RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, (2-endo,3-exo)-ethyl 3-(1-methylethyl)bicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene-2-carboxylate, CAS registry number 116044-44-1

In addition, the total systemic exposure to (2-endo,3-exo)-ethyl 3-(1-methylethyl)bicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene-2-carboxylate (3.3 μg/kg/day) is below the TTC (9 μg/kg/day; Kroes, 2007) for the repeated dose toxicity endpoint of a Cramer Class II material at the current level of use.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-ene-2-propionaldehyde, CAS Registry Number 33885-51-7

No treatment-related effects at the low and mid doses were observed in gestation, viability and lactation indices, duration of gestation, parturition, sex ratio, maternal care, litter size, and early postnatal pup development consisting of mortality, clinical signs, anogenital distance, areola/nipple retention, T4 thyroid hormone levels, or macroscopic examination. However, the number of litters (N = 5) at the high dose was considered too low for toxicological evaluation. Thus, based on insufficient data at 120 mg/kg/day, the NOAEL for this study was considered to be 60 mg/kg/day (RIFM, 2020d).

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cis-3-hexenyl methyl carbonate, CAS Registry Number 67633-96-9

The following paper presents the method of determination of the percolation threshold in cement composites with expanded graphite by impedance spectroscopy. Most of the applications of cement composites with conductive additives require exceeding the percolation threshold. The ionic conductivity of cement matrix below the percolation threshold has a major impact on the conductivity of the composite, as a result, it significantly hinders the exploitation of these composites. The electric properties of cement composites with expanded graphite were evaluated by DC measurements and impedance spectroscopy (IS). Based on Nyquist plots, two equivalent circuits were adopted for the composites. Next, the values of capacitance and inductance of cement composites with expanded graphite were calculated from the fitted equivalent circuits. The analysis of the results shows that the percolation threshold occurs when the reactance of the composite changes from captative to inductive. Comparison between the values of percolation threshold obtained from DC measurements and IS shows that the method is effective for cement composites with conductive additives.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, citronellyl propionate, CAS registry number 141-14-0

In addition, the total systemic exposure for citronellyl propionate (0.54 μg/kg/day) is below the TTC (30 μg/kg/day; Kroes, 2007) for the repeated dose toxicity endpoint at the current level of use.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, dihydrocarvyl acetate, CAS Registry Number 20777-49-5

The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Dihydrocarvyl acetate was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from read-across analogs dihydrocarveol (isomer unspecified) (CAS # 619-01-2) and acetic acid (CAS # 64-19-7) show that dihydrocarvyl acetate is not expected to be genotoxic. Data on read-across analogs isopulegol (CAS # 89-79-2) and acetic acid (CAS # 64-19-7 provide a calculated MOE >100 for the repeated dose toxicity endpoint. The reproductive and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were evaluated using the TTC for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to dihydrocarvyl acetate is below the TTC (0.03 mg/kg/day and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). Data from read-across analog 4-methyl-8-methylenetricyclo [3.3.1.(3,7)]decan-2-yl acetate (CAS # 122,760-85-4) provided dihydrocarvyl acetate a NESIL of 2500 μg/cm2 for the skin sensitization endpoint. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on UV/Vis spectra; dihydrocarvyl acetate is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; dihydrocarvyl acetate was found not to be PBT as per the IFRA Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., PEC/PNEC), are <1.