CHLOROPRENE
CAS Number 126-99-8
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was
nominated by NICNAS due to its proposed listing
by the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) in
its 9th Report on Carcinogens as reasonably
anticipated to be a human carcinogen.
Import, Manufacture & Use
The chemical was subject to
a call for information under Section 48 of the
Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment
Act 1989. No data from industry was received.
Subsequent to the Section 48 notice, contact
with suppliers of products to the rubber tyre
manufacturing industry indicated that the
chemical is only imported into Australia as a
polymer.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals.
Other databases searched
included the Exichem and other OECD databases.
The searches indicated that the chemical had not
been evaluated by any overseas agency, other
than the US National Toxicology Program, or that
any work had been undertaken or was underway in
the OECD Existing Chemicals Program.
Information on the Chemical
Chloroprene is supplied as a
colourless liquid. Acute administration to rats
found it to be of low toxicity, though it was
irritating to the eyes. Repeat dosing to rats
resulted in depression of growth and liver
damage. There was evidence of carcinogenic
potential, effects on reproduction and
developmental effects on the foetus.
Chloroprene is classified in
the List of Designated Hazardous Substances 1999
as:
Reasons for Non-Selection
Chloroprene is imported into
Australia only as a polymer hence exposure to
the chemical is unlikely. The chemical did not
meet the published screening criteria for
prioritisation of nominated chemicals.
__________________________________________
GLYCEROL MONOTHIOGLYCOLATE
CAS Number 30618-84-9
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was nominated
by a dermatologist who was of the view that
glycerol monothioglycolate was responsible for a
number of skin problems seen in hairdressers
presenting at the practice. There was a
suggestion the chemical was banned in Europe.
Import, Manufacture & Use
The chemical was subject to
a call for information under Section 48 of the
Act. No responses were received from industry.
NICNAS was unable to determine that the chemical
is imported as an ingredient of products used in
Australia.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals. This
did not disclose any data on health effects or
toxicology.
Other Databases Searched
included the Exichem and other OECD databases.
The searches indicated that the chemical had not
been evaluated by any overseas agency or that
any work had been undertaken or was underway in
the OECD Existing Chemicals Program.
Information on the Chemical
No data was located in the
Databases Searched. A report published in the
Journal of the American College of Toxicology in
1991 found evidence of skin and respiratory
system irritation and sensitisation as well as
contact dermatitis in humans. No other
toxicological data was found.
Reasons for Non-Selection
NICNAS was unable to find
any evidence that glycerol monothioglycolate is
used in Australia. The data available on health
and environmental effects of the chemical was
limited. Based on the available data the
chemical did not meet the published screening
criteria for prioritisation of nominated
chemicals.
__________________________________________
HEXAFLUOROPROPYLENE
CAS Number
116-15-4
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was nominated
by NICNAS following publication of a draft
report by the OECD suggesting kidney toxicity.
Import, Manufacture & Use
The chemical was subject to
a call for information under Section 48 of the
Act. No responses from industry were received.
Subsequent contact with the Association of
Fluorocarbon Consumers and Manufacturers
indicated the chemical is not used in Australia.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals. Some
data was retrieved from this source.
Other Databases Searched
included the Exichem and other OECD databases.
These searches indicated that the OECD is
evaluating this chemical under its High
Production Volume Chemicals Program. Further
data was extracted from the OECD's draft report.
Information on the Chemical
Data retrieved from the
database searches indicated low acute toxicity
in rats plus some mutagenic effect on animal
cells.
The OECD draft report noted
toxic effects on the kidney in repeated dosing
to rodents.
The chemical is classified
in the ASCC List of Designated Hazardous
Substances 1999 as:
Reasons for Non-Selection
As far as NICNAS could
determine, hexafluropropylene is not used in
Australia. The chemical did not meet the
published screening criteria for prioritisation
of nominated chemicals.
__________________________________________
ISOPRENE
CAS Number
78-79-5
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was nominated
by NICNAS due to its proposed listing in the 9th
report on Carcinogens of the US National
Toxicology Program (NTP) as reasonably
anticipated to be a human carcinogen.
Import, Manufacture & Use
The chemical was subject to
a call for information under Section 48 of the
Act. No data from industry was received. The
chemical is used overseas in the rubber tyre
manufacturing industry. Subsequent to the
Section 48 notice, contact with suppliers of
products to the rubber tyre manufacturing
industry indicated the chemical was not imported
into Australia.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals. Other
Databases Searched included the Exichem and
other OECD databases.
The searches indicated that
the chemical had not been evaluated by any
overseas agency other than the US National
Toxicology Progam, or that any work had been
undertaken or was underway in the OECD Existing
Chemicals Program.
Information on the Chemical
The chemical is supplied as
a colourless liquid. Studies in rats showed low
acute toxicity. In humans it was found to be
irritating to the skin and slightly irritating
to the respiratory tract. Under repeated dosing
changes in brain, lung and kidney weights were
observed in one study in rats. The chemical was
found to cause mutations in isolated animal
cells and to have a possible effect on
reproduction and/or developing foetuses. In a
two year study in rats it caused an increased
incidence of mammary fibroadenoma in females and
mammary gland carcinoma in males. Kidney tubule
adenoma occurred in both sexes while testicular
adenoma was found in males. Rare brain tumors
that may have been substance related occurred in
females.
