Science Approach Document:

Ecological Risk Classification of Organic Substances

Environment and Climate Change Canada

July 2016

(PDF Version - 781 KB)

Table of Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables


Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) has characterized organic substances from the third phase of the Chemicals Management Plan (CMP) for their potential to cause ecological harm. The ecological risk classification of organic substances (ERC) ranked 640 substances into three levels of concern based on their relative anticipated potential to pose a risk to the environment. These 640 substances had met the categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), or were considered a priority based on other human health or ecological concerns.

This Science Approach Document presents the ERC approach and the results of its application to 640 organic substances. A period of consultation on the Science Approach Document is being provided to the public who will have an opportunity to comment and provide additional information in advance of this information being applied in Screening Assessments. This publication of the scientific approach and results in a Science Approach Document will assist the government in addressing substances that may be of low concern to either human health or the environment in a more effective manner and identifies substances of relatively higher concern that will require more detailed evaluation.

The ERC involved the use of empirical and modelled data to classify substances as warranting further evaluation of their potential to cause harm to the environment or as having a low likelihood of causing ecological harm. The ERC was applied using data collected during categorization, through the Domestic Substances List (DSL) Inventory Updates carried out under authority of section 71 of CEPA and through other recent data-gathering activities. The ERC describes the hazard or potency of a substance using key parameters, including mode of action, chemical reactivity, internal toxicity thresholds, bioavailability, and chemical activity and bioactivity. The possible exposure of organisms in the aquatic and terrestrial environments is characterized based on factors including potential emission rates, overall persistence and long-range transport potential in air. Hazard and exposure profiles were developed for individual substances based on multiple metrics. Use of a weight-of-evidence approach based on multiple lines of evidence to classify hazard, exposure, and risk reduces the overall uncertainty associated with the classification outcomes. Additional rules were applied (e.g. classification consistency, margin of exposure) to refine the preliminary classification of hazard or exposure.

A risk matrix was used to assign a low, moderate or high classification of potential concern for each substance based on its hazard and exposure classifications. Organic substances classified as having higher potential risk concern were generally those characterized as being more potent and having a greater potential for widespread continuous exposure. Substances classified as having low potential risk concern generally had short residence times in the environment, do not undergo long-range transport and are expected to only demonstrate baseline toxicity.

Initial ERC outcomes of potential risk concern were adjusted using a two-step approach. The first step decreased the risk classification outcomes for substances which had a low regional rate of emission to water after wastewater treatment, representing a low potential for exposure. The second step reviewed low classification outcomes using relatively conservative, local-scale (i.e., in the area immediately surrounding a point-source of discharge) risk scenarios designed to be protective of the environment; substances for which a potential local risk was identified were reclassified to a higher level.

Based on inherent hazard properties and current use patterns and quantities in commerce, 40 substances were classified as being of high potential ecological concern, 92 substances were classified as being of moderate ecological concern, and 508 substances were classified as being of low ecological concern. Substances classified as high ecological concerns will undergo further ecological assessment. Some of the substances of moderate ecological concern (58 of 92 substances) have similarities to substances that were classified as having a high potential for ecological concern and will therefore also undergo further assessment as part of those groups. The remainder of the substances of moderate ecological concern and of low ecological concern (542 substances in total) are not expected to pose an ecological risk based on current information, and further assessment work is not required at this time. The approach and results for these 542 substances will form the basis, in conjunction with any other relevant information that becomes available after the publication of this Science Approach Document, for the conclusions in Screening Assessment Reports that will be published at a later time. Substances which were classified as low or moderate concern primarily on the basis of current low exposures may be subject to follow-up or tracking of use pattern information to inform future priority-setting.

Top of Page

1. Introduction

Following categorization of substances on the Domestic Substances List (DSL), which was completed in 2006, approximately 4300 of the 23 000 substances on the DSL were identified for additional assessment activity. Among the remaining substances are 640 organic substances remaining to be addressed under the Chemicals Management Program (CMP). The 640 substances met the categorization criteria for persistence or bioaccumulation and inherent toxicity to human or non-human organisms, or for greatest potential for exposure to humans under subsection 73(1) of Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) (Canada 1999), or were identified as having health effects of concern based on classifications by other national or international agencies for carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, developmental toxicity or reproductive toxicity, or as having other ecological concerns. The 640 substances, which include 448 discrete organic substances and 192 organic substances of Unknown or Variable Composition, Complex Reaction Products and Biological Materials (UVCBs), were evaluated through the ecological risk classification of organic substances (ERC). The approach described in this report was not applied broadly to petroleum substances, polymers or inorganic substances, but in those few cases where such substances were considered, these substances may additionally be addressed in other activities (e.g., an organometallic substance considered in the ERC may also be addressed in an assessment of the metal moiety).

The ERC was applied to 640 organic substances using data collected during DSL categorization, through the DSL Inventory Updates and from other sources. The approach involved the use of empirical and modelled data to identify substances warranting more detailed evaluation of their potential to cause harm to the environment, and those expected to have a low likelihood of causing ecological harm.

The purpose of this document is to provide stakeholders and the public with the opportunity to review and comment on the ERC approach and the results of its application. It is also an opportunity to provide additional information to inform revisions to the use of the approach prior to these results forming the basis, in conjunction with any other relevant information that becomes available after the publication of the Science Approach Document, before proposing conclusions through the publication of screening assessments under section 68 or 74 of CEPA. The publication of the scientific approach and results in the Science Approach Document will assist the government in addressing substances that may be of low concern to either human health or the environment in a more effective manner and identifies substances of relatively higher concern that require more detailed evaluation.

The ERC approach includes consideration of information on chemical properties, environmental fate, hazards, uses and exposure. Most of the substances had data on reported commercial quantities received through submissions of information in response to notices under section 71 of CEPA regarding commercial activity in Canada (DSL Inventory Update). Empirical data (where available) as well as results from models were used to inform substance-specific decisions.

This document does not represent an exhaustive or critical review of all available data, but provides a summary of the approach and the results obtained. For the substances identified as having a low and in some cases moderate likelihood of causing harmful ecological effects, results are intended to form the basis for the ecological portion of screening assessments that will be published subsequently, in conjunction with the assessment of potential human health risks. The basis of the classification pertaining to some of the substances in ERC may be subsequently updated and new data considered as part of future assessments.

This document was prepared by staff in the CEPA Risk Assessment Program at Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC). The document has undergone external written peer review and/or consultation. Comments on the technical portions of the document were received from Dr. Jon Arnot (ARC Arnot Research and Consulting) and Mr. Geoff Granville (GCGranville Consulting Corp.). While external comments were taken into consideration, the final content and outcome of the report remain the responsibility of Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Top of Page

2. Basis of Approach to Ecological Risk Classification of Organic Substances

The ERC is a risk-based approach that employs multiple metrics for both hazard (potency) and exposure based on weighted consideration of multiple lines of evidence determining risk classification. Unlike categorization of the DSL, where hazard profiles were typically based on one modelled or empirical 96-h median lethal effects endpoint (e.g. LC50) for a daphid or fish, hazard profiles are established using various approaches such as consideration of mode of toxic action, reactivity and food web-derived internal toxicity thresholds. Exposure profiles are also composed of multiple metrics including overall persistence, emission rate and long-range transport. The various lines of evidence are combined to identify substances of higher potency and increased potential for exposure in various media. This approach reduces the overall uncertainty with risk classification compared to one that relies on a single metric in a single medium (e.g., LC50) for classification.

The ERC is illustrated in Figure 1. Empirical data were collected and model data were generated for 640 organic substances (section 3) to create hazard and exposure profiles (sections 4.1 and 4.2, respectively). In parallel, structural or functional substance groups (see appendices) were assigned to maximize the effectiveness and efficiencies in the risk classification processes. Substance-specific profiles were then compared to decision criteria for preliminary classification of hazard and exposure (sections 5.1 and 5.2, respectively). If there were insufficient data, or if a UVCB substance could not be suitably represented by a single chemical structure, a manual expert judgement-based approach (section 5.3) to classification was used. The preliminary classifications of hazard and exposure were examined and were adjusted, as required, according to specific rules and use of judgement (section 6). A risk matrix was then used to classify levels of expected concern according to risk (section 7). Substances were further adjusted to minimize the potential for both over- and underestimation of risk classification results (section 7.1). This included a review of the substances initially identified as having a low potential of ecological harm using relatively conservative, local-scale (i.e., in the area immediately surrounding a point-source of discharge) exposure estimation. Final risk classifications (low, moderate, and high potential for ecological harm) and identification of potential need for tracking of future use patterns were then determined for each of the 640 organic substances (section 8).

Critical data and considerations used to create substance-specific profiles and classifications associated with hazard, exposure and risk, as well as identification of potential need for tracking of future use patterns, are presented in ECCC 2016a.

Figure 2.1 Framework for the ecological risk classification of organic substances
Figure 2.1 (See long description below)

Figure 1: Overview of the Ecological Risk Classification of organic substances. The figure illustrates the data collection and decision steps which occur throughout the process. In the first step data is collected and generated for each of the organic substances. If sufficient data is available the substance moves on to the hazard and exposure profiling step. For those substances with an incomplete dataset, or where no representative structure for a UVCB substance is available, the profiling step is skipped and the hazard and exposure classifications are manually generated.

The hazard of a substance is profiled using the following hazard metrics: mode of action, chemical reactivity, internal toxicity threshold, bioavailbility, and chemical and biological activity of the substance. The exposure of a substance is profiled using the following exposure metrics: quantity, emission rate, critical emission rate/margins of exposure, overall persistence and long-range transport potential in air of the substance. A numerical classification is assigned for the hazard and exposure of each substance using scores of one to three to represent lower, moderate, and higher level of hazard or exposure potential. The preliminary classifications of hazard and exposure are examined and adjusted, as required, according to specific rules and use of judgement.

A risk matrix is used to classify levels of expected concern based on hazard and exposure classifications. Substances were further adjusted to minimize the potential for both over and underestimation of risk classification results. Final risk classifications (low ecological concern or more detailed assessment required) were then determined for each of the organic substances.

* Some moderate concern substances will be further assessed because a similar substance has been classified as a high ecological concern.

Top of Page

3. Data Collection and Generation

Physical-chemical properties, fate (e.g., chemical half-lives in various media and biota, partition coefficients, and fish bioconcentration), acute fish ecotoxicity, and chemical import and manufacture volumes in Canada were collected from recent section 71 surveys (Canada 2009, Canada 2012); from available scientific literature or empirical databases (e.g., OECD QSAR Toolbox), or were generated using selected Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) or mass-balance and bioaccumulation models. These data were required as inputs to other mass-balance models or to complete the substance profiles. For UVCB substances, a representative chemical structure was chosen to represent the substance. In many cases, a conservative representative chemical structure was chosen to represent an entire UVCB substance (e.g., where variation of the UVCB components was predictable). Individual structures deemed inappropriate for modeling (some UVCB representative structures or discrete organics such as organometallics) did not use modeling. A manual ranking of hazard and exposure classification was required in these cases. Ionogenic organic chemicals (IOCs) comprise about 20% of the 640 organics. Very few measured data are available for IOCs and, hence, assessment uncertainty may be greater for these substances than for the neutral substances. IOCs were identified and modelled using approaches and necessary simplifying assumptions described in Arnot (2014). Substances having complete and appropriate data sets were then subject to chemical profiling involving both empirical and modeling approaches.

Mass-balance modeling involved two fate models. The Risk Assessment IDentification And Ranking (RAIDAR) model was used for determining the fate of a substance in representative aquatic and terrestrial environments and food webs based on separate water or soil emissions. RAIDAR combines mass-balance environmental fate and food web bioaccumulation models to estimate the potential for an organic chemical to deliver a toxic internal dose to a target receptor on a steady-state basis in a regional-scale evaluative environment of 100,000 km2 (Arnot et al. 2006; Arnot and Mackay 2008). An updated RAIDAR Ver.2.0 (RAIDAR-IONIC) was applied to better address the fate and bioaccumulation for IOCs (Armitage et al. 2013, Arnot 2011). While the revised RAIDAR model seeks to improve the simulation for IOCs in the environment, it is recognized that significant data gaps exist and, hence, uncertainty in evaluating appreciably dissociated IOCs is generally assumed to be greater than evaluating neutral organic chemicals with the model. A second fate model, SimpleTreat (Struijs et al. 1991), was applied to determine the removal of a substance in a model wastewater treatment system (WWTS) from biodegradation (reaction) as well as adsorption to primary and secondary sludge. Losses to reaction were considered completely removed. Adsorption of substances to sludge was addressed by evaluating terrestrial hazard to account for land-applied biosolids. The quantity of substance lost from wastewater to air due to volatilization was not considered removed from the environment and was subject to subsequent atmospheric fate considerations (e.g., long-range transport).

Chemical profiling using various QSAR models and expert systems was then conducted on all organic substances with acceptable 2D chemical structures represented by an alpha-numeric formula known as the Simplified Molecular-Input Line-Entry System (SMILES). Further details are given under the hazard and exposure profiling sections.

Top of Page

4. Profiling

4.1 Hazard Profiling

Profiling of hazard was conducted to determine the potency of a chemical via five primary metrics: (1) mode of toxic action, (2) chemical reactivity, (3) internal toxicity thresholds (i.e., critical body residues), (4) bioavailability and (5) chemical/biological activity. The aim of hazard profiling is to identify chemicals that are bioavailable and present a high hazard either intrinsically due to their non-baseline potency (toxicodynamics) or extrinsically because of their fate and behaviour in food webs (toxicokinetics). Effect concentrations for chemicals that only exert baseline toxicity (or narcosis) as a mode of action are generally better understood and more predictable in ecological sciences than effect concentrations for chemicals that exert more specific modes of toxic action or reactivity (Mackay et al. 2009). Effect concentrations for chemicals with more specific modes of action (i.e. chemicals that also exert a specific mechanism of toxicity such as acetylcholinesterase inhibition in addition to baseline toxicity) or reactivity (e.g., electrophiles) are less reliably predicted. Aquatic concentrations or tissue residues associated with non-baseline effects can be lower than concentrations or residues associated with baseline toxicity. This difference in toxicity is sometimes referred to as "excess toxicity" or the "toxic ratio" (e.g., Maeder et al. 2004, Arnot 2014). Discriminating between baseline behaviour and non-baseline behaviour is thus useful for classifying hazardous substances simply because non-baseline substances are more potent than chemicals that only exert a toxic baseline toxicity. Hence, exposures required to exert a toxic effect can be lower for chemicals that exert additional, non-baseline modes of toxic action. A similar concept is advocated by the OECD (2014) and others as a strategy for grouping chemicals of common reactivity (e.g., Wu et al. 2010, Mackay et al. 2014a). The profiling approach also minimizes the chance of underestimating hazard classification from limited ecotoxicity data based on a single medium of exposure (e.g., water) because internal concentrations (body or tissue residues) are also considered and hence exposures and potential risks of chemicals that exhibit bioaccumulation or biomagnification in food webs (higher internal concentrations at higher trophic levels) are more appropriately evaluated.

