Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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.
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: 230-811-7 | CAS number: 7328-17-8
Toxicological Summary
Administrative data
Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 2.6 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 75
- Dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 2.6 mg/m³
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
No inhalation study available. Thus, extrapolation from OECD 422 oral study wtih a NOAEL of 225 mg/kg bw/d with respect to repeated dose systemic toxicity.
Using this value as a starting point for chronic DNEL derivation for workers with respect to dermal and inhalational exposure:
DNEL, inhalation, workers:
Adjustment of dose metric to inhalational concentration:
The REACH R.8 guidance uses an inhalation volume for rats of 0.38 m3/kg for 8 hr exposure
Thus NOAEL to NOAEC conversion:
NOAEC rats = 225 mg/kg/d / 0.38 m3/kg = 592 mg/m3
As no data is available for absorption rate for oral exposure versus inhalation exposure a default factor of 2 is used for accounting for the potential for higher absorption by inhalation :
NOAEC rats = 592 mg/m3 / 2 = 296 mg/m3
Correction factor for increased inhalation volume during work:
NOAEC worker, 8hr = 6.7 m3/ 10m3 x 296 mg/m3 = 198 mg/m3
Using an overall assessment factor of 75 a DNEL of 2.6 mg/m3 can be derived.
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- default
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 6
- Justification:
- Extrapolation from 28 D study to chronic exposure situation
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- not used when dose metric is converted to mg/m3
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 2.5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- default
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 77 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: SCOEL OEL value on acrylic acid as starting point for an indicative DNEL value for Ethoxyethoxyethyl acrylate (EOEOEA)
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- hazard unknown (no further information necessary)
DNEL related information
Workers - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 0.083 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 300
- Dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 25 mg/kg bw/day
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
No dermal repeated dose studies available. Absorption by dermal route is by default considered
identical to absorption from oral route
28D to chronic study equals an AF=6
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 6
- Justification:
- extrapolation from 28D study to chronic exposure situation
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- default
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 2.5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- medium hazard (no threshold derived)
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- high hazard (no threshold derived)
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- high hazard (no threshold derived)
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
Workers - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- medium hazard (no threshold derived)
Additional information - workers
Ethoxyethoxyethyl acrylate(EOEOEA) is acute toxic both dermally and orally and should be classified as Acute Tox. 3. And Acute Tox. 4., respectively. No data for the acute inhalational toxicity is available.
Results from irritation studies (skin and eye) suggests that EOEOEA should be classified as Skin Irrit.2 and Eye Irrit. 2. Moreover, EOEOEA should be classified as Skin Sens 1A based on data from a Guinea pig maximisation test
Based on the data from an oral OECD 422 study on the read-across substance a NOAEL of 25 mg/kgbw/day forsystemicrepeated dose toxicity is concluded. Further, a NOAEL of 225 mg/kgbw/day for reproductive toxicity was concluded.
Exposure of EOEOEA to humans is only relevant for workers in industrial processing and professional uses. Based on the physical/chemical properties, dermal exposure is considered the most relevant exposure route. DNEL forsystemic effectof 0.083 mg/kgbw/day has been derived based on a NOAEL of 25 mg/kgbw/day for systemic effects in relation to repeated dose toxicity in an OECD 422 study (28D oral exposure). This DNEL value is considered conservative as dermal absorption is considered equal to oral absorption. No DNEL for skin sensitising effects can be derived, thus dermal exposure is considered most critical route of exposure.
Based on the NOAEL of 25 mg/kg/bw /day from oral exposure, a DNEL for inhalation of 0.29 mg/m3 was derived by route-to-route extrapolation for protection against any systemic effects.
Kan vi overhoved bruge dette med hydrolysis for M170?
As hydrolysis of EOEOEA into acrylic acid and 2 -2 -phenylphenoxyethanol may occur, there is a potential of local toxicity in the lung due to the formation of acrylic acid. In 2012, SCOEL derived an OEL value of 10 ppm (29 mg/m3) for acrylic acid. 10 ppm of
biphenyl-2 -ol, ethoxylated, esters of acrylic acid equivalates to 77 mg/m3. This indicative DNEL value for local effects is far less restrictive than the DNEL for systemic effects (0.29 mg/m3).
General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
No hazard identification for consumers/general population considered necessary.
Exposure of consumers/general population to the subtance is not relevant as only used in industrial settings and for professional uses.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
No hazard identification for consumers/general population considered necessary.
Exposure of consumers/general population to the subtance is not relevant as only used in industrial settings and for professional uses.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
General Population - Hazard via oral route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
No hazard identification for consumers/general population considered necessary.
Exposure of consumers/general population to the subtance is not relevant as only used in industrial settings and for professional uses.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
No hazard identification for consumers/general population considered necessary.
Exposure of consumers/general population to the subtance is not relevant as only used in industrial settings and for professional uses.
General Population - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Additional information - General Population
Exposure of consumers/general population to the substance is not relevant as the substance is only used in industrial settings and for professional uses. Therefore, no hazard identification for consumers/general population considered necessary.
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.
