Carbamothioic acid, 2-propenyl-, O-(2-methylpropyl)ester(AERO?5100 Promoter)
File No: NA/747
2 November 2000
NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS NOTIFICATION
AND ASSESSMENT SCHEME
FULL PUBLIC REPORT
Carbamothioic acid, 2-propenyl-, O-(2-methylpropyl)ester
(AERO 5100 Promoter)
This Assessment has been compiled in accordance with the provisions of the Industrial Chemicals
(Notification and Assessment) Act 1989 (the Act) and Regulations. This legislation is an Act of the
Commonwealth of Australia. The National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment
Scheme (NICNAS) is administered by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission
which also conducts the occupational health & safety assessment. The assessment of environmental
hazard is conducted by the Department of the Environment and the assessment of public health is
conducted by the Department of Health and Aged Care.
For the purposes of subsection 78(1) of the Act, copies of this full public report may be inspected by
the public at the Library, National Occupational Health and Safety Commission, 92-94 Parramatta
Road, Camperdown NSW 2050, between the following hours:
Monday - Wednesday 8.30 am - 5.00 pm
Thursday 8.30 am - 8.00 pm
Friday 8.30 am - 5.00 pm
Copies of this full public report may also be requested, free of charge, by contacting the
Administration Coordinator on the fax number below.
For enquiries please contact the Administration Coordinator at:
Street Address: 92 -94 Parramatta Rd CAMPERDOWN NSW 2050, AUSTRALIA
Postal Address: GPO Box 58, SYDNEY NSW 2001, AUSTRALIA
Telephone: (61) (02) 9577 9514 FAX (61) (02) 9577 9465
Director
Chemicals Notification and Assessment
NA/747
FULL PUBLIC REPORT
Carbamothioic acid, 2-propenyl-, O-(2-methylpropyl)ester
(AERO 5100 Promoter)
1. APPLICANT
Cytec Australia Holdings Pty Ltd. has submitted a standard notification statement in support
of their application for an assessment certificate for Carbamothioic acid, 2-propenyl-, O-(2-
methylpropyl)ester.
No claims for exempt information were made.
2. IDENTITY OF THE CHEMICAL
Carbamothioic acid, 2-propenyl-, O-(2-
Chemical Name:
methylpropyl)ester
Chemical Abstracts Service
86329-09-1
(CAS) Registry No.:
CT-637-97;
Other Names:
Carbamate, N-allyl-O-isobutylthiono-;
Carbamic acid, allylthio-, O-isobutyl ester;
Isobutyl allylthionocarbamate.
AERO 5100 Promoter (containing approximately 87%
Marketing Name:
notified chemical)
C8H15NOS
Molecular Formula:
Structural Formula:
S
iBuO C NH CH2 CH CH2
173
Molecular Weight:
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 2 of 29
Method of Detection
Infra-Red (IR) spectroscopy
and Determination:
IR spectrum: major absorbance peaks were at:
Spectral Data:
3 260, 2 964, 2 879, 1 646, 1 518, 1 470, 1 389, 1 324,
1 273, 1 198, 1 178, 1 149, 1 059 and 990 cm-1
3. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
Pale brown liquid with a garlic odour, non-viscous
Appearance at 20癈 at 101.3 kPa:
< -25癈
Freezing Point:
225.5癈
Boiling Point:
0.994 g/cm3
Density:
7.9 x 10-3 kPa at 25癈 (see comments below)
Vapour Pressure:
497 mg/L at 25癈
Water Solubility:
Log10 Pow = 2.84
Partition Co-efficient
(n-octanol/water):
Substance is hydrolytically stable at 25癈
Hydrolysis:
T1/2 > 1 year at pH 4.0, 7.0 & 9.0
Hydrolysis as a Function of pH:
Log10KOC = 2.61 (KOC = 407)
Adsorption/Desorption:
Substance is a thiocarbanate and does not contain any
Dissociation Constant:
groups which can undergo dissociation
49.0 mN/m
Surface Tension:
Not applicable, substance is a liquid
Particle Size:
95癈
Flash Point:
Not available, but chemical is flammable
Flammability Limits:
344癈
Autoignition Temperature:
Not explosive
Explosive Properties:
React with strong acids and alkalies and also oxidising
Reactivity/Stability:
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 3 of 29
agents
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 4 of 29
Comments on Physico-Chemical Properties
Tests were performed according to corresponding EC and/or OECD test guidelines (European
Commission 1992), (OECD 1995-1996) at Huntingdon Life Sciences testing facilities, UK.
These facilities comply with the OECD principles of good laboratory practice and full test
reports were submitted. All tests were performed on the notified chemical.
Vapour pressure was determined using the OECD static method and the substance is
considered to be volatile. This relatively high volatility is likely to be due to the presence of
the butanol and isobutanol solvents present in the end use product.
From a preliminary study, water solubility of the notified chemical was estimated to be
greater than 100 mg/L. The definitive test was performed by the flask method.
Supersaturated solutions were filtered and 2 mL sub-samples of each filtrate were diluted to
20 mL with ethanol for analysis by gas chromatography. From this, water solubility was
determined to be 497 mg/L.
The results from a preliminary study showed that the hydrolysis rates at pH 4, 7 and 9 at 50癈
were less than 10% at 5 days (HLS 1998). Although this level is low, it is likely that the
notified chemical will degrade slowly.
Log10POW = 2.84 for the notified chemical was calculated by the Leo and Hansch procedure.
This value indicates there is a potential for the notified chemical to partition into the n-
octanol phase.
Adsorption/Desorption study was conducted in accordance with the OECD draft document
TGP/94.75. Estimate for the adsorption coefficient KOC was based on an empirical
relationship with the partition coefficient. Log10KOC = 2.61, indicating that the notified
chemical will sorb moderately to soil colloids and organic matter and will be mobile through
the soil profile.
Dissociation Constant of the notified chemical was not determined. However, no groups are
present which are likely to lose or gain a proton.
