p. 1 

CBIC Control Number 

OPPT CBIC Chemical 

" Corporation 

asub~yaticcenomuK. 

2013 OCT 18 PM 2= 14 

3676 Davis Road N.W. " Dover, Ohio 44622 " (330) 343-7711 " 1-800-321-8805 " Fax: (330) 364-9626 

September 25, 2013 

Document Control Office (7407 M) 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 

(OPPT) Environmental Protection Agency 

EPA East Building, Room E6428 (202-564-8930) 

1201 Constitution Avenue, 

NW Washington, DC 

20460 

Attention: TSCA Section 4 

Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0112 

To Whom It May Concern: 

Proposed Test Plan ; Testing of Certain High Production Volume Chemicals; 

Third Group of Chemicals. Federal Register 76 (204), 65385-65410, October 21, 2011 . 

1-Decene. sulfurized (CAS No. 72162-15-31 

Dover Chemical Corporation submitted a test plan to be completed in three phases to 

satisfy the testing requirements of the subject test rule for 1-Decene, sulfurized (CAS # 

72162-15-3). The results of the Phase 1 study noted below are attached . 

Phase 1 

Physical/Chemical Properties to Fulfill Testing Requirements A2 to 5 

Boiling point: EC A.2 / OECD 103 / OPPTS 830.7220 

Vapor Pressure: ASTM E 1782-08 (thermal analysis) 

N-Octanol/water partition coefficient (log 10 basis) or IogKoW by appropriate method as 

specified as Method A, 40 CFR 799.6755 (shake flask) ; Method B, ASTM E 1147-92 

(reapproved 2005) (liquid chromatography) ; or Method C, 40 CFR 799.6756 (generator 

column). 

A test to determine the octanol/water partition coefficient is not required when the estimated 

log Kow (the log of the octanol/water partitioning coefficient) of the chemical is < 0. 

356398 RECEIVED 

Water solubility : By appropriate test method as specified as Method A, ASTM E 1148-02 

(reapproved 2008) (shake flask) ; Method B, 40 CFR 799.6784 (shake flask) ; Method C, 40 

CFR 799.6784 (column elution) ; or Method D, 40 CFR 799.6786 (generator column). 
Chemical 

" Corporation 

asuera .nawceenmsn~. 

3676 Davis Road N.W. " Dover, Ohio 44622 " (330) 343-7711 " 1-800-321-8805 " Fax: (330) 364-9626 

In addition, the ELCO Corporation, 100 Belt Line Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2800, has 

applied for an exemption from the test rule requirements referenced above on the basis that 

the required testing for 1-Decene, sulfurized (CAS#72162-15-3) is being conducted by 

Dover Chemical . The ELCO Corporation has agreed with Dover Chemical to pay a 

percentage of the testing costs incurred by Dover Chemical in conducting the testing . 

If you have any questions or comments, please contact me directly at 330-365-3610 . 

Sincerely, 

Tim Nowicki 

Manager Product Compliance 

Dover Chemical Corporation 

tnowickiP.doverchem.com 
FINAL REPORT 

Studv Title 

DETERMINATION OF PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF 

1-DECENE, SULFURIZED 

" Validation of an analytical method 

" Boiling temperature 

" Vapour pressure 

" Water solubility 

" Partition coefficient 

Author 

K.A . Oudhoff, PhD. 

Test Facilitv 

WIL Research Europe B.V . 

Hambakenwetering 7 

5231 DD's-Hertogenbosch 

The Netherlands 

Laboratorv Proiect Identification 

Project 502505 

Substance 2047231A 

- Page 1 of 32 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

1 . CONTENTS 

1 . CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 

2. STATEMENT OF GLP COMPLIANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 

3. QUALITYASSURANCESTATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 

4. SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 

5. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 

5.1 . Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 

5.2 . Aim of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 

5.3 . Storage and retention of records and materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 

6. MATERIALS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 

6.1 . Test substance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 

6.2 . Electronic data capture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 

6.3 . List of deviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 

7. VALIDATION OF AN ANALYTICAL METHOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 

7.1 . Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 

7.2 . Reagents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 

7.3. Performance of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 

7.4. Analytical method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

7.5 . Formulas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 

7.6 . Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 

7.7 . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 

7.8. Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 

8. BOILING TEMPERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 

8.1 . Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 

8.2 . Performance of the test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 

8.3 . Analytical method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 

8.4 . Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 

8.5 . Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 

8.6 . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 

8.7 . Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 

9. VAPOUR PRESSURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 

9.1 . Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 

9.2 . Performance of the test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 

9.3 . Analytical method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 

9.4 . Reference substances. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 

9.5 . Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 

9.6 . Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 

9.7 . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 

9.8 . Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 

10. WATER SOLUBILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

10.1 . Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 

10.2 . Reagents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

10.3 . Performance of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

10.4 . Analytical method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 

10.5 . Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 

10 .6 . Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 

10 .7 . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 

11 . PARTITION COEFFICIENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 

11 .1 . Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 

11 .2 . Reagents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 

11 .3 . Performance of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 

11 .4 . Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 

11 .5 . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 

Final report - Page 2 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

TABLES 

Table 1 Statistical parameters of the calibration curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Table 2 Accuracysamples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 

Table 3 Stability of the analytical system and end solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

Table 4 Stored accuracy samples. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

Table 5 Results of the isothermal TGA analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 

Table 6 Vapour pressure of the test substance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 

Table 7 Main study-water solubility of the test substance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 

FIGURES 

Figure 1 GC-MS chromatogram of a 1 .20 mg/I test substance solution [res . id . 1888]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 

Figure 2 GC-MS chromatogram of the blank accuracy sample [res . id . 1921]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 

Figure 3 GC-MS chromatogram in the full scan mode of a 50 mg/I test substance solution and a 

blank n-hexane [inj . id . 1443 and 1450]. The MS spectrum of the compound at 

8.2 minutes is included . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 

Figure 4 Regression line: response of the test substance as a function of concentration [cal . curve 

id . 1879]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 

Figure 5 TGA curve of the test substance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 

Figure 6 DSC curve of the test substance obtained with Experiment 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 

Figure 7 DSC curve of the test substance obtained with Experiment 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

Figure 8 DSC curve of the test substance obtained with Experiment 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

Figure 9 Weight loss curve of the test substance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 

Figure 10 Plot of log PT of the test substance versus 1/T. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 

Final report - Page 3 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

2. STATEMENT OF GLP COMPLIANCE 

WIL Research Europe B.V.,'s-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands 

The study described in this report has been correctly reported and was conducted in compliance with : 

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Principles on Good 

Laboratory Practice(GLP) (as revised in 1997),ENVIMC/CHEM (98) 17. 