4.1.1 Mode of toxic action

Just over half of the substances on the DSL have been predicted, using quantum chemical descriptors, to have a baseline, narcotic mode of toxic action (MoA), while approximately one third were predicted to have a specific MoA, with the remaining portion having an undefined MoA (Dimitrov et al. 2003). In the ERC, MoA was profiled using more than one approach and utilizing more recent advances to determining MoA than those described in 2003 work by Dimitrov and co-authors. Structural profiling using two rule-based systems contained in the OECD Toolbox (v3.3) was first applied. The Verharr profiler, which is based on the ToxTree software (Verharr et al. 1992, Verharr 2000, Enoch 2008) and OASIS MoA profiler developed by the Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry (e.g., Dimitrov et al. 2003) determine MoA bins based on pass/fail structural rules. Mode of action was also determined using tissue residue toxicity ratios. Toxicity ratio refers to the difference in concentration between a baseline toxicant and a chemical exerting a more specific MoA (e.g., Maeder et al. 2004, Arnot 2014). A median critical body residue (CBR) associated with acute lethality of 3.0 mmol/kg is used for the acute threshold and 0.3 mmol/kg is used as a chronic threshold for baseline narcosis (McCarty and Mackay 1993, Esher et al. 2011, McCarty et al. 2013). Thus, if 3.0 mmol/kg divided by the acute CBRLC50 is greater than 10, a chemical is expected to be more potent than a narcotic chemical because the concentration in the tissue necessary to cause death is lower. Since MoA is determined using toxicity ratios based on fish bioconcentration factors (BCF), the toxicity data, and thus extrapolation to other species, remains uncertain. Additional structure-based metrics are combined with toxicity ratios to help increase the certainty of MoA across species (see section 5). Similar MoA considerations have been used to propose ecological Thresholds of Toxicological Concern (eco-TTC) for various modes of action. Eco-TTCs have been advocated as a useful approach to screening and prioritization of chemicals (de Wolf et al. 2005, Williams et al. 2011, Belanger et al. 2015).

Chemical activities (Mackay et al. 2009, Mackay et al. 2014a), here defined as the fraction of maximum solubility in water resulting in acute lethality in fish, were also calculated and used as a qualitative check on MoA as well as on the quality of aquatic toxicity data; i.e., activities greater than 1 indicate toxicity predictions or empirical results above maximum solubility of a chemical in water. A chemical activity of 0.01 to 0.1 has been associated with baseline narcosis (Mackay et al. 2009, Mackay et al. 2014a). Finally, the MoATox database from the USEPA (Baron et al. 2015) was incorporated to provide empirical insight into mode of toxic action, where information was available.

4.1.2 Chemical reactivity

Chemical reactivity is a broad term that refers to the ability of a chemical to undergo changes according to the environmental system in which it resides. Here, we refer to reactivity as a chemical's potential to undergo interactions with biological tissues that are outside the domain of baseline interactions, which are non-specific weak interactions with cell membrane surfaces (Dimitrov et al. 2003). In essence, profiling for chemical reactivity provides a subcellular "mechanism of action" level of investigation since many of these reactions can involve binding and/or disruptions of biologically relevant macromolecules (e.g., protein, DNA, RNA). Profiling of covalent interactions with protein and DNA was conducted using mechanistic profilers in the OECD QSAR Toolbox (v3.3). Protein and DNA binding profilers in the Toolbox developed by the OECD and Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry (LMC) were applied. These profilers work by applying mechanistic rules governing covalent (electrophilic/nucleophilic substitution or addition) or other interactions with protein or DNA. Greater detail can be found in the meta-information in the OECD QSAR Toolbox for each of the above profilers (OECD, QSAR Toolbox (v3.3)). Protein binding is typically associated with skin sensitization in mammals but has been shown to be indicative of a non-passive mechanism of uptake and distribution in a broad suite of organisms (Princz et al. 2014) as well as having a moderate to strong correlation with aquatic toxicity, albeit with a limited sample size in some cases (Bonnell and Kuseva, unpublished). DNA binding can lead to genetic damage through, for example, adduct formation and is a well-known initiating event for genotoxicity.

To account for receptor-mediated effects, profiling of estrogen and androgen receptor (ER and AR) binding was conducted. The OECD QSAR Toolbox structural rule-based ER profiler, which is based on the work of Dimitrov et al. (2005), Serafimova et al. (2007) and Mekenyan et al. (2009), was used. These are generally considered to be precautionary models in that binding results do not necessarily reflect adverse outcomes. AR interactions were profiled using the TIMES® software suite (v2.27.16) from the Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry based on Fang et al. (2003) and Todorov et al. (2011). Only ER binding was used directly to classify hazard in the ERC, because the domain of applicability of AR binding is restricted and many chemicals were identified as being out of the model domain. Thus, in silico AR binding affinities were considered as additional supporting information. However, the ERC also includes the in vitro assay Endocrine Disruption Knowledge Base (EDKB) from the USFDA (Ding et al. 2010). Similar to the MOATox from the USEPA, EDKB is used as supporting empirical in vitro binding information for those organic substances contained in its database.

4.1.3 Internal toxicity threshold

The advantages of using a tissue residue approach for ecological risk assessment have long been advocated in the ecological scientific literature beginning with McCarty and Mackay (1993) and more recently by Mackay et al. (2014b). To summarize, it is preferable to compare the relative toxicity of substances using an internal dose metric rather than an external media concentration metric since concentrations external to the organism ignore the toxicokinetics of a substance in the exposed organism. Greater detail on tissue residue approaches, including applications within risk assessments (Sappington et al. 2010), can be found in a series of six 2010 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Pellston Workshop papers (Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management  2011, Esher et al. 2011).

Tissue residue thresholds (CBRs) for acute lethality were employed to calculate toxicity ratios as discussed earlier in the section on mode of toxic action. CBRs are also calculated to determine food web Hazard Assessment Factors (HAF) in the RAIDAR model (v2.0). RAIDAR HAFs are estimated in aquatic and terrestrial food webs based on a default emission rate (1 kg/hr) to each of these media independently. HAFs are numerical values calculated as the ratio between the dose in representative food web organisms based on a unit default emission rate (CU) and the dose associated with acute lethality (CT), which can be indicative of a narcotic (~3 mmol/kg) or non-narcotic mode of action (less than 3 mmol/kg). The HAF can be equated to a combined persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity metric (Arnot and Mackay 2008) because HAFs integrate unit emission rate-based chemical fate (i.e., persistence), food web bioaccumulation and toxicity (hazard data) into a single value. HAFs are independent of the actual chemical emission rate but span several orders of magnitude for the organic substances characterized. HAFs are used directly in the ERC as a hazard metric. Details on how HAFs are calculated can be found in Arnot and Mackay (2008) and, specifically as it pertains to the substances being addressed in this report, in ARC (2014). All tissue residue-based metrics (i.e., HAFs, toxicity ratios) accounted for biotransformation of a substance in the target receptor.

4.1.4 Bioavailability

Bioavailability relates the quantity of a substance absorbed by the organism compared to the quantity of substance to which the organism is exposed. Currently, no aquatic QSAR model is able to provide reliable estimates of aquatic toxicity for substances with a log Kow above eight primarily due to the lack of observed acute or chronic effects at or above this log Kow. In addition, Kelly et al. (2004), Arnot and Gobas (2006) and Arnot and Quinn (2014) have shown that, for higher log Kow substances, dietary assimilation efficiency, bioconcentration, bioaccumulation and biomagnification factors in non-human organisms decrease above ~log Kow of 8.0. Thus, a simple rule of log Kow or log D (the log dissociation constant is applied to ionisable substances) greater than 10 was used to indicate very low aquatic and terrestrial bioavailability both internal and external to an organism. Log D accounts for the dissociation of ionizable chemicals at pH 7. A log Kow or log D of 10 was used to account for a two order of magnitude error with estimating the log Kow or Log D given that there are currently no acceptable empirical log Kow values greater than 10.

4.1.5 Chemical activity and bioactivity

The thermodynamic equilibrium criterion of chemical activity can be used to help identify substances acting via a baseline MoA as well as more specific MoAs (Mackay et al. 2009). Here we define activity to be the fraction of solubility in water associated with median lethal effects (LC50) in aquatic organisms. An activity in water of 0.01 to 0.1 has been associated with baseline narcosis (Mackay et al. 2014a). Calculated activities below just 0.01 could suggest subtle chronic effects and activities far below 0.01 could suggest a MoA more potent than baseline narcosis. Activities greater than one indicate a potential error with the ecotoxicity data as solubility limits in water have been exceeded. Chemical activity in the ERC was calculated for substances with log Kow greater than 2 (very soluble substances are outside the domain of this approach, as activities would appear unrealistically low) and was used as supporting information for MoA profiling but, more importantly, to verify the quality of ecotoxicity data used in the ERC. Due to the lack of existing empirical data, many LC50 values and most water solubility values had to be estimated using QSARs and, hence, chemical activity estimates can be quite uncertain as well. Therefore, activities were not used to directly classify the potency of organic substances and were applied on a case-by-case basis, depending on reliability as determined using professional judgement.

Bioactivity is a broad definition to mean the effect of a chemical on any living tissue. Bioactivity can be determined using high-throughput in vitro assays such as those developed by the USEPA under the Toxcast and Tox21 programs. ToxCast screens chemicals in over 700 high-throughput assays that cover a range of high-level cell responses and approximately 300 signaling pathwaysFootnote 1. A hit of "activity" in either of these databases for any of the 640 organic substances in the report means that some activity has been observed in one of the many in vitro assays used for bioactivity. This does not represent a definitive adverse outcome, but another type of in vitro level alert (e.g., oxidative stress, mitotic arrest, impaired enzyme functioning). Consequently, the ERC uses both the Toxcast 2014 and Tox21 bioactivity databasesFootnote 2 as lookup information only. Given the difficulty in relating bioactivity to adverse outcomes, bioactivity is considered as supporting information to help determine overall reactivity of a chemical but is not used directly to classify hazard.

Results of the hazard profiling are compared to the decision criteria used to determine hazard classification (see Figure 1) as described later in this document.

4.2 Exposure Profiling

An exposure profile was created for all substances based on selected metrics. The purpose of the exposure profile is to determine the probability of ecological receptors coming into contact with an organic substance released to the aquatic or terrestrial environment in Canada. Similar to the hazard profile, multiple metrics are used to weigh this probability, and are discussed below. A weighted approach to exposure profiling was used to address the uncertainty associated with reliance on a single quantitative estimation of chemical release to define exposure to organisms. This helps to mitigate the possibility of over or underestimation of risk classification from relying on a single metric (Stahl and Cimorelli 2013).

4.2.1 Quantity

Data on quantity of a substance in commerce (kg/yr) were gathered for all 640 organic substances. Quantity data consist of chemical import and/or manufacture volume in Canada from recent section 71 surveys (Canada 2009, Canada 2012). Quantity data for most of the substances came from Phase 2 of the DSL Inventory Update (Canada 2012). In general, higher chemical quantities can be related to a higher probability of widespread exposure upon release to the environment.

4.2.2 Emission rate

Emission rates (kg/yr) to the aquatic environment were calculated based on Phase 2 DSL Inventory Update (Canada 2012) volumes described above after determining percentage removal in a modelled waste water treatment system (WWTS). Removal in WWTS, as a function of biodegradation and adsorption to biosolids, was estimated using the SimpleTreat model (Struijs et al. 1991). WWTS removal was used to determine the emission rate to water after treatment as well as the fraction of chemical quantity that could be applied to agricultural lands in association with biosolids. The ERC conservatively assumes that 100% of the chemical quantity reported to be in commerce can be released to a WWTS, without consideration of the fraction actually released as a function of a substance's use pattern (which would typically be considerably less than 100%).

4.2.3 Critical emission rate and margin of exposure

Estimated rate of emission to water after WWTS removal was compared to the critical emission rate to water generated by the RAIDAR model. The critical emission rate is the rate of emission to water (kg/yr) that could result in a risk (internal body burden) to the most sensitive aquatic receptor identified in the RAIDAR model (including various representative species in the food web). The ratio of these two emissions provides a margin of exposure (MoE) and is similar to the concept of an MoE used in human health studies.

4.2.4 Overall persistence and long-range transport in air

Overall persistence (Pov) is the sum of chemical half-lives in all media weighted by the mass fraction of the chemical in the medium as determined using a multimedia fate model (Webster et al. 1998; Klasmeier et al. 2006; Wegmann et al. 2009) and does not consider advection out of a model environment as removal from the environment. Pov has been advocated by many environmental chemists (e.g., Webster et al. 1998, Gouin et al. 2000; Pennington 2001, Mackay et al. 2014b) and the OECD (e.g., OECD 2004) as a preferred metric for screening chemicals for persistence, rather than medium-specific half-lives. Essentially, advection is ‘turned off' as Pov only includes the reaction (degradation) rate of a chemical. Pov was calculated for all substances using the RAIDAR model assuming 100% release of the substance to water, given that water represents the predominant entry point into the environment for industrial chemicals.

The long-range transport potential (LRTP) in air was determined using calculated or observed air half-lives and air-water partition coefficients. Combining these substance-specific properties identifies those substances expected to partition to air and potentially undergo long-range transport. The OECD LRTP and Pov Screening Tool (v2.2) was considered as a possible model to determine long-range transport in air. However, as the model cannot account for air transport as a function of release to water (as is the case with the majority of industrial chemical releases) and given the strong correlation of longer air half-life and higher CTD, air half-life and air-water partition coefficients were used. Use of the air half-life is considered a precautionary approach because the deposition of the substance, which could limit the travel distance in air, is not taken into account. Long-range transport in water was not considered, owing to the difficulties of identifying a suitable evaluative receiving water body for environments across Canada (e.g., the Great Lakes or rivers of varying sizes and depths).

Top of Page

5. Preliminary Classification

Hazard and exposure profiles for each organic substance were compared to decision criteria in order to classify the organic substances. A numerical score was given to the hazard and exposure profile of each substance using scores of one to three to represent lower, moderate, and higher level of hazard or exposure potential. While some of the criteria below overlap in concept (e.g., HAF and toxicity ratio), they use different algorithms and are applied for different purposes (MoA vs food web hazard). They are also applied in a step-wise manner to avoid double counting of metrics. This approach provides a precautionary fail-safe mechanism for classification. Classification was dependent on the number and type of metrics triggered in each profile. The preliminary classifications, particularly low hazard classifications, were subject to further examination in subsequent steps, as described in section 6.

5.1 Preliminary Hazard Classification Criteria

Hazard Class 3 (high hazard) was given to higher potency substances fitting any of the following criteria:

Hazard Class 3 substances are mostly substances that are identified to potentially exert "non-baseline toxicity" or "excess toxicity to baseline", and also include some polar and non-polar narcotics (approximately 17% of Hazard Class 3 substances) with high food web accumulation potential. Hazard Class 3 substances are profiled to be the most reactive and potentially the most potent of the 640 organics.

Hazard Class 2 (moderate hazard) was given to moderate potency substances which fit any of the following criteria:

Toxicity ratios for these Hazard Class 2 substances are generally less than 10 suggesting a baseline mode of action. No Hazard Class 2 substances have toxicity ratios greater than 10 and an unspecified mode of action. However, many profile as "reactive unspecified" (~38%) suggesting some uncertainty with the MoA. Thus, Hazard Class 2 substances may still have some degree of potency greater than baseline and remain of moderate hazard concern.

Hazard Class 1 (low hazard) was given to lower potency substances if none of the above classification rules were triggered in the hazard profile and consequently meet the following criteria:

Structural alerts for MoA using the OASIS profiler suggest that ~25% of Hazard Class 1 substances have unknown MoAs. If Verharr MoA results are also considered in parallel with the OASIS profiler, only ~14% of the Hazard Class 1 substances have an unidentified MoA according to structural alerts only. Examination of these chemicals reveals them to be mainly weak acids, ethers, short chain esters, alcohols, amides and ketones; these groups of substances are generally not considered to present significant ecological concern except in exceptional circumstances (such as high acute exposures resulting from spills).

5.2 Preliminary Exposure Classification Criteria

Exposure Class 3 (high exposure potential) was given to substances having the greatest spatial and temporal scale of potential exposure in the environment that fit any of the following criteria:

The substances in Exposure Class 3 are expected to have a longer reaction residence time in the environment (i.e., longer Pov), may undergo long-range transport in air or have been imported or manufactured in higher tonnages in Canada. Therefore, the spatial and temporal scale of potential exposure in the environment for these chemicals is the highest.

