documented, i.e. guideline criteria are fulfilled, including use of non-adapted inoculum (United Nations GHS (Rev.1) 2005).
Summarising there is one study of Müller (1999) directly indicating ready biodegradability as the 60% pass levels has been reached. There is additional supporting evidence for ready biodegradability from the manometric respirometry study of Eisner (2012), where the narrowly missing of the pass level can possibly be explained by the relatively high volatility of the test item. Even though being of lower reliability, the study of King also indicates ready biodegradability of the test item. Taking together the results as retrieved from the studies of Müller, Eisner, and King, it is to be concluded that this collective evidence outweighs the negative study outcome of the study of Caspers and Müller. Based on these reasons the substance is considered as readily biodegradable.
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.