CLASSIFICATION UPDATE REPORT
www.epa.govt.nz
APP201051 – Antifouling paints (AFPs) February 2013
2
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Executive Summary
This document provides additional information related to the Application for the reassessment of
antifouling paints (APP201051), specifically the review of HSNO hazard classifications for antifouling
paints (AFPs). This report should be read in conjunction with the application report.1
This document summarises the process followed in reviewing the classifications of AFP substances.
EPA staff undertook a review of the classifications of AFP active ingredients, which led to some
proposed amendments to the existing HSNO classifications of AFP substances covered by this
reassessment. No proposals are made regarding classification changes to the approvals of active
ingredients themselves. The effect of the proposed classification changes in terms of the default
HSNO controls that should apply, are detailed for each AFP substance.
What happens next?
Comments on proposed classification changes for AFP substances detailed in this document are
welcomed. Please send your feedback to the email address below by 22 March 2013, and ensure
that you quote the application code APP201051. Note that feedback received on this report will not
form part of the formal submission process for this Application, but may be incorporated into the
Evaluation and Review Report that is provided to the decision-making committee.
For further information, please use the following contact details:
Email: [email protected]
Telephone: +64 4 474 2426
1 http://www.epa.govt.nz/search-
databases/HSNO%20Application%20Register%20Documents/APP201051_APP201051%20Application%20Final%20(2012.01.
22).pdf
3
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 2
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................... 3
Review of the classifications of AFP substances .............................................................................. 5
Appendix A: Classification of AFP active ingredients ....................................................................... 8
Chlorothalonil ................................................................................................................................. 8
Copper (I) oxide ........................................................................................................................... 10
Copper pyrithione ......................................................................................................................... 14
Copper thiocyanate ...................................................................................................................... 17
DCOIT .......................................................................................................................................... 19
Dichlofluanid ................................................................................................................................ 21
Diuron .......................................................................................................................................... 24
Irgarol ........................................................................................................................................... 27
Mancozeb .................................................................................................................................... 29
Octhilinone ................................................................................................................................... 32
Thiram .......................................................................................................................................... 34
Tolylfluanid ................................................................................................................................... 37
Zinc pyrithione .............................................................................................................................. 40
Zineb ............................................................................................................................................ 43
Ziram ............................................................................................................................................ 45
Appendix B: Classification of AFP formulations .............................................................................. 48
3(2H)-Isothiazolone, 4,5-dichloro-2-octyl-, Copper (I) Oxide ....................................................... 49
3(2H)-Isothiazolone, 4,5-dichloro-2-octyl-, Copper Thiocyanate ................................................. 49
Chlorothalonil, Copper (I) Oxide .................................................................................................. 50
Chlorothalonil, Mancozeb, Copper (I) Oxide ............................................................................... 50
Copper (I) Oxide .......................................................................................................................... 51
Copper (I) Oxide, Copper Pyrithione ........................................................................................... 53
Dichlofluanid, Copper (I) Oxide .................................................................................................... 54
Dichlofluanid, Copper Thiocyanate .............................................................................................. 54
Diuron .......................................................................................................................................... 54
Diuron, Copper (I) Oxide .............................................................................................................. 55
Diuron, Copper Thiocyanate ........................................................................................................ 58
Irgarol 1051, Copper (I) oxide ...................................................................................................... 58
Irgarol 1051, Copper Thiocyanate ............................................................................................... 58
4
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Irgarol 1051, Tolylfluanid, Zinc pyrithione, Octhilinone, Copper (I) oxide, Copper Pyrithione ..... 59
Octhilinone, Copper (I) Oxide ...................................................................................................... 61
Octhilinone, Tolylfluanid, Copper (I) Oxide .................................................................................. 61
Thiram, Copper (I) Oxide ............................................................................................................. 62
Tolyfluanid, Copper Thiocyanate ................................................................................................. 62
Zinc Pyrithione ............................................................................................................................. 63
Zinc Pyrithione, Copper (I) Oxide ................................................................................................ 65
Zinc Pyrithione, Copper Thiocyanate ........................................................................................... 65
Zineb, Copper (I) Oxide ............................................................................................................... 66
Zineb, Copper (I) Oxide, Copper Pyrithione ................................................................................ 66
Zineb, Copper Thiocyanate ......................................................................................................... 66
5
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Review of the classifications of AFP substances
EPA staff have reviewed classifications for all AFP formulations covered by the reassessment. This
review took into account the following matters which influence the classification assigned:
any changes in the classification of the components of the mixture, including AFP active
ingredients, that may have occurred since the original classification was carried out;
use of summation rules in place of additivity for derivation of ecotoxicity classifications for
mixtures; and
in the absence of formulation data, use of mixture rules to determine irritancy/corrosivity
classifications.
Active ingredients
EPA staff reviewed the HSNO classification for each of the active ingredients used in AFPs, as they
are the primary biocidal ingredient in the substances. Reviews of the active ingredient classifications
by European, US and Australian authorities were considered.