Exposure Class 2 (moderate exposure potential) was given to substances having the next greatest spatial and temporal scale of potential exposure that fit either of the following criteria:

Classification at this level captures substances with longer reaction residence time (i.e. longer Pov) but lower quantities, or shorter reaction residence time but greater quantities. This class thus does not present a spatial and/or temporal extent of potential exposure as high as an Exposure Class 3 substance. Exposure Class 2 substances are not expected to undergo long-range transport in air.

Exposure Class 1 (low exposure potential) was given to substances having the lowest spatial and temporal scale of exposure that fit any of the following criteria:

Classification at this level captures substances with various combinations of overall persistence and chemical quantity not captured in Exposure Class 2 or 3. Substances in Exposure Class 1 present a low spatial and/or temporal extent of potential exposure and are not expected to undergo long-range transport in air.

The EAF (exposure assessment factor) from the RAIDAR model was considered for use in exposure classification as an alternative to use of the HAF. EAF is an integrated persistence and bioaccumulation property. However, these properties are already integrated into the HAF (along with internal toxicity). Also, analysis comparing the two approaches shows the use of HAF in the classification scheme to be more precautionary.

5.3 Manual Classification

In several instances, a manual classification of hazard and exposure was required due to insufficiency of available data. Primarily this was due to (i) the lack of a two-dimensional structure or lack of a representative structure (e.g., some UVCB biologicals) for the substance, or (ii) the substance was outside of the model domain of applicability, or (iii) lack of empirical data to fulfill other the data requirements for the ERC. The manual approach was mainly applied to the 192 UVCBs. Manual classification involved consideration of read-across empirical data from close analogues. All hazard low-concern UVCBs were closely checked for classification consistency (see section 6) and were still subject to adjustment of risk classification (section 7.1).

Top of Page

6. Examination and Adjustment of Preliminary Classification

Preliminary classification of hazard and exposure as discussed above relies quite heavily on modeled parameters, given the limited empirical data available for most of the organic substances addressed. It is recognized that there is some degree of uncertainty in these model-based classifications, even though empirical evidence has been used where available and multiple metrics for hazard and exposure have been considered. The following additional rules were applied to reduce the potential for both over and under classification of hazard or exposure. Preliminary classification could be adjusted based on any one of the rules outlined below. These rules were applied outside of the preliminary classification step to allow for use of judgement when applying them (such as when a rule is only intended to be applied to a subset of substances) and to give them additional weight. In most cases, the impact of these rules affects preliminary Hazard Class 1 (lower concern) substances and thus is precautionary and minimizes potential underestimation of risk of low hazard substances. In this context, the first four rules below take precedence over the fifth.

  1. Classification Consistency: Classification results for substance groups were examined more closely in cases where a single CAS RN within the group appeared to be an outlier compared with the other structurally similar members of the group. If there was sufficient rationale to adjust the outlier result (e.g., due to model error), the differing classification was adjusted to be consistent with the group.
  2. Special Classes: To allow for potential error with current predictive approaches for a potent class of highly ionized substances outside of model domain of applicability, quaternary ammonium compounds were manually classified as, at a minimum, Hazard Class 2. Higher results (i.e., Hazard Class 3) were maintained. Similar considerations were given to nitro musks.
  3. Potent Reactivity (section 4.1.2): If both protein and DNA binding alerts were triggered, substances were manually classified as, at a minimum, Hazard Class 2.
  4. Terrestrial Hazard (section 4.1.3): If the RAIDAR soil HAF was greater than 10-4, substances were manually classified as, at a minimum, Hazard Class 2. This rule considers soil hazards from the application of biosolids. This soil HAF threshold was selected in order to equate it to a preliminary Hazard Class 2 triggered by the aquatic HAF criterion.
  5. Margin of Exposure (section 4.2.3): For baseline substances, if the MoE, as explained in section 4.1, was greater than 10,000, hazard classification was lowered to Hazard Class 1. This rule was applied to the preliminary hazard classification and not the preliminary exposure classification because MoE is calculated using the aquatic HAF and is therefore most sensitive to the HAF (i.e., a substance has lower hazard because it cannot reach critical levels in biota associated with adverse effects).

Top of Page

7. Risk Classification Matrix

Following hazard and exposure classification based on multiple criteria (sections 5.1 to 5.3) and adjustment based on additional judgement rules (section 6), a risk matrix was used to classify level of potential for risk as high, moderate, or low. Table 7.1 lists the possible risk outcomes from combinations of hazard and exposure classifications. Following this step, risk classification outcomes were adjusted to account for possible overestimation of potential risk (section 7.1.1) or underestimation of potential risk (section 7.1.2).

Table 7.1 Risk Matrix According to Hazard and Exposure Classifications
 Hazard Class 1Hazard Class 2Hazard Class 3
Exposure Class 1LowLowModerate
Exposure Class 2LowModerateHigh
Exposure Class 3LowModerateHigh

Organic substances of higher risk concern are generally characterized as being more potent from a hazard perspective and having a greater potential for widespread continuous exposure. There are relatively few of these substances among the 640 organics. Substances of higher risk concern generally have moderate to high tonnage, have longer reaction residence times in the environment (months or longer), may be transported over long distances in air, and are potentially very potent substances beyond baseline toxicity. Substances in the low risk classification generally have a relatively short predicted reaction residence time in the environment (less than months, often days), do not undergo long range transport in air and are generally baseline substances (e.g., alcohols, esters, acids, alkanes) with lower reactivity. Organic substances classified as being of low risk concern are generally characterized as being less potent from a hazard perspective and having a lower potential for widespread continuous exposure. There are a relatively high proportion of these substances among the 640 organics. Additionally, there are a relatively high proportion of low exposure (Exposure Class 1) substances regardless of hazard classification.

7.1 Adjustment of Risk Classification

Adjustment of risk classification involved examination of all classifications to determine potential for both over and underestimation of risk.

7.1.1 Adjusting for low regional emissions

To address possible overestimation of risk, the risk classification outcome (from section 7) for substances which had a regional rate of emission to water (section 4.2.2) estimated to be less than 1 000 kg/yr after wastewater treatment was adjusted to low risk based on low potential for exposure. The likelihood of risk is very low at this rate of emission to a regional environment (defined as 100,000 km2 in RAIDAR) (Van Leuween and Vermeire 2007). In addition, the aquatic emission rate (assumed to be 100% release in the region over the substance's life-cycle) used in the ERC is very conservative in most cases and, as such, is precautionary. All low concern substances were nonetheless subject to the near-field exposure analysis outlined below.

More than 90% of the low risk substances have reported annual quantities less than 10,000 kg/yr, with the majority having less than 5,000 kg/yr, reported under phase two of the DSL inventory update. This adjustment for low regional emissions affected 9% of the 640 organics substances in the ERC.

7.1.2 Accounting for near-field exposure

Given that exposure and hazard classification is, in part, based on regional scale model results, local field exposures may not be fully accounted for in classification of potential for risk. To account for this situation, an additional near-field risk-based evaluation of all substances classified as low risk was performed to address the higher concentrations that may occur close to the point of discharge of a substance in the aquatic environment. In general, a conservative (precautionary) risk scenario similar to that used in rapid screening assessments (Canada 2013, Canada 2014, Canada 2015) was employed as described below.

The aquatic release scenario for near-field exposure involved applying a generic scenario to estimate local aquatic exposure. While the generic aquatic exposure scenario has been developed to be conservative overall, the level of conservatism applied to individual parameters was selected to be moderate, since it is recognized that:

The equation and parameters used in this scenario are given in Appendix A. In brief, the scenario estimates exposure (predicted environmental concentration (PEC)) based on releases from an assumed, representative industrial facility that is manufacturing or using the substance. Based on the use codes and North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes provided in the DSL inventory update submissions, a generic emission factor of 2% (low), 25% (medium) or 100% (high) was associated to the notified quantity. In order to do so, all use codes and NAICS were rated for their potential release, based on professional judgement. All undefined codes (U999) were rated manually after reviewing the description provided by the notifier. Assigned emission factors for each of the NAICS and use codes are presented in ECCC, 2016b. Wastewater removal rates were estimated for all the substances of interest based on the physical/chemical properties from categorization and using the SimpleTreat model (Struijs et al. 1991). In situations where it was not possible to calculate a removal rate (e.g. due to lack of data, or for substances falling outside of the domain of applicability of the model), a default value of 0% removal was conservatively used.

A predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) value was derived using data collected or estimated during categorization. Where updated values were judged to be more appropriate, the toxicity values may have been modified from the categorization value using new empirical or predicted (QSAR) acute ecotoxicity values. An application factor of 10 for baseline narcotic substances and 100 for reactive unspecified substances was applied. Risk quotients (RQs) were then determined by comparing PEC with PNEC.

The following considerations were taken into account in this analysis to minimize the potential for overestimating risk classification with this analysis. Specifically, the following checks were applied:

After application of the local scale risk analysis, there is 94% agreement between the local scale RQ approach and the risk classification matrix approach for the low risk substances. The remaining 6% of substances (where risk classification had been underestimated) were reclassified to a moderate level of risk.

Top of Page

8. Ecological Risk Classification Results

Appendices B to D list the risk classification outcomes for all 640 organic substances by CAS RN according to their revised ecological risk classification results. Table 8.1 summarizes the risk classifications for the 640 substances.

A total of 39 substances representing 14 chemical groups and one individual substance were classified as having higher risk potential (Appendix B). Substances were grouped based on similarity of chemical structures (e.g., hindered phenols) or similar types of use (e.g., flame retardants).

Ninety-two substances were classified as having moderate risk potential (Appendix C), 58 of which are associated with the 14 groups of higher risk potential substances. For reasons of precaution and potential for substitution, these 58 moderate risk substances will undergo more detailed assessment with the 40 high risk substances, resulting in a total of 98 organic substances being proposed for more detailed assessment. Appendix C lists these substances and their proposed groups. Given the lower likelihood of risk compared with the moderate concern substances associated with high risk groups, use patterns of the 34 remaining moderates will be tracked and their priority status re-evaluated if new information becomes available.

A total of 508 substances were classified as having low risk potential (Appendix D). More detailed assessment of these substances is not proposed at this time. However, information associated with these substances (e.g., phys-chem, ecotoxicity, tissue residue) may be used in a read-across manner during assessment of substance groups under the CMP. Data from low risk substances can be used to inform the assessment of the larger group, including the potential for cumulative risk of that group. Additionally, substances classified as "low risk" with high classification of hazard (Class 3) and those that trigger other hazard alerts, but which are currently used in low volume in Canada (225 substances), are proposed to be identified for additional tracking of use patterns and their priority status re-evaluated if new information becomes available.

Various mechanisms exist to inform the priority status of these substances based on consideration of use pattern and other types of information, including but not limited to:

Table 8.1. Percentage breakdown of the final risk classification for 640 organic substances
Risk classificationCountPercent (%)
low (use pattern data is proposed to be collected for 225 of these substances)50880
moderate (use pattern to be tracked; priority to be re-evaluated if new information becomes available)345
moderate (to be included in group for assessment with substances classified as high potential for ecological risk)589

Critical data and considerations used to create substance-specific profiles and classifications associated with hazard, exposure and risk, as well as identification of potential need for tracking of future use patterns, are presented in ECCC 2016a.

Top of Page

9. Assessment of Risk Classification Uncertainty

Uncertainties have been identified in this document and their impact considered during the design of the ERC. The ERC generally reflects a realistically conservative or precautionary approach where consistency of metrics adds to a weight of evidence for classification. A weighted approach helps minimize the potential for both over and under classification of hazard and exposure and subsequent risk classification. A balanced approach to dealing with uncertainty has been used. For example, values of central tendency rather than those from extremes of a distribution have been used (e.g., median LC50 values, median CBRs). Although empirical values were used where available, many physicochemical input parameters for fate modeling (e.g., RAIDAR) required the use of QSAR-derived values. Appropriate best available science modeling practices have been applied when selecting these values and, although median values were generally used, uncertainty estimates have been generated for some parameters (e.g., RAIDAR HAFs). Also, concepts of adequate margin of exposure have been incorporated via the ratio of critical to actual (assumed) emission rates to address the uncertainty associated with the use of some metrics (e.g., Pov, RAIDAR HAF) estimated at a regional environmental scale. Furthermore, adjustment for potential risks associated with greater exposure near points of discharge to the aquatic environment was applied, as necessary. Nonetheless, uncertainties with hazard and exposure classification remain, the more significant of which are discussed below.

9.1 Hazard Uncertainty

Hazard classification required the generation of multiple metrics, some of which are very sensitive to median values of lethal aquatic toxicity data (e.g., CBR, HAF, chemical activity, toxicity ratios). Error with empirical or modeled acute toxicity values could result in significant changes in classification of hazard, particularly metrics relying on tissue residue values (e.g., mode of toxic action and the RAIDAR HAF), many of which are predicted values from QSAR models. However, the impact of this error is mitigated by the fact that overestimation of median lethality will result in a conservative tissue residue used for CBR analysis. Error with underestimation of acute toxicity will be mitigated through the use of other hazard metrics such as structural profiling of mode of action and/or reactivity and/or estrogen binding affinity. Although employing a mode of action-driven tissue residue threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) approach mitigates the error of classifying chemicals based on external concentrations (i.e., by avoiding the illusion of hydrophobicity), it is acknowledged that some uncertainty with hazard classification remains due to the fact that median lethal aquatic toxicity data were still required to generate some of the metrics used in the hazard classification (there are few reliable LC50 data for high Kow substances and there are uncertainties with models estimating internal concentrations at high Kow due to errors in Kow).

Results from profiling of chemical reactivity, bioactivity and binding affinity are also subject to uncertainty when extrapolating to a final adverse outcome. However, because these are based on mechanistic rules, which are in turn derived from first principle chemical interactions, they generally suggest a potential for interaction with biological tissues which may or may not be realized depending on the fate and toxicokinetics of the substance. Further in vitro or in vivo testing would be necessary to confirm reactivity or bioactivity. Thus, accepting the reactivity profiling results (i.e., binding affinities) de facto reduces underestimation of chemical potency, but will likely result in overestimations of hazard. Given this uncertainty, some activity metrics (e.g., bioactivity, androgen binding) were considered as supporting information only. Also, protein and DNA binding affinity must have been supported by more than one profiler in the OECD QSAR Toolbox and were then only applied after preliminary classification using other hazard metrics (this essentially impacts only the classification of low hazard). Finally, RAIDAR values such as the HAFs and critical emission rates have estimated bounds of uncertainty. Median values have been used here to avoid overly conservative values.

Few measured data were available for ionogenic substances; hence, assessment uncertainty may generally be greater for these substances than for the neutral substances.

9.2 Exposure Uncertainty

Exposure classification required the generation of multiple metrics, some of which (e.g., emission rate, margin of exposure) are very sensitive to the reported annual quantity in commerce. Changes in chemical quantity could result in significant changes in classification of exposure; i.e., the exposure and risk-based classifications are highly sensitive to uncertainties in emission rate and use quantity estimates. The ERC classification thus represents current exposure and risk in Canada and may not reflect future trends. This is primarily why use patterns of moderate concern substances not identified for more detailed assessment and all low risk substances with a high hazard classification are proposed to be tracked. Fluctuation of, and uncertainty with quantity in commerce are also primary reasons for approaching exposure classification as a probability of organism exposure using multiple metrics. It is also the reason that the HAF was selected from RAIDAR because it relies on a default rate of emission and is thus independent of reported chemical quantity. In addition, a local scale risk-based screening procedure ensures that substances with short residence time and travel distance are properly classified.

Exposure classification is also sensitive to the prediction of long-range transport in air. The ERC assesses air transport based predominantly on chemical half-life in air. Some classes of substances may undergo transport in air based on sorption to fine particles in air (e.g., certain organic flame retardants). The half-life approach used in the ERC, although well correlated with long-range air transport, cannot account for this transport process and thus far-field concerns may be underestimated for some classes of organic substances. Efforts are underway by Environment Climate Change Canada and others to improve models to better estimate this type of transport (e.g., Lui et al. 2014, Zhang et al. 2016), but these are not currently available.