The sponsor is responsible for Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) compliance for all test substance 

Information unless determined by WIL Research Europe . 

WIL Research Europe B.V. 

E. Baltussen, PhD. K.A. Oudhoff, PhD. 

Section Head Study Director 

Analyk'cal & Physical 

Date: .(J.~ . . Date: . . . . 13. . .&--:P.A .encite.'. . .ZC? 1 .~. . . . . 

Final report - Page 4 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

3. QUALITY ASSURANCE STATEMENT 

WIL Research Europe B.V., 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands 

This report was inspected by the WIL Research Europe Quality Assurance Unit (QAU) to confirm that 

the methods and results accurately and completely reflect the raw data. 

During the on-site process inspections, procedures applicable to this type of study were inspected . 

The dates of Quality Assurance inspections are given below. 

Start End 

Type of Inspection Inspection Reporting 

Inspections Phase/Process date date date 

Study Protocol 28-May-2013 28-May-2013 28-May-2013 

Protocol Amendment 01 22-Aug-2013 22-Aug-2013 22-Aug-2013 

Report 30-Aug-2013 30-Aug-2013 30-Aug-2013 

Process Analytical and physical chemistry 13-May-2013 21-May-2013 27-May-2013 

Test Substance Handling 

Observations/Measurements 

WIL Research Europe B.V. 

C.J . Mitchell, BSc. 

Head of Quality Assurance 

Date: . . . . . . ~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Final report - Page 5 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

4. SUMMARY 

The results of the physico-chemical properties of the test substance are given below. 

Parameter Guideline(s) Result Comment 

Analytical method Sanco 3029 successfully validated 

Boiling temperature EC A.2 no boiling temperature reaction and/or 

OECD 103 decomposition of the 

OPPTS 830.7220 test substance at 

> 200°C (> 473K) 

was observed 

Vapour pressure EC A.4 20°C 1 .8 x 10"2 Pa = isothermal TGA 

OECD 104 1 .3 x 10'° mm Hg effusion method 

OPPTS 830.7950 250C 2.7 x 10"2 Pa = 

2.Ox10'°mmHg 

Water solubility EC A.6 5 10 Ng/I at 20°C by the 

OECD 105 column elution 

OPPTS 830.7840 method 

Partition coefficient EC A.8 log P. : > 8.0 at 20°C by the 

OECD 107 estimation method 

Final report - Page 6 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

5. INTRODUCTION 

5.1 . Preface 

Sponsor Dover Chemical Corporation 

3676 Davis Road N.W . 

Dover, Ohio 44622 

USA 

Study Monitor Mr. P. Leber 

Test Facility WIL Research Europe B.V . 

Hambakenwetering 7 

5231 DD's-Hertogenbosch 

The Netherlands 

Study Director K.A. Oudhoff, PhD. 

Study Plan Start : 31 May 2013 

Completion : 26 July 2013 

5.2 . Aim of the study 

The aim of the study was to determine the following physico-chemical properties for 

1-Decene, sulfurized : 

Validation of an analytical method 

Boiling temperature 

Vapour pressure 

Water solubility 

Partition coefficient 

5.3 . Storage and retention of records and materials 

Records and materials pertaining to the study including protocol, raw data, specimens (except 

specimens requiring refrigeration or freezing) and the final report are retained in the WIL Research 

Europe archives for a period of at least 2 years after finalization of the report. After this period, the 

sponsor will be contacted to determine how the records and materials should be handled. W IL 

Research Europe will retain information concerning decisions made. 

Those specimens requiring refrigeration or freezing will be retained by W IL Research Europe for as 

long as the quality of the specimens permits evaluation but no longer than three months after 

finalization of the report. 

W IL Research Europe will retain a test substance sample until the expiry date, but no longer than 10 

years after finalization of the report . After this period the sample will be destroyed. 

Final report - Page 7 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized 

6. MATERIALS 

6.1 . Test substance 

6.1 .1 . Test substance information 

Identification 

Molecular formula 

Molecular weight 

CAS Number 

Description 

Batch 

Content 

Test substance storage 

Stability under storage conditions 

Expiry date 

1-Decene, sulfurized 

CxH % 

315-1000+ 

72162-15-3 

Dark brown liquid 

S31173 

37.6% Sulfur 

At room temperature in the dark 

Stable 

13 September 2013 

6.1 .2 . Study specific test substance Information 

Purity/composition correction factor 

Reactivity 

Test substance handling 

6.2. Electronic data capture 

No 

Reactive to moisture 

Well-sealed container 

Project 502505 

System control, data acquisition and data processing were performed using the following programmes: 

- Advantage Integrity Software version 3.0 (TA Instruments, New Castle, DE, USA) 

- Empower version 7.00 (Waters, Milford, MA, USA) 

- Enhanced Chemstation version D.00.01 .27 (Agilent Technologies, Wilmington, DE, USA) 

Temperature, relative humidity and/or atmospheric pressure during sample storage and/or 

performance of the studies was monitored continuously using the following programme: 

- REES Centron Environmental Monitoring system version SQL 2.0 (REES Scientific, Trenton, NJ, 

USA) 

6.3. List of deviations 

6.3.1 . List of protocol deviations 

There were no deviations from the protocol. 

6.3 .2 . List of standard operating procedures deviations 

Any deviations from standard operating procedures (SOPs) were evaluated and filed in the study file . 

There were no deviations from SOPs that affected the integrity of the study. 