A summary of the classification changes for the active ingredients is provided in the following table:
Table 2: Proposed classification changes for the active ingredients
Active Changes
Chlorothalonil Change 9.2B to 9.2C
Copper (I) oxide None
Copper pyrithione Remove 6.3A, add 6.8B and 6.9A oral and inhalation, add 9.3B
Copper thiocyanate Remove 6.9B
DCOIT Add 6.1D oral 567 mg/kg, add 9.3C
Dichlofluanid Remove 6.1D oral, add 9.4C
Diuron Remove 6.4A, add 6.7B, change 9.3C to 9.3B
Irgarol Remove 6.4A
Mancozeb None
Octhilinone None
Thiram Change 6.1C to 6.1B value 0.5mg/L.
6
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Active Changes
Delete 6.3B, add 6.8B
Tolyfluanid Remove 6.1C oral
Zinc pyrithione Remove 6.3A, add 6.9A inhalation
Zineb Remove 9.2C
Ziram Remove 6.3B
A summary table was prepared for each active ingredient that identifies when a change in
classification should apply and a brief indication of the data and source that justified the change.
These summary tables active are provided in Appendix A.
EPA staff note: No formal amendment can be made to the approvals for the active ingredients used in
AFPs under this application, as the active ingredient approvals do not form part of this reassessment.
The review of the HSNO classification of the active ingredients used in AFPs was carried out in order
to inform the review of hazard classifications of AFP substances. Any modifications to the
classifications of the active ingredient substances will need to be carried out as part of a separate
application process, such as the EPA’s Yearly Chemical Review. EPA staff note that modifications to
classifications of active ingredients used in AFPs could have wider ranging implications, given that the
same active ingredients are used in many non-AFP pesticide substances which have not been
reviewed in this application.
AFP Formulations
The review of AFP classifications highlights a number of instances where proposed classifications are
not appropriate for all substances approved under a given approval. In such instances, EPA staff
propose the introduction of additional approvals for those substances where the amended original
approval is no longer considered appropriate. Classifications for AFP formulations are provided in
Appendix B, highlighting proposed changes to classifications for each substance. Additionally, AFPs
that contain hydrocarbon solvents that are aspiration hazards, and present at concentrations of 10%
or greater, will also be classified as acutely toxic via aspiration. The affected substances are detailed
in Appendix B.
EPA staff urge importers and manufacturers of AFPs, and other interested parties, to review the
proposed revised classifications for the formulations. Interested parties should contact the EPA if they
require additional assistance in determining which approval relates to a given trade name product. If
formulation data can be provided that would alter the proposed classification, EPA staff request that
this is submitted for review.
7
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Impact of revised classifications on default HSNO controls
Default HSNO controls that apply to a substance are largely based on the controls that are triggered
for a given hazard classification. The effect of EPA staff’s proposed classification changes on default
controls for AFP substances are detailed in Appendix B, highlighting where controls have been added
or removed.
Staff note: In some circumstances, a change in hazard classification is proposed for a formulation but
the default controls triggered may not change. However, the measures required to comply with the
control may change, such as the secondary identifiers required to be specified on a product
label. Approvals may contain variations to controls, which are not listed here but may still be relevant
despite a change of classification. EPA staff consider that variations to controls and additional
controls previously applied to the existing approvals should remain in place, unless the proposed
classification changes mean that a particular classification and associated controls and variations are
no longer relevant.
EPA staff consider that implementation of the modified controls should come into force after a
transitional period of 2 years to allow manufacturers and importers to make the necessary changes
required to comply with the revised controls. EPA staff propose that classification changes should
come into force immediately should such a decision be made.
The most significant changes to default controls would arise when a substance that is currently
classified as a eye irritant is reclassified as a eye corrosive substance. Product labels and safety data
sheets of affected products will need to be updated to reflect the corrosive nature of the substance
(i.e. pictograms, priority and secondary identifiers, precautionary statements (including the PPE
requirements), etc.). The EPA’s labelling guide2 can be used to assist in determining the effects of
proposed classification changes.
All AFPs are classified as 9.1A substances. The packing group requirements for class 8.3A
substances are the same as for 9.1A substances, so the proposed corrosivity classification for some
AFPs does not alter the existing packing group requirements.
Introduction of a corrosive classification also imposes a requirement that advertising must include an
indication of the corrosive nature of the substance, and that access to the substance by children must
be restricted under certain circumstances.
2 http://www.epa.govt.nz/Publications/hsnogen-labelling-guide.pdf .
8
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Appendix A: Classification of AFP active ingredients
Abbreviations used in this appendix are explained in the glossary of the main application report.3
In this appendix the following abbreviations are used:
ND: No Data or poor quality data (according to Klimisch criteria).
No: Data are available for the formulation, or for all components and classification is not triggered.
Chlorothalonil
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral)
No -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal)
No -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation)
6.1B -
Subclass 6.1
Aspiration hazard
ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion
No -
3 http://www.epa.govt.nz/search-databases/Pages/applications-details.aspx?appID=APP201051
9
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion
8.3A -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory
sensitisation
ND -
Subclass 6.5B
Contact sensitisation
6.5B -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity
No -
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity
6.7B -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
No -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic
toxicity
6.9A (Oral) -
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic 9.1A - Current classification is based on an acute endpoint of 96-h EC50 = 0.0076
10
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
ecotoxicity mg/L for the rainbow trout. The proposed change corresponds to a higher
quality (fulfils USEPA-guideline criteria and is listed in a trustworthy
regulatory source) fish study for the fathead minnow with a 96-h EC50 =
0.023 mg/L listed in the USEPA RED for chlorothalonil. The same
rationale for change applies to the crustacean (from a 48-h EC50 of 0.059
mg/L to 0.068 mg/L for Daphnia magna) and algal (from a 72-h EC50 of
0.17 mg/L to 0.19 mg/L for Selenastrum capricornutum) endpoints obtained
from the same data source.
