GHS Classification Result

日本語で表示



GENERAL INFORMATION
Item Information
CAS RN 87-56-9
Chemical Name Mucochloric acid
Substance ID 24A6037
Classification year (FY) FY2012
Ministry who conducted the classification Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW)/Ministry of the Environment (MOE)
New/Revised New
Classification result in other fiscal year  
Download of Excel format Excel file

REFERENCE INFORMATION
Item Information
Guidance used for the classification (External link) Physical Hazards and Health Hazards: GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government (July, 2010) Environmental Hazards: UN GHS Document (4th revised edition)
UN GHS document (External link) UN GHS document
Definitions/Abbreviations (Excel file) Definitions/Abbreviations
Model Label by MHLW (External link) MHLW Website (in Japanese Only)
Model SDS by MHLW (External link) MHLW Website (in Japanese Only)
OECD/eChemPortal (External link) eChemPortal

PHYSICAL HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Pictogram
Signal word
Hazard statement
(code)
Precautionary statement
(code)
Rationale for the classification
1 Explosives Not applicable
-
-
- - There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.
2 Flammable gases (including chemically unstable gases) Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (normal temperatures) (SIDS (2003))
3 Aerosols Not applicable
-
-
- - Not aerosol products.
4 Oxidizing gases Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (normal temperatures) (SIDS (2003))
5 Gases under pressure Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (normal temperatures) (SIDS (2003))
6 Flammable liquids Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (normal temperatures) (SIDS (2003))
7 Flammable solids Classification not possible
-
-
- - There is information that it is combustible (GESTIS (Access on June 2012)), but there are no data in the prescribed test method.
8 Self-reactive substances and mixtures Classification not possible
-
-
- - The substance does not contain chemical groups associated with explosive properties but contains a chemical group associated with self-reactive properties (acrylic group), however, there are no data.
9 Pyrophoric liquids Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (normal temperatures) (SIDS (2003))
10 Pyrophoric solids Classification not possible
-
-
- - No data available.
11 Self-heating substances and mixtures Classification not possible
-
-
- - Test methods applicable to solid (melting point <= 140 deg C) 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
-
-
- - Solid (normal temperatures) (SIDS (2003))
14 Oxidizing solids Not applicable
-
-
- - The substance is an organic compound containing chlorine and oxygen (but not fluorine) which are chemically bonded only to carbon or hydrogen.
15 Organic peroxides Not applicable
-
-
- - Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure.
16 Corrosive to metals Classification not possible
-
-
- - Test methods applicable to solid substances are not available.

HEALTH HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Pictogram
Signal word
Hazard statement
(code)
Precautionary statement
(code)
Rationale for the classification
1 Acute toxicity (Oral) Category 4


Warning
H302 P301+P312
P264
P270
P330
P501
There is a report on five LD50 values for rats (400, 360, 300, 500, and 350 mg/kg) (SIDS (2003)), one corresponds to Category 3, and four correspond to Category 4. Therefore, it was classified in Category 4, to which most corresponded.
1 Acute toxicity (Dermal) Classification not possible
-
-
- - There is a report on an LD50 value of > 200 mg/kg for rabbits (SIDS (2003)), but the category cannot be determined. Therefore, the classification is not possible.
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases) Not applicable
-
-
- - Solid (normal temperatures) (SIDS (2003))
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours) Classification not possible
-
-
- - No data available.
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists) Not classified
-
-
- - It was classified as "Not classified" in the Classification JIS based on an LC50 value for rats of > 5.1 mg/L (dust: 4-hour exposure) (SIDS (2003)).
2 Skin corrosion/irritation Category 1


Danger
H314 P301+P330+P331
P303+P361+P353
P305+P351+P338
P304+P340
P260
P264
P280
P310
P321
P363
P405
P501
In a test by a 4-hour occlusive application of 0.5 g of an 80% aqueous solution of this substance to the skin of two rabbits (Test guidelines of the US Department of Transportation), the average scores after 4 hours, 1 day, 2 days, and 8 days were 3.5, 4, 4, 4, respectively for erythema, and 3, 3, 3, 1.5 for edema, and it was assessed to be corrosive (SIDS (2003)). Therefore, it was classified in Category 1.
3 Serious eye damage/eye irritation Category 1


Danger
H318 P305+P351+P338
P280
P310
In a test in which 50 mg of this substance as a powder was applied to rabbits, the most severe symptom was an opacity of the complete cornea graded as opaque, this persisted on day 8 of the end of the test and was regarded as irreversible, and it was judged as highly corrosive (SIDS (2003)). Therefore, it was classified in Category 1.
4 Respiratory sensitization Classification not possible
-
-
- - No data available.
4 Skin sensitization Classification not possible
-
-
- - It is reported that one out of five animals became sensitized in a maximization test with guinea pigs (SIDS (2003)), but the test results are unclear, and no conclusion was drawn. And it is reported that it was not sensitizing in another skin sensitization test with guinea pigs (open epicutaneous test) (SIDS (2003)), but the test method was not the one approved by OECD. Because there was no other information to be the rationale for classification, it was classified as "Classification not possible."
5 Germ cell mutagenicity Category 2