Final report - Page 8 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

7. VALIDATION OF AN ANALYTICAL METHOD 

7.1 . Guidelines 

The study was based on the following guideline: 

European Commission: Guidance for Generating and Reporting Methods of Analysis in Support of 

Pre-registration Data Requirements for Annex II (Part A, section 4) and Annex III (Part A, section 5) of 

Directive 91/414, SANCO/3029/99 rev. 4 (11/07/00) . 

7.2. Reagents 

Water Tap water purified by a Milli-Q water purification system 

(Millipore, Bedford, MA, USA) 

n-Hexane Merck, Dannstadt, Germany 

Tetrahydrofuran (THF) VWR International, Leuven, Belgium 

All reagents were of analytical grade, unless specified otherwise. 

7.3 . Performance of the study 

A gas chromatographic method with mass spectrometric detection (GC-MS) for the quantitative 

analysis of the test substance in water was developed. Validation of the analytical method was 

performed for the following parameters: 

Specific 

A test substance solution and blank accuracy sample were analysed by single injection. The analytical 

method was found to be specific if the blank chromatogram showed no response for the test 

substance or a response of < 30% of the limit of quantification . 

Calibration curve 

Calibration solutions were analysed in duplicate. The response of the calibration solutions was 

correlated with concentration using regression analysis with a 1/concentration2 weighting factor. A 

calibration curve with a coefficient of correlation (r) of > 0.99 and back calculated accuracies of the 

calibration solutions in the range 85-115% was accepted . 

Accuracy and repeatability 

Accuracy samples were analysed by single injection into the analytical system . The analytical method 

was considered applicable for the determination of the test substance if the mean accuracy was in the 

range 70-110% and the coefficient of variation was 5 20%. 

Limit of auantification 

The limit of quantification (LOQ) is defined as the lowest concentration level at which an accuracy in 

the range 70-110% and a repeatability of 5 20% is demonstrated . The LOQ was obtained from the 

data of the accuracy- and repeatability test . 

Stability of the analytical system and end solutions 

Calibration solutions were injected throughout the validation sequence including the beginning and 

end. The analytical system and/or end solutions were found to be stable if the coefficient of variation 

on the responses of the solutions was :5 20%. 

Stability of stock solutions 

Stock solutions of the test substance were stored at room temperature for at least 12 hours. Additional 

calibration solutions were prepared and analysed by single injection . The stock solutions were found to 

be stable if the coefficient of variation on the response factors of the calibration solutions prepared with 

fresh and stored stock solutions was 510%. 

Final report - Page 9 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

Storage stability of samples 

Additional accuracy samples were prepared and stored in the freezer (s -15°C) for at least 16 hours. 

On the day of analysis, the samples were defrosted at room temperature and treated identically as 

freshly analysed accuracy samples. The stored samples were found to be stable if the mean accuracy 

was in the range 70-110%. 

7.4 . Analytical method 

7.4 .1 . Analytical conditions 

Instrument 

Injector 

Detector 

Column 

Carrier gas 

Carrier gas flow 

Injection 

PTV Mode 

Splitless time 

Split flow 

Gas saver 

Injection volume 

PTV temperature program 

Initial temperature 

Initial time 

Rate 

Final temperature 

Hold time 

Oven temperature program 

Initial temperature 

Initial time 

Rate 

Final temperature 

Hold time 

MS Detection 

lonisation source 

MS interface temperature 

Solvent delay 

Quantitation 

7.4.2 . Preparation of solutions 

Gaschromatograph 6890N 

(Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA) 

CombiPal (CTC analytics, Zwingen, Switzerland) 

Mass selective detector (MSD) 5973N (Agilent Technologies) 

DB-5MS; 25 m x 250 pm i .d ., df = 0.25 pm 

(J&W Scientific, Folsom, CA, USA) 

Helium 

1 ml/min (constant flow) 

Programmed temperature vaporizer (PTV) 

Splitless 

60 sec 

50 ml/min 

Off 

1 PI 

62°C 

0.01 min 

720°C/min 

300°C 

5 min 

60°C 

1 min 

25°C/min 

300°C 

2 min 

El* 

280°C 

3 min 

m/z 236 amu 

Stock and spiking solutions 

Stock solutions of the test substance were prepared in n-hexane at concentrations of 1045 -

1125 mg/I . 

Spiking solutions of the test substance were prepared in THF at concentrations of 7.49 - 1060 mg/I. 

Calibration solutions 

Six calibration solutions in the concentration range of 0.04 - 6 mg/1 were prepared from two stock 

solutions. The end solution of the calibration solutions was n-hexane. 

Final report - Page 10 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

Accuracy samples 

7.5 ml water was spiked with the test substance at a target concentration of 0.01 and 1 mg/I . The 

accuracy samples were extracted in a 5:1 (v :v) ratio with n-hexane. The shaking time was 30 seconds. 

The n-hexane layer was analysed. 

The blank accuracy sample was prepared and treated similarly to the accuracy samples. 

7.5 . Formulas 

Response (R) Peak area of the test substance [units] 

Response factor (Rf) Rr = R 

CN 

where: 

CN = nominal concentration [mg/1] 

Calibration curve R=a C N +b CN +c 

where: 

a = quadratic regression factor [units x (I/mg)2] 

b = linear regression factor [units x I/mg] 

c = intercept [units] 

Analvsedconcentration (Ce) C. =

-b42 -4ax(c-R) xd 

where: 

2a 

d = dilution factor 

Accuracy CA x100 [%] 

N 

Final report - Page 11 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

7.6. Results 

7.6.1 . Specificity 

Chromatograms of a test substance solution and the blank accuracy sample are shown in Figure 1 

and Figure 2, respectively. 

The chromatogram of the test substance solution showed a major test substance peak at a retention 

time of 8.2 minutes. The area of this peak was used as response in the calculations . It was considered 

that the compound was representative for the test substance. 

The chromatogram of the blank sample showed no peak at the retention time of the test substance. 

Since no interferences were detected, the specificity requirements were met and the analytical method 

was found to be specific for the test substance. 