Top of Page

10. Conclusion

Based on inherent hazard properties and current use patterns and quantities in commerce, 40 substances were classified as being of high potential ecological concern, 92 substances were classified as being of moderate ecological concern, and 508 substances were classified as being of low ecological concern. Substances classified as high ecological concerns will undergo further ecological assessment. Some of the substances of moderate ecological concern (58 of 92 substances) have similarities to substances that were classified as having a high potential for ecological concern and will therefore also undergo further assessment as part of those groups. The remainder of the substances of moderate and low ecological concern (542 substances in total) are not expected to pose an ecological risk based on current information, and further assessment work is not required at this time. The approach and results for these 542 substances will form the basis, in conjunction with any other relevant information that becomes available after the publication of this Science Approach Document, for the conclusions in Screening Assessment Reports that will be published at a later time. Further follow-up or tracking of information may be done for the 34 moderate concern substances that are not currently planned for additional detailed assessment as well as for 225 substances which were classified as low concern primarily on the basis of current low exposures, to inform whether further activity is required in the future.

Top of Page


ARC. 2014. Parameterization and Application of the RAIDAR Model to Support Prioritization and Assessment of Substances. Report prepared by ARC Arnot Research & Consulting Inc., Toronto, ON, for the Existing Substances Division, Environment Canada, Gatineau, QC, Canada.

Armitage JM, Arnot JA, Wania F, Mackay D. 2013. Development and evaluation of a mechanistic bioconcentration model for ionogenic organic chemicals in fish. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 32(1): 115-128.

Arnot JA. 2011. Updating the RAIDAR and FHX models to aid in the prioritization and assessments of chemicals including ionisable substances. Draft Technical Report for Health Canada.; Health Canada: Ottawa, ON, March 25, 2011; p 39.

Arnot JA, Gobas FAPC. 2006. A review of bioconcentration factor (BCF) and bioaccumulation factor (BAF) assessments for organic chemicals in aquatic organisms.  Environ. Rev. 14(4):257-297.

Arnot JA, Mackay D. 2008. Policies for chemical hazard and risk priority setting: Can persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity and quantity information be combined? Environ. Sci. Technol. 42(13): 4648-4654.

Arnot JA, Mackay D, Webster E, Southwood J. 2006. Screening level risk assessment model for chemical fate and effects in the environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40:2316-2323.

Arnot JA, Quinn CL. 2014. Development and evaluation dietary bioaccumulation test data for organic chemicals in fish. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49(8): 4783–4796.

Baron MG, Lilavois CR, Martin TM. 2015. MOATox: A comprehensive mode of action and acute toxicity database for predictive model development. Aquat. Toxicol. 161: 102-107.

Belanger S, Sanderson H, Embry M, DeZwart D, Farr B, Gutsell S, Haider M, Sternberg R, Wilson P. 2015. It is Time to Develop Ecological Thresholds of Toxicological Concern to Assist Environmental Hazard Assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 34(12):2864-2869.

Bonnell M, Kuseva C. 2015. Correlation analysis of RC50 protein binding and acute algal, daphnid and fish toxicity using the OECD QSAR Toolbox endpoint correlation function. (unpublished).

Canada. 1999. Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. S.C. 1999, c.33. Canada Gazette Part III, vol. 22, no. 3.

Canada. 2009. Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999: Notice with respect to certain inanimate substances (chemicals) on the Domestic Substances List. Canada Gazette, Part 1, vol. 143, no. 40.. Available from:

Canada. 2012. Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999: Notice with respect to certain inanimate substances (chemicals) on the Domestic Substances List, Vol. 146, No. 48, 1 December, 2012. Available from:

Canada. 2013. Rapid Screening of Substances of Low Concern. Available from:

Canada. 2014. Rapid Screening of Substances from Phase One of the Domestic Substances List Inventory Update. Available from:

Canada. 2015. Rapid Screening of Substances from Phase Two of the Domestic Substances List Inventory Update. Avalailable from:

Cimorelli A, Stahl C. 2013. Avoiding "proofiness": Addressing uncertainty in environmental characterization. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manage. 10(1): 138-141.

de Wolf W, Siebel-Sauer A, Lecloux A, Koch V, Holt M, Feijtel T, Comber M, Boeije G. 2005. Mode of action and aquatic exposure thresholds of no concern. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 24(2):479-485.

Dimitrov S, Dimitrova G, Pavlov T, Dimitrova D, Patlevisz G, Niemela J, Mekenyan O. 2005. A stepwise approach for defining the applicability domain of SAR and QSAR models. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 45(4): 839-849.

Dimitrov SD, Mekenyan OG, Sinks GD, Schultz TW. 2003. Global modeling of narcotic chemicals: ciliate and fish toxicity. J. Mol. Structr. 622(1-2): 62-70.

Ding D, Xu L, Fang H, Hong H, Perkins R, Harris S, Bearden ED, Shi L, Tong W. The EDKB: an established knowledge base for endocrine disrupting chemicals. BMC Bioinformatics 2010, 11 Suppl 6:S5.

Enoch SJ, Hewitt M, Cronin MTD, Azam S, Madden JC. 2008. Classification of chemicals according to mechanism of aquatic toxicity: An evaluation of the implementation of the Verhaar scheme in Toxtree. Chemosphere 73(73): 243-248.

[ECCC] Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2016a. Gatineau (QC): ECCC. Data used to create substance-specific hazard and exposure profiles and assign risk classifications. Available from:

[ECCC] Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2016b. Gatineau (QC): ECCC. Assigned emission factors for NAICS and Substance Function Codes. Information in support of Ecological Risk Classification of Organic Substances. Available from:

Escher BI, Ashauer R, Dyer S, Hermens JLM, Lee J-H, Leslie HA, Mayer P, Meador JP, Warne MSJ. 2011. Crucial role of mechanisms and modes of toxic action for understanding tissue residue toxicity and internal effect concentrations of organic chemicals. Integr Environ Assess Manag. 7 (1): 28-49

Fang M, Tong W, Branham S, Moland CLS, Dial L, Hong H, Xie Q, Perkins R, Owens W, Sheehan DM. 2003. Study of 202 Natural, Synthetic, and  Environmental Chemicals for Binding to the Androgen Receptor. Chem. Res. Toxicol., 16(10): 1338 -1358.

Gouin T, Mackay D, Webster E, Wania F. 2000. Screening Chemicals for Persistence in the Environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 34 (5): 881–884.

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 2011. 7(1): 1-140.

Kelly BC, Gobas FA, McLachlan MS. 2004. Intestinal absorption and biomagnification of organic contaminants in fish, wildlife and humans. Environ Toxicol Chem 23(10):2324-2336.

Klasmeier J, Matthies M, MacLeod M, Fenner K, Scheringer M, Stroebe M, Le Gall AC, McKone TE, van de Meent D, Wania F. 2006. Application of multimedia models for screening assessment of long-range transport potential and overall persistence. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40(1):53–60.

Liu Y, Liggio J, Harner T, Jantunen L, Shoeib M, Li S-M. 2014. Heterogeneous OH initiated oxidation: a possible explanation for the persistence of organophosphate flame retardants in air. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48(2): 1041-1048.

Mackay D, Arnot JA, Petkova EP, Wallace KB, Call DJ, Brooke LT, Veith GD 2009. The physicochemical basis of QSARs for baseline toxicity. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 20(3-4): 393-414.

Mackay D, Hughes DM, Romano ML, Bonnell M. 2014b. The role of persistence in chemical evaluations. Integrated Environ Assessment Management 10(4):588-594.

Mackay, D., McCarty, L.S. and J.A. Arnot. 2014a. Relationships between exposure and dose in aquatic toxicity tests for organic chemicals. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 33(9): 2038-46.

Maeder V, Escher BI, Scheringer M, Hungerbühler K. 2004. Toxic ratio as an indicator of the intrinsic toxicity in the assessment of persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38(13): 3659-3666.

McCarty LS, Arnot JA, Mackay D. 2013. Evaluation of critical body residue for acute narcosis in aquatic organisms. Environ Toxicol Chem 32(10): 2301-2314.

McCarty LS, Mackay D. 1993. Enhancing ecotoxicological modeling and assessment: critical body residues and modes of toxic action. Environ Sci Technol 27(9):1719-1728.

Mekenyan O, Serafimova R. 2009. Mechanism-Based Modeling of Estrogen Receptor Binding Affinity A COREPA Implementation. CRC Press, pp. 259-293.

[OECD] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2004. Guidance Document On The Use Of Multimedia Models For Estimating Overall Environmental Persistence And Long-Range Transport. (Series on Testing and Assessment No.45). Report No. ENV/JM/MONO(2004)5, JT00160339. Paris (FR): OECD.

[OECD]Toolbox [Read-across tool]. 2014. Version 3.3. Paris (FR): Organisation for Economic Cooporation and Development, Environment Directorate. Available from:

Pennington D. 2001. An evaluation of chemical persistence screening approaches. Chemosphere. 44: 1589-1601.

Princz J, Bonnell M, Ritchie E, Velicogna J, Robidoux P-Y, Scroggins R. 2014. Estimation of the bioaccumulation potential of a non-chlorinated bisphenol and an ionogenic xanthene dye to Eisenia andrei in field-collected soils, in conjunction with predictive In silico profiling. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 33(2): 308-316.

Sappington KG, Bridges TS, Bradbury SP, Erickson RJ, Hendriks KA, Lanno RP, Meador JP, Mount DR, Salazar MH, Spry DJ. 2010. Application of the Tissue Residue Approach in Ecological Risk Assessment. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 7(1): 116–140

Serafimova, R, Todorov M, Nedelcheva D, Pavlov T, Akahori Y, Nakai M, Mekenyan O. 2007. QSAR and mechanistic interpretation of estrogen receptor binding. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 18(3-4): 1-33.

Stahl CH, Cimorelli AJ. 2013. A Demonstration of the Necessity and Feasibility of Using a Clumsy Decision Analytic Approach on Wicked Environmental Problems. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 9(1): 17-30.

Struijs J, Stoltenkamp J, Van de Meent D. 1991. A Spreadsheet-based Box Model to Predict the Fate of Xenobiotics from a Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant. Wat. Res. 25(7): 891-900.

[TIMES] TIssue MEtabolism Simulator [prediction module]. 2014. Ver. 2.27.15. Bourgas (BG): University "Prof. Dr. Assen Zlatarov", Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry.

Todorov M, Mombelli E, Ait-Aissa S, Mekenyan O. 2011. Androgen Receptor Binding Affinity: A QSAR Evaluation. SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research 22(3-4): 265-291.

Van Leeuwen CJ, Vermeire TG (eds). 2007. Risk assessment of chemicals: an introduction, Second edition. Springer Dordrecht, The Netherlands. ISBN 978-1-4020-6101-1 (handbook), ISBN 978-1-4020-6102-8 (e-book).

Verhaar HJM, Solbe J, Speksnijder J, van Leeuwen CJ and Hermens JLM. 2000. Classifying environmental pollutants: Part 3. External validation of the classification system. Chemosphere 40: 875-883

Verhaar HJ M, Van Leeuwen CJ, Hermens JLM. 1992. Classifying environmental pollutants. 1. Structure-activity relationships for prediction of aquatic toxicity. Chemosphere 25: 471-491.

Webster E, Mackay D, Wania F. 1998. Evaluating environmental persistence. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 17(11):2148-2158.

Wegmann F, Cavin L, MacLeod M, Scheringer M, Hungerbuler K. 2009. The OECD software tool for screening chemicals for persistence and long range transport potential. Environ. Model. Software. 24(2): 228–237.

Williams ES, Berninger JP, Brooks BW. 2011. Application of chemical toxicity distributions to ecotoxicology data requirements under REACH. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 30(8):1943-1954.

Wu S, Blackburn K, Amburgey J, Jaworska J, Federla T. 2010. A framework for using structural, reactivity, metabolic and physicochemical similarity to evaluate the suitability of analogs for SAR-based toxicological assessments. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 56(1): 67-81.

Zhang X, Sühring R, Serodio D, Bonnell M, Sundin N, Diamond M. 2016. Novel flame retardants: Estimating the physicalechemical properties and environmental fate of 94 halogenated and organophosphate PBDE replacements. Chemosphere 144: 2401-2407.

Top of Page


Appendix A. Summary of local exposure screening scenarios

Table A-1. Parameters used in near-field scenario
Qtyquantity of substance reported by notifierquantity from Inventory Update (or other)kg/yearsubstance-specific
Releaserelease of substance during industrial process2% (low)
25% (medium)
100% (high)
 default value based on analysis of reported use and NAICS codes
Wastewater RemovalWastewater Treatment System (WWTS) removal efficiencyValue from SimpleTreat model
Default value when removal could not be estimated by model = 0
Durationduration over which substance is released150days/yearassumes variable or discontinuous use of substance over a year
Wastewater flowWWTS flow rate0.04m3/s10th percentile of municipal WWTS flow rates in Canada
River flowflow of receiving watercourse1.84m3/s15th percentile of the distribution of receiving watercourse flows in the country (based on the distribution of the 50th percentile of flow rates); weighted by number of industries releasing to the receiving watercourse
-factor combining conversion from kg to mg and m3 to L1000  
-conversion factor from seconds to days86400  
CTVcritical toxicity valueValue from categorization or more recent source of datamg/Lsubstance-specific
AFassessment factor10 or 100 To account for acute-to-chronic; inter-species variability.
A default value of 10 is used for baseline narcotic substances and 100 for reactive unspecified substances

Appendix B. Substances classified as higher potential of risk to the environment

Table B-1. Substances classified as higher potential of risk to the environment
CAS RNDomestic Substances List nameCMP Chemical GroupHazard RankingExposure Ranking
112-69-61-Hexadecanamine, N,N-dimethyl-Aliphatic amines32
61790-59-8Amines, hydrogenated tallow alkyl, acetatesAliphatic amines32
25167-32-2Benzenesulfonic acid, oxybis[dodecyl-, disodium saltAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives32
68411-30-3Benzenesulfonic acid, C10-13-alkyl derivs., sodium saltsAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives32
68411-32-5Benzenesulfonic acid, dodecyl-, branchedAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives33
68608-26-4Sulfonic acids, petroleum, sodium saltsAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives33
68649-00-3Benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C9-17-branched alkyl derivs., compds. with 2-propanamineAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives32
70146-13-3Benzenesulfonic acid, oxybis[decyl-, disodium saltAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives32
70775-94-9Sulfonic acids, C10-18-alkane, Ph estersAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives32
3147-75-9Phenol, 2-(2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles32
28777-98-22,5-Furandione, dihydro-3-(octadecenyl)-Carboxylic acid anhydrides33
32072-96-12,5-Furandione, 3-(hexadecenyl)dihydro-Carboxylic acid anhydrides33
11145-3aAlkylamine salt of complex phosphate esterDithiophosphate Alkyl Esters32
58965-66-5bBenzene, 1,2,4,5-tetrabromo-3,6-bis(pentabromophenoxy)-Flame Retardants32
68937-41-7Phenol, isopropylated, phosphate (3:1)Flame Retardants32
96-69-5bPhenol, 4,4'-thiobis[2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-5-methyl-Hindered phenols32
96-76-4bPhenol, 2,4-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-Hindered phenols32
4221-80-1Benzoic acid, 3,5-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-hydroxy-, 2,4-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl esterHindered phenols32
61788-44-1bPhenol, styrenatedHindered phenols32
25619-56-1Naphthalenesulfonic acid, dinonyl-, barium saltNaphthalene sulfonic acids and salts32
60223-95-2Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, dinonyl-Naphthalene sulfonic acids and salts32
81-14-1Ethanone, 1-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-2,6-dimethyl-3,5-dinitrophenyl]-Nitro musks32
81-15-2Benzene, 1-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3,5-dimethyl-2,4,6-trinitro-Nitro musks32
140-66-9Phenol, 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)-Octylphenol and ethoxylates32
61789-77-3Quaternary ammonium compounds, dicoco alkyldimethyl, chloridesQuaternary ammonium compounds33
61789-80-8Quaternary ammonium compounds, bis(hydrogenated tallow alkyl)dimethyl, chloridesQuaternary ammonium compounds33
68308-67-8Quaternary ammonium compounds, ethyldimethylsoya alkyl, Et sulfatesQuaternary ammonium compounds32
68511-92-29-Octadecenoic acid (Z)-, reaction products with diethylenetriamine, cyclized, di-Et sulfate-quaternizedQuaternary ammonium compounds32
70955-34-9Fatty acids, tall-oil, reaction products with 2-[(2-aminoethyl)amino]ethanol, di-Et sulfate-quaternizedQuaternary ammonium compounds32
71011-24-0Quaternary ammonium compounds, benzyl(hydrogenated tallow alkyl)dimethyl, chlorides, compds. with bentoniteQuaternary ammonium compounds32
71011-26-2Quaternary ammonium compounds, benzyl(hydrogenated tallow alkyl)dimethyl, chlorides, compds. with hectoriteQuaternary ammonium compounds32
8016-81-7Tall-oil pitchResins & rosins32
8050-09-7RosinResins & rosins33
9007-13-0Resin acids and Rosin acids, calcium saltsResins & rosins32
61790-51-0Resin acids and Rosin acids, sodium saltsResins & rosins32
120-54-7Piperidine, 1,1'-(tetrathiodicarbonothioyl)bis-Thiocarbamates33
548-62-9Methanaminium, N-[4-[bis[4-(dimethylamino)phenyl]methylene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]-N-methyl-, chlorideTriarylmethanes32
569-64-2Methanaminium, N-[4-[[4-(dimethylamino)phenyl]phenylmethylene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]-N-methyl-, chlorideTriarylmethanes32
1324-76-1Benzenesulfonic acid, [[4-[[4-(phenylamino)phenyl][4-(phenylimino)-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]methyl]phenyl]amino]-Triarylmethanes32
88-85-7Phenol, 2-(1-methylpropyl)-4,6-dinitro-NA33