By definition, a chemical has surface activity when the surface tension is less than 60 mN/m
(European Commission 1992). The notified chemical has a surface tension of
49.0 mN/m and is expected to be surface active.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 5 of 29
4. PURITY OF THE CHEMICAL
Approximately 98%
Degree of Purity:
Hazardous Impurities:
Chemical name: Isobutanol
Synonyms: Isobutyl alcohol
CAS No.: 78-83-1
Weight percentage: 0.6%
Hazard Classification (NOHSC 1999):
Regulatory Controls:
R10 ?flammable;
R20 ?harmful by inhalation;
National Exposure Standard (NOHSC 1995):
50 ppm; 152 mg/m3 TWA;
Dangerous Goods Class (FORS 1998):
Class 3; Packing Group III
Non-hazardous Impurities
Unidentified impurities constitute 1.2%
(> 1% by weight):
None known.
Additives/Adjuvants:
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 6 of 29
5. USE, VOLUME AND FORMULATION
AERO 5100 Promoter is intended for use as a mineral processing reagent. The notifier
claims that the reagent is an improved sulfide collector used in mineral flotation processes to
more efficiently float and separate copper, lead and zinc sulfides from certain milled ores.
The notified chemical will not be manufactured in Australia. It will be imported in 200 L
steel drums or one tonne International Bulk Containers (IBC), coming in at 87% in
butanol/isobutanol. It is transported from dockside to the notifiers warehouse for storage
prior to being transported to the customer site. The estimated import volume of the notified
substance will be 10 to 50 tonnes for the first two years increasing to approximately 100
tonnes per year in following years.
At the customers site, the notified chemical will be pumped or gravity fed from the 200 L
drums to a storage tank. An automatically controlled ring main system will be used to
regulate flow, mix reagents and deliver reagents to the addition points in the flotation circuits.
AERO 5100 Promoter selectively chelates to and enhances the floatability of the metal
sulfide particles. The metal sulphides will then be mechanically collected and further
concentrated by succeeding `cleaner' flotation cells. The concentrate, including the metal
sulphides and adsorbed notified chemical will be drawn off and transported to a smelter for
metal recovery where the notified chemical will be destroyed by oxidation in the smelting
process. The reagent storage, mixing and flotation processes are completely automated,
continuous and recycling.
6. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE
Transport and Storage (2 to 13 workers; 2 to 3 hours/day, 10-15 days/year)
Transport and storage workers may be exposed to AERO 5100 Promoter in the event of a
spill.
Plant Operators (6 to 12 workers, 1 to 8 hours/day, 300 days/year)
Ore treatment by plant operators involves transfer of AERO 5100 Promoter from 200 L
drums or IBC by pumping or gravity feed to a flotation cell where it mixes and chelates the
ore. There is potential for skin and possibly eye contact during connecting and disconnecting
lines and cleaning pumping and ancillary apparatus. The product is added at 10 to 50 g per
tonne of ore equivalent to a concentration in slurry of approximately 8.7 to 43.5 ppm
(0.00435%). The chelated metal, including AERO 5100 Promoter is successively
concentrated. The transfer, mixing and flotation processes are automated, continuous and
recycling, with little need for worker intervention. The reagent storage and flotation areas are
open and well ventilated. The notifier states that plant operators in the reagent storage area
are required to wear respirators, impervious gloves, coveralls and eye protection due to the
presence of other hazardous chemicals. The notifier states that personnel in other areas will
be required to wear impervious gloves, coveralls and chemical splash goggles. The metal
concentrate is stockpiled before removal from the mine to the smelter. The notifier estimates
that 80% (70% after the metal is washed) of the chemical will remain with the ore, and 20%
will remain with the waste. The chemical will be destroyed during smelting
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 7 of 29
(900 to 10 000癈, 0.5 to 1 hour).
Worker Education and Training
The notifier states that workers receive induction training including sessions on safe handling
of hazardous chemicals. MSDS are available for workers.
7. PUBLIC EXPOSURE
There is little potential for exposure of the public to the notified chemical used as a mineral
processing agent as it will not be sold to the public and will only be used in the mineral
processing industry. The public would only be exposed to AERO5100 Promoter in the
event of an accident during transportation between dockside and the end customer site.
8. ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE
Release
AERO 5100 Promoter is likely to be used at the following four mine sites: Cadia in Orange
and Northparkes near Parkes in NSW, Kanowna Belle near Kalgoorlie in WA and
Mt Leyshon near Charters Towers in QLD.
The notified chemical functions as a flotation reagent, and 70% is estimated to remain bound
to the mineral surfaces, and become incorporated in the metal sulphide concentrates. These
are smelted for recovery of the metal and the high temperature of the furnace would destroy
the compound.
Some of the remaining reagent becomes attached to the surface of the gangue (waste)
minerals, deposited into the tailings dams. The notifier indicates that typically, 10% of the
reagent would be disposed of with the tailings. The remaining 20% will remain with the
water and be returned to the process. Based on an annual import volume of 87 tonnes, this
equates to 8.7 tonnes of notified chemical being released to tailings dams per annum.
The reagent disposed of with the tailings either attached to gangue particles or dissolved in
the water is not be expected to be released to the wider environment. Tailings dams are
designed to "substantially" reduce the potential for seepage. All liner systems, whether soil or
geotextile material, have a leakage rate and this will depend on the hydraulic conductivity of
the liner. Hydraulic conductivity is influenced by the size and frequency of defects or
discontinuities in the liner and the underlying base material and the length of time the
hydraulic head is applied to the liner (EPA 1995). Older tailings dam floors are usually
constructed from soils. The integrity of these soil floors depends largely upon the texture,
strength, plasticity, and dispersion index of the soil type used including. The degree of
maintenance and the age of the tailings dam are also important factors. Regardless of the
lining used, there remains a risk of tailings dam seepage which may ultimately lead to
contamination of surface and ground water. This concern is reinforced by a 1998
environmental report for Mt Leyshon Operations that reported seepage from a new tailings
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 8 of 29
dam contaminating ground water bores (Normandy Mining Limited 1998). In addition, the
1997 Environment, Safety and Health Report (North Limited 1998) for North Limited
indicated that for all Australian sites, cases of actual or potential ground water contamination
were identified.