Note : The compound at 8.2 minutes was selected based on full scan GC-MS for the test substance during method development 

(data is archived in the raw data). Figure 3 shows chromatograms of a test substance solution and a corresponding blank. The 

test substance is a mixture of multiple components. The component al 8.2 minutes was detected at m/z 236 amu (see MS 

spectrum added lo Figure 3) . 

7.6 .2 . Calibration curve 

The calibration line was constructed using all data points.Figure 4 illustrates the calibration curve and 

Table 1 shows the statistical parameters. There was a quadratic relationship between response and 

test substance concentration in the range of 0.0401 - 6.08 mg/I (in end solution). Since the coefficient 

of correlation (r) was > 0.99 and the back calculated accuracies of the data points were in the range 

85-115% the calibration line was accepted. 

Table 1 Statistical parameters of the calibration curve 

Quadratic regression factor 

Linear regression factor 

Intercept 

Weighting factor 

r 

4.36 x 107 

8.11 x 10s 

-9.61 x 10' 

1/concentrationZ 

0.997 

7.6.3 . Accuracy and repeatability 

The results of the accuracy samples are given in Table 2. Since the mean accuracy at each 

concentration level fell in the criterion 70-110% and the coefficient of variation was :5 20% the 

analytical method was accepted for the analysis of the test substance in water in the target 

concentration range of 0.01 -1 mg/I . 

Table 2 Accuracy samples 

Target 

concentration 

[mg/11 

Nominal 

concentration 

m /I 

Analysed 

concentration 

[mg/11 

Accuracy 

% 

Mean 

accuracy 

% 

Coefficient of 

variation 

% 

0.01 0.0100 0.00594 59 1 

0.0100 0.00886 89 87 2.0 

0.0100 0.00873 87 

0.0100 0.00845 85 

0.0100 0.00877 88 

Final report - Page 12 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

Table 2 Continued 

Target 

concentration 

[mg/11 

Nominal 

concentration 

m /I 

Analysed 

concentration 

[mg/11 

Accuracy 

% 

Mean 

accuracy 

% 

Coefficient of 

variation 

°/u 

1 1 .00 0.965 97 92 13 

1 .00 0.864 86 

1 .00 0.961 96 

1 .00 0.741 74 

1 .00 1 .06 106 

Outlier according to the Dixon's Q-test at 95% confidence level . 

7.8 .4. Limit of quantification 

The limit of quantification (LOQ) was assessed at 0.01 mg/I in water. 

7.6 .5. Stability of the analytical system and end solutions 

The results of the stability of the analytical system and end solutions are given in Table 3. Since the 

coefficient of variation at both concentration levels was 5 20% the analytical system and end solutions 

were stable over at least a 18.25 hour time interval . 

Table 3 Stability of the analytical system and end solutions 

Nominal concentration 

[mg/11 

Elapsed time 

hours 

Coefficient of variation 

% 

0.0401 20.27 7.8 (n=8) 

1 .20 18.25 4.5 (n=8) 

7.6 .6 . Stability of stock solutions 

The coefficient of variation on the response factors of the calibration solutions prepared with fresh and 

stored stock solutions was 2.4%. Since the value was 510% the stock solutions were stable when 

stored at room temperature for at least 18 days. 

7.6 .7 . Storage stability of samples 

The results of the storage stability of the test substance in the freezer are given in Table 4. Since the 

mean accuracy of the frozen samples fell in the criterion 70-110% the samples were stable when 

stored in the freezer. 

Table 4 Stored accuracy samples 

Target 

concentration 

[ mg/1 1 

Nominal 

concentration 

[mg/11 

Analysed 

concentration 

m /I 

Accuracy 

% 

Mean accuracy 

% 

0.01 0.0100 0.00813 81 84 

0.0100 0.00862 86 

1 1 .00 0.896 90 92 

1 .00 0.953 95 

Final report - Page 13 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized 

7.7 . Conclusion 

The analytical method was validated for the following parameters: 

Specificity 

Calibration curve 

Accuracy 

Repeatability 

Limit of quantification 

Stability analytical system and end solutions 

Stability stock solutions 

Storage stability 

specific 

r = 0.997 

87 and 92% 

2.0 and 13% 

0.01 mg/I 

stable 

stable 

stable 

Project 502505 

Final report - Page 14 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

7.8 . Figures 

Note: the time scale of Figure 3 is different from Figure 1 and Figure 2. 

Figure 1 GC-MS chromatogram of a 1 .20 mg/I test substance solution [res . Id . 1888]. 

iG'S'J"'u'iG'1Y"4Y'iL'IL'W'lY'4'a 'u -m 'u Ys bS 

Figure 2 GC-MS chromatogram of the blank accuracy sample [res . Id . 1921]. 

_q--, 

m. . W. - 

Figure 3 GC-MS chromatogram in the full scan mode of a 50 mgll test substance solution 

and a blank n-hexane [inj . id . 1443 and 1450]. The MS spectrum of the compound at 

8 .2 minutes is included. 

Final report - Page 15 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

Figure 4 Regression line : response of the test substance as a function of concentration [cal . 

curve id . 1879]. 

Final report - Page 16 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

8. BOILING TEMPERATURE 

8.1 . Guidelines 

European Community (EC), EC no. 440/2008, Part A: Methods for the Determination of PhysicoChemical Properties, Guideline A.2 : "Boiling Temperature", Official Journal of the European Union no. 

L142, May 31, 2008. 

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for the Testing 

of Chemicals no. 103: "Boiling Point", July 27, 1995. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Product Properties Test Guidelines no. 

OPPTS 830.7220: "Boiling Point/Boiling Range", August 1996. 

8.2. Performance of the test 

The boiling temperature of the test substance was determined using differential scanning calorimetry 

(DSC). This technique records the difference in heat flow of two crucibles, one filled with test 

substance and the other left empty as reference, while these crucibles are subjected to a controlled 

temperature programme. When the test substance undergoes a transition, such as evaporation, is 

indicated by a deviation from the base line of the heat-flow record . Because evaporation is a process 

in which heat is consumed, for this process the deviation from the base line is in the endothermic 

direction. The boiling temperature (if any) of the test substance is evaluated from the DSC curve as 

the extrapolated onset temperature of the endothermic evaporation peak. 

