GHS Classification Result

Chemical Name：nonanoic acid
CAS：112-05-0

Result：
ID: 20A2178
Classifier: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare （MHLW）, Ministry of the Environment （MOE）
Year Classified: FY2008
Reference Manual: GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）

PHYSICAL HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Symbol Signal word Hazard statement Precautionary statement Rationale for the classification
1 Explosives Not applicable - - - - There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecules.
2 Flammable gases （including chemically unstable gases） Not applicable - - - - Liquid (GHS definition)
3 Aerosols Not applicable - - - - Not aerosol products.
4 Oxidizing gases Not applicable - - - - Liquid (GHS definition)
5 Gases under pressure Not applicable - - - - Liquid (GHS definition)
6 Flammable liquids Not classified - - - - Its flash point (closed) is > 93degC (PM (14th, 2006)).
7 Flammable solid Not applicable - - - - Liquid (GHS definition)
8 Self-reactive substances and mixtures Not applicable - - - - There are no chemical groups present in the molecule associated with explosive or self-reactive properties.
9 Pyrophoric liquids Classification not possible - - - - No data available.
10 Pyrophoric solids Not applicable - - - - Liquid (GHS definition)
11 Self-heating substances and mixtures Classification not possible - - - - Test methods applicable to liquid substances are not available.
12 Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases Not applicable - - - - The chemical structure of the substance does not contain metals or metalloids (B, Si, P, Ge, As, Se, Sn, Sb, Te, Bi, Po, At).
13 Oxidizing liquids Not applicable - - - - It contains oxygen, which is chemically bonded only to hydrogen or carbon.
14 Oxidizing solids Not applicable - - - - Liquid (GHS definition)
15 Organic peroxides Not applicable - - - - Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure
16 Corrosive to metals Classification not possible - - - - No data available.

