European Chemicals Bureau Institute for Health and Consumer Protection European Union Risk Assessment Report European Chemicals Bureau CAS No: 110-85-0 EINECS No: 203-808-3 Existing Substances piperazine European Union Risk Assessment Report Report Assessment Risk Union H p i p N erazine N H CAS: EC: 203-808-3 110-85-0 rd 3 Priority List EUROPEAN COMMISSION JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE Volume: 56 PL-3 EUR 21642 EN 56 European Union Risk Assessment Report PIPERAZINE CAS No: 110-85-0 EINECS No: 203-808-3 RISK ASSESSMENT 1 LEGAL NOTICE Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa Server (http://europa.eu.int). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2005 © European Communities, 2005 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Italy 2 PIPERAZINE CAS No: 110-85-0 EINECS No: 203-808-3 RISK ASSESSMENT Final Report, 2005 Sweden The rapporteur for the risk assessment on piperazine is the National Chemicals Inspectorate, Sweden National Chemicals Inspectorate Box 2 S-172 13 SUNDBYBERG SWEDEN e-mail: [email protected] Tel: 0046 8 519 41 100 Fax: 0046 8 735 76 75475 3 Date of Last Literature Search: 2003 Review of report by MS Technical Experts finalised: 2004 Final report: 2005 4 Foreword We are pleased to present this Risk Assessment Report which is the result of in-depth work carried out by experts in one Member State, working in co-operation with their counterparts in the other Member States, the Commission Services, Industry and public interest groups. The Risk Assessment was carried out in accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) 793/931 on the evaluation and control of the risks of “existing” substances. “Existing” substances are chemical substances in use within the European Community before September 1981 and listed in the European Inventory of Existing Commercial Chemical Substances. Regulation 793/93 provides a systematic framework for the evaluation of the risks to human health and the environment of these substances if they are produced or imported into the Community in volumes above 10 t/year. There are four overall stages in the Regulation for reducing the risks: data collection, priority setting, risk assessment and risk reduction. Data provided by Industry are used by Member States and the Commission services to determine the priority of the substances which need to be assessed. For each substance on a priority list, a Member State volunteers to act as “Rapporteur”, undertaking the in-depth Risk Assessment and recommending a strategy to limit the risks of exposure to the substance, if necessary. The methods for carrying out an in-depth Risk Assessment at Community level are laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) 1488/942, which is supported by a technical guidance document3. Normally, the “Rapporteur” and individual companies producing, importing and/or using the chemicals work closely together to develop a draft Risk Assessment Report, which is then presented at a Meeting of Member State technical experts for endorsement. The Risk Assessment Report is then peer-reviewed by the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment (CSTEE) which gives its opinion to the European Commission on the quality of the risk assessment. If a Risk Assessment Report concludes that measures to reduce the risks of exposure to the substances are needed, beyond any measures which may already be in place, the next step in the process is for the “Rapporteur” to develop a proposal for a strategy to limit those risks. The Risk Assessment Report is also presented to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development as a contribution to the Chapter 19, Agenda 21 goals for evaluating chemicals, agreed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. This Risk Assessment improves our knowledge about the risks to human health and the environment from exposure to chemicals. We hope you will agree that the results of this in-depth study and intensive co-operation will make a worthwhile contribution to the Community objective of reducing the overall risks from exposure to chemicals 1 O.J. No L 084, 05/04/1993 p.0001 – 0075 2 O.J. No L 161, 29/06/1994 p. 0003 – 0011 3 Technical Guidance Document, Part I – V, ISBN 92-827-801 [1234] V 0 OVERALL RESULTS OF THE RISK ASSESSMENT CAS No: 110-85-0 Piperazine hexahydrate CAS-No. 142-63-2 EINECS No: 203-808-3 IUPAC Name: Piperazine Environment Aquatic compartment Conclusion (iii) There is a need for limiting the risks; risk reduction measures which are already being applied shall be taken into account. For the local production site C and the local formulation site H the PEC/PNEC ratios are >1. For the industrial use of gas washer