As a safety precaution for the DSC cell a preliminary test was performed using a 

thermogravimetricanalyzer (TGA). 

8.2 .1 . Preliminary test 

8.15 mg test substance was heated at a rate of 20°C/minute from 25°C to 295°C. At this point 70% 

weight loss of the test substance was observed. After the experiment, the sample was cooled to and 

equilibrated at 50°C and the consistency of the test substance was determined . 

8.2 .2 . Main study 

An overview of the experimental conditions of the main study is given below. 

Experiment 1 2 3 

Sample amount (mg) 6.06 5.41 6.40 

Initial temperature (°C) 25 25 25 

Rate (°C/minute) 20 20 20 

End temperature (°C) 275 400 400 

The experiments were performed under a flow of nitrogen and at atmospheric pressure. 

8.3 . Analytical method 

Preliminary test 

Instrument Q50 thermogravimetricanalyzer (TGA) (TA Instruments, New 

Castle, DE, USA) 

Sample container aluminium ; closed with a lid in which a small hole was drilled 

Final report - Page 17- 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

Main studv 

Instrument Q100 differential scanning calorimeter (TA Instruments) 

Sample container aluminium; closed (Experiment 3) or closed with a lid in which a 

small hole was drilled (Experiment 1 and Experiment 2) 

Reference empty sample container 

8.4 . Interpretation 

The standard boiling temperature is defined as the temperature at which the vapour pressure of a 

liquid is the same as the standard pressure (1013.25 hPa). 

8.5 . Results 

8.5 .1 . Preliminary test 

The TGA-curve of the test substance is shown in Figure 5. From 250°C upwards the weight of the 

sample decreased significantly. At 275°C the sample weight had decreased by 25%. 

After the experiment, a black residue was observed on the lid of the sample container and a dark 

brown residue remained in the sample container (original colour: dark brown). The black residue on 

the lid of the sample container indicated reaction and/or decomposition of the test substance. 

8.5 .2 . Main study 

The DSC-curve obtained with Experiment 1 is shown in Figure 6. An endothermic peak was observed 

starting at 200°C. The effect was most likely obtained due to reaction and/or decomposition of the test 

substance. After the experiment, a dark red residue remained in the sample container. 

To investigate the endothermic peak a higher end temperature was applied in the Experiment 2. 

Figure 7 shows the DSC-curves obtained . An exothermic peak was observed between 200°C and 

325°C. The extrapolated onset temperature of the peak was 257.06°C. The effect was most likely 

obtained due to reaction and/or decomposition of the test substance. After the experiment, a dark 

brown residue remained in the sample container. 

To further investigate the endothermic peak a closed sample container was applied. Figure 8 shows 

the DSC-curve obtained . The extrapolated onset temperature of the peak was 258.09°C. Since the 

endothermic peak did not shift to higher temperatures it demonstrated that reaction and/or 

decomposition of the test substance was the reason for the endothermic effect . After the experiment, a 

dark brown residue remained in the sample container. 

8.6 . Conclusion 

The boiling temperature of 1-Decene, sulfurized was investigated using DSC. 

Reaction and/or decomposition of the test substance was observed at temperatures of > 200°C 

(>473K). Boiling of the test substance was not observed below the temperature at which reaction 

and/or decomposition started. Based on this, the test substance has no boiling temperature. 

Final report - Page 18- 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

8.7 . Figures 

e 

60 

120 

100 

t D4.61C70.00%tam 

20- 

FIB . NDT0X20101369994882 

+ 

T792TC2500%I+cs 

150 

e (° 

Figure 5 TGA curve of the test substance. 

-15-1-

0 

300 

UAamIV0.7ATAIreNmmb 

Rio: NDT0X20101369995464 

gmy, 

T-P-b- M ~IV47ATAIMV,Me 

Figure 6 DSC curve of the test substance obtained with Experiment 1 . 

Final report - Page 19 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

10 

~6 -10 ¢ 

-p 

eoy, 

RIe:N0T0%E0101370004385 

P5708°C 

1E0

. . . 

A 

. . 

.260 

. . . ,~ . . . ,~ . 

460 

TaTperall" CC) ~rvavATAImmm.rln 

Figure 7 DSC curve of the test substance obtained with Experiment 2. 

FIe :ND'r0%20101370004452 

I~~ 

-

¢ 

.25 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 3rA 400 

~L~p TWTMWMI^Q 

UYwuIVO>ATAIMViab 

Figure 8 DSC curve of the test substance obtained with Experiment 3. 

Final report - Page 20 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

9. VAPOUR PRESSURE 

9.1 . Guidelines 

European Community (EC), EC no. 761/2009, Part A: Methods for the Determination of PhysicoChemical Properties, Guideline A.4 : "Vapour Pressure", Official Journal of the European Union no. 

L220,August 24,2009. 

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for the Testing 

of Chemicals no.104 : "Vapour Pressure", March 23, 2006. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Product Properties Test Guidelines no. 

OPPTS 830.7950: "Vapor pressure", August 1996. 

9.2. Performance of the test 

The vapour pressure of the test substance (PT) was determined by the isothermal thermogravimetric 

effusion method . The method is validated in the range 10"8 -103 Pa using a set of five reference 

substances with known vapour pressures (see paragraph 9.4). The validity of the method was verified 

maximum one month before this study using hexachlorobenzene as reference control substance. The 

logarithm of the evaporation rate at 20°C (log vT, Zo) deviated < 10% from the average value obtained 

during the validation test. From this, it was possible to apply the constants obtained with the validation 

test for the determination of the vapour pressure of the test substance. 

An amount of 9.89 and 11 .7 mg of the test substance was applied to the surface of a roughened glass 

plate as a homogeneous layer. 