Table Notes

Abbreviation: CAS RN, Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number; CMP, Chemical Management Plan; NA, not available

aConfidential Domestic Substance List (CDSL) substance(s).

bExposure ranking of this substance was increased following application of the classification consistency rule (see section 6).

Appendix C. Substances classified as moderate potential risk to the environment

Table C-1. Substances classified as moderate potential risk to the environment
CAS RNDomestic Substances List nameCMP Chemical GroupHazard RankingExposure RankingAction*
103-11-7a2-Propenoic acid, 2-ethylhexyl esterAcrylates/ methylacrylates11track
141-32-22-Propenoic acid, butyl esterAcrylates/ methylacrylates31track
124-30-1a1-OctadecanamineAliphatic amines21assess in group
61788-46-3aAmines, coco alkylAliphatic amines11assess in group
61790-60-1Amines, tallow alkyl, acetatesAliphatic amines31assess in group
61791-55-7bAmines, N-tallow alkyltrimethylenedi-Aliphatic amines31assess in group
68155-39-5Amines, C14-18 and C16-18-unsatd. alkyl, ethoxylatedAliphatic amines21assess in group
68479-04-9b1,3-Propanediamine, N-[3-(tridecyloxy)propyl]-, branchedAliphatic amines31assess in group
68783-25-5Amines, N,N,N'-trimethyl-N'-tallow alkyltrimethylenedi-Aliphatic amines31assess in group
27178-16-1Hexanedioic acid, diisodecyl esterAliphatic diesters23track
26264-05-1aBenzenesulfonic acid, dodecyl-, compd. with 2-propanamine (1:1)Alkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives21assess in group
28519-02-0Benzenesulfonic acid, dodecyl(sulfophenoxy)-, disodium saltAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives22assess in group
61789-86-4Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium saltsAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives22assess in group
61789-87-5Sulfonic acids, petroleum, magnesium saltsAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives22assess in group
61790-48-5Sulfonic acids, petroleum, barium saltsAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives22assess in group
68584-22-5aBenzenesulfonic acid, C10-16-alkyl derivs.Alkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives11assess in group
68584-24-7Benzenesulfonic acid, C10-16-alkyl derivs., compds. with 2-propanamineAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives22assess in group
68783-96-0Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts, overbasedAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives31assess in group
90218-35-2Benzenesulfonic acid, dodecyl-, branched, compd. with 2-propanamineAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives23assess in group
95-38-51H-Imidazole-1-ethanol, 2-(8-heptadecenyl)-4,5-dihydro-Alkyl imidazolines and salts31track
27136-73-81H-Imidazole-1-ethanol, 2-(heptadecenyl)-4,5-dihydro-Alkyl imidazolines and salts31track
68442-97-7a1H-Imidazole-1-ethanamine, 4,5-dihydro-, 2-nortall-oil alkyl derivs.Alkyl imidazolines and salts21track
139-96-8aSulfuric acid, monododecyl ester, compd. with 2,2',2''-nitrilotris[ethanol] (1:1)Alkyl Sulfates and Olefin Sulfonate11track
151-21-3aSulfuric acid monododecyl ester sodium saltAlkyl Sulfates and Olefin Sulfonate21track
68439-57-6Sulfonic acids, C14-16-alkane hydroxy and C14-16-alkene, sodium saltsAlkyl Sulfates and Olefin Sulfonate31track
25550-98-5Phosphorous acid, diisodecyl phenyl esterAlkyl/aryl Phosphites31track
81-77-65,9,14,18-Anthrazinetetrone, 6,15-dihydro-Anthraquinones32track
90-30-21-Naphthalenamine, N-phenyl-Aromatic Amines23track
101-14-4Benzenamine, 4,4'-methylenebis[2-chloro-Aromatic Amines31track
101-96-21,4-Benzenediamine, N,N'-bis(1-methylpropyl)-Aromatic Amines22track
793-24-81,4-Benzenediamine, N-(1,3-dimethylbutyl)-N'-phenyl-Aromatic Amines23track
5285-60-9Benzenamine, 4,4'-methylenebis[N-(1-methylpropyl)-Aromatic Amines31track
120-78-5Benzothiazole, 2,2'-dithiobis-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles23assess in group
149-30-42(3H)-BenzothiazolethioneBenzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31assess in group
2492-26-42(3H)-Benzothiazolethione, sodium saltBenzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31assess in group
3846-71-7bPhenol, 2-(2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-4,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles22assess in group
3896-11-5Phenol, 2-(5-chloro-2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-methyl-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31assess in group
36437-37-3Phenol, 2-(2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-6-(1-methylpropyl)-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31assess in group
70321-86-7Phenol, 2-(2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-4,6-bis(1-methyl-1-phenylethyl)-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31assess in group
85-44-9a1,3-IsobenzofurandioneCarboxylic acid anhydrides11assess in group
26544-38-7a2,5-Furandione, dihydro-3-(tetrapropenyl)-Carboxylic acid anhydrides21assess in group
68784-12-32,5-Furandione, dihydro-, mono-C15-20-alkenyl derivs.Carboxylic acid anhydrides23assess in group
11105-8cPhosphorothioic acid, dialkyl ester, alkylamine saltDithiophosphate Alkyl Esters31assess in group
61789-01-3Fatty acids, tall-oil, epoxidized, 2-ethylhexyl estersEpoxides & glycidyl ethers31track
78-51-3Ethanol, 2-butoxy-, phosphate (3:1)Flame Retardants31assess in group
115-86-6aPhosphoric acid, triphenyl esterFlame Retardants11assess in group
29761-21-5Phosphoric acid, isodecyl diphenyl esterFlame Retardants22assess in group
56803-37-3Phosphoric acid, (1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl diphenyl esterFlame Retardants22assess in group
65652-41-7Phosphoric acid, bis[(1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl] phenyl esterFlame Retardants31assess in group
68527-01-5bAlkenes, C12-30 α-, bromo chloroFlame Retardants31assess in group
68527-02-6aAlkenes, C12-24, chloroFlame Retardants11assess in group
98-54-4aPhenol, 4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-Hindered phenols11assess in group
118-82-1Phenol, 4,4'-methylenebis[2,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-Hindered phenols31assess in group
128-37-0aPhenol, 2,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-methyl-Hindered phenols21assess in group
128-39-2aPhenol, 2,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-Hindered phenols21assess in group
1843-03-4Phenol, 4,4',4''-(1-methyl-1-propanyl-3-ylidene)tris[2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-5-methyl-Hindered phenols31assess in group
35958-30-6Phenol, 2,2'-ethylidenebis[4,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-Hindered phenols31assess in group
36443-68-2Benzenepropanoic acid, 3-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-hydroxy-5-methyl-, 1,2-ethanediylbis(oxy-2,1-ethanediyl) esterHindered phenols31assess in group
67774-74-7Benzene, C10-13-alkyl derivs.Linear Alkyl Benzenes (LAB) and Derivatives22track
68648-87-3aBenzene, C10-16-alkyl derivs.Linear Alkyl Benzenes (LAB) and Derivatives11track
25322-17-2Naphthalenesulfonic acid, dinonyl-Naphthalene sulfonic acids and salts31assess in group
57855-77-3Naphthalenesulfonic acid, dinonyl-, calcium saltNaphthalene sulfonic acids and salts31assess in group
68425-61-6Naphthalenesulfonic acid, bis(1-methylethyl)-, compd. with cyclohexanamine (1:1)Naphthalene sulfonic acids and salts31assess in group
1338-02-9a,dNaphthenic acids, copper saltsNaphthenic acids and salts11track
1338-24-5aNaphthenic acidsNaphthenic acids and salts21track
12001-85-3a,dNaphthenic acids, zinc saltsNaphthenic acids and salts11track
118-96-7Benzene, 2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitro-Nitrobenzenes22track
121-14-2Benzene, 1-methyl-2,4-dinitro-Nitrobenzenes22track
1326-03-0Xanthylium, 9-(2-carboxyphenyl)-3,6-bis(diethylamino)-, molybdatetungstatephosphatePigments and Dyes31track
5521-31-3Anthra[2,1,9-def:6,5,10-d'e'f']diisoquinoline-1,3,8,10(2H,9H)-tetrone, 2,9-dimethyl-Pigments and Dyes22track
8005-03-6C.I. Acid Black 2Pigments and Dyes31track
66241-11-0C.I. Leuco Sulphur Black 1Pigments and Dyes22track
75627-12-2Xanthylium, 3,6-bis(ethylamino)-9-[2-(methoxycarbonyl)phenyl]-2,7-dimethyl-, molybdatesilicatePigments and Dyes31track
106276-80-6Benzoic acid, 2,3,4,5-tetrachloro-6-cyano-, methyl ester, reaction products with p-phenylenediamine and sodium methoxidePigments and Dyes31track
139-07-1Benzenemethanaminium, N-dodecyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chlorideQuaternary ammonium compounds31assess in group
139-08-2Benzenemethanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-tetradecyl-, chlorideQuaternary ammonium compounds31assess in group
68391-01-5Quaternary ammonium compounds, benzyl-C12-18-alkyldimethyl,chloridesQuaternary ammonium compounds22assess in group
68391-05-9Quaternary ammonium compounds, di-C12-18-alkyldimethyl, chloridesQuaternary ammonium compounds31assess in group
68424-85-1Quaternary ammonium compounds, benzyl-C12-16-alkyldimethyl,chloridesQuaternary ammonium compounds23assess in group
68953-58-2Quaternary ammonium compounds, bis(hydrogenated tallow alkyl)dimethyl, salts with bentoniteQuaternary ammonium compounds31assess in group
8002-26-4Tall oilResins & rosins31assess in group
8050-15-5Resin acids and Rosin acids, hydrogenated, Me estersResins & rosins31assess in group
8050-28-0Rosin, maleatedResins & rosins31assess in group
8052-10-6Tall-oil rosinResins & rosins31assess in group
118-56-9Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy-, 3,3,5-trimethylcyclohexyl esterSalicylates31track
10703-2cSubstituted alkylphenol, calcium saltSubstituted alkyl (dodecyl) phenols31track
137-26-8Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide ([(H2N)C(S)]2S2), tetramethyl-Thiocarbamates31assess in group
2390-59-2Ethanaminium, N-[4-[bis[4-(diethylamino)phenyl]methylene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]-N-ethyl-, chlorideTriarylmethanes31assess in group
2390-60-5Ethanaminium, N-[4-[[4-(diethylamino)phenyl][4-(ethylamino)-1-naphthalenyl]methylene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]-N-ethyl-, chlorideTriarylmethanes31assess in group
3844-45-9Benzenemethanaminium, N-ethyl-N-[4-[[4-[ethyl[(3-sulfophenyl)methyl]amino]phenyl](2-sulfophenyl)methylene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]-3-sulfo-, hydroxide, inner salt, disodium saltTriarylmethanes22assess in group
10685-2cSubstituted dimercaptodithiazoleNA31track
1843-05-6Methanone, [2-hydroxy-4-(octyloxy)phenyl]phenyl-NA31track

Table Notes

* For reasons of precaution and potential for substitution, substances which are associated with groups of higher risk potential substances will undergo more detailed assessment with the high risk substances. The remaining moderates have been identified for additional tracking of use patterns and their priority status re-evaluated if new information becomes available.

Abbreviation: CAS RN, Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number; CMP, Chemical Management Plan; NA, not available

aSubstance had initially been classified as a low risk concern, but was adjusted to moderate risk classification based on application of the near-field exposure scenario (see section 7.1.2). This adjustment is not reflected in the exposure ranking.
bExposure ranking of this substance was revised following application of the classification consistency rule (see section 6).
cConfidential Domestic Substance List (CDSL) substance(s).
dMetal moieties will be assessed in future inorganic assessments.

