Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Data platform availability banner - registered substances factsheets
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.
The new ECHA CHEM database has been released by ECHA, and it now contains all REACH registration data. There are more details on the transition of ECHA's published data to ECHA CHEM here.
Diss Factsheets
Use of this information is subject to copyright laws and may require the permission of the owner of the information, as described in the ECHA Legal Notice.
EC number: 233-135-0 | CAS number: 10043-01-3
- Life Cycle description
- Uses advised against
- Endpoint summary
- Appearance / physical state / colour
- Melting point / freezing point
- Boiling point
- Density
- Particle size distribution (Granulometry)
- Vapour pressure
- Partition coefficient
- Water solubility
- Solubility in organic solvents / fat solubility
- Surface tension
- Flash point
- Auto flammability
- Flammability
- Explosiveness
- Oxidising properties
- Oxidation reduction potential
- Stability in organic solvents and identity of relevant degradation products
- Storage stability and reactivity towards container material
- Stability: thermal, sunlight, metals
- pH
- Dissociation constant
- Viscosity
- Additional physico-chemical information
- Additional physico-chemical properties of nanomaterials
- Nanomaterial agglomeration / aggregation
- Nanomaterial crystalline phase
- Nanomaterial crystallite and grain size
- Nanomaterial aspect ratio / shape
- Nanomaterial specific surface area
- Nanomaterial Zeta potential
- Nanomaterial surface chemistry
- Nanomaterial dustiness
- Nanomaterial porosity
- Nanomaterial pour density
- Nanomaterial photocatalytic activity
- Nanomaterial radical formation potential
- Nanomaterial catalytic activity
- Endpoint summary
- Stability
- Biodegradation
- Bioaccumulation
- Transport and distribution
- Environmental data
- Additional information on environmental fate and behaviour
- Ecotoxicological Summary
- Aquatic toxicity
- Endpoint summary
- Short-term toxicity to fish
- Long-term toxicity to fish
- Short-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Long-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Toxicity to aquatic algae and cyanobacteria
- Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Toxicity to microorganisms
- Endocrine disrupter testing in aquatic vertebrates – in vivo
- Toxicity to other aquatic organisms
- Sediment toxicity
- Terrestrial toxicity
- Biological effects monitoring
- Biotransformation and kinetics
- Additional ecotoxological information
- Toxicological Summary
- Toxicokinetics, metabolism and distribution
- Acute Toxicity
- Irritation / corrosion
- Sensitisation
- Repeated dose toxicity
- Genetic toxicity
- Carcinogenicity
- Toxicity to reproduction
- Specific investigations
- Exposure related observations in humans
- Toxic effects on livestock and pets
- Additional toxicological data
![](https://echa.europa.eu./o/diss-blank-theme/images/factsheets/A-REACH/factsheet/print_toxicological-information.png)
Epidemiological data
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- epidemiological data
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across based on grouping of substances (category approach)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Reliable with restrictions.
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 1 983
Materials and methods
- Study type:
- case control study (prospective)
- Endpoint addressed:
- respiratory irritation
- skin sensitisation
- respiratory sensitisation
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- A health survey was carried out on all white males in an aluminum smelter in British Columbia. The survey consisted of a medical-occupational questionnaire, spirometry, chest radiography, and environmental monitoring. We have compared the results of a respiratory survey in 713 workers in the office and casting department with no significant exposure to air contaminants (control workers) with those of 797 potroom workers: 495 who spent more than 50% of their working time in the potroom (high exposure) and 302 workers who spent less than 50% of their working time in the potroom (medium exposure).
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Aluminium oxide
- EC Number:
- 215-691-6
- EC Name:
- Aluminium oxide
- Cas Number:
- 1344-28-1
- IUPAC Name:
- 1344-28-1
- Details on test material:
- - Name of test material :aluminium oxide
- Molecular formula :Al2O3
- Molecular weight :101.96 g mol−1
- Smiles notation :[Al+3].[Al+3].[O-2].[O-2].[O-2]
- InChl :1/2Al.3O/q2*+3;3*-2
- Structural formula attached as image file : see Fig.1
- Substance type:inorganic
- Physical state:white solid very hygroscopic
- Odor: odorless
- Density: 3.95-4.1 g/cm3
- Melting point: 2072 °C
- Boiling point: 2977 °C
- Solubility in water: insoluble
- Solubility :insoluble in diethyl ether, practically insoluble in ethanol
Constituent 1
Method
- Type of population:
- occupational
- Ethical approval:
- confirmed, but no further information available
- Details on study design:
- A health survey was carried out on all white males in an aluminum smelter in British Columbia. The survey consisted of a medical-occupational questionnaire, spirometry, chest radiography, and environmental monitoring. They have compared the results of a respiratory survey in 713 workers in the office and casting department with no significant exposure to air contaminants (control workers) with those of 797 potroom workers: 495 who spent more than 50% of their working time in the potroom (high exposure) and 302 workers who spent less than 50% of their working time in the potroom (medium exposure). Potroom workers (high) had a significantly greater prevalence of cough and wheeze than did those in the control group, and they had significantly lower mean forced expiratory volume in one second and maximal midexpiratory flow rate than did those in the control group after adjustment had been made for differences in age, height, and smoking habits.
