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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Administrative data

Description of key information

Skin irritation:

Both of the two structurally similar molecules (2,4-dinitrotoluene and 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline) are not classified for irritation. Both also showed the same experimental result of "Not irritating", neither result required the classification as a skin irritant.

Eye irritation:

Two strucutrally similar molecules were used for read-across. The molecule 2,4-dinitrotoluene had an experimental result of "Not Irritating" to the eye whilst 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline had an experimental result of "Mildly Irritating to the eye". Neither result required classification as an ocular irritant.

Based on read-across to the two structurally similar molecules (2,4-dinitrotoluene and 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline) it is assumed the compound N,N,N-trimethyl-nitroanilinium chloride is not a skin or eye irritant, and therefore has no skin sensitization classification under CLP (1272/2008).

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin irritation / corrosion

Link to relevant study records

Referenceopen allclose all

Endpoint:
skin irritation / corrosion, other
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
Read-across
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
data from handbook or collection of data
Remarks:
From read-across report
Justification for type of information:
See attached for read-across supporting information.
Qualifier:
no guideline required
Principles of method if other than guideline:
Results aquired form a JMPR evaluation - guideline followed is not specified in the report.
GLP compliance:
not specified
Remarks:
Data from collection/ handbook, no informaiton on completion date or compliace is available.
Specific details on test material used for the study:
Read-across to 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline (JMPR evaluation)
Species:
rabbit
Strain:
New Zealand White
Type of coverage:
not specified
Preparation of test site:
other: abraded or unabraided
Vehicle:
water
Amount / concentration applied:
500 mg per site (Raczniak & Wood, 1980b) or after repeated daily applications of 10 mg dry material or 0.1 ml of 10% aqueous suspension to the abraded or unabraded skin of albino rabbits over five days (Boots Pure Drug Co., 1962)
Irritation parameter:
other: Final result from read-across molecule
Basis:
other: Final result from read-across molecule
Time point:
other: Final result from read-across molecule
Reversibility:
other: Not irritating (JMPR evaluation)
Remarks on result:
no indication of irritation
Remarks:
Not irritating (JMPR evaluation)
 Technical-grade dicloran (purity, 96%) was not irritating to the intact or abraded skin of male or female New Zealand white rabbits at a concentration of 500 mg per site (Raczniak & Wood, 1980b) or after repeated daily applications of 10 mg dry material or 0.1 ml of 10% aqueous suspension to the abraded or unabraded skin of albino rabbits over five days (Boots Pure Drug Co., 1962).
Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
The compound 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline was found to be not irritating, and therefore has no irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008)
Executive summary:

The compound 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline was found to be not irritating, and therefore has no irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008)

Endpoint:
skin irritation / corrosion, other
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
Read-across
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
data from handbook or collection of data
Remarks:
From read-across report
Justification for type of information:
See attached for read-across supporting information.
Qualifier:
no guideline required
Principles of method if other than guideline:
Carried out according to the modified Draize procedure, Guideline not specified in read across report
GLP compliance:
not specified
Remarks:
Data from collection/ handbook, no informaiton on completion date or compliace is available.
Specific details on test material used for the study:
Not available, read-across fro EU RAR of 2,4-dinitrotoluene
Species:
rabbit
Strain:
other: New Zealand, colour not specified
Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
Zealand rabbits with intact and abraded skin in each test group and control group were used (n= 6/group). After application of the 2,4-DNT as a 50% pasta with peanut oil, all animals were
examined for signs of erythema and oedema, and the responses scored at 24 and 72 hours.
The purity of 2,4-DNT was 98% with 2% of 2,6-DNT as impurity.
Type of coverage:
not specified
Preparation of test site:
abraded
Vehicle:
other: peanut oil
Amount / concentration applied:
2,4-DNT as a 50% pasta with peanut oil
Duration of treatment / exposure:
Not Specified
Observation period:
all animals were examined for signs of erythema and oedema, and the responses scored at 24 and 72 hours.
Number of animals:
New Zealand rabbits with intact and abraded skin in each test group and control group were used (n= 6/group).
Details on study design:
Carried out according to the modified Draize procedure.
Irritation parameter:
other:
Basis:
other: Final result from read-across molecule
Time point:
other: Final result from read-across molecule
Reversibility:
other: Not irritating (EU RAR)
Remarks on result:
no indication of irritation
Remarks:
Not irritating (EU RAR)
Irritant / corrosive response data:
The primary irritation score of 2,4-DNT was 0.25 over control.
Other effects:
None noted.
Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
The compound 2,4-dinitrotoluene was found to be not irritating, and therefore has no irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008)
Executive summary:

The compound 2,4-dinitrotoluene was found to be not irritating, and therefore has no irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008)

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

Eye irritation

Link to relevant study records

Referenceopen allclose all

Endpoint:
eye irritation, other
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
Read-across
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
data from handbook or collection of data
Justification for type of information:
See attached for read-across supporting information.
Qualifier:
no guideline required
Principles of method if other than guideline:
From read-across report utilising 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline JMPR evaluation
GLP compliance:
not specified
Remarks:
Data from collection/ handbook, no informaiton on completion date or compliace is available.
Specific details on test material used for the study:
From read-across report utilising 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline JMPR evaluation
Irritation parameter:
other: Final result from read-across report
Basis:
other: Final result from read-across report
Time point:
other: Final result from read-across report
Reversibility:
not specified
Remarks on result:
probability of mild irritation
Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
The compound 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline was found to be mildly irritating to the eyes, and therefore has no eye irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008)
Executive summary:

The compound 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline was found to be mildly irritating to the eyes, and therefore has no eye irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008)

Endpoint:
eye irritation, other
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
Read-across
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
data from handbook or collection of data
Justification for type of information:
See attached for read-across supporting information.
Qualifier:
no guideline required
Principles of method if other than guideline:
From read-across report utilising 2,4-dinitrotoluene EU RAR assessment
GLP compliance:
not specified
Remarks:
Data from collection/ handbook, no informaiton on completion date or compliace is available.
Specific details on test material used for the study:
From read-across report utilising 2,4-dinitrotoluene EU RAR assessment
Irritation parameter:
other: Final result from read-across report
Basis:
other: Final result from read-across report
Time point:
other: Final result from read-across report
Reversibility:
not specified
Remarks on result:
no indication of irritation
Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
The compound 2,4-dinitrotoluene was found to be not irritating to the eyes, and therefore has no eye irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008)
Executive summary:

The compound 2,4-dinitrotoluene was found to be not irritating to the eyes, and therefore has no eye irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008)

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

Respiratory irritation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no study available

Additional information

Not required on the basis of tonnage

Justification for classification or non-classification

There is sufficient evidence from the two structurally similar molecules (2,4-dinitrotoluene and 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline) to show the compound N,N,N-trimethyl-nitroanilinium chloride should not be a skin or eye irritant, and therefore has no skin or eye irritation classification under CLP (1272/2008).