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity
9.2B -
Subclass 9.3
Terrestrial vertebrate
ecotoxicity
9.3B -
Subclass 9.4
Terrestrial
invertebrate
ecotoxicity
No -
Copper (I) oxide
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
11
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) No -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion No -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 6.4A -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation 6.5A -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation No -
Subclass 6.6 ND No Changing the classification would be consistent with the conclusions of the EU4 and
US5 cited reviews. Both documents indicate that via routes which do not pass
4 http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13630/scher_opinion_hh_en.pdf
12
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Mutagenicity normal homeostatic mechanisms i.e. oral, dermal and inhalation, there is no
identified risk of mutagenicity.
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND ND
ND classification consistent with the conclusions of the EU4 and US
5 cited reviews.
Both documents indicate that there is insufficient animal or human data to give a
carcinogenic classification.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
No -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
NC -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity
6.9B (Oral and
inhalation) -
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Current classification is based on a fish study of unknown quality and an
undetermined form of copper for the Thymallus arcticus with a 96-h LC50 of 0.003
mg/L. The proposed change is a specific endpoint for copper oxide (96-h flow
through EC50 = 0.0344 mg/L dissolved) from a trustworthy regulatory source that
uses validated methodology (EFSA6, 2008).
5 http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/copper_red_amend.pdf
6 http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/187r.pdf
13
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
The same rationale as mentioned above justifies the changes proposed for
crustaceans (48-h EC50 for Daphnia magna from 0.005 mg/L to 0.45 mg/L) and
algae (from a 4-day EC50 for Selenastrum capricornutum of 0.03 mg/L to a 72-h
EC50 for Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata of 0.133 mg/L) from the same data
source.
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity No -
There is currently no available soil ecotoxicity data in the Substance Database.
EFSA6 data on Eisenia fetida (14-day LC50 > 862 mg Cu/kg d.w. soil based on
Copper oxide WP) is therefore recommended for inclusion in the Substance
Database.
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3B -
Current classification based on a rat LD50 of 470 mg/kg bw should be updated to
an LD50 of 261 mg Cu/kg bw from the EFSA6 report
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity No -
Current classification is based on an contact toxicity LD50 for Apis mellifera of >25
μg/bee. This information should be modified slightly to >22 µg/bee, from the EFSA6
report.
14
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Copper pyrithione
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) ND No
Data from the UK7 cite a dermal LD50 of > 2.0 g/kg from a rabbit study along with
data indicating that dermal absorption of copper pyrithione is low. On this basis
EPA staff agree with the UK report in that a dermal toxicity classification is not
appropriate for copper pyrithione.
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1A -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion 6.3A -
The UK7 assessment concluded negative results on a study for this endpoint with
copper pyrithione in rabbits. The EU CLP8 inventory lists copper pyrithione as
“Causes skin irritation” from 28 notifiers, but not classified by 6 notifiers. APVMA9
reports are consistent in their view that copper pyrithione is not a skin irritant and
thus classification is not warranted.
7 http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/Resources/CRD/ACP/223_CuP.pdf
8 http://clp-inventory.echa.europa.eu/ (CAS# 238-984-0)
9 http://www.apvma.gov.au/registration/assessment/docs/prs_zinc_pyrithione.pdf
15
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 8.3A -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation ND No
The UK 7 and APVMA
7 assessment reported that no classification for contact
sensitisation is necessary.
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity ND No
The UK 7 and APVMA
7 assessment reported that no classification for contact
sensitisation is necessary.
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND No
The UK 7 and APVMA
7 assessment reported that no classification for contact
sensitisation is necessary.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
ND 6.8B
The UK7 concluded a possible developmental risk at the same dose as
maternotoxicity based on the precautionary approach as causality cannot be
established using read-across studies from zinc pyrithione and sodium pyrithione.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity ND 6.9A (Oral)
According to the UK7 report, repeat dose oral studies in rats using sodium, copper
or zinc pyrithione consistently resulted in loss of hindlimb function. The lowest
adverse effect level cited was 2 mg/kg bw/day.
Similar effects were not apparent in a repeat dose investigative study in monkeys.
However due to the lack of information as to whether the results from the rat or
16
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
monkey are more relevant to humans, the UK adopted a precautionary approach
and allocated a target organ toxicity classification. The EPA staff agrees with the
UK regulator in the approach for assigning this hazard classification.
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND 9.2D
Change proposed on the basis of consistency with read-across done for similar
compounds (sodium and zinc pyrithione).
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity ND 9.3B
Change proposed on the basis of a 28-day LD50 = 126 mg/kg bw on Colinus
virginianus from a UK10
report
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity ND -
10 The Health and Safety Executive, 2005. Evaluation on: Copper Pyrithione as a New Active Ingredient in Professional Antifouling Products.