Start temperature 

Isothermal intervals 

Increment steps 

End temperature 

100°C 

10 minutes 

10°C 

200°C 

The weight loss of the test substance was measured continuously as a function of time at defined 

isothermal temperatures. The evaporation rate of the test substance (vT) was calculated from the 

weight loss of the compound. The PT values at the defined isothermal temperatures were determined 

using the vapour pressure equation with the constants c and d specific for the experimental 

arrangement. Linear regression analysis of the log PT values and 1lT was performed using a least 

squares method. The PT values of the test substance at 20°C and 25°C were determined using the 

vapour pressure regression curve. 

9.3. Analytical method 

Instrument Q50 thermogravimetric analyzer (TGA) (TA Instruments, New 

Castle, DE, USA) 

Surface of the glass plate 0.50 cmZ 

The experiments were performed under a flow of nitrogen and at atmospheric pressure. 

Final report - Page 21 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

9.4. Reference substances 

Validation of the method is performed at least once every year (project 502186). 

Each reference substance was measured in duplicate by TGA using a temperature program that was 

specific for the substance. Plots of log vT obtained at elevated temperatures and 1!T were inter- or 

extrapolated to determine the log vT values at 20°C (log vT,zo) . The log vT,zo values were plotted against 

the logarithm of the vapour pressure at 20°C in Pascal units (log PT, Zo). Linear regression analysis 

using the least squares method yielded an equation of log PT,2o = 1 .05 x log vT,2o + 4.32. The 

coefficient of correlation (r) was > 0.99. The constants c and d specific for the experimental 

arrangement were 1 .05 and 4.32, respectively . 

Reference substance 

Reference PT values 

20°C 

Pa mm H 

Corresponding PT values 

25°C 

pa mm H 

Literature 

Benzo(ghi)perylene 1 .33 x 10"8 1 .00 x 10-'0 1 .52 x 10'a" 1 .14 x 10-'e° 1 

Chrysene 8.40 x 10"' 6.30 x 10"a 2.18 x 10"8° 1 .64 x 10'8" 2 

Hexachlorobenzene 1 .47 x 10"3 1 .10 x 10'5 1 .01 x 104 7.57 x 10"5" 1 

Naphthalene 7.56 x 100 5.67 x 10"2 1 .15 x 10' 8.61 x 10-2 3 

Water 2.34 x 103 1 .75 x 10' 3.17 x 10s 2.38 x 10' 3 

" Detennined by the vapour pressure regression curve of the validation study. No literature value ms available . 

9 . Verschueren, K., Handbook of environmental data on organic chemicals, 4" edition, Wiley Chemistry 

2. Borges, H.T., Formal toxicity summary for Chrysene, The Risk Assessment Information System (RAIS), 1994 

3. Lide, D.R ., CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 79" edition, CRC Press LLC., Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1998 

4-

2-

0-

-2 - 

a -4 - 

-6 -

-8 - 

-10 , i i r 

-14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 

log VT,2o 

Final report - Page 22 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

9.5 . Interpretation 

9.5 .1 . Specifications 

The vapour pressure is a function of the temperature and is specified in Pascal (Pa) or in mm Hg. 

9.5.2 . Formulas 

Evaporation rate (vT) VT = 

4m [g/cm2/h] 

F t 

where: 

Am = weight loss of the test substance [g] 

F = surface of the sample plate [cmZ] 

t = elapsed time for the weight loss [h] 

Vapour pressure equation log PT = c IogvT + d 

where: 

c = constant specific for the experimental arrangement 

d = constant specific for the experimental arrangement 

Vapour pressure regression curve log PT = a 1/T+b 

where: 

T = temperature [K] 

a = slope [K] 

b = intercept 

Final report - Page 23 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

9.8. Results 

A representative weight loss curve of the test substance is shown in Figure 9. The results of the 

isothermal TGA analysis for the test substance and the vapour pressure at 20°C and 25°C are given in 

Table 5 and Table 6. 

The plot of the log PT of the test substance as function of the reciprocal temperatures is shown in 

Figure 10 . The equation of the curve was: 109 PT,ZO =-3282 x 1/T + 9.44 (r = 0.992, n = 8) . 

Table 5 Results of the Isothermal TGA analysis 

Temperature 

°C 

Weight loss 

/min 

vT 

/cmZ/h 

log vT log PT PT 

Pa 

110 5.078 6.06 x 10-0 -3 .22 0.93 8.5 x 100 

4.218 5.03 x 10" -3 .30 0.85 7.0 x 10° 

120 7.453 8.90 x 10-0 -3.05 1 .11 1 .3 x 10' 

6.675 7.97 x 10-0 -3 .10 1 .06 1 .1 x 10, 

130 11 .56 1 .38 x 10'3 -2.86 1 .31 2.0 x 101 

10.79 1 .29 x 10-' -2.89 1 .28 1 .9 x 10, 

140 18.39 2.20 x 103 -2 .66 1 .52 3.3 x 101 

17.71 2.11 x 10-3 -2 .67 1 .50 3.2 x 101 

Table 6 Vapour pressure of the test substance 

Temperature 

l oci 

log PT PT 

[ Pal 

PT 

[mm Hgj 

20 -1 .75 1 .8 x 10-2 1 .3 x 104 

25 -1 .57 2.7 x 10"2 2.0 x 10'° 

9.7 . Conclusion 

The isothermal TGA effusion method was applied for the determination of the vapour pressure of 

1-Decene, sulfurized . 

The vapour pressure of the test substance at 20°C (293K) and 25°C (298K) was: 

20°C 25°C 

Pa mm H Pa mm H 

Test substance 1 .8 x 10-2 1 .3 x 10'° 2.7 x 10-z 2.0 x 10' 

Final report - Page 24 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

9.8 . Figures 

R1e:N0T0k20101370265757 

Figure 9 Weight loss curve of the test substance. 

1 .6 -

1 .4 -

1 .2 - 

1- 

F 

~ 0.8 

0.6 

0.4 

0.2 

0 

0.0024 0.00245 0.0025 0.00255 0.0026 0.00265 

1/T [K-11 

Figure 10 Plot of log P7 of the test substance versus 1/T . 