Appendix D. Substances classified as posing a lower relative risk to the environment

Table D-1. Substances classified as posing a lower relative risk to the environment
CAS RNDomestic Substances List nameCMP Chemical GroupHazard RankingExposure RankingAction
136-51-6Hexanoic acid, 2-ethyl-, calcium salt2-EHA and derivatives11 
7425-14-1Hexanoic acid, 2-ethyl-, 2-ethylhexyl ester2-EHA and derivatives11 
79-10-72-Propenoic acidAcrylates/methylacrylates11track
79-41-42-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-Acrylates/methylacrylates11track
97-88-12-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, butyl esterAcrylates/methylacrylates11track
122-68-92-Propenoic acid, 3-phenyl-, 3-phenylpropyl esterAcrylates/methylacrylates11track
7534-94-32-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo[2.2.1]hept-2-yl ester, exo-Acrylates/methylacrylates21track
24448-20-22-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, (1-methylethylidene)bis(4,1-phenyleneoxy-2,1-ethanediyl) esterAcrylates/methylacrylates21track
43048-08-42-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, (octahydro-4,7-methano-1H-indene-5,?-diyl)bis(methylene) esterAcrylates/methylacrylates21track
75-65-02-Propanol, 2-methyl-Alcohols13 
77-99-61,3-Propanediol, 2-ethyl-2-(hydroxymethyl)-Alcohols11 
78-83-11-Propanol, 2-methyl-Alcohols11 
96-23-12-Propanol, 1,3-dichloro-Alcohols21track
104-76-71-Hexanol, 2-ethyl-Alcohols11track
108-11-22-Pentanol, 4-methyl-Alcohols11 
124-41-4Methanol, sodium saltAlcohols11 
8027-33-6cAlcohols, lanolinAlcohols31track
67762-30-5Alcohols, C14-18Alcohols21track
68603-15-6Alcohols, C6-12Alcohols11 
1334-78-7Benzaldehyde, methyl-Aldehydes11 
8024-06-4cOils, vanillaAldehydes31track
174333-80-3cBenzaldehyde, 2-hydroxy-5-nonyl, oxime, branchedAldehydes31track
103-83-3Benzenemethanamine, N,N-dimethyl-Aliphatic amines11track
107-15-31,2-EthanediamineAliphatic amines11track
108-91-8CyclohexanamineAliphatic amines11track
111-40-01,2-Ethanediamine, N-(2-aminoethyl)-Aliphatic amines11track
112-90-3c9-Octadecen-1-amine, (Z)-Aliphatic amines31track
124-40-3Methanamine, N-methyl-Aliphatic amines11track
58713-21-61,3,5,7-Tetraazatricyclo[,7]decane, hydrochlorideAliphatic amines11track
61789-79-5Amines, bis(hydrogenated tallow alkyl)Aliphatic amines11track
68955-53-3Amines, C12-14-tert-alkylAliphatic amines11track
80939-62-4Amines, C11-14-branched alkyl, monohexyl and dihexyl phosphatesAliphatic amines11track
90367-27-4Ethanol, 2,2’-[[3-[(2-hydroxyethyl)amino]propyl]imino]bis-, N-tallow alkyl derivs.Aliphatic amines11track
91745-52-7cAmines, coco alkyl, hydrochloridesAliphatic amines31track
103-24-2Nonanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) esterAliphatic diesters11track
100-37-8Ethanol, 2-(diethylamino)-Alkanolamines11 
102-71-6Ethanol, 2,2’,2’’-nitrilotris-Alkanolamines11 
111-42-2Ethanol, 2,2’-iminobis-Alkanolamines11track
122-20-32-Propanol, 1,1’,1’’-nitrilotris-Alkanolamines11 
141-43-5Ethanol, 2-amino-Alkanolamines11 
61791-31-9Ethanol, 2,2’-iminobis-, N-coco alkyl derivs.Alkanolamines11 
61791-44-4Ethanol, 2,2’-iminobis-, N-tallow alkyl derivs.Alkanolamines11track
127-68-4Benzenesulfonic acid, 3-nitro-, sodium saltAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives12track
61789-85-3cSulfonic acids, petroleumAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives31track
68584-25-8Benzenesulfonic acid, C10-16-alkyl derivs., compds. with triethanolamineAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives11track
71486-79-8Benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C15-30-branched alkyl and di-C11-13-branched and linear alkyl derivs., calcium salts, overbasedAlkyl aryl sulfonates/LABS and derivatives12track
21652-27-7c1H-Imidazole-1-ethanol, 2-(8-heptadecenyl)-4,5-dihydro-, (Z)-Alkyl imidazolines and salts31track
31135-57-6c1H-Benzimidazolesulfonic acid, 2-heptadecyl-1-[(sulfophenyl)methyl]-, disodium saltAlkyl imidazolines and salts31track
67633-57-21H-Imidazolium, 1-ethyl-4,5-dihydro-1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-isoheptadecyl-, ethyl sulfate (salt)Alkyl imidazolines and salts21track
68122-86-1Imidazolium compounds, 4,5-dihydro-1-methyl-2-nortallow alkyl-1-(2-tallow amidoethyl), Me sulfatesAlkyl imidazolines and salts11track
68966-38-1c1H-Imidazole-1-ethanol, 4,5-dihydro-2-isoheptadecyl-Alkyl imidazolines and salts31track
74-88-4cMethane, iodo-Alkyl or aryl halides31track
74-96-4Ethane, bromo-Alkyl or aryl halides11track
75-00-3Ethane, chloro-Alkyl or aryl halides13track
77-47-4c1,3-Cyclopentadiene, 1,2,3,4,5,5-hexachloro-Alkyl or aryl halides31track
106-94-5Propane, 1-bromo-Alkyl or aryl halides11track
126-99-81,3-Butadiene, 2-chloro-Alkyl or aryl halides11 
156-60-5Ethene, 1,2-dichloro-, (E)-Alkyl or aryl halides13 
630-20-6Ethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloro-Alkyl or aryl halides11 
2235-54-3Sulfuric acid, monododecyl ester, ammonium saltAlkyl Sulfates and Olefin Sulfonate11track
15647-08-2Phosphorous acid, 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl esterAlkyl/aryl Phosphites11track
81-48-1c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1-hydroxy-4-[(4-methylphenyl)amino]-Anthraquinones31track
2379-79-5cAnthra[2,3-d]oxazole-5,10-dione, 2-(1-amino-9,10-dihydro-9,10-dioxo-2-anthracenyl)-Anthraquinones31track
2475-45-8c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,4,5,8-tetraamino-Anthraquinones31track
4051-63-2c[1,1’-Bianthracene]-9,9’,10,10’-tetrone, 4,4’-diamino-Anthraquinones31track
6408-72-6c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,4-diamino-2,3-diphenoxy-Anthraquinones31track
13676-91-0c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,8-bis(phenylthio)-Anthraquinones31track
14233-37-5c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,4-bis[(1-methylethyl)amino]-Anthraquinones31track
15791-78-3c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,8-dihydroxy-4-[[4-(2-hydroxyethyl)phenyl]amino]-5-nitro-Anthraquinones31track
17418-58-5c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1-amino-4-hydroxy-2-phenoxy-Anthraquinones31track
19286-75-0c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1-hydroxy-4-(phenylamino)-Anthraquinones31track
19720-45-7c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,4-bis[(2-methylpropyl)amino]-Anthraquinones31track
28173-59-3cCarbonic acid, 2-[(1-amino-9,10-dihydro-4-hydroxy-9,10-dioxo-2-anthracenyl)oxy]ethyl phenyl esterAnthraquinones31track
72391-24-3cBenzenesulfonic acid, [[(chloroacetyl)amino]methyl][4-[[4-(cyclohexylamino)-9,10-dihydro-9,10-dioxo-1-anthracenyl]amino]phenoxy]methyl-, monosodium saltAnthraquinones31track
74499-36-8c9,10-Anthracenedione, 1,4-diamino-, N,N'-mixed 2-ethylhexyl and Me and pentyl derivs.Anthraquinones31track
57-97-6Benz[a]anthracene, 7,12-dimethyl-Arenes11track
98-82-8Benzene, (1-methylethyl)-Arenes11 
632-51-9Benzene, 1,1’,1’’,1’’’-(1,2-ethenediylidene)tetrakis-Arenes11 
38640-62-9Naphthalene, bis(1-methylethyl)-Arenes21 
64800-83-5Benzene, ethyl(phenylethyl)-Arenes11 
68398-19-6Benzene, ethyl(phenylethyl)-, mono-ar-ethyl deriv.Arenes11 
68953-80-0Benzene, mixed with toluene, dealkylation productArenes13track
68987-42-8Benzene, ethylenated, residuesArenes11 
86-30-6Benzenamine, N-nitroso-N-phenyl-Aromatic Amines11track
91-66-7Benzenamine, N,N-diethyl-Aromatic Amines11track
95-54-5c1,2-BenzenediamineAromatic Amines31track
95-55-6cPhenol, 2-amino-Aromatic Amines31track
121-69-7Benzenamine, N,N-dimethyl-Aromatic Amines11track
122-39-4Benzenamine, N-phenyl-Aromatic Amines21track
134-09-8Cyclohexanol, 5-methyl-2-(1-methylethyl)-, 2-aminobenzoateAromatic Amines11track
3081-14-9c1,4-Benzenediamine, N,N’-bis(1,4-dimethylpentyl)-Aromatic Amines31track
13680-35-8Benzenamine, 4,4’-methylenebis[2,6-diethyl-Aromatic Amines11track
63449-68-32-Naphthalenol, 2-aminobenzoyl esterAromatic Amines11track
93-58-3Benzoic acid, methyl esterBenzoates11 
93-89-0Benzoic acid, ethyl esterBenzoates11 
120-50-3Benzoic acid, 2-methylpropyl esterBenzoates11 
120-55-8Ethanol, 2,2’-oxybis-, dibenzoateBenzoates21 
121-91-51,3-Benzenedicarboxylic acidBenzoates11 
136-60-7Benzoic acid, butyl esterBenzoates11 
614-33-51,2,3-Propanetriol, tribenzoateBenzoates11track
8024-05-3Oils, tuberoseBenzoates13 
27138-31-4Propanol, oxybis-, dibenzoateBenzoates21track
68052-23-3d1,3-Pentanediol, 2,2,4-trimethyl-, dibenzoateBenzoates12 
95-31-82-Benzothiazolesulfenamide, N-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles21track
95-33-02-Benzothiazolesulfenamide, N-cyclohexyl-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles11track
4979-32-22-Benzothiazolesulfenamide, N,N-dicyclohexyl-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles21track
21564-17-0cThiocyanic acid, (2-benzothiazolylthio)methyl esterBenzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31track
29385-43-11H-Benzotriazole, 4(or 5)-methyl-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles11track
80584-90-3c1H-Benzotriazole-1-methanamine, N,N-bis(2-ethylhexyl)-4-methyl-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31track
80595-74-0c1H-Benzotriazole-1-methanamine, N,N-bis(2-ethylhexyl)-5-methyl-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31track
94270-86-7c1H-Benzotriazole-1-methanamine, N,N-bis(2-ethylhexyl)-ar-methyl-Benzotriazoles & benzothiazoles31track
85-42-71,3-Isobenzofurandione, hexahydro-Carboxylic acid anhydrides11 
108-31-62,5-FurandioneCarboxylic acid anhydrides13 
552-30-75-Isobenzofurancarboxylic acid, 1,3-dihydro-1,3-dioxo-Carboxylic acid anhydrides11 
79-09-4Propanoic acidCarboxylic acids13track
107-92-6Butanoic acidCarboxylic acids11 
112-05-0Nonanoic acidCarboxylic acids11 
144-62-7Ethanedioic acidCarboxylic acids11 
64754-95-6bCastor oil, hydrogenated, lithium saltInorganic - Lithium11 
76-03-9Acetic acid, trichloro-Chloroacetic acids21 
79-43-6Acetic acid, dichloro-Chloroacetic acids11 
101-37-11,3,5-Triazine, 2,4,6-tris(2-propenyloxy)-Cyanurates21 
2893-78-9c1,3,5-Triazine-2,4,6(1H,3H,5H)-trione, 1,3-dichloro-, sodium saltCyanurates31track
60-00-4Glycine, N,N’-1,2-ethanediylbis[N-(carboxymethyl)-EDTA and salts11 
64-02-8Glycine, N,N’-1,2-ethanediylbis[N-(carboxymethyl)-, tetrasodium saltEDTA and salts11 
15708-41-5Ferrate(1-), [[N,N’-1,2-ethanediylbis[N-(carboxymethyl)glycinato]](4-)-N,N’,O,O’,O#N,O#N#’]-, sodium, (OC-6-21)-EDTA and salts11 
21265-50-9Ferrate(1-), [[N,N’-1,2-ethanediylbis[N-(carboxymethyl)glycinato]](4-)-N,N’,O,O’,O#N,O#N#’]-, ammonium, (OC-6-21)-EDTA and salts12 
101-90-6Oxirane, 2,2’-[1,3-phenylenebis(oxymethylene)]bis-Epoxides & glycidyl ethers21track
106-92-3Oxirane, [(2-propenyloxy)methyl]-Epoxides & glycidyl ethers21 
556-52-5OxiranemethanolEpoxides & glycidyl ethers21 
1139-30-65-Oxatricyclo[,6]dodecane, 4,12,12-trimethyl-9-methylene-, [1R-(1R,4R,6R,10S)]-Epoxides & glycidyl ethers21track
2210-79-9cOxirane, [(2-methylphenoxy)methyl]-Epoxides & glycidyl ethers31track
2451-62-91,3,5-Triazine-2,4,6(1H,3H,5H)-trione, 1,3,5-tris(oxiranylmethyl)-Epoxides & glycidyl ethers23track
28768-32-3cOxiranemethanamine, N,N’-(methylenedi-4,1-phenylene)bis[N-(oxiranylmethyl)-Epoxides & glycidyl ethers31track
61788-72-5cFatty acids, tall-oil, epoxidized, octyl estersEpoxides & glycidyl ethers31track
66072-38-6cOxirane, 2,2’,2’’-[methylidynetris(phenyleneoxymethylene)]tris-Epoxides & glycidyl ethers31track
68082-35-9cFatty acids, soya, epoxidized, Me estersEpoxides & glycidyl ethers31track
120547-52-6cOxirane, mono[(C12-13-alkyloxy)methyl] derivs.Epoxides & glycidyl ethers31track
79-20-9Acetic acid, methyl esterEsters11 
102-76-11,2,3-Propanetriol, triacetateEsters11 
106-70-7Hexanoic acid, methyl esterEsters11 
109-60-4Acetic acid, propyl esterEsters13 
110-19-0Acetic acid, 2-methylpropyl esterEsters13 
111-55-71,2-Ethanediol, diacetateEsters11 
111-82-0Dodecanoic acid, methyl esterEsters11 
122-79-2Acetic acid, phenyl esterEsters11 
577-11-7cButanedioic acid, sulfo-, 1,4-bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester, sodium saltEsters31track
623-42-7Butanoic acid, methyl esterEsters11 
1119-40-0Pentanedioic acid, dimethyl esterEsters11 
3234-85-3Tetradecanoic acid, tetradecyl esterEsters11 
6846-50-0Propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2,2-dimethyl-1-(1-methylethyl)-1,3-propanediyl esterEsters21track
25265-77-4Propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, monoester with 2,2,4-trimethyl-1,3-pentanediolEsters11 
68990-53-4Glycerides, C14-22 mono-Esters11 
70657-70-41-Propanol, 2-methoxy-, acetateEsters11 
60-29-7Ethane, 1,1’-oxybis-Ethers11 
101-84-8Benzene, 1,1’-oxybis-Ethers11 
115-10-6Methane, oxybis-Ethers13 
34590-94-8Propanol, 1(or 2)-(2-methoxymethylethoxy)-Ethers11 
110-71-4Ethane, 1,2-dimethoxy-Ethylene glycol ethers11 
111-46-6Ethanol, 2,2’-oxybis-Ethylene glycol ethers11 
111-90-0Ethanol, 2-(2-ethoxyethoxy)-Ethylene glycol ethers11 
111-96-6Ethane, 1,1’-oxybis[2-methoxy-Ethylene glycol ethers11 
112-07-2Ethanol, 2-butoxy-, acetateEthylene glycol ethers11 
112-27-6Ethanol, 2,2’-[1,2-ethanediylbis(oxy)]bis-Ethylene glycol ethers11 
112-34-5Ethanol, 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)-Ethylene glycol ethers11 
112-49-22,5,8,11-TetraoxadodecaneEthylene glycol ethers11 
112-60-7Ethanol, 2,2’-[oxybis(2,1-ethanediyloxy)]bis-Ethylene glycol ethers11 
97-53-0Phenol, 2-methoxy-4-(2-propenyl)-Eugenol and Isoeugenol derivatives11 
120-11-6Benzene, 2-methoxy-1-(phenylmethoxy)-4-(1-propenyl)-Eugenol and Isoeugenol derivatives11 
120-24-1Benzeneacetic acid, 2-methoxy-4-(1-propenyl)phenyl esterEugenol and Isoeugenol derivatives11 
84696-47-9Rose, Rosa canina , ext.Eugenol and Isoeugenol derivatives11 
112-38-910-Undecenoic acidFatty acids and salts11 
463-40-1c9,12,15-Octadecatrienoic acid, (Z,Z,Z)-Fatty acids and salts31track
8001-20-5Tung oilFatty acids and salts13 
8002-65-1cMargosa oilFatty acids and salts31track
53980-88-42-Cyclohexene-1-octanoic acid, 5(or 6)-carboxy-4-hexyl-Fatty acids and salts21track
61788-89-4Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., dimersFatty acids and salts11 
61790-12-3dFatty acids, tall-oilFatty acids and salts21track
61790-44-1cFatty acids, tall-oil, potassium saltsFatty acids and salts31track
68139-89-9cFatty acids, tall-oil, maleatedFatty acids and salts31track
68476-03-9cFatty acids, montan-waxFatty acids and salts31track
68551-42-8bFatty acids, C6-19-branched, manganese saltsFatty acids and salts11 
68647-55-2Fatty acids, tall-oil, esters with triethanolamineFatty acids and salts11 
68647-58-5b,cAluminum, benzoate hydrogenated tallow fatty acid iso-Pr alc. complexesFatty acids and salts31track
68783-36-8b,dFatty acids, C16-22, lithium saltsFatty acids and salts21track
68783-37-9b,dFatty acids, C16-18, lithium saltsFatty acids and salts21track
68937-90-6Fatty acids, C18-unsatd., trimersFatty acids and salts11 
73138-45-1Fatty acids, montan-wax, ethylene estersFatty acids and salts11 
90028-66-3cEvening primrose, Oenotherabiennis, ext.Fatty acids and salts31track
92044-87-6Fatty acids, coco, 2-ethylhexyl estersFatty acids and salts11 
112-84-5c13-Docosenamide, (Z)-Fatty amides23 
120-40-1Dodecanamide, N,N-bis(2-hydroxyethyl)-Fatty amides11 
142-78-9Dodecanamide, N-(2-hydroxyethyl)-Fatty amides11 
301-02-0c9-Octadecenamide, (Z)-Fatty amides22 
11053-1aFatty acids compounded with ethylenediamineFatty amides11 
11555-8aFatty acids, reaction products with maleic anhydride and triethanolamineFatty amides11 
11556-0aFatty acids, reaction products with maleic anhydrideFatty amides11 
11557-1aFatty acids, reaction products with maleic anhydride and oleylamineFatty amides11 
68153-35-5Ethanaminium, 2-amino-N-(2-aminoethyl)-N-(2-hydroxyethyl)-N-methyl-, N,N’-ditallow acyl derivs., Me sulfates (salts)Fatty amides13 
68478-81-99-Octadecenoic acid (Z)-, reaction products with 3-(dodecenyl)dihydro-2,5-furandione and triethylenetetramineFatty amides11 
68603-42-9Amides, coco, N,N-bis(hydroxyethyl)Fatty amides11track
68784-17-8Isooctadecanoic acid, reaction products with tetraethylenepentamineFatty amides11 
71820-35-4Fatty acids, tall-oil, low-boiling, reaction products with 1-piperazineethanamineFatty amides11 
78-40-0Phosphoric acid, triethyl esterFlame Retardants11track
78-42-2Phosphoric acid, tris(2-ethylhexyl) esterFlame Retardants21track
298-07-7Phosphoric acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) esterFlame Retardants21track
26446-73-1Phosphoric acid, bis(methylphenyl) phenyl esterFlame Retardants21track
64-18-6Formic acidFormic acids & formates13 
107-31-3Formic acid, methyl esterFormic acids & formates11 
109-94-4Formic acid, ethyl esterFormic acids & formates11 
141-53-7Formic acid, sodium saltFormic acids & formates13 
77-09-81(3H)-Isobenzofuranone, 3,3-bis(4-hydroxyphenyl)-Furan and derivatives11track
98-00-02-FuranmethanolFuran and derivatives11 
109-99-9Furan, tetrahydro-Furan and derivatives11 
110-00-9FuranFuran and derivatives11 
126-33-0Thiophene, tetrahydro-, 1,1-dioxideFuran and derivatives11 
4174-09-8c3H-Pyrazol-3-one, 2,4-dihydro-4-[(5-hydroxy-3-methyl-1-phenyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)methylene]-5-methyl-2-phenyl-Heterocycles31track
28984-69-2c4,4(5H)-Oxazoledimethanol, 2-(heptadecenyl)-Heterocycles31track
68909-18-2Pyridinium, 1-(phenylmethyl)-, Et Me derivs., chloridesHeterocycles11track
4080-31-33,5,7-Triaza-1-azoniatricyclo[,7]decane, 1-(3-chloro-2-propenyl)-, chlorideHexamethylenetetramine12 
51229-78-83,5,7-Triaza-1-azoniatricyclo[,7]decane, 1-(3-chloro-2-propenyl)-, chloride, (Z)-Hexamethylenetetramine11 
79-74-3c1,4-Benzenediol, 2,5-bis(1,1-dimethylpropyl)-Hindered phenols31track
85-60-9cPhenol, 4,4’-butylidenebis[2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-5-methyl-Hindered phenols31track
2082-79-3Benzenepropanoic acid, 3,5-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-hydroxy-, octadecyl esterHindered phenols13track
6386-38-5Benzenepropanoic acid, 3,5-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-hydroxy-, methyl esterHindered phenols11track
41484-35-9Benzenepropanoic acid, 3,5-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-hydroxy-, thiodi-2,1-ethanediyl esterHindered phenols12track
104-15-4Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-methyl-Hydrotropes and derivatives11 
12068-03-0Benzenesulfonic acid, methyl-, sodium saltHydrotropes and derivatives11 
2422-91-5cBenzene, 1,1’,1’’-methylidynetris[4-isocyanato-Isocyanates31track
4035-89-6cImidodicarbonic diamide, N,N’,2-tris(6-isocyanatohexyl)-Isocyanates31track
4098-71-9dCyclohexane, 5-isocyanato-1-(isocyanatomethyl)-1,3,3-trimethyl-Isocyanates12 
4151-51-3cPhenol, 4-isocyanato-, phosphorothioate (3:1) (ester)Isocyanates31track
108-10-12-Pentanone, 4-methyl-Ketones11 
110-12-32-Hexanone, 5-methyl-Ketones11 
123-42-22-Pentanone, 4-hydroxy-4-methyl-Ketones13 
141-79-73-Penten-2-one, 4-methyl-Ketones11 
513-86-02-Butanone, 3-hydroxy-Ketones11 
68442-69-3Benzene, mono-C10-14-alkyl derivs.Linear Alkyl Benzenes (LAB) and Derivatives11track
68890-99-3Benzene, mono-C10-16-alkyl derivs.Linear Alkyl Benzenes (LAB) and Derivatives11track
106-02-5Oxacyclohexadecan-2-oneMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
108-94-1CyclohexanoneMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
109-29-5Oxacycloheptadecan-2-oneMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
502-72-7CyclopentadecanoneMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
541-91-3Cyclopentadecanone, 3-methyl-Musks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
542-46-19-Cycloheptadecen-1-one, (Z)-Musks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
1335-94-0IroneMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)21 
7779-30-81-Penten-3-one, 1-(2,6,6-trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-1-yl)-Musks (Macro/Poly cyclic)21 