Reasons for Non-Selection
As far as NICNAS could
determine, isoprene is not used in Australia.
The chemical did not meet the published
screening criteria for prioritisation of
nominated chemicals.
__________________________________________
CHLORINATED POLYPROPYLENE
CAS Number
68442-33-1
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was nominated
by a member of the public based on a member of
that person's family becoming ill after using a
product containing chlorinated polypropylene as
part of that person's job.
Import, Manufacture & Use
During the screening of
chemicals nominated by the public, background
work was done by NICNAS. Data collected from the
chemical industry indicate that the chemical is
not manufactured in Australia. A total of 0.08
tonnes was imported into Australia as a
constituent in a primer for automotive paint and
is supplied to the trade only. In addition the
chemical is purchased locally for manufacturing
an adhesion promoter and a product used for
screenprinting. These products are also supplied
to the trade only and are not available to the
general public.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals. This
did not disclose any data on health effects or
toxicology. Other Databases Searched included
the Exichem and other OECD databases. The
searches indicated that the chemical had not
been evaluated by any overseas agency or that
any work had been undertaken or was underway in
the OECD Existing Chemicals Program.
Information on the Chemical
No data was located.
Reasons for Non-Selection
The quantities used in
Australia were found to be low. No relevant data
on health and environment effects could be
located. Based on the available data the
chemical did not meet the published screening
criteria for prioritisation of nominated
chemicals.
__________________________________________
PARAGOETHITE
CAS Number
None
Reasons for Nomination
The substance was nominated
by a member of the public because of
environmental concerns. The person believed that
paragoethite was imported from Brazil and that
it was shipped from the Pasminco smelter in
Hobart to Port Pirie and Newcastle thus creating
a risk of spillage at sea and during trucking.
Import, Manufacture & Use
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS indicated that paragoethite
is a mixture of minerals, mainly a solid iron
residue. It is generated as a by-product of a
process used for making zinc by the electrolytic
method at Pasminco Hobart Smelter. Paragoethite
is transported by ship to Pasminco Port Pirie
Smelter where it is further treated to recover
lead and zinc and other metals. The final
product is an inert, glass like material that is
safe to be disposed of as landfill. Paragoethite
is not imported from overseas as far as NICNAS
could determine. The substance is not used at
the Newcastle facility of Pasminco.
Databases Searched
A search of the TOMES CPS
database, an extensive collection of proprietary
and licensed databases with medical, hazard, and
environmental information for the safe
management and handling of chemicals, did not
disclose any health effects or toxicological
data of the mixture.
Other Databases Searched
included the OECD databases, such as Exichem.
The searches indicated that the substance had
not been evaluated by any overseas agency or
that any work had been undertaken or was
underway in the OECD Existing Chemicals Program.
Extensive data is available on the constituents.
Information on the
Substance
The paragoethite process was
introduced following modifications to the zinc
smelting process so as to cease the production
of hazardous jarosite as the waste product.
Paragoethite is composed of sulphate, copper,
arsenic, lead, silica, iron and zinc, with the
last two typically making up about 50% of the
mixture. The appearance is of a red to brown
paste material.
Re-processing of
paragoethite avoids the need for use of
extensive areas as waste dumps and dumping at
sea as with previous waste streams.
Reasons for Non-Selection
Extensive hazard information
is available on the constituents of paragoethite.
Occupational and environmental exposure to the
substance is considered to be low.
The substance did not meet
the published screening criteria for
prioritisation as a Candidate chemical of
nominated chemicals.
__________________________________________
IRON
PENTACARBONYL
CAS Number
13463-40-6
Reasons for Nomination
The
chemical was nominated by a member of the public
due to concerns about toxic effects of exposure
to iron in high doses.
Import,
Manufacture & Use
The
chemical was subject to a call for information
under S48 of the Act. No data from industry were
received. According to published literature,
uses for the chemical include:
-
To make
carbonyl iron which is used to make high
frequency coils for radio and television;
-
As an
antiknock agent in motor fuels;
-
As a catalyst and
reagent in chemical reactions.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public, background work done
by NICNAS included a search of websites of overseas
regulatory agencies, the TOMES CPS database, Exichem and
OECD databases. The searches indicated that the chemical
had not been evaluated by any overseas agency, or that
any work had been undertaken or was underway in the OECD
Existing Chemicals Program.
Information on the
Chemical
The chemical is
supplied as an oily yellow liquid. Studies in rats
showed medium acute toxicity. Dermal toxicity in rabbits
was low. The chemical was a lung irritant in animals and
repeated exposure to rats caused severe lung effects. In
humans, high concentrations were reported to cause
headaches, dizziness, fever, cyanosis, respiratory and
central nervous system effects, kidney and liver damage.
Iron pentacarbonyl has an occupational exposure standard
assigned of 0.23 mg/m3 TWA and 0.45 mg/m3 STEL.
Reasons for
Non-Selection
As far as NICNAS
could determine, iron pentacarbonyl is not used in
Australia. On this basis, the chemical did not meet the
published screening criteria for prioritisation of
nominated chemicals.
__________________________________________
ETHACURE 300
CAS Number
106264-79-3
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was nominated
by NICNAS because of possible mutagenic
potential and apparent lack of data about its
effects.
Import, Manufacture & Use
The chemical was subject to
a call for information under Section 48 of the
Act. Data collected from the chemical industry
indicate that 61 tonnes per year of the chemical
is imported into Australia. The uses were all
associated with polyurethane production.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals. This
search disclosed limited health effects or
toxicological data.
Other Databases Searched
included the Exichem and other OECD databases.
The searches indicated that the chemical had not
been evaluated by any overseas agency or that
any work had been undertaken or was underway in
the OECD Existing Chemicals Program.
Information on the Chemical
The chemical is supplied as
an amber-coloured liquid. Database searches
found Ethacure 300 to have possible toxic
effects on isolated bacterial cells.
Ethacure 300 is classified
in the List of Designated Hazardous substances
1999 as:
-
Harmful if swallowed
-
May cause sensitisation
by skin contact.
-
Very toxic to aquatic
organisms.
-
May cause long term
adverse effects in the aquatic environment
Reasons for Non-Selection
The data on health effects
available on the chemical was limited. The
substance is already classified for health
effects and is required to be labelled
accordingly. Environmental concerns are
currently of low priority for this chemical.
__________________________________________
POLACURE 740M
CAS Number
57609-64-0
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was nominated
by NICNAS because of possible mutagenic
potential and apparent lack of data about its
effects.
Import, Manufacture & Use
The chemical was subject to
a call for information under Section 48 of the
Act. The survey revealed that three tonnes were
imported into Australia for use in polyurethane
coatings manufacture.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals. This
search disclosed no health effects or
toxicological data.
Other Databases Searched
included OECD databases, such as Exichem. The
searches indicated that the chemical had not
been evaluated by any overseas agency or that
any work had been undertaken or was underway in
the OECD Existing Chemicals Program.
Information on the Chemical
No information was located.
Reasons for Non-Selection
The NICNAS survey found the
quantities of Polacure 740M used in Australia to
be low. No relevant data on health and
environment effects could be located. The
chemical did not meet the published screening
criteria for prioritisation of nominated
chemicals.
__________________________________________
CYANACURE
CAS Number
52411-33-3
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was nominated
by NICNAS because of possible mutagenic
potential and apparent lack of data about its
effects.
Import, Manufacture & Use
The chemical was subject to
a call for information under Section 48 of the
National Industrial Chemicals Notification and
Assessment Act 1989. No data was received from
the chemical industry.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals. This
search disclosed limited health effects or
toxicological data.
Other Databases Searched
included the Exichem and other OECD databases.
The searches indicated that the chemical had not
been evaluated by any overseas agency or that
any work had been undertaken or was underway in
the OECD Existing Chemicals Program.
Information on the Chemical
Database searches found
Cyanacure to have possible toxic effects on
isolated bacterial cells.
Reasons for Non-Selection
NICNAS was unable to
determine that Cyanacure is used in Australia.
The data available on the chemical was limited.
Environmental concerns are currently of low
priority for this chemical. Based on the
available data the chemical did not meet the
published screening criteria for prioritisation
of nominated chemicals.
__________________________________________
TRICHLOROACETIC ACID
CAS Number 76-03-9
Reasons for Nomination
The chemical was nominated
by NICNAS following publication of data in an
OECD report suggesting trichloroacetic acid may
be damaging to the environment.
Import, Manufacture & Use
The chemical was subject to
a call for information under Section 48 of the
Act. Data collected from the chemical industry
indicate that a total of 0.4 tonnes is imported
into Australia. Uses of the chemical in
Australia were not determined.
Databases Searched
During screening of
chemicals nominated by the public background
work done by NICNAS included a search of the
TOMES CPS database, an extensive collection of
proprietary and licensed databases with medical,
hazard, and environmental information for the
safe management and handling of chemicals. Other
Databases Searched included the OECD databases,
such as Exichem. These searches indicated that
the chemical has been evaluated by the OECD
under its High Production Volume Chemicals
Program. Data was extracted from the OECD's
report.
Information on the Chemical
The report showed the
chemical to have low acute toxicity in rats.
Under repeat dosing to rats cell death was noted
in the gums and lining of the mouth. Severe
changes to white blood cells occurred as well as
toxic effects on the liver and heart.
Some mutagenic activity was
noted in isolated animal cells. Liver tumours
occurred in mice but not rats.
Reasons for Non-Selection
The NICNAS survey found the
quantities used in Australia to be low with low
potential exposure. The chemical did not meet
the published screening criteria for
prioritisation of nominated chemicals.