17
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Copper thiocyanate
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion ND -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion ND -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity ND -
Subclass 6.7 ND -
18
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Carcinogenicity
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity 6.9B ND
No information on target organ toxicity has been found in the public domain
including reviews by other regulatory bodies. The 6.9B classification has been
based on other copper compounds. To ensure a consistent approach with other
classifications for this active, an ND classification is proposed.
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND 9.2D
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3C -
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity No ND Change proposed on the basis of no available information for this endpoint.
19
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
DCOIT
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) ND 6.1D
Based on the EU11
Competent Authority Report citing validated rat and mouse
studies with LD50s of 1636 and 567 mg/kg bw, respectively.
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) ND -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1B -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion 8.2C -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion ND -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
Subclass 6.6 ND -
11 http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/bio_reports/library?l=/review_programme/ca_reports/antifouling_products/doc_pt_publicpdf/_EN_1.0_&a=d
20
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Mutagenicity
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity ND -
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Same classification remains, but it is based on 120-h ErEC50 of 0.00048 mg/L for
Skeletonema costatum obtained from the EU11
Competent Authority Report.
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND No
Change proposed on the basis of data from the EU11
Competent Authority Report
for Eisenia fetida, citing an LC50 = 250 mg/kg bw soil.
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity ND 9.3C
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity ND ND
21
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Dichlofluanid
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1D No
A UK12
and EU13
indicate the oral rat LD50 using recognised regulatory methods
and GLP is >5000 mg/kg bw. On the basis of data from a commonly used species
for LD50 testing (current classification is based on a guinea pig study) and
consistency with other international regulators a change to a “No” classification is
proposed.
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) No -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion 6.3B -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 6.4A -
Subclass 6.5A ND -
12 http://www.fluoridealert.org/pesticides/dichlofluanid.evaluation.03.pdf
13 http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/bio_reports/library?l=/assessement_directive/dichlofluanid_assessment/_EN_1.0_&a=d
22
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Respiratory sensitisation
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity ND No
The UKError! Bookmark not defined.
report concludes that in spite of positive results for
bacterial point mutation and mutations at the TK locus in eukaryotic cells (in vitro),
the weight of evidence (negative in 6 in vivo assays) was that dichlofluanid was
unlikely to be a genotoxic hazard.
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND No
According to the study cited in the UKError! Bookmark not defined.
and EU13
an increased
incidence of thyroid tumours was noted in rats, however further investigative studies
provided sufficient data to indicate that this was a rat-specific event and not relevant
to humans.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
No ND
According to the study cited in the UKError! Bookmark not defined.
and EU13
effects seen in
the offspring occurred at maternally toxic doses. In the absence of any information
which provides sufficient evidence that the effects seen were a result of maternal
toxicity and not a direct effect of treatment, an “ND” classification is proposed.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity 6.9B (Oral) 6.9B (Oral)
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic 9.1A - Classification remains the same but the lowest endpoint for fish is updated on the
basis of the UKError! Bookmark not defined.
report data for Oncorhynchus mykiss changing
23
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
ecotoxicity from the current 96-h EC50 of 0.05 mg/L to 0.01 mg/L.
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND No
Change proposed on the basis of data from the Pesticides Properties Database
(PPDB14
) for Eisenia fetida, with a 14-day LC50 = 890 mg/kg.
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3C -
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity ND 9.4C
Change proposed on the basis of data from the Pesticides Properties Database
(PPDB14
) for Apis mellifera, with a 48-h acute contact toxicity LD50 = 16 µg/bee.
14 http://sitem.herts.ac.uk/aeru/footprint/en/index.htm
24
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Diuron
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) ND No
Reports from other regulators, e.g. US EPA15
RED on diuron conclude the dermal
LD50 as determined in a valid rat study is >2000 mg/kg. For consistency with
international regulators a “No” classification is proposed.
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) No -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion No -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 6.4A No
Reports from other regulators, e.g. US EPA15
RED on diuron conclude diuron is not
an eye irritant. For consistency with international regulators a “No” classification is
proposed.
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation No -
15 http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/diuron_red.pdf
25
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity ND No
Reports from other regulators, e.g. US EPA15
RED on diuron conclude that a
classification for mutagenicity is not required. The approach or classification also
took into account conflicting data mentioned in the EPA Substance Database, but
on a weight-of-evidence approach have still concluded a “No” classification.
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND 6.7B
Reports from other regulators, e.g. US EPA15
RED on diuron present rat and mouse
studies that clearly showed an increased incidence of tumours in these animals.
The relevance to humans remains uncertain despite investigative/mechanistic type
studies performed. Due to the uncertainty on relevance to humans and the HSNO
criteria for carcinogenicity classifications a 6.7B classification is proposed.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
6.8B No
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity 6.9A (Oral) -
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity 9.2A -
26
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3C 9.3B
Change proposed on the basis of data from the Pesticides Properties Database
(PPDB14
) for the rat, with an acute toxicity LD50 = 437 mg/kg bw.
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity No -
27
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Irgarol
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1E -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) ND -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) No -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion No -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 6.4A No
Based on a UK16
report on diuron were adequate data was provided to classify
diuron as non-irritant to the eyes a removal of the eye irritancy classification is
proposed.