HEALTH HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Symbol Signal word Hazard statement Precautionary statement Rationale for the classification
1 Acute toxicity （Oral） Not classified - - - - Since its rat LDLo = 3200 mg/kg (PATTY (5th, 2001) vol. 5), the substance was classified into the "Not classified" category (it may be falls under Category 5 or the "Not classified" category in the United Nations classification).
1 Acute toxicity （Dermal） Not classified - - - - Since its rabbit LD50 is > 5000 mg/kg (PATTY (5th, 2001) vol. 5), the substance was classified into the "Not classified" category.
1 Acute toxicity （Inhalation: Gases） Not applicable - - - - Liquid (GHS definition)
1 Acute toxicity （Inhalation: Vapours） Classification not possible - - - - No data available.
1 Acute toxicity （Inhalation: Dusts and mists） Classification not possible - - - - Its rat LC50 is found to be 0.46-3.8 mg/L/4h (HSDB (2008)), indicating that the substance falls under Category 2 through 4. More refined classification cannot be carried out. Since the LD50 value is higher than its saturated vapour pressure concentration (0.0141 mg/L), the experiment was presumably conducted in a mist state.
2 Skin corrosion/irritation Category 2 Warning H315: Causes skin irritation P302+P352: IF ON SKIN: Wash with plenty of soap and water.
P332+P313: If skin irritation occurs: Get medical advice/attention.
P264: Wash ... thoroughly after handling.
P280: Wear protective gloves/protective clothing/eye protection/face protection.
P321: Specific treatment （see ... on this label）.
P362: Take off contaminated clothing and wash before reuse. 		In humans, an application of 20% concentration of the test substance (carrier: 1-propanol) to 116 healthy volunteers and 75 dermal patients resulted that 90-94% of test subjects showed reactions, which were mainly in forms of erythema after 48 hours, and pigmentation after 96 hours (PATTY (5th, 2001) vol. 5). In addition, in occlusive patch tests, an application of 0.5M and 1M (carrier: 1-propanol) concentrations resulted in irritation reactions (PATTY (5th, 2001) vol. 5). There are several other test results that the substance is an irritant to humans. Also, skin irritation tests using rabbits (GLP: OECD TG 404) found the substance irritating (IUCLID (2000)). Based on these positive results, the substance was classified into Category 2.
3 Serious eye damage/eye irritation Category 2A Warning H319: Causes serious eye irritation P305+P351+P338: IF IN EYES: Rinse cautiously with water for several minutes. Remove contact lenses, if present and easy to do. Continue rinsing.
P337+P313: If eye irritation persists: Get medical advice/attention.
P264: Wash ... thoroughly after handling.
P280: Wear protective gloves/protective clothing/eye protection/face protection. 		Eye irritation tests using rabbits found the substance a severe irritant (PATTY (5th, 2001) vol. 5) or highly irritating (IUCLID (2000)). Thus, it was classified into Category 2A.
4 Respiratory sensitization Classification not possible - - - - No data available.
4 Skin sensitization Classification not possible - - - - This substance has been considered to be a non-sensitizer. However, local lymph node assays (LLNA method) using mice showed clearly positive results at high concentrations (>= 50%), indicating that it is a potential sensitizer (HSDB (2008)). In humans, 25 volunteers took patch tests (12% in petrolatum) and they did not show sensitizing reactions (PATTY (5th, 2001) vol. 5). Since no other detailed studies are available, classification is not possible.
5 Germ cell mutagenicity Classification not possible - - - - Classification is not possible due to lack of in vivo mutagenicity test results. Also, Ames tests gave negative results (HSDB (2008)).
6 Carcinogenicity Classification not possible - - - - In carcinogenicity tests using mice, no increase in incidences of tumorigenesis in the skin was noted in treated groups compared with control groups (IUCLID (2000)). However, since detailed test information is not provided and only one animal species was tested, classification is not possible based on these results.
7 Reproductive toxicity Classification not possible - - - - In developmental toxicity tests conducted using rats that underwent oral administration during the gestation period including organogenetic period, no abnormalities were detected in terms of pregnancy rate, corpora lutea, and implantation rate in parental animals; regarding the offspring, two cases of cleft palate, two cases of a small tongue, and one case of hydroureter were noted, although the difference between treated and control groups were not statistically significant. Likewise, skeletal and soft tissue malformations observed in treated animals were not statistically significant in comparison with controls (PATTY (5th, 2001) vol. 5). Despite the information above, since study results on reproductive functions and fertility are not available, classification is not possible.
8 Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure Classification not possible - - - - No data available.
9 Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure Classification not possible - - - - In 4-week repeated dermal exposure tests using rabbits, localized changes in the skin that fall under a skin corrosion / irritation category were observed at 500 mg/kg/day (90-day conversion: 167 mg/kg/day); however, as for other organs, no abnormalities were observed in histopathological examinations under the microscope (PATTY (5th, 2001) vol. 5). In 4-week repeated oral administration tests using rats, the NOAEL was found to be > 4.17% (concentration in the feed) (the value corrected for administration dose per body weight and for 90 day: 695 mg/kg/day) (IUCLID (2000)). However, no detailed test information is available. Consequently, although target organ toxicity via dermal exposure is expected to be low, no detailed information on oral exposure tests is available to support the expectation. Thus, classification is not possible.
10 Aspiration hazard Classification not possible - - - - No data available.

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Symbol Signal word Hazard statement Precautionary statement Rationale for the classification
11 Hazardous to the aquatic environment （Acute） Category 3 - - H402: Harmful to aquatic life P273: Avoid release to the environment.
P501: Dispose of contents/container to ... 		Since its 96-hour LC50 = 91 mg/L for fish (rainbow trout) (HSDB, 2000), the substance was classified into Category 3.
11 Hazardous to the aquatic environment （Long-term） Not classified - - - - Its classification for acute toxicity is Category 3, it is rapidly degradable (DOC degradability = 99% (HSDB, 2008)), and its potential for bioaccumulation is presumably low (LogPow = 3.42 (PHYSPROP Database, 2008)). Based on this information, the substance was classified into the "Not classified" category.


NOTE:
* Classification was conducted by relevant Japanese Ministries in accordance with GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government, and is intended to provide a reference for preparing GHS labelling and SDS for users.
* This is a provisional English translation of classification results and is subject to revision without notice.
* The responsibility for any resulting GHS labelling and SDS referenced from this site is with users.

Reference：
Reference Manual
Definitions / Abbreviations
Model Label by MHLW

 MHLW Website （in Japanese Only）
Model SDS by MHLW

 MHLW Website （in Japanese Only）

To GHS Information