- Exposure assessment:
- estimated
- Details on exposure:
- The survey consisted of a medical-occupational questionnaire, spirometry, chest radiography, and environmental monitoring. They have compared the results of a respiratory survey in 713 workers in the office and casting department with no significant exposure to air contaminants (control workers) with those of 797 potroom workers: 495 who spent more than 50% of their working time in the potroom (high exposure) and 302 workers who spent less than 50% of their working time in the potroom (medium exposure). Potroom workers (high) had a significantly greater prevalence of cough and wheeze than did those in the control group, and they had significantly lower mean forced expiratory volume in one second and maximal midexpiratory flow rate than did those in the control group after adjustment had been made for differences in age, height, and smoking habits.
Results and discussion
- Results:
- There were two components to the study, a health study and an industrial hygiene survey.
For the health study, trained interviewers administered a questionnaire using a standardized technique; data on smoking habits and detailed occupational history were collected. A limited physical examination was conducted, including respiratory symptoms, and tests for common skin allergens. Chest roentgenograms were obtained (from 60% of workers), and pulmonary function tests were conducted. To determine if work place exposure to contaminants had acute effects on the airways, pre-shift and post-shift spirometry was conducted on a subset of the medium and high exposure groups. In addition, pre-shift, post-shift and end of the work week urine samples were collected to measure urinary fluoride levels.
The industrial hygiene survey involved personal sampling on representative workers of different job categories for levels of air contaminants, including total airborne particulates, gaseous and particulate fluoride, carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide and benzo-alpha-pyrene. Highly exposed potroom workers were significantly younger, were employed for significantly shorter periods of time, and were more likely to smoke than the control group. Potroom workers had a greater prevalence of cough, sputum, and wheeze compared with the control group; these results were statistically significant for the high exposure group but not for the medium exposure group. Less than 10% of the workers who had a chest radiograph exhibited abnormal findings; most of these changes were determined to have resulted from previous pulmonary tuberculosis. Chest radiographs revealed the presence of diffuse reticulonodular shadows in 28 workers with no association with any particular group. When pulmonary function was adjusted for age, height, duration of employment and smoking, potroom workers in the high exposure category were found to have significantly lower mean FEV1 and lower maximal mid-expiratory flow rate. The same result was observed in the medium exposure group, but was not statistically significant. Pulmonary function was lower when measured post-shift as compared to the pre-shift measurement in both potroom and control workers. Urinary fluoride levels increased in potroom workers after one shift, while the control group exhibited a slight decrease in urinary fluoride levels after one shift.
Results from personal samplers revealed that potroom workers were exposed to higher levels of air contaminants (total particulate, fluoride, carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, and benzo-alpha-pyrene) than the controls.
These results suggest that the increased frequency of adverse pulmonary effects seen in the potroom workers, compared with the controls, may be a result of the irritant properties of the air contaminants on the potline. Although no cases of asthma were detected in the potroom workers, five workers in the control group indicated that they left the potroom as a result of asthma. In interpreting the results of this study, it must be considered that only 60% of the sample received chest radiographs. In addition, the article states that many of the workers had previously been miners which could have had an impact on the workers= current pulmonary status. - Confounding factors:
- occupational exposure to dust or substances such as asbestos have not been controlled.
- Strengths and weaknesses:
- lack of information required to rule out exposure to other toxic substances as the cause of the observed effect.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Conclusions:
- These results suggest that the increased frequency of adverse pulmonary effects seen in the potroom workers, compared with the controls, may be a result of the irritant properties of the air contaminants on the potline. Although no cases of asthma were detected in the potroom workers, five workers in the control group indicated that they left the potroom as a result of asthma. In interpreting the results of this study, it must be considered that only 60% of the sample received chest radiographs. In addition, the article states that many of the workers had previously been miners which could have had an impact on the workers= current pulmonary status.
- Executive summary:
A health survey was carried out on all white males in an aluminum smelter in British Columbia. The survey consisted of a medical-occupational questionnaire, spirometry, chest radiography, and environmental monitoring.Theyhave compared the results of a respiratory survey in 713 workers in the office and casting department with no significant exposure to air contaminants (control workers) with those of 797 potroom workers: 495 who spent more than 50% of their working time in the potroom (high exposure) and 302 workers who spent less than 50% of their working time in the potroom (medium exposure). Potroom workers (high) had a significantly greater prevalence of cough and wheeze than did those in the control group, and they had significantly lower mean forced expiratory volume in one second and maximal midexpiratory flow rate than did those in the control group after adjustment had been made for differences in age, height, and smoking habits. Potroom workers (medium) had a slightly greater prevalence of respiratory symptoms and lower lung function than did workers in the control group, but the differences were not significant. We were unable to demonstrate potroom asthma. The levels of total fluoride, gaseous fluoride, particulate fluoride, sulphur dioxide, and total particulates found in the potroom at the time of the study were below the currently accepted threshold limit values, but the levels of benzo-alpha-pyrene were high.
Information on Registered Substances comes from registration dossiers which have been assigned a registration number. The assignment of a registration number does however not guarantee that the information in the dossier is correct or that the dossier is compliant with Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (the REACH Regulation). This information has not been reviewed or verified by the Agency or any other authority. The content is subject to change without prior notice.
Reproduction or further distribution of this information may be subject to copyright protection. Use of the information without obtaining the permission from the owner(s) of the respective information might violate the rights of the owner.
![ECHA](/o/diss-blank-theme/images/factsheets/A-REACH/factsheet/echa_logo.png)