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
16 http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/Resources/CRD/ACP/218_Irgarol.pdf
28
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity ND No
No classification required on the basis of five in vitro and one in vivo study as
“negative” cited in the UKError! Bookmark not defined.
and the EU Competent Authority
Report17
, 2011.
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity ND -
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND -
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial No -
17 http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/bio_reports/library?l=/review_programme/ca_reports/antifouling_products/version_reference/_EN_1.0_&a=d
29
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
vertebrate ecotoxicity
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity ND -
Mancozeb
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) No -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) No -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) No -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion No -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 6.4A -
30
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity No -
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity 6.9B (Oral) -
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity No -
31
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity No -
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity No -
32
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Octhilinone
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1D -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) 6.1C -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1C -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion 8.2C -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 8.3A -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity ND No
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND -
33
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity ND -
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND -
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3B -
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity ND -
34
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Thiram
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1C -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) ND No
US EPA18
and ECHA19
database information indicate that classification for acute
dermal toxicity is not triggered citing a rat dermal LD50 > 2000 mg/kg bw. A “No”
classification is therefore proposed.
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1C 6.1B
The change is proposed based on current available data in the EPA Substance
Database indicating a rat LC50 = 0.5 mg/L. This is consistent with information from
the EPA18
report.
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion 6.3B No
A removal of the skin irritancy classification is proposed on the basis of conclusions
reached in the US EPA18
report and ECHA19
database where classification for skin
irritation is not met. Other general summary type literature available in the public
domain indicate thiram is a skin irritant but do not cite the data this was based
upon. The change is proposed, therefore, to achieve consistency with other
international regulators.
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye 6.4A -
18 http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/chem_search/reg_actions/reregistration/red_PC-079801_1-Sep-04.pdf
19 http://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals (CAS# 137-26-8)
35
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
irritancy/corrosion
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity ND No
A change to a “No” classification is proposed on the basis of insufficient evidence to
classify. A similar conclusion has been reached by other regulators (US EPA18
and
ECHA19
database).
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND No
The US EPA18
report concluded that thiram is “not likely to be a carcinogen” whilst
the ECHA19
database reports that classification is not triggered. For consistency
with other regulators a change to “No” in the carcinogenicity classification is
proposed.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
ND 6.8B
A more recent report from the US EPA, 2007 (found in docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-
0020-0009) notes that the study in which serious malformations were seen initially
is considered unacceptable due to technical deficiencies that compromised the
evaluation of the study. Additionally, the findings weren’t reproduced in a more
recent study at similar doses. Classification should be based on a more recent
developmental neurotoxicity study (offspring systemic and neurotoxicity LOAEL: 3.7
mg/kg bw/day based on increased locomotor activity in females; NOAEL: 1.4 mg/kg
bw/day). A 6.8B classification for reproductive/developmental toxicity is therefore
proposed.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/ ND -
36
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity 6.9B (Oral) -
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND -
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3B -
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity No -
37
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Tolylfluanid
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1C No
Current classification is based on toxicity studies on guinea pigs/rabbits. A more
consistent approach with other intentional regulators would be to use data obtained
from rats/mice. This data is available in the EPA Substance Database and its use is
proposed in favour of a “No” classification.
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) No -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1B -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion 6.3A -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 6.4A -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity No -
38
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
No -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND No
Currently the EPA Substance Database does not include any reference to data on
this endpoint. A US EPA20
factsheet and other regulatory reports such as EFSA’s21
mention the endpoint and conclude that classification is not met. Based on a
weight-of-evidence approach, the staff therefore consider relevant to classify it as
“No” in order to achieve consistency with other regulators.
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity
6.9A
(Inhalation)
6.9B (Oral)
-
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity No -
20 http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/chem_search/reg_actions/registration/fs_PC-309200_01-Sep-02.pdf
21 http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/praper_sr29_conclusion_tolylfluanid_summary_en1.pdf
39
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3B -
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity No -
40
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Zinc pyrithione
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1C -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) ND No
In the absence of any specific data on zinc pyrithione and on the basis that the
acute dermal toxicity of both copper and sodium pyrithione salts is considered to be
low, a “No” classification has been recommended for copper pyrithione as part of
this review. To achieve consistency within the EPA Substance database the same
change is proposed for zinc pyrithione.
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1B -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion 6.3A No Same rationale as cited for the 6.1 acute toxicity (dermal) subclass.
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 8.3A -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation No -
Subclass 6.6 ND No See comments on this endpoint for copper pyrithione.
41
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Mutagenicity
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND No See comments on this endpoint for copper pyrithione.
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
6.8B -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity 6.9A (Oral)
6.9A (Oral)
6.9A (Inhalation)
Little data available suggest lung as possible target after single and repeated
exposure (LOAEC = 2.5 mg/m3). Sources are from a UK
22 report and information
found in a US EPA docket (EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0147-0023) support this view and
in order to achieve consistency with other regulators, the addition of a 6.9A
(Inhalation) classification is proposed.