Warning
H341 P308+P313
P201
P202
P280
P405
P501
In a test in which nuclear anomalies including micronuclei were measured using intestinal epithelial cells after oral administration to mice, an increase in anomalies was observed only in the duodenum, and it was suggested to be weakly genotoxic (SIDS (2003)). On the other hand, as for in vitro tests, there is a report on positive results in all of the various in-vitro mutagenicity tests such an Ames test, a mouse lymphoma test, an HGPRT test with CHO cells, a chromosomal aberration test with CHO cells, and a micronucleus test with V79 cells of Chinese hamsters (SIDS (2003)). Therefore, it was classified in Category 2.
6 Carcinogenicity Classification not possible
-
-
- - Data are lacking. Besides, it is reported that in a test in which 7-day-old mice of two different hybrid strains were orally administered for 18 months (by gavage until the age of 4 weeks followed by diet administration), there were no significant effects on mortality compared to the control group, and no significant increase in tumor rates was also observed (SIDS (2003)), but data are insufficient to use for classification because it is a test with only one dose and the limited number of animals, and the number of organs examined and target tumor categories were limited.
7 Reproductive toxicity Classification not possible
-
-
- - In a developmental toxicity test by oral administration to rats on gestational days 6-19 (OECD TG414: GLP), decreased food consumption and reduced weight gain were observed in maternal animals as general toxicity, but there were no signs of developmental toxicity or teratogenicity (SIDS (2003)). Therefore, it was judged to have no adverse effects on the development of offspring. However, because effects on sexual function and fertility are unknown due to no data, it was classified as "Classification not possible."
8 Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure Category 2 (systemic toxicity)


Warning
H371 P308+P311
P260
P264
P270
P405
P501
In an oral administration test with rats, an LD50 value was 300-400 mg/kg, and atonia and ataxia were observed (SIDS (2003)). And in another test, all animals died at the high dose, and gasping and clonic convulsions were found as symptoms (SIDS (2003)). Furthermore, there is also a test in which excitement was found initially followed by labored breathing and reduced breathing frequency (SIDS (2003)). On the other hand, in an inhalation test, 4-hour exposure to 5.1 mg/L caused no deaths in rats, and clinical signs of preening, dyspnea, and salivation were seen (SIDS (2003)). From the above, after oral administration, symptoms were observed at doses corresponding to the guidance values for Category 2, but it was hard to specify the target organ. Therefore, it was classified in Category 2 (systemic toxicity).
9 Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure Classification not possible
-
-
- - Data are lacking. Besides, there is a description of findings such as loss of reflexes and an intermittent increase in excitability after 5-month inhalation exposure in rats and increased excitability after 4-month oral administration to rats, but neither was used for classification because both were regarded as insufficient data for assessment due to the test method being inappropriate or limited (SIDS (2003)).
10 Aspiration hazard Classification not possible
-
-
- - No data available.

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Pictogram
Signal word
Hazard statement
(code)
Precautionary statement
(code)
Rationale for the classification
11 Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Acute) Category 3
-
-
H402 P273
P501
It was classified in Category 3 from 48-hour EC50 = 13 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (SIDS, 2005).
11 Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term) Category 3
-
-
H412 P273
P501
Reliable chronic toxicity data were not obtained. It was classified in Category 3 because appropriate data on rapid degradability were not obtained, and it corresponds to Category 3 in acute toxicity for crustacea (SIDS, 2005).
12 Hazardous to the ozone layer Classification not possible
-
-
- - This substance is not listed in the Annexes to the Montreal Protocol.


NOTE:
  • GHS Classification Result by the Japanese Government is intended to provide a reference for preparing a GHS label or SDS for users. To include the same classification result in a label or SDS for Japan is NOT mandatory.
  • Users can cite or copy this classification result when preparing a GHS label or SDS. Please be aware, however, that the responsibility for a label or SDS prepared by citing or copying this classification result lies with users.
  • This GHS classification was conducted based on the information sources and the guidance for classification and judgement which are described in the GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government etc. Using other literature, test results etc. as evidence and including different content from this classification result in a label or SDS are allowed.
  • Hazard statement and precautionary statement will show by hovering the mouse cursor over a code in the column of "Hazard statement" and "Precautionary statement," respectively. In the excel file, both the codes and statements are provided.
  • A blank or "-" in the column of "Classification" denotes that a classification for the hazard class was not conducted in the year.

To GHS Information