formulations, the PEC/PNEC for surface water was >1 at 21 out of 33 local sites. It should be noted that these worst case release calculations are based on TGD defaults for dilution in STP and recipients and, with regard to frequency of release events, information from one company was used for all sites. Conclusion (iii) also applies for micro- organisms in the STP for the majority of the local gas washer scenarios. Terrestrial compartment Conclusion (ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing and for risk reduction measures beyond those, which are being applied already All PEC/PNEC ratios for the local point sources are below 1. In case the use of piperazine in veterinary medicine increases drastically this has to be reconsidered. Atmosphere Conclusion (ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing and for risk reduction measures beyond those, which are being applied already At present, no concern has been raised for the atmospheric compartment. Secondary poisoning Conclusion (ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing and for risk reduction measures beyond those, which are being applied already At present, no concern has been raised for secondary poisoning of piperazine. Human health Human health (toxicity) Workers Conclusion (ii) There is at present no need for further information and/or testing and for risk reduction measures beyond those, which are being applied already VI Conclusion (ii) applies to: • Acute toxicity: Although the LD50 –levels indicate a relatively low level of oral acute toxicity (LD50 1-5 g/kg bw), signs of neurotoxicity may appear in humans after exposure to lower doses. Based on exposure levels of up to 3.4 mg/kg/day piperazine base, and a LOAEL of 110 mg/kg, there is no concern for acute toxicity. • Skin and eye irritation, and corrosion: Concentrated aqueous solutions of piperazine base have corrosive properties with regard to skin, and should be regarded as corrosive with respect to the eye. Considering that piperazine is already classified with R34, and that workers are assumed to protect themselves with proper PPE against the irritation/corrosion exerted by piperazine base (anhydrate and hexahydrate), there should be no further concern. • Carcinogenicity: There seems to be an additional cancer risk due to the formation of N-mononitrosopiperazine (NPZ) from piperazine. It is possible to calculate a hypothetical additional cancer risk posed by NPZ after exposure to piperazine, but the calculation would depend on several assumptions. It is concluded that there seems to be an additional cancer risk due to the formation of NPZ from piperazine, and although it is difficult to estimate, it is probably small. Conclusion (iii) There is a need for limiting the risks; risk reduction measures which are already being applied shall be taken into account. Conclusion (iii) applies to: • Skin sensitisation: Worker dermal exposure to piperazine salts has been estimated to be up to 0.5 mg/ cm2/day. Based on the sensitisation potential of piperazine, it is concluded that piperazine represents a risk for all worker scenarios concerning skin sensitisation. • Occupational Asthma: The external worker exposure has been estimated to be up to 8.6 mg/m3 (vapour and dust) for an 8-hour day and even higher during peak exposure. Based on the sensitisation potential of piperazine, it is concluded that piperazine represents a risk for all worker scenarios concerning occupational asthma. • Repeated dose toxicity: The internal worker exposure has been estimated to be 0.5-3.4 mg/kg/day for an 8-hour day exposure. Based on the LOAEL for neurotoxicity in humans of 30 mg/kg/day of piperazine base, it is concluded that piperazine represents a risk for workers (during final handling in production of piperazine salts and during loading in formulation with piperazine salts) concerning repeated dose toxicity. • Reproductive toxicity: The internal worker exposure has been estimated to be 0.5-3.4 mg/kg/day for an 8-hour day. Based on a NOAEL of 125 mg/kg/day and the derived MOSs, it is concluded that piperazine represents a risk for workers (during final handling in production of piperazine salts and during loading in formulation with piperazine salts) concerning reproductive toxicity. Consumers Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2377/90, a regulation dealing with the establishment of Maximum Residue Limits for veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin, already covers the use of piperazine in veterinary medicine as an anthelmintic in pigs and poultry (including laying hens). Therefore this use is not further addressed here. Consumer exposure to piperazine via other consumer products is considered negligible.