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND -
22 http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/Resources/CRD/ACP/208_zinc_pyrithione.pdf
42
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3C -
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity ND -
43
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Zineb
Hazard Current HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) No -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) ND -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) ND -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion ND -
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion ND -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity No -
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity ND -
44
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard Current HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
ND -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
ND -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity
No (Oral)
ND
(Dermal/Inhalation)
-
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Although the classification for aquatic ecotoxicity remains the same, a new lowest
endpoint in which the 9.1A classification will be based on is proposed. The data
was sourced from a EU23
Competent Authority Report, citing a 72-h EC50 for algae
Skeletonema costatum = 0.036 mg/L.
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity ND -
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity No -
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial ND -
23 http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/bio_reports/library?l=/review_programme/ca_reports/antifouling_products/bpd_car_03-2011pdf/_EN_1.0_&a=d
45
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard Current HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
invertebrate ecotoxicity
Ziram
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (oral) 6.1C -
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (dermal) ND No
A “No” classification is proposed with the purpose of achieving consistency with
other regulators and based on a weight of evidence approach, as it was concluded
by a US EPA24
RED and information found in the EU25
Pesticide Database that this
classification is not triggered due to the acute dermal toxicity LD50 > 2000 mg/kg.
Subclass 6.1 Acute
toxicity (inhalation) 6.1B -
Subclass 6.1 Aspiration
hazard ND -
Subclass 6.3/8.2 Skin
irritancy/corrosion 6.3B No Considering both, the US EPA
24 RED and EU
25 Pesticide Database information
concluding that the skin irritancy endpoint is not triggered and that the data cited
24 http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/chem_search/reg_actions/reregistration/red_PC-034805_12-Jul-04.pdf
46
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
refers to GLP and regulatory compliant studies which indicate no irritation, a
removal of this classification is proposed.
Subclass 6.4/8.3 Eye
irritancy/corrosion 6.4A -
Subclass 6.5A
Respiratory sensitisation ND -
Subclass 6.5B Contact
sensitisation 6.5B -
Subclass 6.6
Mutagenicity No -
Subclass 6.7
Carcinogenicity No -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
No -
Subclass 6.8
Reproductive/
developmental toxicity
(via lactation)
No -
Subclass 6.9 Target
organ systemic toxicity 6.9B (Oral) -
47
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Hazard
Current
HSNO
classification
Proposed
changes to the
classification
Reference, Rationale
Subclass 9.1 Aquatic
ecotoxicity 9.1A -
Although the classification for aquatic ecotoxicity remains the same, a new lowest
endpoint in which the 9.1A classification will be based on is proposed. The data
was sourced from the EU25
Pesticide Database , citing a 96-h LC50 for the fish
Lepomis macrochirus = 0.00097 mg/L.
Subclass 9.2 Soil
ecotoxicity No -
Subclass 9.3 Terrestrial
vertebrate ecotoxicity 9.3B -
Using data from the same report mentioned above from the EU25
Pesticide
Database, a change of endpoint is proposed, using an LD50 for the bird Colinus
virginianus = 97 mg/kg bw.
Subclass 9.4 Terrestrial
invertebrate ecotoxicity No -
25 http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/protection/evaluation/database_act_subs_en.htm (CAS# 137-30-4)
48
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Appendix B: Classification of AFP formulations
Approval numbers marked with an asterisk have been proposed for phase-out (e.g. HSR000912*) – refer to application document26
for further information.
Where an approval has been assigned an acute toxicity classification that is denoted with the superscript A (e.g. 6.1DA), the substance will also be an
aspiration hazard if it contains hydrocarbons that are aspiration hazards at concentrations of 10% or greater.
The following table provides descriptions of the controls referred to by the codes in the substance classification tables.
Control
code Regulation Description
Hazardous Substances (Emergency Management) Regulations 2001
EM2 8(a) Information requirements for corrosive substances
Hazardous Substances (Identification) Regulations 2001
I2 8 Priority identifiers for corrosive substances
I10 19 Secondary identifiers for corrosive substances
I20 36(8) Durability of information for class 6.1 substances
I22 40 Specific documentation requirements for corrosive substances
I30 53 Advertising corrosive and toxic substances
Hazardous Substances (Packaging) Regulations 2001
P14 20 Packaging requirements for corrosive substances
26 http://www.epa.govt.nz/search-databases/HSNO%20Application%20Register%20Documents/APP201051_APP201051%20Application%20Final%20(2012.01.22).pdf
49
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
The following tables contain the proposed changes to the classifications of the AFP substances that are the subject of this application.
3(2H)-Isothiazolone, 4,5-dichloro-2-octyl-, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Hempel's Antifouling Globic
HSR000112* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A
3.1C, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.6A,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A
Remove:
I20, I30
ABC7 ANTIFOULING
HSR001748* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
3(2H)-Isothiazolone, 4,5-dichloro-2-octyl-, Copper Thiocyanate
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
SeaSafe Ultra
HSR100427* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
No change
50
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Chlorothalonil, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 138
g/L chlorothalonil and 722 g/L
cuprous oxide
HSR000912* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2C, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Antifouling paint containing 84-
138 g/L chlorothalonil and 517-
690 g/L cuprous oxide
HSR000913* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2C, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Chlorothalonil, Mancozeb, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing
chlorothalonil 62 g/L and 518 g/L
cuprous oxide and 82 g/L
mancozeb
HSR000914* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2C, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
51
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Waterbased Antifouling Range HSR000041 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A,
9.3C
6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A,
9.3B
No change
Antifouling paint containing 195
g/litre cuprous oxide
HSR000919 6.1E, 6.4A, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C No change No change
Antifouling paint containing 245
g/litre cuprous oxide
HSR000920 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
No change
Antifouling paint containing 521
g/litre cuprous oxide
HSR000921 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Antifouling paint containing 1000
g/kg cuprous oxide (Part B)
HSR000922 6.1D, 6.4A, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B No change No change
Antifouling paint containing 754
g/litre cuprous oxide and 550
g/litre zinc oxide
HSR000929 This substance was erroneously
identified in the application
document with the following
classifications:
6.1E, 6.4A, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
The correct current hazard
classification for this substance
are:
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.9B,
9.1A, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.9B,
9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Antifouling paint containing 780
g/litre cuprous oxide and 220
g/litre zinc oxide
HSR000930 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
52
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 840
g/litre cuprous oxide and 350
g/litre zinc oxide
HSR000931 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Split approval into 2 approvals
1. Antifouling paint containing
840 g/litre cuprous oxide and 350
g/litre zinc oxide HSR000931
Antifouling Seaguardian
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
2. Antifouling Seavictor 50
Assign new approval name and
approval number
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Hempel's Antifouling Olympic
86901 colour range
HSR002484 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Split approval into 2 approvals
1. Hempel's Antifouling Olympic
86901 colour range HSR002484
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
2. Reduced Copper Antifouling
Range (Range C)
Assign new approval name and
approval number
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Hempel's Antifouling Olympic
86951 colour range
HSR002698 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
53
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 640-
655g/L cuprous oxide
HSR100080 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.9B,
9.1A, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.9B,
9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Copper (I) Oxide, Copper Pyrithione
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Micron 77 Red HSR100057 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.7B, 6.8B,
6.8C, 6.9B, 8.3A, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
Micron 77 Blue HSR100058 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.7B, 6.8B, 6.8C,
6.9B, 8.3A, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
Micron 77 Black HSR100059 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.7B, 6.8B, 6.8C,
6.9B, 8.3A, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
Micron 77 Navy HSR100060 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.7B, 6.8B, 6.8C,
6.9B, 8.3A, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
54
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Dichlofluanid, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 408 -
494 g/litre cuprous oxide and 34 -
42 g/litre dichlofluanid
HSR000923 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Dichlofluanid, Copper Thiocyanate
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 215
g/litre copper thiocyanate and 36
g/litre dichlofluanid
HSR000889 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1EA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A
Remove:
I20
Diuron
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 20
g/litre diuron (Part A)
HSR000934* 3.1C, 6.1E, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2B, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2B,
9.3C
No change
55
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Diuron, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 450 -
849 g/litre cuprous oxide and 40 -
70 g/litre diuron
HSR000924* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A, 9.3B
Split approval into 3 approvals
1. Antifouling paint containing
450 - 849 g/litre cuprous oxide
and 40 - 70 g/litre diuron
HSR000924
Interspeed 642 BQA 407
Red/BQA 412 Blue
Micron Extra
Intercleane 165 BWA 900 Bright
Red
Interspeed 642 BQA 405 Dark
Red
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A,
9.3B
No change
2. Antifouling paint containing
450 - 849 g/litre cuprous oxide
and 40 - 70 g/litre diuron
(aspiration hazard)
(Substance A)
If approval is not revoked,
assign new approval name and
approval number
No change
56
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Micron CSC (Black, Blue,
Burgundy & White)
Longlife (Black, Blue & White)
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A,
9.3B
3. Antifouling paint containing
450 - 849 g/litre cuprous oxide
and 40 - 70 g/litre diuron
(aspiration hazard)
(Substance B)
If approval is not revoked,
assign new approval name and
approval number
Coppercoat Extra
Longlife Extra (Blue, Red &
Black)
Micron Extra Dover White
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A,
9.3B
No change
Antifouling paint containing 580
g/litre cuprous oxide, 65 g/litre
diuron and 320 g/litre zinc oxide
HSR000925* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.4A, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A,
9.2A, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.4A, 6.7B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A, 9.3B
No change
Antifouling paint containing 760 HSR000926* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B, 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, No change
57
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
g/litre cuprous oxide, 62 g/litre
diuron and 165 g/litre zinc oxide
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A, 9.3B 6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A,
9.3B
58
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Diuron, Copper Thiocyanate
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Alloy Antifouling Range HSR000038* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9A, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A,
9.3C
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
Antifouling paint containing 230
g/litre copper thiocyanate and 40
g/litre diuron
HSR000916* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2A,
9.3C
No change
Irgarol 1051, Copper (I) oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Ablative B Antifouling Range HSR000037* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.9B,
9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
Hard A Antifouling Range HSR000039* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8A,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8A,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Antifouling paint containing 570
g/litre cuprous oxide and 20
g/litre irgarol
HSR000927* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.9B,
9.1A, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Irgarol 1051, Copper Thiocyanate
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
59
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Antifouling paint containing 220
g/litre copper thiocyanate and 20
g/litre irgarol
HSR000917* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.9B,
9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.5B, 9.1A,
9.3C
No change
Irgarol 1051, Tolylfluanid, Zinc pyrithione, Octhilinone, Copper (I) oxide, Copper Pyrithione
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Ablative A1 Antifouling Range
Trade Names
Ablative A1 Antifouling Range
Antifouling SeaQuantum Classic
Antifouling SeaQuantum Ultra
Hempel’s A/F Globic NCT 8190M
Hempel’s A/F Globic NCT 8195M
HSR000036* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Split approval into 4 approvals
1. Ablative A1 Antifouling
Range HSR000036
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
2. Hempel’s A/F Globic NCT
If approval is not revoked,
assign new approval name and
approval number
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
3. Antifouling SeaQuantum
Ultra
If approval is not revoked,
assign new approval name and
approval number
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
4. Antifouling Seaquantum
Classic
If approval is not revoked,
No change
60
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
assign new approval name and
approval number
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
61
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Octhilinone, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Reduced Copper Antifouling
Range (Range D)
HSR007955* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.9B,
9.1A, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Octhilinone, Tolylfluanid, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Hard B Antifouling Range HSR000040* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8A,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
62
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Thiram, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Ablative A Antifouling Range
HSR000035* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.6B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
Split approval into 2
1. Ablative A Antifouling
Range HSR000035
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
2. AF1000
If approval is not revoked,
assign new approval name and
approval number
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
Antifouling paint containing 750
g/litre cuprous oxide, 50 g/litre
thiram and 260 g/litre zinc oxide
HSR000928* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
Tolyfluanid, Copper Thiocyanate
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Alloy C Antifouling Range HSR000952 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2B, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2B, 9.3C
No change
63
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Zinc Pyrithione
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Optima Activator (Black) HSR000103
This substance was erroneously
identified in the application
document with the following
classifications:
6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A,
9.3C
The correct current hazard
classification for this substance
are:
6.1C, 6.3A, 6.8B, 6.9A, 8.3A, 9.1A,
9.3B
6.1C, 6.8B, 6.9A, 8.3A, 9.1A,
9.3C
No change
Optima Activator (Blue) HSR000104
This substance was erroneously
identified in the application
document with the following
classifications:
6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A,
9.3C
The correct current hazard
classification for this substance
are:
6.1C, 6.3A, 6.8B, 6.9A, 8.3A, 9.1A,
9.3B
6.1C, 6.8B, 6.9A, 8.3A, 9.1A,
9.3C
No change
Optima Activator (Red) HSR000105
This substance was erroneously
identified in the application
6.1C, 6.3B, 8.3A, 6.8B, 6.9A,
9.1A, 9.3C
No change
64
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
document with the following
classifications:
6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A,
9.3C
The correct current hazard
classification for this substance
are:
6.1C, 6.3A, 6.5B, 6.8B, 6.9A, 8.3A,
9.1A, 9.3B
Optima Activator (White) HSR000106
This substance was erroneously
identified in the application
document with the following
classifications:
6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A,
9.3C
The correct current hazard
classification for this substance
are:
6.1C, 6.3A, 6.8B, 6.9A, 8.3A, 9.1A,
9.3B
6.1C, 6.8B, 6.9A, 8.3A, 9.1A,
9.3C
No change
65
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Zinc Pyrithione, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 640
g/litre cuprous oxide and 60
g/litre zinc pyrithione
HSR000932 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.7B, 6.8B,
6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Split approval into 2 approvals
1:
Antifouling paint containing
640 g/litre cuprous oxide and
60 g/litre zinc pyrithione
HSR000932
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 8.3A, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
2.
Antifouling paint containing
cuprous oxide and zinc
pyrithione
Assign new approval name and
approval number
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 8.3A, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
Zinc Pyrithione, Copper Thiocyanate
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Trilux 33 White HSR000121
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
66
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Alloy B Antifouling Range HSR000951 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8A,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2B, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3B, 8.3A, 6.5B,
6.8A, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2B, 9.3C
Add:
EM2, I2, I10, I22, P14
Zineb, Copper (I) Oxide
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 648
g/litre cuprous oxide and 70
g/litre zineb
HSR000933 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.8B,
6.9B, 9.1A, 9.2D, 9.3B
3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change
Zineb, Copper (I) Oxide, Copper Pyrithione
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
SeaForce 60 HSR100411 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
SeaForce 90 HSR100412 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
Zineb, Copper Thiocyanate
Substance Description HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
Antifouling paint containing 290
g/litre copper thiocyanate, 220
g/litre zinc oxide and 55 g/litre
zineb
HSR000918 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3B, 6.4A, 6.5B, 6.7B,
6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A, 9.3C
3.1C, 6.1DA, 6.3A, 6.4A, 6.5B,
6.7B, 6.8B, 6.8C, 6.9B, 9.1A,
9.3C
No change
67
APP201051 Classification Update Report
February 2013
Ziram, Copper (I)
OxideSubstance
Description
HSNO Approval
Number
Current Hazard
Classifications
Proposed Hazard
Classifications
Effect on default
controls
ABC #3 Antifouling HSR007897* 3.1C, 6.1D, 6.3A, 6.5B, 6.8B, 6.9B,
8.3A, 9.1A, 9.3B
No change No change
Top Related