7779-50-2Oxacycloheptadec-7-en-2-oneMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
8001-04-5MusksMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11track
28645-51-4Oxacycloheptadec-10-en-2-oneMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
37609-25-95-Cyclohexadecen-1-oneMusks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
68140-48-7Ethanone, 1-[2,3-dihydro-1,1,2,6-tetramethyl-3-(1-methylethyl)-1H-inden-5-yl]-Musks (Macro/Poly cyclic)11 
1321-69-3Naphthalenesulfonic acid, sodium saltNaphthalene sulfonic acids and salts11track
25638-17-9Naphthalenesulfonic acid, butyl-, sodium saltNaphthalene sulfonic acids and salts11track
61789-36-4Naphthenic acids, calcium saltsNaphthenic acids and salts11track
78-67-1Propanenitrile, 2,2’-azobis[2-methyl-Nitriles12 
13472-08-7Butanenitrile, 2,2’-azobis[2-methyl-Nitriles12track
61790-28-1Nitriles, tallowNitriles13track
61790-29-2dNitriles, tallow, hydrogenatedNitriles21track
125328-64-5Nitriles, rape-oil, hydrogenatedNitriles12 
100-00-5Benzene, 1-chloro-4-nitro-Nitrobenzenes11track
872-50-42-Pyrrolidinone, 1-methyl-NMP and NEP11 
2687-91-42-Pyrrolidinone, 1-ethyl-NMP and NEP11 
80-15-9cHydroperoxide, 1-methyl-1-phenylethylOrganic peroxides31track
80-43-3cPeroxide, bis(1-methyl-1-phenylethyl)Organic peroxides22track
133-14-2cPeroxide, bis(2,4-dichlorobenzoyl)Organic peroxides31track
614-45-9Benzenecarboperoxoic acid, 1,1-dimethylethyl esterOrganic peroxides11 
3006-86-8dPeroxide,cyclohexylidenebis[(1,1-dimethylethyl)Organic peroxides12track
3851-87-4Peroxide, bis(3,5,5-trimethyl-1-oxohexyl)Organic peroxides21 
94-13-3Benzoic acid, 4-hydroxy-, propyl esterParabens11track
94-18-8Benzoic acid, 4-hydroxy-, phenylmethyl esterParabens11track
94-26-8Benzoic acid, 4-hydroxy-, butyl esterParabens11track
99-76-3Benzoic acid, 4-hydroxy-, methyl esterParabens11 
120-47-8Benzoic acid, 4-hydroxy-, ethyl esterParabens11 
4191-73-5Benzoic acid, 4-hydroxy-, 1-methylethyl esterParabens11track
4247-02-3Benzoic acid, 4-hydroxy-, 2-methylpropyl esterParabens11 
25155-23-1dPhenol, dimethyl-, phosphate (3:1)Phosphoric acid derivatives12track
37310-83-1c9-Octadecen-1-ol, (Z)-, phosphatePhosphoric acid derivatives31track
68604-99-9cFatty acids, C18-unsatd., phosphatesPhosphoric acid derivatives31track
68952-35-2Tar acids, cresylic, Ph phosphatesPhosphoric acid derivatives21 
111174-61-9cAlcohols, C8-16, reaction products with phosphorus oxide (P2O5), compds. with 2-ethyl-1-hexanaminePhosphoric acid derivatives31track
119345-01-6Phosphorous trichloride, reaction products with 1,1’-biphenyl and 2,4-bis(1,1-methylethyl)phenolPhosphoric acid derivatives11 
596-03-2Spiro[isobenzofuran-1(3H),9’-[9H]xanthen]-3-one, 4’,5’-dibromo-3’,6’-dihydroxy-Pigments and Dyes11track
1328-04-7b,cC.I. Pigment Violet 5:1Pigments and Dyes31track
1328-51-4b,cC.I. Solvent Blue 38Pigments and Dyes31track
2387-03-3c1-Naphthalenecarboxaldehyde, 2-hydroxy-, [(2-hydroxy-1-naphthalenyl)methylene]hydrazonePigments and Dyes31track
2478-20-81H-Benz[de]isoquinoline-1,3(2H)-dione, 6-amino-2-(2,4-dimethylphenyl)-Pigments and Dyes11track
4378-61-4Dibenzo[def,mno]chrysene-6,12-dione, 4,10-dibromo-Pigments and Dyes11track
5718-26-3c1H-Indole-5-carboxylic acid, 2-[(1,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1-phenyl-4H-pyrazol-4-ylidene)ethylidene]-2,3-dihydro-1,3,3-trimethyl-, methyl esterPigments and Dyes31track
6858-49-7cPropanedinitrile, [[4-[ethyl[2-[[(phenylamino)carbonyl]oxy]ethyl]amino]-2-methylphenyl]methylene]-Pigments and Dyes31track
7576-65-01H-Indene-1,3(2H)-dione, 2-(3-hydroxy-2-quinolinyl)-Pigments and Dyes21track
12224-98-5Xanthylium, 9-[2-(ethoxycarbonyl)phenyl]-3,6-bis(ethylamino)-2,7-dimethyl-, molybdatetungstatephosphatePigments and Dyes11track
13082-47-8cXanthylium, 9-(2-carboxyphenyl)-3,6-bis(diethylamino)-, hydroxidePigments and Dyes31track
16294-75-014H-Anthra[2,1,9-mna]thioxanthen-14-onePigments and Dyes11track
26694-69-9cXanthylium, 9-[2-(ethoxycarbonyl)phenyl]-3,6-bis(ethylamino)-2,7-dimethyl-, ethyl sulfatePigments and Dyes31track
42373-04-6cThiazolium, 3-methyl-2-[(1-methyl-2-phenyl-1H-indol-3-yl)azo]-, chloridePigments and Dyes31track
62973-79-9b,cXanthylium, 9-(2-carboxyphenyl)-3,6-bis(diethylamino)-, molybdatesilicatePigments and Dyes31track
63022-09-3b,cXanthylium, 9-(2-carboxyphenyl)-3,6-bis(diethylamino)-, molybdatephosphatePigments and Dyes31track
68310-07-6Xanthylium, 3,6-bis(ethylamino)-9-[2-(methoxycarbonyl)phenyl]-2,7-dimethyl-, molybdatephosphatePigments and Dyes11track
68409-66-5cEthanaminium, N-[4-[[4-(diethylamino)phenyl][4-(ethylamino)-1-naphthalenyl]methylene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]-N-ethyl-, molybdatephosphatePigments and Dyes31track
68814-02-8b,cEthanaminium, N-[4-[bis[4-(diethylamino)phenyl]methylene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]-N-ethyl-, molybdatephosphatePigments and Dyes31track
80083-40-5b,cXanthylium, 9-[2-(ethoxycarbonyl)phenyl]-3,6-bis(ethylamino)-2,7-dimethyl-, molybdatetungstatesilicatePigments and Dyes31track
102082-92-8cXanthylium, 3,6-bis(diethylamino)-9-[2-(methoxycarbonyl)phenyl]-, molybdatesilicatePigments and Dyes31track
9015-54-7Protein hydrolyzatesProteins and derivatives11 
92113-31-0Collagens, hydrolyzatesProteins and derivatives11 
111174-63-1cProtein hydrolyzates, leather, reaction products with isostearoyl chlorideProteins and derivatives31track
57-09-0c1-Hexadecanaminium, N,N,N-trimethyl-, bromideQuaternary ammonium compounds31track
78-21-7Morpholinium, 4-ethyl-4-hexadecyl-, ethyl sulfateQuaternary ammonium compounds21track
3327-22-81-Propanaminium, 3-chloro-2-hydroxy-N,N,N-trimethyl-, chlorideQuaternary ammonium compounds21track
61791-34-2cOnium compounds, morpholinium, 4-ethyl-4-soya alkyl, Et sulfatesQuaternary ammonium compounds31track
71011-25-1cQuaternary ammonium compounds, benzyl(hydrogenated tallow alkyl)dimethyl, chlorides, compds. with bentonite and bis(hydrogenated tallow alkyl)dimethylammonium chloridesQuaternary ammonium compounds31track
72102-40-0c1-Propanaminium, 3-amino-N-ethyl-N,N-dimethyl-, N-lanolin acyl derivs., Et sulfatesQuaternary ammonium compounds31track
90459-62-4cOctadecanoic acid, reaction products with diethylenetriamine, di-Me sulfate-quaternizedQuaternary ammonium compounds31track
115340-80-2c1-Propanaminium, 3-amino-N-ethyl-N,N-dimethyl-, N-wheat-oil acyl derivs., Et sulfatesQuaternary ammonium compounds31track
1740-19-81-Phenanthrenecarboxylic acid, 1,2,3,4,4a,9,10,10a-octahydro-1,4a-dimethyl-7-(1-methylethyl)-, [1R-(1,4aβ,10a)]-Resins & rosins21track
8046-19-3Storax (balsam)Resins & rosins11track
26266-77-31-Phenanthrenemethanol, dodecahydro-1,4a-dimethyl-7-(1-methylethyl)-Resins & rosins11track
68186-14-1Resin acids and Rosin acids, Me estersResins & rosins11track
73138-82-6cResin acids and Rosin acidsResins & rosins31track
91081-53-7cRosin, reaction products with formaldehydeResins & rosins31track
69-72-7Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy-Salicylates11track
87-22-9Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy-, 2-phenylethyl esterSalicylates11track
68917-75-9Oils, wintergreenSalicylates11track
84012-15-7Birch, Betula alba, ext.Salicylates11track
107-46-0Disiloxane, hexamethyl-Siloxanes21 
141-62-8cTetrasiloxane, decamethyl-Siloxanes31track
141-63-9cPentasiloxane, dodecamethyl-Siloxanes31track
541-05-9Cyclotrisiloxane, hexamethyl-Siloxanes21 
2627-95-4Disiloxane, 1,3-diethenyl-1,1,3,3-tetramethyl-Siloxanes21 
33204-76-1cCyclotetrasiloxane, 2,2,4,6,6,8-hexamethyl-4,8-diphenyl-, cis-Siloxanes31track
69430-24-6Cyclosiloxanes, di-MeSiloxanes22 
1533-45-5cBenzoxazole, 2,2’-(1,2-ethenediyldi-4,1-phenylene)bis-Stilbenes31track
3426-43-5cBenzenesulfonic acid, 2,2’-(1,2-ethenediyl)bis[5-[[4-methoxy-6-(phenylamino)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]-, disodium saltStilbenes31track
4193-55-9Benzenesulfonic acid, 2,2’-(1,2-ethenediyl)bis[5-[[4-[bis(2-hydroxyethyl)amino]-6-(phenylamino)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]-, disodium saltStilbenes22 
16090-02-1Benzenesulfonic acid, 2,2’-(1,2-ethenediyl)bis[5-[[4-(4-morpholinyl)-6-(phenylamino)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]-, disodium saltStilbenes22 
68784-26-9Phenol, dodecyl-, sulfurized, carbonates, calcium salts, overbasedSubstituted alkyl (dodecyl) phenols11 
80-54-6Benzenepropanal, 4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)--methyl-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
80-56-8Bicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-ene, 2,6,6-trimethyl-Terpenes & Terpenoids21 
87-44-5Bicyclo[7.2.0]undec-4-ene, 4,11,11-trimethyl-8-methylene-, [1R-(1R,4E,9S)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
88-84-6Azulene, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-7-(1-methylethylidene)-, (1S-cis)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
117-98-66-Azulenol, 1,2,3,3a,4,5,6,8a-octahydro-4,8-dimethyl-2-(1-methylethylidene)-, acetateTerpenes & Terpenoids21 
469-61-41H-3a,7-Methanoazulene, 2,3,4,7,8,8a-hexahydro-3,6,8,8-tetramethyl-, [3R-(3,3aβ,7β,8a)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
470-40-6cCyclopropa[d]naphthalene, 1,1a,4,4a,5,6,7,8-octahydro-2,4a,8,8-tetramethyl-, [1aS-(1a,4aβ,8aR)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
471-53-4cOlean-12-en-29-oic acid, 3-hydroxy-11-oxo, (3β,20β)      Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
489-40-7c1H-Cycloprop[e]azulene, 1a,2,3,4,4a,5,6,7b-octahydro-1,1,4,7-tetramethyl-, [1aR-(1a,4,4aβ,7b)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
489-84-9Azulene, 1,4-dimethyl-7-(1-methylethyl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
489-86-15-Azulenemethanol, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-octahydro-,,3,8-tetramethyl-, [3S-(3,5,8)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
495-62-5Cyclohexene, 4-(1,5-dimethyl-4-hexenylidene)-1-methyl-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
514-51-24,7-Methanoazulene, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-octahydro-1,4,9,9-tetramethyl-, [1S-(1,4,7)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
546-28-11H-3a,7-Methanoazulene, octahydro-3,8,8-trimethyl-6-methylene-, [3R-(3,3aβ,7β,8a)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
639-99-6Cyclohexanemethanol, 4-ethenyl-,,4-trimethyl-3-(1-methylethenyl)-, [1R-(1,3,4β)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
1113-21-91,6,10,14-Hexadecatetraen-3-ol, 3,7,11,15-tetramethyl-, (E,E)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
3407-42-9Cyclohexanol, 3-(5,5,6-trimethylbicyclo[2.2.1]hept-2-yl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11track
3691-12-1cAzulene, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-7-(1-methylethenyl)-, [1S-(1,4,7)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
3738-00-9Naphtho[2,1-b]furan, dodecahydro-3a,6,6,9a-tetramethyl-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
4572-09-2cOlean-12-en-29-oic acid, 3-hydroxy-11-oxo-, (3β,20β)-, compd. with (2,5-dioxo-4-imidazolidinyl)urea (1:1)Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
4630-07-3cNaphthalene, 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,8a-octahydro-1,8a-dimethyl-7-(1-methylethenyl)-, [1R-(1,7β,8a)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
8000-27-9Oils, cedarwoodTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8000-46-2Oils, geraniumTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8001-61-4Balsams, copaibaTerpenes & Terpenoids12 
8002-09-3Oils, pineTerpenes & Terpenoids21 
8006-64-2Turpentine, oilTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8006-78-8Oils, bayTerpenes & Terpenoids11track
8006-87-9Oils, sandalwoodTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8007-01-0Oils, roseTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8007-02-1Oils, lemongrassTerpenes & Terpenoids21 
8007-08-7Oils, gingerTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8008-31-9Oils, mandarinTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8008-52-4Oils, corianderTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8008-57-9Oils, orange, sweetTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8008-93-3Oils, wormwoodTerpenes & Terpenoids11track
8013-10-3cOils, cadeTerpenes & Terpenoids31track
8014-19-5Oils, palmarosaTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8015-77-8Oils, bois de roseTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8016-37-3Oils, myrrhTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8016-85-1Oils, tangerineTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8016-88-4Oils, tarragonTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8021-28-1Oils, firTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8022-56-8Oils, sageTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8022-96-6Oils, jasmineTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8023-75-4Oils, jonquilTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8024-08-6Oils, violetTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8024-43-9Perfumes and Essences, jasminTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
8031-03-6Oils, mimosaTerpenes & Terpenoids12 
9005-90-7TurpentineTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
17627-44-0Cyclohexene, 4-(1,5-dimethyl-1,4-hexadienyl)-1-methyl-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
22451-73-65-Azulenemethanol, 1,2,3,3a,4,5,6,7-octahydro-,,3,8-tetramethyl-, [3S-(3,3aβ,5)]-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
25428-43-73-Cyclohexene-1-methanol, ,4-dimethyl--(4-methyl-3-pentenyl)-, (R,R)-(±)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
29350-73-0Naphthalene, decahydro-1,6-dimethyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-, [1S-(1,4,4a,6,8aβ)]-, didehydro deriv.Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
37677-14-83-Cyclohexene-1-carboxaldehyde, 4-(4-methyl-3-pentenyl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
52474-60-93-Cyclohexene-1-carboxaldehyde, 1-methyl-3-(4-methyl-3-pentenyl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
52475-86-23-Cyclohexene-1-carboxaldehyde, 1-methyl-4-(4-methyl-3-pentenyl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
59056-62-12,3b-Methano-3bH-cyclopenta[1,3]cyclopropa[1,2]benzene-4-methanol, octahydro-7,7,8,8-tetramethyl-, acetateTerpenes & Terpenoids21 
65113-99-73-Cyclopentene-1-butanol, ,β,2,2,3-pentamethyl-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
65405-84-7Cyclohexenebutanal, ,2,2,6-tetramethyl-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
66068-84-6Cyclohexanol, 4-(5,5,6-trimethylbicyclo[2.2.1]hept-2-yl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11track
66327-54-63-Cyclohexene-1-carboxaldehyde, 1-methyl-4-(4-methylpentyl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
68608-32-2Terpenes and Terpenoids, cedarwood-oilTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
68877-29-2Cyclohexanol, (1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo[2.2.1]hept-2-yl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids11track
68916-97-2Oils, horehoundTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
68917-29-3dTerpenes and Terpenoids, clove-oilTerpenes & Terpenoids21track
68917-65-7Terpenes and Terpenoids, vetiver-oilTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
68990-83-0Oils, cedarwood, TexanTerpenes & Terpenoids11 
70788-30-6Cyclohexanepropanol, 2,2,6-trimethyl--propyl-Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
70955-71-4Phenol, 2-methoxy-, reaction products with 2,2-dimethyl-3-methylenebicyclo[2.2.1]heptane, hydrogenatedTerpenes & Terpenoids11track
84082-54-2Ivy, Hedera helix, ext.Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
84961-67-1cVerbena officinalis, ext.Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
90045-36-6cGinkgo biloba, ext.Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
90045-38-8cGinseng, Panaxquinquefolium, ext.Terpenes & Terpenoids31track
107898-54-44-Penten-2-ol, 3,3-dimethyl-5-(2,2,3-trimethyl-3-cyclopenten-1-yl)-Terpenes & Terpenoids21 
164288-52-2Cork tree, Phellodendronamurense, ext.Terpenes & Terpenoids11 
60-24-2Ethanol, 2-mercapto-Thiols11 
75-18-3Methane, thiobis-Thiols11 
150-60-7Disulfide, bis(phenylmethyl)Thiols21 
71159-90-5c3-Cyclohexene-1-methanethiol, ,,4-trimethyl-Thiols31track
73984-93-7c1,3,4-Thiadiazole-2(3H)-thione, 5-(tert-dodecyldithio)-Thiols31track
632-99-5Benzenamine, 4-[(4-aminophenyl)(4-imino-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene)methyl]-2-methyl-, monohydrochlorideTriarylmethanes11track
121-82-4c1,3,5-Triazine, hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitro-Triazoles31track
3089-11-01,3,5-Triazine-2,4,6-triamine, N,N,N’,N’,N’’,N’’-hexakis(methoxymethyl)-Triazoles13track
3319-31-11,2,4-Benzenetricarboxylic acid, tris(2-ethylhexyl) esterTrimellitates11 
53894-23-81,2,4-Benzenetricarboxylic acid, triisononyl esterTrimellitates11 
68515-60-61,2,4-Benzenetricarboxylic acid, tri-C7-9-branched and linear alkyl estersTrimellitates11 
70225-05-71,2,4-Benzenetricarboxylic acid, mixed branched tridecyl andisodecyl estersTrimellitates11 
94109-09-81,2,4-Benzenetricarboxylic acid, tritridecyl esterTrimellitates11 
67-97-0c9,10-Secocholesta-5,7,10(19)-trien-3-ol, (3β,5Z,7E)-Vitamins & derivatives31track
68-26-8RetinolVitamins & derivatives11 
116-31-4RetinalVitamins & derivatives11 
7235-40-7β,β-CaroteneVitamins & derivatives11 
11103-57-4Vitamin AVitamins & derivatives11 
59-50-7Phenol, 4-chloro-3-methyl-NA11 
62-44-2Acetamide, N-(4-ethoxyphenyl)-NA11 
64-19-7dAcetic acidNA13 
77-73-64,7-Methano-1H-indene, 3a,4,7,7a-tetrahydro-NA11 
88-19-7Benzenesulfonamide, 2-methyl-NA11 
90-93-7cMethanone, bis[4-(diethylamino)phenyl]-NA31track
91-44-12H-1-Benzopyran-2-one, 7-(diethylamino)-4-methyl-NA11track
91-51-0Benzoic acid, 2-[[3-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl]-2-methylpropylidene]amino]-, methyl esterNA11 
92-70-62-Naphthalenecarboxylic acid, 3-hydroxy-NA21track
98-88-4Benzoyl chlorideNA21track
100-40-3Cyclohexene, 4-ethenyl-NA11 
101-20-2Urea, N-(4-chlorophenyl)-N’-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-NA21 
105-60-22H-Azepin-2-one, hexahydro-NA11 
108-03-2Propane, 1-nitro-NA11 
108-24-7Acetic acid, anhydrideNA11 
109-87-5Methane, dimethoxy-NA11 
119-61-9Methanone, diphenyl-NA11 
126-13-6-D-Glucopyranoside, 6-O-acetyl-1,3,4-tris-O-(2-methyl-1-oxopropyl)-β-D-fructofuranosyl, 6-acetate 2,3,4-tris(2-methylpropanoate)NA11 
132-27-4[1,1’-Biphenyl]-2-ol, sodium saltNA11track
139-05-9Sulfamic acid, cyclohexyl-, monosodium saltNA11 
302-17-01,1-Ethanediol, 2,2,2-trichloro-NA11 
647-42-71-Octanol, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,8-tridecafluoro-NA11 
4390-04-9cNonane, 2,2,4,4,6,8,8-heptamethyl-NA31track
5064-31-3Glycine, N,N-bis(carboxymethyl)-, trisodium saltNA11 
5089-22-5cBenzoxazole, 2,2’-(1,4-naphthalenediyl)bis-NA31track
8013-01-2Yeast, ext.NA11 
8021-39-4Creosote, woodNA11 
15827-60-8Phosphonic acid, [[(phosphonomethyl)imino]bis[2,1-ethanediylnitrilobis(methylene)]]tetrakis-NA13 
27193-86-8cPhenol, dodecyl-NA31track
61790-49-6Oils, lard, sulfurizedNA21track
66071-94-1Corn, steep liquorNA11 
68511-50-21-Propene, 2-methyl-, sulfurizedNA11track
68649-11-61-Decene, dimer, hydrogenatedNA11 
68649-12-71-Decene, tetramer, mixed with 1-decene trimer, hydrogenatedNA12 
68909-20-6Silanamine, 1,1,1-trimethyl-N-(trimethylsilyl)-, hydrolysis products with silicaNA11 
68909-77-3Ethanol, 2,2'-oxybis-, reaction products with ammonia, morpholine derivs. residuesNA13 
84696-24-2cLotus corniculatus, ext.NA31track
129828-23-5Fatty acids, tall-oil, reaction products with Bu phenylmethyl phthalate, 2-(dimethylamino)ethanol, morpholine and overbased calcium petroleum sulfonatesNA11 