Final report - Page 25 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

10. WATER SOLUBILITY 

10.1 . Guidelines 

European Community (EC), EC no. 440/2008, Part A: Methods for the Determination of PhysicoChemic.al Properties, Guideline A.6 : "Water Solubility", Official Journal of the European Union no. 

L142, May 31, 2008 . 

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for the Testing 

of Chemicals no. 105: "Water Solubility", July 27, 1995. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Product Properties Test Guidelines no. 

OPPTS 830.7840 : "Water Solubility : Column Elution Method; Shake Flask Method", March 1998. 

10.2 . Reagents 

Double distilled water Waldeck, Miinster-Roxel, Germany 

n-Hexane Merck, Dannstadt, Germany 

All reagents were of analytical grade, unless specified otherwise. 

10.3 . Performance of the study 

Two methods are available for the determination of the water solubility of a test substance: 

1 . Column elution method 

The method is based on the elution of the test substance with water from a column which is charged 

with an inert support material, such as bare silica particles, coated with an excess of the test 

substance. It can be applied to test substances with a water solubility of < 10-Z g/I. 

2. Flask method 

The mass concentration of the test substance in aqueous solutions saturated with the test substance 

will be determined after stirring or shaking at a specific temperature for a specific period of time . The 

method can be used for test substances with a water solubility of t 10~2 g/I. 

A preliminary test was carried out as a range-finding test prior to performance of the column elution 

method or flask method. 

Preliminary test 

Test substance was stirred with double distilled water at a nominal concentration of 103 mg/I at 

19.8 t 0.2°C for 19 hours. After stirring, the water phase was centrifuged, treated and analysed. 

In the preliminary test the water solubility of the test substance was < 10'Z g/I. Therefore, the column 

elution method was chosen for the main study. 

Main stud v 

A solution with an absolute test substance quantity of 76.2 mg was prepared in n-hexane . The solution 

was mixed with 5.5 g LiChroprep Si 60 25-40 um column material (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). The 

n-hexane was completely evaporated at 45°C using a rotary evaporator. The loaded carrier material 

was stored overnight at room temperature. 

A 150 mm x 4 .6 mm i .d . column was filled with the carrier material and 0 .5 um frits were used to 

enclose the column. Double distilled water was pumped through the column until it was completely 

filled . The system was allowed to equilibrate for two hours. After the equilibration period, the column 

was eluted overnight with double distilled water at a flow rate of 12 ml/hour. 

Final report - Page 26 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

The following day the flow was increased to 24 ml/hour. Ten consecutive samples of 2 ml were taken. 

The flow was halved to 12 ml/hour and ten consecutive samples of 2 ml were taken. After sampling 

the flow of the column elution system was halved to 6 ml/hour. 

Analysis was performed on subsamples of 1 .5 ml. The aqueous samples were extracted in a 5:1 (v:v) 

ratio with n-hexane . The shaking time was 30 seconds. The n-hexane layer was analysed. 

With analysis it was observed that differential results were obtained for the water solubility at the flow 

rates of 12 and 24 ml/hour. Therefore, the test at 24 ml/hour was repeated. 

The pH was measured from the water fractions that were collected for the determination of the flow 

rates . 

The eluates were checked for the presence of undissolved particles using a turbidimeter. 

The experiment was also performed using a column filled with blank carrier material . The procedure 

was identical to the procedure used for the column loaded with test substance. At each flow rate, two 

consecutive samples were taken for analyses. 

The column elution method was performed at 19.7°C t 0.3°C. 

10.4. Analytical method 

10.4.1 . Analytical conditions 

Quantitative analysis was performed according to the analytical method as validated in Chapter 7. 

Turbidity measurements: 

Instrument 2100 AN IS Laboratory Turbidimeter (Hach Company, 

Loveland, Colorado, USA) 

Unit NTU 

Calibration range < 0.2 to 7500 NTU 

10.4.2 . Preparation of the calibration solutions 

Stock solutions 

Stock solutions of the test substance were prepared in n-hexane at concentrations of 1085 -

2110 mg/I . 

Calibration solutions 

Calibration solutions in the concentration range of 0.04 - 6 mg/1 were prepared from two stock 

solutions. The end solution of the calibration solutions was n-hexane . 

10.4.3 . Sample Injections 

Calibration solutions were injected in duplicate. Test samples were analysed by single injection. 

10.4.4. Calibration curves 

Calibration curves were constructed using at least five concentrations. For each concentration, two 

responses were used . Quadratic regression analysis was performed using the least squares method 

with a 1/concentration2 weighting factor. The coefficient of correlation (r) was > 0.99 for each curve. 

Final report - Page 27 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

10.5 . Interpretation 

10.5 .1 . Specifications 

The water solubility of a test substance is specified by the saturation mass concentration of the test 

substance in water at a given temperature and is expressed in g/I . 

10.5 .2. Formulas 

Response (R) Peak area of the test substance [units] 

Maximum difference 

highest value-lowest value x100% 

mean value 

where: 

'mean value' is the mean of the highest and lowest value. 

Calibration curve R = a C N + b CN + c 

where: 

a = quadratic regression factor [units x (I/mg)Z] 

b = linear regression factor [units x I/mg] 

c = intercept [units] 

Analvsed concentration (Ce) C. - - 

b + Jb2 - 4 a x (c - R) 

x d 

2a 

where: 

d = dilution factor 

Final report - Page 28 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

10.6 . Results 

10.6 .1 . Preliminary test 

The content of test substance dissolved in the water sample was 46.9 Ng/I . 

Note: The value obtained could be overestimated since the content of the centrifugation control 

sample was significantly lower (i .e . 25.3 pg/I). Further research to investigate the results was not 

performed since both values were significantly below 10 mg/I . According to this, the column elution 

method was selected for the main study. 

10.8.2 . Main study 

The results for the water samples of the column elution method are given in Table 7. 

With a flow rate of 24 ml/h a mean water solubility of 9.86 ug/I was obtained . The coefficient of 

variation (CV) was 5 30%. 

A small response of the test substance was observed in the chromatograms of the test samples 

obtained at the flow rate of 12 ml/h . The concentrations were below the nominal concentration of the 

lowest calibration solution . Taking the sample extraction method into account it corresponds with a 

water solubility of < 8 Ng/I . 

The test at 24 ml/h was repeated. With the new test, the sample concentrations were close to the 

noise level of the GC-MS instrument and therefore below the nominal concentration of the lowest 

calibration solution . Taking the sample extraction method into account it corresponds with a water 

solubility of < 8 Ng/I . 

Based on the results obtained it was concluded that the water solubility of the test substance is 

510 pg/I . A more accurate value could not be given since the test concentrations were close to the 

detection limit of the GC-MS method. The analytical method with a 5:1 (v :v) extraction method and 

sample volumes of 1 .5 ml was considered to be optimal for the support of the column elution method. 

No test substance was detected in the samples from the blank column. The turbidity of the eluates 

was < 0.5 NTU. It was considered that the eluates had no undissolved test substance particles (i.e . the 

test substance was a liquid . Particles of the test substance could not be present) . 

Table 7 Main study-water solubility of the test substance 

Flow rate Sample Concentration ana l sed pH 

no. Individual Mean CV Mean MD 

ml/h /I /I % /I % 

24 1 10.7 9.86 7.8 <10 n.a . 7.9 

2 11 .0 

3 9.21 

4 10.2 

5 10.4 

6 9.64 

7 8.67 

8 13 .7 9 

9 9.47 

10 9.42 

Final report - Page 29 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

Table 7 Continued 

Flow rate Sample Concentration ana l ed pH 

no. Individual Mean Cv Mean MD 

ml/h /I /I % 

12 1 < 8 < 8 n.a . 8.0 

2 <8 

3 <8 

4 <8 

5 <8 

6 <8 

7 <8 

8 <8 

9 <8 

10 <8 

24 1 < 8 < 8 n.a . 6.6 

2 <8 

3 <8 

4 <8 

5 <8 

6 <8 

7 <8 

8 <8 

9 <8 

10 <8 

Mean of the concentrations obtained at one flow rate . 

Mean of the concentrations obtained at a flow rate of 12 ml/h and repeated 24 ml/h . 

Outlier according to the Dixon's 0-test at 95% confidence level . 10.7 . Conclusion 

The column elution method was applied for the determination of the water solubility of 1-Decene, 

sulfurized . 

The water solubility of the test substance at 20°C was 510 jig/I . 

The pH of the aqueous samples was 6.6 - 8.0 . 

Final report - Page 30 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

11 . PARTITION COEFFICIENT 

11 .1 . Guidelines 

European Community (EC), EC no. 440/2008, Part A: Methods for the Determination of PhysicoChemical Properties, Guideline A.8: "Partition Coefficient", Official Journal of the European Union no. 

L142, May 31, 2008. 

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for the Testing 

of Chemicals no. 107 : "Partition Coefficient (n-octanol/water), Shake Flask Method", July 27, 1995. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Product Properties Test Guidelines no. 

OPPTS 830.7550: "Partition Coefficient (n-octanol/water), Shake Flask Method", August 1996. 

11 .2. Reagents 

n-Octanol Sigma-Aldrich, Steinheim, Germany 

All reagents were of analytical grade, unless specified otherwise. 

11 .3 . Performance of the study 

Four methods are available for the determination of the partition coefficient (Po ,) of the test substance. 

The principle of each method is described below: 

1 . Shake flask method 

Test substance is partitioned in a two-phase system of n-octanol and water. After phase separation, 

the concentration of the test substance in both phases is determined by a suitable analytical method. 

The shake flask method can be used for test substance with a log P. value in the range of -2 to 4. 

2. HPLC method 

A solution of the test substance is injected onto a reversed-phase HPLC column. The log Pm value is 

calculated from the retention time of the test substance. The HPLC method covers log Po , values in 

the range of 0 to 6. 

3. Estimation method 

The solubility of the test substance in n-octanol and in water is determined. The quotient of the noctanol solubility and the water solubility is an estimation of the Po , . The estimation method can be 

applied if the shake flask method and HPLC method are not applicable. 

4. Calculation method 

The calculation method is based on the theoretical fragmentation of the molecule into suitable 

substructures for which reliable log Pa,. increments are known. The log Po,., is obtained by summing the 

fragment values and the correction terms for intramolecular interactions . Lists of fragment constants 

and correction terms are available. 

The test substance is a mixture of multiple components with high log P"w values. The shake flask 

method was therefore not applicable for the test substance. 

The HPLC method with UV and refractive index (RI) detection was tested to determine the log P of 

the test substance. However, it was found that the components of the test substance had no sufficient 

sensitivity for both UV and RI detection. According to this the log Po , of the test substance was 

determined by the estimation method. 

n-Octanol solubility 

Test substance was stirred with n-octanol at a 1 :1 (w/v) ratio (i .e. at a nominal concentration of 

1 .01 x 103 g/I) at 19.8 t 0.2°C for approximately 2.5 hours. After stirring, the test sample was visually 

interpreted. 

Final report - Page 31 - 
1-Decene, sulfurized Project 502505 

Water solubility 

Information on the water solubility of the test substance is given in Chapter 10. The water solubility 

was 510 x 10's g/I. 

11 .4. Results 

After the stirring period, the n-octanol sample was clear and no undissolved test substance was 

observed . From this it was concluded that the n-octanol solubility of the test substance was 

> 1 x 103 g/I. 

The Po calculated as the quotient of the n-octanol and water solubility, is > 1 .0 x 108. It corresponds 

with a log Pow value of > 8.0 . 

11 .5 . Conclusion 

The estimation method was applied for the determination of the partition coefficient (P.) of 1-Decene, 

sulfurized . 

The PoV, value of the test substance at 20°C was > 1 .0 x 108 . 

It corresponds with a log P value of > 8.0 . 

Final report - Page 32 - 
I'~ I III III II I Il lll ll lil Fcv 1000090