Release to the environment may also occur as a result of accidental spillage. The material
will be transported from dockside to the notifiers chemical warehouse where it will be stored
prior to transport to mining sites. Transport will be by road in either 200 L drums or IBC.
Risk of exposure to the environment in the case of accident, increases as container size
increases. In the case of an accident leading to a ruptured bulk container, up to one tonne of
the notified chemical could be released in a single event.
Fate
Approximately 20% of the notified chemical will be reclaimed and reused in the process.
Approximately 70% of the notified chemical will be exported with the metal concentrates.
The material exported with the concentrates will be destroyed during smelting, with
production of water vapour and oxides of carbon, nitrogen and sulphur.
Approximately 10% of the reagent will be disposed of into the tailings dams. It is a
characteristic of most sulphide metal mines that pyrite and other gangue metal sulphides will
slowly oxidise when exposed to air producing sulphuric acid and solutions of metal sulphates.
Consequently, the water in the tailings dams becomes very acidic, (pH 1 and 2 is common)
and highly polluted with heavy metal sulphates. The results from a preliminary study
indicated that hydrolysis rates at pH 4, 7 and 9 at 50癈 were less than 10% at 5 days.
Although this level is low, it is likely that the notified chemical will degrade slowly due to the
very low pH. The products of this degradation are further expected to slowly degrade to
simpler compounds through chemical and physical processes.
The Ready Biodegradability of the notified chemical was assessed using the Closed Bottle
Method (OECD TG 310D) (HLS 1998). The notified chemical degraded by 1% after 28 days
indicating slow degradation. Tests on the reference substance indicated the inoculum was
viable and the notified chemical was not significantly inhibiting to the microbial medium.
In the case of accidental release to waterways, the notified chemical would be likely to
persist, either hydrolysing or degrading only slowly. The partition coefficient of 2.84
indicates the chemical is relatively lipophilic and will moderately sorb to soil sediments
therefore soil mobility is expected (Mensinck, 1995). According to Connell (1990), the
above physico-chemical data and the low molecular weight (173) indicate that the notified
chemical has the potential to bioaccumulate. However, exposure to natural waters is
expected to be low.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 9 of 29
9. EVALUATION OF TOXICOLOGICAL DATA
The toxicological studies performed on the notified chemical (purity 98%) were performed
according to corresponding EEC and OECD test guidelines (European Commission 1992),
(OECD 1995-1996) at Huntingdon Life Sciences testing facilities. These facilities comply
with the OECD principles of good laboratory practice and full test reports were submitted.
All tests were performed on the notified chemical.
9.1 Acute Toxicity
Summary of the acute toxicity of Carbamothioic acid, 2-propenyl-,
O-(2 methylpropyl)ester
Test Species Outcome Reference
Acute oral toxicity Rat LDLO > 500 mg/kg (HLS 1998)
(HLS 1998)
Acute dermal toxicity Rat LD50 > 2 000 mg/kg
Skin irritation Rabbit Moderate Irritant (HLS 1998)
Eye irritation Rabbit Slight irritant (HLS 1998)
(HLS 1998)
Skin sensitisation Guinea pig Sensitising
9.1.1 Oral Toxicity (HLS 1998)
Species/strain: Rat/Sprague-Dawley origin
Number/sex of animals: 5/sex
Observation period: 14 days
Method of administration: Gavage, dose of 500 mg/kg bw
Test method: OECD TG 420 ?fixed dose method
EC Directive 92/69/EEC ?fixed dose method
Mortality: Nil
Clinical observations: Piloerection, increased salivation and ungroomed
appearance were observed within 7 minutes of dosing and
accompanied by hunched posture, unsteady gait, lethargy,
partially closed eyelids, pallid extremities, walking on toes
and dull colouring to eyes in all rats. Abnormal respiration,
discoloured urine, increased lacrimation, increased
sensitivity to touch, thin appearance, protruding eyes, body
tremors, prostration, blue and cold extremities and swollen
abdomen were observed in some rats.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 10 of 29
Morphological findings: No abnormalities revealed upon macroscopic examination
LDLO: 500 mg/kg discriminating dose
Comment: The discriminating dose, ie the dose which caused evident
toxicity, but not mortality (100% survival) was determined
at 500 mg/kg
Result: The notified chemical was of low acute oral toxicity in rats.
9.1.2 Dermal Toxicity (HLS 1998)
Species/strain: Rat/Sprague-Dawley origin
Number/sex of animals: 5/sex
Observation period: 14 days
Method of administration: A single topical application of 2 000 mg/kg bw test article
held under semi-occlusive dressing for 24 hours.
Test method: OECD TG 402
EC Directive 92/69/EEC
Mortality: Nil
Clinical observations: Lethargy, partially closed eyelids and pallid extremities
observed in one animal between 4 and 6 hours after dosing;
slight body weight loss in two females on day 8 only
Morphological findings: No organ abnormalities observed
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 11 of 29
Draize scores:
Time after Animal #
treatment
(days) 1M 2M 3M 4M 5M 6F 7F 8F 9F 10F
Erythema
2 1 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 2c
3 1 0a 1 1 1 2b 2a 1a 0 1c
4 0 0a 0 0 1 2ab 2a 1a 0 1c
5 0 0 0 0 0 2a 2a 1a 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 2a 2a 1a 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 1a 1a 0a 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0a 0a 0 0 0
9-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oedema
2 1 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 1
3 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 1 0 1
4 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1
see Attachment 1 for Draize scales
M male
F female
a desquamation of the stratum corneum (characterised by dryness sloughing and/or scaling)
b necrosis (localised)
c patchy response (dry area of skin) at edge of dose site
Comment: Slight or well-defined erythema with or without slight to
moderate oedema accompanied with localised desquamation
of the stratum corneum, necrosis and a patchy response at
the edge of the treated site from day 2 which was not visible
after day 8
LD50: > 2 000 mg/kg
Result: The notified chemical was of low dermal toxicity in rats.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 12 of 29
9.1.3 Inhalation Toxicity
No studies were available. Claims were made and accepted for variation of schedule
requirements of this toxicological end point, on the basis that the substance is a liquid with a
low vapour pressure and it will be used in a closed, automated process which will minimise
potential worker exposure.
9.1.4 Skin Irritation (HLS 1998)
Species/strain: Rabbit/New Zealand White
Number/sex of animals: 3 females
Observation period: 14 days
Method of administration: A single topical application of 0.5 mL of test material to
intact, shorn dorsal skin and held under semi-occlusive
dressing for 4 hours
Test method: OECD TG 404
EC Directive 92/69/EEC
Draize scores :
Time after treatment (days)
Animal #
1* 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Erythema
1 2 2 2 2 2 2a 2a 2a 2a 2 1 1 0
2 0 2 2 2 2 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 1a
3 0 2 2 1 1 1 0
Oedema
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
2 0 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 0
3 0 2 1 1 0 0 0
1
see Attachment 1 for Draize scales
*approximately 60 minutes after removal of the dressing
a desquamation of the stratum corneum
Mean individual score Erythema/Eschar Formation: 2, 2, 1.7
(24, 48 and 72 hours Oedema: 1, 1.7, 1.3
observation)
Comment: Well-defined erythema with slight oedema was evident in all
animals and accompanied by desquamation of the stratum
corneum in two rabbits; the reactions persisted to day 6 or
day 12 in two animals and until study termination in one
animal
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 13 of 29
Result: The notified chemical was a moderate irritant to the skin of
rabbits.
9.1.5 Eye Irritation (HLS 1998)
Species/strain: Rabbit/New Zealand White
Number/sex of animals: 3 females
Observation period: 3 days
Method of administration: A single ocular dose of 0.1 mL of test material into one eye
of each animal; the contralateral eye remained untreated and
served as control
Test method: OECD TG 405
EC Directive 92/69/EEC
Draize scores1 of unirrigated eyes:
Time after instillation
Animal 1 hour 1 day 2 days 3 days
All individual scores were zero
Cornea
Iris All individual scores were zero
Conjunctiva r c d r c d r c d r c d
1 1 1 - 1 0 - 1 0 - 0 0 -
2 3 2 - 1 0 - 1 0 - 0 0 -
3 32 - 21 - 1 0 - 0 0 -
1
see Attachment 1 for Draize scales
r = redness c = chemosis d = discharge
Mean individual score
(24, 48 and 72 hour Redness of the conjunctivae: 0.7, 0.7, 1.0
observation) Chemosis: 0, 0, 0.3
Comment: No iridial or corneal effects were observed; a diffuse, beefy
red coloration of the conjunctivae with partial eversion of
the eyelids was evident in two animals after 1 hour
exposure; transient hyperemia of blood vessels with slight
swelling was observed in the remaining animal; the reactions
had recovered by day 3 (72 hours)
Result: The notified chemical was slightly irritating to the eyes of
rabbits.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 14 of 29
9.1.6 Skin Sensitisation (HLS 1998)
Species/strain: Guinea pig/Dunkin/Hartley albino
Number of animals: Test group: 20 males
Control group: 10 males
Induction procedure:
Test group: Intradermal induction:
Day 1 Three pairs of intradermal injections (0.1 mL) into the dorsal
skin of the scapular region:
- Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA) 50:50 in water for
injection
- test material, 2.5% v/v in Alembicol D
- The test material, 2.5% v/v in a 50:50 mixture of FCA
and Alembicol D;
Topical induction:
Day 8 Filter paper patch saturated with 0.4 mL test material applied
to the scapular area and held under occlusive dressing for 48
hours;
Control group: Treated similarly to the test animals omitting the test
material from the intradermal injections and topical
application
Challenge procedure:
Day 22 An anterior site of the shorn flank of each animal was treated
with 0.2 mL of test material, 75% v/v in Alembicol D, and a
posterior site treated in 37.5% v/v in Alembicol D using
filter paper patch and held under occlusive dressing for 24
hours
Test method: OECD TG 406 ?Maximisation Test
EC Directive 96/54/EEC
Clinical observations: No signs of ill health or toxicity were recorded; bodyweight
increased in all animals over the period of the study
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 15 of 29
Challenge outcome:
Test animals Control animals
Challenge Dermal
concentration Reaction 24 hours* 48 hours* 24 hours 48 hours
E O E O E+O E+O
37.5% Grade 1 **9/20 4/20 8/20 2/20 0/10 0/10
Grade 2 2/20 0/20 0/20 0/20 0/10 0/10
75% Grade 1 12/20 8/20 11/20 8/20 0/10 0/10
Grade 2 2/20 0/20 2/20 0/20 0/10 0/10
* time after patch removal
** number of animals exhibiting response
E = erythema
O = oedema
Grade 1 = slight erythema/ oedema
Grade 2 = well-defined erythema/ oedema
Comment: Dermal reactions observed in test animals were not observed
in control animals. Thirteen of the 20 test animals scored
Grade 1 or Grade 2, that is evidence of skin sensitisation.
Result: The notified chemical was moderately sensitising to the skin
of guinea pigs.
9.2 Repeated Dose Toxicity (HLS 1998)
Species/strain: Rat/Sprague-Dawley
Number/sex of animals: 5/sex/group
Method of administration: oral (gavage); vehicle ?corn oil
Dose/Study duration: 0, 15, 50 and 150 mg/kg bw/day (5 mL/kg bw/day) of the
test substance administered once a day for 28 consecutive
days
Test method: OECD TG 407
EC Directive 92/69/EEC
Clinical observations:
Dose-related, transient post-dose salivation was observed in all animals receiving 150
mg/kg bw/day from the second week of treatment. Piloerection, walking on toes and
hunched posture were occasionally seen in 150 mg/kg bw/day animals. Body weight gain
was reduced in a generally dose-related manner among all treated male groups and females
at 50 and 150 mg/kg bw/day groups. Food consumption was affected in males receiving 50
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 16 of 29
and 150 mg/kg bw/day during the first week of the treatment. Slightly reduced efficiency
of food consumption for male animals at 150 mg/kg bw/day was observed, reflecting the
reduced bodyweight gain at this dose. Increased water intake was seen among both sexes at
150 mg/kg bw/day.
No behavioural changes indicative of neurotoxicity were observed.
Clinical chemistry/Haematology
Cholesterol was significantly increased among both sexes receiving 150 mg/kg bw/day.
Other changes observed in clinical chemistry parameters or hematological indices were
either considered to be of no toxicological significance or within historical control ranges.
Pathology:
Organ weight: Liver weight was slightly increased among both sexes at top dose and
females receiving 50 mg/kg bw/day. Decreased thymus weights among all treated animals
(dose-related in males) were observed.
Macroscopy: No macroscopic pathological changes were seen.
Microscopy: Microscopic changes in the liver were found in both sexes at 150 mg/kg
bw/day and consisted of minimal/slight cell loss and/or inflammatory cell infiltration in the
centrilobular region and hypertrophy of centrilobular hepatocytes. Involution/atrophy of the
thymus was observed among all treated animals, while a slight reduction in colloid in the
follicles of the thyroid was seen among both sexes receiving 150 mg/kg bw/day.
Comment:
Changes observed at 150 mg/kg bw/day were indicative of systemic toxicity. The liver was
identified as the target organ. Treatment related changes, reduced bodyweight gain and
involution/atrophy of the thymus, were observed at 15 mg/kg bw/day.
Result:
No suitable No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) has been established from this study as
treatment related changes were observed at the lowest dose tested, 15 mg/kg bw/day.
Therefore, the Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) is 15 mg/kg/day.
9.3 Genotoxicity
9.3.1 Salmonella typhimurium Reverse Mutation Assay (HLS 1998)
Strains: Salmonella typhimurium TA 1535, TA 1537, TA 98, TA
100 and Escherichia coli CM 891
Metabolic activation: Liver fraction (S9 mix) from rats pretreated with Aroclor
1254, 10% or 20%
Concentration range: Two independent tests were performed:
Test 1: 0, 5, 15, 50, 150, 500, 1 500 and 5 000 礸/plate with
and without S9 mix (10% S9 fraction);
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 17 of 29
Test 2: 0, 50, 150, 500, 1 500 and 5 000 礸/plate with and
without S9 mix (20% S9 fraction)
Test substance was diluted in ethanol and used as a negative
control; appropriate strain specific positive control reference
substances were used
Test method: OECD TG 471 - plate incorporation assay
EC Directive 92/69/EEC
Comment: Inhibition of bacterial growth occurred in both Tests in all
strains at 5 000 礸/plate; substantial dose-related increases
in revertant colony numbers over control counts were
observed in strain TA 1535 in both Tests and in strain TA
100 in Test 1 in the presence of S9 mix; slight increases (less
than 2- fold) in strain TA 100 in Test 2 with S9 mix were
also obtained; these results were maximal at 1 500 礸/plate
Result: The notified chemical tested in ethanol showed evidence of
mutagenic activity in Salmonella typhimurium strains TA
1535 and TA 100 in the presence of metabolic activation,
under the conditions of the experiment.
9.3.2 In Vitro Mammalian Cell Mutation Assay (HLS 1998)
Species/strain: L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells
Concentration range: Two independent experiments were performed.
Experiment 1 (without S9 mix):
Test 1: 0, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40 and 60 礸/mL;
Test 2: 0, 1, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 20, 40 and 60 礸/mL.
Experiment 2 (with S9 mix):
Test 1: 0, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 礸/mL;
Test 2: 0, 2.5, 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 礸/mL.
Vehicle was ethanol; appropriate positive control reference
substances were used.
Metabolic activation: Liver fraction (S9 mix) from rat pretreated with Aroclor
1254
Test method: OECD TG 476
EC Directive 88/302/EEC
Comment: Toxicity was observed in treated cultures in all preliminary
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 18 of 29
toxicity tests, both with and without S9 mix. Increases in
mutation frequency were observed in treated cultures in both
experiments, with and without S9 mix, but an increase of
100 over the control value was not achieved. All mutation
frequency values were within the normal control ranges with
one exception. In Experiment 1 with presence of S9 mix,
there was evidence of mutagenic activity in cultures treated
with test substance at 30 礸/mL, but the Relative Total
Growth (RTG) value of 0.4% was considerably below the
required value of 10-20%.
Result: The notified chemical showed non-conclusive evidence of
mutagenic potential at the thymidine kinase locus on
L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells in vitro
9.3.3 Micronucleus Assay in the Bone Marrow Cells of the Mouse (HLS 2000)
Species/strain: mouse/Crl:CD-1 (ICR) BR
Number and sex of animals: 5/sex/dose group
Doses/Method of By intraperitoneal injection:
administration: Test substance: 25 mg/kg (low), 50 mg/kg (mid) or
100 mg/kg (high);
Vehicle control: corn oil;
Positive control, by intragastric gavage, Mitomycin C
12 mg/kg.
Sampling schedule: Vehicle control, low, mid and high dose animals were
sacrificed 24 hours after dosing;
Remaining animals of the vehicle control group and high
dose animals were sacrificed 48 hours after dosing;
Positive control group animals were sacrificed 24 hours
after dosing
Micronuclei score: No significant increase in micronucleated polychromatic
erythrocytes (PCE) due to treatment with test substance at
either sampling time. The positive control caused a
significant increase in micronucleated PCE.
Test method: OECD TG 474
Result: The notified chemical did not induce a significant increase
in micronucleated PCE in bone marrow cells of the mouse
in vivo.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 19 of 29
9.4 Overall Assessment of Toxicological Data
The notified chemical has low acute oral toxicity (LDL0 > 500 mg/kg) and low dermal
toxicity (LD50 > 2 000 mg/kg) in rats. Acute inhalation studies have not been conducted for
the notified chemical. In rabbits, the notified chemical was a skin irritant but not an eye
irritant. The notified chemical was sensitising to guinea pig skin.
In a 28 day repeat oral dose study, the notified chemical produced systemic toxicity and
pathological effects in rats at dose of 150 mg/kg bw/day. These included reduced body
weight gain, slight impairment of food utilisation, increased water intake, slight increased
cholesterol level, increased liver weight and decreased thymus weight. Microscopic
examination revealed slight liver cell loss and/or inflammatory cell infiltration in the
centrilobular region and hypertrophy of centrilobular hepatocytes, slight reduction in colloid
in the follicles of the thyroid and involution/atrophy of the thymus. No suitable NOEL has
been established from this study as treatment related changes were observed at the lowest
dose,15 mg/kg bw/day. The LOAEL is 15 mg/kg bw/day.
The notified chemical tested in ethanol revealed mutagenic activity in a bacterial test system
but demonstrated non-conclusive evidence of mutagenic potential at the thymidine kinase
locus on L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells in vitro. Further investigation of mutagenic activity
revealed that the notified chemical was non genotoxic in the in vivo mouse micronucleus test.
Based on the submitted data the notified chemical is classified a hazardous substance under
the NOHSC Approved Criteria for Classifying Hazardous Substances (NOHSC 1999). Risk
phrases R22 (likely to be `harmful if swallowed'), R38 (irritating to skin), R43 (may cause
sensitisation by skin contact), and R48/22 (harmful: danger of serious damage to health by
prolonged exposure if swallowed) are appropriate.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 20 of 29
10. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Tests were performed according to corresponding EEC and OECD test guidelines (OECD
1995-1996), (European Commission 1992) at Huntingdon Life Sciences testing facilities, UK.
These facilities comply with the OECD principles of good laboratory practice and full test
reports were submitted. All tests were performed on the notified chemical.
10.1 Summary of Ecotoxicity Test Results
Test Species Test Substance Result
Concentration* mg/L
mg/L
Acute Toxicity Rainbow trout 0.46, 1.0, 2.2, 4.6, 10.0 96 hour:
(Semi-Static Test); (Oncorhynchus 1.9 < LC50 < 4.1
(OECD TG 203) mykiss) NOEC** = 0.38
Acute Toxicity - Water Flea 48 hour EC50 = 0.006
0.0001, 0.00022,
Immobilisation (Static (Daphnia NOEC = 0.0022
0.00046, 0.001, 0.002,
Test) magna) LOEC*** = 0.0051
0.0046, 0.01, 0.022
(OECD TG 202 part I)
Growth Inhibition - Alga 0.33, 0.74, 1.6, 3.4, 7.2, 0-72 hour ERC50 = 9.3
(Selenastrum
Growth (? & Biomass 16.0 72 hour EBC50 = 3.9
capricornutum)
(b) (Static Test) NOEC < 0.33
(OECD TG 201)
* Actual concentration.
** NOEC - no observable effect concentration.
*** LOEC ?lowest observable effect concentration.
The submitted EC50 values for all test organisms were calculated using the Thompson and
Weil model, a model not favoured in this environmental assessment. Probit analysis could
not be undertaken on fish and alga toxicity tests due to the experimental design.
Consequently, the EC50 values for these species are estimated from the data provided.
10.2 Fish Acute Toxicity (HLS 1998)
Results reported are actual and not nominal concentrations. At 96 hours, actual
concentrations ranged from 82 to 85% of nominal. At 96 hours, the highest test concentration
resulting in 0% mortality was 1.9 mg/L. At this concentration, sub-lethal effects were
observed at 2 hours. These effects included increased pigmentation, swimming at the surface,
hyperventilation, lethargy, loss of equilibrium and distended abdomen. The lowest test
concentration resulting in 100% mortality was 4.1 mg/L. These values indicate that the slope
of the dose response curve is very steep. From the data provided the estimated EC50 lies
between 1.9 and 4.1 mg/L.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 21 of 29
10.3 Aquatic Invertebrate Acute Toxicity (HLS 1998)
Measured test concentrations ranged from 144 to 107% of nominal concentrations at 0 hours
and 91-83% at 96 hours. Under the conditions of the study, 10% immobilisation was not
considered to be biologically significant. Therefore, 0.10 礸/L was considered to be a close
approximation of the highest test concentration resulting in 0% immobilisation. Due to the
limited sensitivity of the analytical method of analysis (limit of quantification < 4 礸/L) it
was not possible to verify the aqueous test concentrations below 4.6 礸/L. However, stock
solutions used to prepare all the exposure concentrations were analysed and found to be 97 to
72% of nominal at 0 hours, which inferred that near nominal concentrations were achieved at
the start of the study. This assessment reanalysed the daphnia test data using Probit analysis.
The NOEC, LOEC and EC50 provided in the above table were calculated using the Bonferroni
t-Test. The EC50 ranges from 3.46 to 11.16 礸/L (95% CI). Values provided by the notifier
using the Thompson and Weil model were 6.8 礸/L (EC50, 95% CI 3.2-15) and 0.22 礸/L
(NOEC). It should be noted that the 24 hr EC50 value provided by the notifier
(>22 礸/L) is markedly higher than the 48 hour value (6.8 礸/L). This suggests that
equilibrium may not have been reached and that the actual EC50 value may be even lower.
Results for testing of chronic effects to daphnia are not available.
10.4 Alga Growth Inhibition Test (HLS 1998)
All results are based on mean measured concentrations of notified chemical which ranged
from 74 to 80% of nominal at 0 hours and 68 to 77% of nominal at 72 hours. The NOEC of
less than 0.33 mg/L (determined using the Williams' test) indicated statistically significant
inhibition of growth at the 5% level. However, the mean % inhibition was less than 10% and
not considered biologically significant. The notifier indicated that the ERC50 was 9.3 mg/L.
However, in the absence of Probit analysis, the ERC50 value should be estimated to lie
between 2.3 and 16 mg/L.
10.5 Activated Sludge
Whilst there were no data presented regarding Activated Sludge-Bacterial Inhibition, the three
hour EC50 of the notified chemical is reported in the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) to
be 137.5 mg/L.
10.6 Conclusion
The ecotoxicity data indicate that the notified chemical is moderately toxic to fish and algae,
highly toxic to daphnia but not toxic to water treatment bacteria.
11. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD
AERO 5100 Promoter will be contained within the tailings dam and release to the
environment of the notified chemical is expected to be minimal. The notifier has stated that
tailings storage dams are designed to "substantially" reduce the potential for seepage to occur.
Regardless of the type of floor employed there remains some risk of tailings dam seepage
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 22 of 29
which may lead to contamination of surface and ground water. These factors, combined with
the high toxicity to aquatic organisms, suggest that the notified chemical poses a significant
environmental risk if accidentally released regardless of the remoteness of the site of use.
In the event of accidental spillage, transporters will rely on the MSDS for instructions to
minimise exposure to the environment, and for clean up and disposal.
12. ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY
EFFECTS
Based on the available toxicity data, the notified chemical is acutely toxic by the oral route,
elicits well defined skin irritation and is a skin sensitiser. In a 28 day oral (gavage) repeat
dose study a NOEL could not be established. The LOAEL was 15 mg/kg/day. Hence, the
notified chemical may pose a danger of serious damage to health by prolonged exposure. The
notified chemical tested in ethanol revealed mutagenic activity in a bacterial test system but
demonstrated non-conclusive evidence of mutagenic potential at the thymidine kinase locus
on L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells in vitro. Genotoxic activity was not observed
in vivo in a mouse micronucleus test.
Under the NOHSC Approved Criteria for Classifying Hazardous Substances, the notified
chemical is classified as Harmful (Xn) with the following risk phrases assigned: R22 ?br>
Harmful if Swallowed; R38 ?Irritating to Skin; R43 ?May Cause Skin Sensitisation; and
R48/22 Harmful: Danger of Serious Damage to Health by Prolonged Exposure if Swallowed.
Occupational Health and Safety
Given the nature of the chemical, it is critical that worker exposure does not occur either
accidentally or in routine use. Transport and storage of the 200 or 1 000 L import containers
should not result in worker exposure except in the event of accidental spillage.
Worker exposure during normal use of the notified chemical is most likely to occur from
drips and spills when connecting or disconnecting lines or cleaning pumps and ancillary
equipment. The notifier states that plant operators involved in transferring the notified
chemical to the flotation cell and overseeing the flotation process are required to wear
respirators, impervious gloves, chemical splash goggles and coveralls. It is critical that
employers ensure that workers wear the personal protective clothing as specified, to minimise
the potential for exposure and the risk of adverse health effects. Once mixed in with the ore
slurry, the notified chemical is contained within an automated process requiring little worker
intervention. The initial maximum concentration of reagent is 0.00435% in the slurry,
however, as the slurry becomes more concentrated, the reagent concentration will increase.
The maximum concentration is not known. Therefore, any worker who may potentially come
in contact with the slurry should wear the personal protective equipment specified above. The
subsequent processes also require little worker intervention. Chemical incorporated during
process operations is ultimately destroyed during subsequent off-site metal processing.
Public Health
There is little potential for exposure of the public to the notified chemical used as a mineral
processing agent as it will not be sold to the public and will only be used in the mineral
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 23 of 29
processing industry. The public would only be exposed to the notified chemical in the event
of an accident during transportation between dockside and the end customer site. The low
exposure potential indicates a negligible risk to public health.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 24 of 29
13. RECOMMENDATIONS
Occupational Health and Safety
To minimise occupational exposure to AERO5100 Promoter the following guidelines and
precautions should be observed:
Workers receive regular education and training on handling techniques, good hygiene
?br>
practices and potential adverse health effects associated with use of AERO5640
Promoter;
As potential for skin sensitisation exists the notifier's MSDS should be provided to
?br>
the authorised medical practitioner responsible for health surveillance in the
workplace;
Safety goggles should be selected and fitted in accordance with Australian Standard
?br>
(AS) 1336 (Standards Australia 1994) to comply with Australian/New Zealand
Standard (AS/NZS) 1337 (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand 1992);
Industrial clothing should conform to the specifications detailed in AS 2919
?br>
(Standards Australia 1987) and AS 3765.1 (Standards Australia 1990);
Impermeable gloves should conform to AS/NZS 2161.2 (Standards Australia 1998);
?br>
All occupational footwear should conform to AS/NZS 2210 (Standards
?br>
Australia/Standards New Zealand 1994);
Spillage of the notified chemical should be avoided. Spillages should be cleaned up
?br>
promptly with absorbents which should be put into containers for disposal;
Good personal hygiene should be practised to minimise the potential for ingestion;
?br>
A copy of the MSDS should be easily accessible to employees.
?br>
Environmental
Where seepage is known to occur, monitoring of ground and surface waters for the presence
of the notified chemical or general tests for toxicity using daphnia should be conducted.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 25 of 29
Public Health
If the conditions of use are varied from the notified use, greater exposure of the public to the
product may occur. In such circumstances, further information may be required to assess the
hazards to public health.
Recommendation to NOHSC
The notified chemical may be recommended to the National Occupational Health and Safety
Commission for consideration for inclusion in the NOHSC List of Designated Hazardous
Substances.
14. MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
The MSDS for the AERO?100 Promoter, containing the notified chemical, was provided in
a format consistent with the National Code of Practice for the Preparation of Material Safety
Data Sheets (NOHSC 1994).
This MSDS was provided by the applicant as part of the notification statement. It is
reproduced here as a matter of public record. The accuracy of this information remains the
responsibility of the applicant.
15. REQUIREMENTS FOR SECONDARY NOTIFICATION
Under the Act, secondary notification of the notified chemical shall be required if any of the
circumstances stipulated under subsection 64(2) of the Act arise. No other specific conditions
are prescribed.
16. REFERENCES
EPA (1995) Best Practice Environmental Management in Mining Tailings Containment, US
EPA.
European Commission (1992) European Commission Directive 92/69/EC, Annex V.
Brussels, (L383).
FORS (1998) Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail.
Canberra, Federal Office of Road Safety.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Abiotic Degradation: Hydrolysis as a Function of pH
Report No: CTI067/983720. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Acute Toxicity To Daphnia magna Report No:
CTI063/984454. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 26 of 29
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Acute Toxicity To Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
Report No: CTI062/984522. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Alga Growth Inhibition Report No: CTI065/985101.
Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Biotic Degradation - Closed Bottle Test Report No:
CT064/983537. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Acute Dermal Toxicity to the Rat Report No: CTI
054/983323/AC. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Acute Oral Toxicity to the Rat (Fixed Dose Method)
Report No: CTI 053/983352/AC. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Bacterial Mutation Assay Report No: CTI 060/983526.
Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Eye Irritation to the Rabbit Report No: CTI
056/983259/SE. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Mammalian Cell Mutation Assay Report No:
CTI099/984211. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Skin Irritation to the Rabbit Report No: CTI
055/983273/SE. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Skin Sensitisation to the Guinea Pig Report No: CTI
057/983631/SS. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (1998) AERO 5100 Promoter Toxicity Study by Oral Administration to CD Rats for 4
Weeks Report No: CTI 059/983458. Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
HLS (2000) AERO 5100 Promoter Mouse Micronucleus Assay Report No: CTI/110.
Huntingdon, Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) Ltd.
NOHSC (1994) National Code of Practice for the Preparation of Material Safety Data Sheets
[NOHSC:2011(1994)]. Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service.
NOHSC (1995) Adopted National Exposure Standards for Atmospheric Contaminants in the
Occupational Environment, [NOHSC:1003(1995)]. Exposure Standards for Atmospheric
Contaminants in the Occupational Environment: Guidance Note and National Exposure
Standards. Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service.
NOHSC (1999) Approved Criteria for Classifying Hazardous Substances
[NOHSC:1008(1999)]. Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service.
NOHSC (1999) List of Designated Hazardous Substances [NOHSC:10005(1999)]. Canberra,
Australian Government Publishing Service.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 27 of 29
Normandy Mining Limited (1998) Environmental Report for Mt Leyshon Operations.
North Limited (1998) Environment, Safety and Health Report.
OECD (1995-1996) OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals on CD-Rom. Paris,
OECD.
Standards Australia (1987) AS 2919-1987, Australian Standard Industrial Clothing. Sydney,
Standards Australia.
Standards Australia (1990) AS 3765.1-1990, Australian Standard Clothing for Protection
against Hazardous Chemicals Part 1 Protection Against General or Specific Chemicals.
Sydney, Standards Australia.
Standards Australia (1994) AS 1336-1994, Australian Standard Eye protection in the
Industrial Environment. Sydney, Standards Australia.
Standards Australia (1998) AS/NZS 2161.2:1998, Australian/New Zealand Standard
Occupational Protective Gloves Part 2: General Requirements. Sydney/Wellington, Standards
Australia and Standards New Zealand.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand (1992) AS/NZS 1337-1992, Australian/New
Zealand Standard Eye Protectors for Industrial Applications. Sydney/Wellington, Standards
Australia and Standards New Zealand.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand (1994) AS/NZS 2210-1994, Australian/New
Zealand Standard Occupational Protective Footwear. Sydney/Wellington, Standards Australia
and Standards New Zealand.
FULL PUBLIC REPORT 2 November 2000
NA/747 Page 28 of 29
Attachment 1
The Draize Scale for evaluation of skin reactions is as follows:
Erythema Formation Rating Oedema Formation Rating
No erythema 0 No oedema 0
Very slight erythema (barely perceptible) 1 Very slight oedema (barely perceptible) 1
Well-defined erythema 2 Slight oedema (edges of area well-defined 2
by definite raising
Moderate oedema (raised approx. 1 mm) 3
Moderate to severe erythema 3
Severe erythema (beet redness) 4 Severe oedema (raised more than 1 mm 4
and extending beyond area of exposure)
The Draize scale for evaluation of eye reactions is as follows:
CORNEA
Opacity Rating Area of Cornea involved Rating
No opacity 0 none 25% or less (not zero) 1
Diffuse area, details of iris clearly 1 slight 25% to 50% 2
visible
50% to 75% 3
Easily visible translucent areas, details 2 mild
of iris slightly obscure
Greater than 75% 4
Opalescent areas, no details of iris 3
visible, size of pupil barely discernible moderate
Opaque, iris invisible 4 severe
CONJUNCTIVAE
Redness Rating Chemosis Rating Discharge Rating
Vessels normal 0 none No swelling 0 none No discharge 0 none
Vessels definitely 1 Any swelling above 1 slight Any amount different 1 slight
injected above normal slight normal from normal
More diffuse, deeper 2 mod. Obvious swelling with 2 mild Discharge with 2 mod.
crimson red with partial eversion of lids moistening of lids and
individual vessels not adjacent hairs
Swelling with lids half-
easily discernible
closed 3 mod. Discharge with 3 severe
Diffuse beefy red 3 severe moistening of lids and
Swelling with lids half- hairs and considerable
closed to completely 4 severe area around eye
closed
IRIS
Values Rating
Normal 0 none
Folds above normal, congestion, swelling, circumcorneal injection, iris reacts to light 1 slight
No reaction to light, haemorrhage, gross destruction 2 severe
2 November, 2000
FULL PUBLIC REPORT
NA/ 2/29
|