Table Notes

* Substances that are currently used in low volume in Canada but which have high classifications of hazard or that trigger other hazard alerts, have been identified for additional tracking of use patterns and their priority status re-evaluated if new information becomes available.

Abbreviation: CAS RN, Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number; CMP, Chemical Management Plan; NA, not available.

aConfidential Domestic Substance List (CDSL) substance(s)
bMetal moieties will be assessed in future inorganic assessments
cSubstance had initially been classified as a higher risk concern, but was adjusted to low risk classification based on low regional emissions (see section 7.1.1). In these cases, it is proposed to track use pattern of the substance.
dHazard ranking of this substance was revised following application of the classification consistency rule (see section 6).


Footnote 1

Toxicity Forecasting

Return to footnote 1 referrer

Footnote 2

Toxicity ForeCaster (ToxCast™) Data

Return to footnote 2 referrer

Footnote 3

The HAF threshold value was selected based on an examination of the HAF distribution and the HAF correlation with higher levels of inherent aquatic toxicity. A HAF of 10-3 or greater represents approximately 23% of the HAF distribution and captures more potent chemicals.

Return to footnote 3 referrer

Footnote 4

The threshold value was selected based on an examination of the HAF distribution and the correlation with moderate levels of inherent aquatic toxicity. A HAF between 10-3 and 10-6 represents approximately 35% of the distribution and captures more potent chemicals.

Return to footnote 4 referrer

Footnote 5

The threshold value was selected based on an examination of the HAF distribution and the correlation with low levels of inherent aquatic toxicity. A HAF <10-6 represents approximately 42% of the distribution and captures less potent chemicals.

Return to footnote 5 referrer

Footnote 6

Selection of Pov cut-off values was arbitrary, but reflect those typical of persistence criteria in some jurisdictions for water (i.e., 60 days criteria in the European Union) or reflect chronic aquatic toxicity test durations (i.e., 21 days). Single media half-lives will be lower than the Pov.

Return to footnote 6 referrer

Top of Page

Date modified: