NITE - Chemical Management Field

GHS Classification Result

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	7722-84-1
Chemical Name	Hydrogen peroxide
Substance ID	25B0044
Classification year (FY)	FY2013
Ministry who conducted the classification	Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW)/Ministry of the Environment (MOE)
New/Revised	Revised
Classification result in other fiscal year	FY2006
Download of Excel format	Excel file

REFERENCE INFORMATION

Item	Information
Guidance used for the classification (External link)	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government (July, 2013)
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 classified	- -	-	-	There is a chemical group associated with explosive properties (neighboring oxygen atoms) in the molecule, but because it is classified in Division 5.1 (Subsidiary Risk 8) PG I (UN2015) in UNRTDG, it does not correspond the hazards of the highest precedence, explosives.
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	- -	-	-	Not combustible (ICSC (2000)).
7	Flammable solid	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
8	Self-reactive substances and mixtures	Not applicable	- -	-	-	It is classified as oxidizing liquids.
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	Not combustible (ICSC (2000)).
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
11	Self-heating substances and mixtures	Not classified	- -	-	-	Not combustible (ICSC (2000)).
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	Category 1	Danger	H271	P371+P380+P375 P306+P360 P370+P378 P210 P220 P221 P280 P283 P501	It is classified in Division 5.1 (Subsidiary Risk 8) PG I (UN2015, HYDROGEN PEROXIDE, STABILIZED or HYDROGEN PEROXIDE, AQUEOUS SOLUTION, STABILIZED with more than 60% hydrogen peroxide) in UNRTDG.
14	Oxidizing solids	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
15	Organic peroxides	Not applicable	- -	-	-	It is an inorganic compound.
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data 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 are reports on two LD50 values for rats on a 70% solution of this substance. 75 mg/kg (EU-RAR (2003), ECETOC Special Report (1996)) corresponded to Category 3, 805 mg/kg (EU-RAR (2003), DFGOT vol. 26 (2011), ECETOC Special Report (1996)) corresponded to Category 4, and there is a big difference between them. However, in EU-RAR (2003), the knowledge of 75 mg/kg is described in the Appendix and is not quoted in the main text. Therefore, the weight of the knowledge of 75 mg/kg was judged to be low, and it was classified in Category 4 by adopting the category with lower hazard. Besides, data described in DFGOT vol. 26 (2011), which was obtained in this investigation, were added, and the classification was conducted by using data on a 70% solution of this substance.
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Category 3	Danger	H311	P302+P352 P361+P364 P280 P312 P321 P405 P501	There are reports on two LD50 values on a 90% solution of this substance. An LD50 value for rats was about 3.5 mL/kg (= about 5,000 mg/kg) (EU-RAR (2003)) and corresponded to "Not classified" (Category 5 in UN GHS classification). An LD50 value for rabbits was 690 mg/kg (EU-RAR (2003), DFGOT vol. 26 (2011), ECETOC Special Report (1996)) and corresponded to Category 3. Because of the same number for Category 3 and "Not classified," it was classified in Category 3 by adopting a more hazardous category. Besides, an LD50 value of 4,060 mg/kg for rats (EU-RAR (2003)), which was the rationale in the previous classification, was not adopted because the concentration of test substance is unknown. Data described in DFGOT vol. 26 (2011), which was obtained in this investigation, were added, and the classification was conducted by using data on a 90% solution of this substance.
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Category 3	Danger	H331	P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P311 P321 P405 P501	An LC50 value (4 hours) of 2,000 mg/m3 (= 1,438 ppmV) for rats on the vapour of this substance (EU-RAR (2003), DFGOT vol. 26 (2011), ECETOC Special Report (1996)) corresponded to Category 3. Data in DFGOT vol. 26 (2011), which was obtained in this investigation, were added, and the classification was conducted by using a reference value in the unit of ppmV as a vapour without mist because it is described that the test was done by using the vapour of this substance.
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Category 2	Danger	H330	P304+P340 P403+P233 P260 P271 P284 P310 P320 P405 P501	It is reported that as a result of exposure to the aerosol of a 90% solution of this substance in mice: 10-minute exposure to 13,200 mg/m3 (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 0.55 mg/L) or 15-minute exposure to 11,800 mg/m3 (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 0.74 mg/L), five out of ten animals died in both cases (EU-RAR (2003), ECETOC Special Report 10 (1996)). Furthermore, based on this report, it is reported that an LC50 value after 2-hour exposure to the aerosol of a 90% solution of this substance in mice was 920-2,000 mg/m3 (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 0.46-1.00 mg/L) (DFGOT vol. 26 (2011)). Among the above LC50 values, the same number of values corresponded to Category 2 and Category 3, therefore it was classified in Category 2 by adopting the category for the minimum LC50 value. Besides, data in DFGOT vol. 26 (2011) obtained in this investigation were added, and the classification was conducted by using data on a 90% solution of this substance. Besides, although the converted 4-hour equivalent LC50 values were lower than the saturated vapour pressure concentration of 3.605 mg/L, a reference value in the unit of mg/L was applied because of the description of being tested on the aerosol.
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	It is described that 3-minute, 1-hour, or 4-hour application of this substance to rabbit skin caused necrosis of all the skin layers or corrosivity (EU-RAR (2003), ECETOC Special Report 10 (1996)). Furthermore, this substance is corrosive to the skin and is classified in "C; R35" in EU DSD classification and "Skin Corr. 1A H314" in EU CLP classification. It was classified in Category 1 based on the above information. EU DSD classification and EU CLP classification obtained in this investigation were added.
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 1	Danger	H318	P305+P351+P338 P280 P310	This substance is corrosive to the skin. It is described that it was severely irritating in animals, and it was corrosive (ECETOC JACC (1993), EU-RAR (2003)). It was classified in Category 1 based on the above information.
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.
4	Skin sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It is described that two tests with guinea pigs gave negative results (EU-RAR (2003), ECETOC JACC (1993)), and in humans, many subjects were negative in patch tests (EU-RAR (2003)). It is described in EU-RAR (2003) that despite two reported cases of positive patch tests to hydrogen peroxide and the uncertainty surrounding an outdated animal study (with a negative result), and on recognition of the widespread occupational and consumer use over many decades, it may be confidently stated that the potential of hydrogen peroxide to cause skin sensitization is extremely low, and therefore it does not meet the criteria for classification. However, it is concluded in the summary of ACGIH (7th, 2001) that sufficient data were not available to recommend a SEN notation for this substance, which is different from the conclusion in EU-RAR (2003). From the comprehensive judgment that there is not sufficient evidence, ACGIH (7th, 2001) was adopted, and it was classified as "Classification not possible."
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It was classified as "Classification not possible" because it was not possible to classify a substance as "Not classified" according to the revised GHS classification guidance for the Japanese government. As for in vivo, it was negative in a micronucleus test with mouse bone marrow cells (EU-RAR (2003), ECETOC-JACC (1993)) and a chromosomal aberration test with rat bone marrow cells (IARC 71 (1999), ECETOC-JACC (1993)). As for in vitro, there are multiple positive results in bacterial reverse mutation tests and gene mutation tests and chromosomal aberration tests with cultured mammalian cells (IARC 71 (1999)). This substance is considered to be an in vitro mutagen, but as for in vivo, it is concluded that this substance is not classified as a mutagen (SIDS (1999), EU-RAR (2003)).
6	Carcinogenicity	Category 2	Warning	H351	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	It is classified in Group 3 in IARC (1999) and A3 in ACGIH (7th, 2001). It is classified in A3 in ACGIH (7th, 2001) because there is limited evidence for the carcinogenicity of this substance from the carcinogenicity data reviewed by IARC (1999). Therefore, the classification by ACGIH was adopted, and it was classified in Category 2. The category was changed according to the revised GHS classification guidance for the Japanese government.
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. Besides, it is reported in ECETOC JACC (1993) that in a test with rats in the oral route (drinking water), effects on sperm mobility, effects on female estrus cycle, a decreased number of maternal animals which delivered, and decreased body weights of offspring were observed, but it was impossible to assess it because the descriptions are insufficient. Furthermore, as for a test with male mice in the oral route (drinking water), or tests to investigate effects on sperm of male rabbits or male fertility, no firm conclusions can be drawn from these limited studies which did not use any control group. Therefore, it was classified as "Classification not possible." Besides, in EU-RAR (2003), the latest assessment, this substance was judged to be not a reproductive toxicant because no serious disorder in reproductive function was found in limited reproductive toxicity tests, and no adverse effects on genetic organs were seen in a 90-day repeated dose toxicity test with mice or carcinogenicity tests with mice or rats.
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 1 (respiratory organs)	Danger	H370	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P321 P405 P501	Irritation of the nose, throat, and trachea is reported after inhalation exposure in animals (rats, mice) (EU-RAR (2003)) and humans (ACGIH (7th, 2001)). In animals (rats, mice), congestion of the lung and trachea, pulmonary edema, emphysema, and pulmonary congestion are described at the doses (0.34-0.43 mg/L) all within the guidance value range for Category 1 (EU-RAR (2003), ECETOC Special Report 10 (1996)). It was classified in Category 1 (respiratory system) based on the above. Headache, dizziness, tremors, convulsions, unconsciousness, faintness, and cerebral infarction are described in humans (ACGIH (7th, 2001), EU-RAR (2003)), which were not adopted because there is no detailed information for these findings, and they were judged to be secondary or non-specific symptoms from inhalation of a corrosive substance.
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 1 (respiratory organs)	Danger	H372	P260 P264 P270 P314 P501	It was classified in Category 1 (respiratory system) because it is described that fibrotic lesions scattered in the lung, patchy areas of atelectasis integrated with emphysematous areas (dogs), necrosis and inflammation of the epithelium of the nasal cavity and cell infiltration in the larynx (rats) were observed at the concentrations (0.005-0.01 mg/L) within the guidance value range for Category 1 in inhalation tests with dogs and rats exposed to the vapour of this substance (EU-RAR (2003)), and in humans, it produces irritation of the nose and throat, and in the worst cases, there is a risk of lung edema (ECETOC JACC (1993)). Besides, it was classified Category 2 (blood) in the previous classification from the results of a 100-day oral administration test with rats, but blood findings were only a decreased hematocrit and plasma proteins and a decreased plasma catalase activity within the guidance value range for Category 2 with no description of hemolysis (EU-RAR (2003)). These findings were not sufficient to support classification in Category 2 (blood), which was deleted this time.
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.

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 1	Warning	H400	P273 P391 P501	It was classified in Category 1 from 72-hour EC50 = 0.85 mg/L for algae (Nitzschia closterium) (EU-RAR, 2003).
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term)	Not classified	- -	-	-	If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified in Category 2 due to rapid degradability ("ready biodegradability" demonstrated by meeting the criteria within the 10-day window (EU-RAR, 2003)), and 72-hour NOEC = 0.1 mg/L for algae (Chlorella vulgaris) (EU-RAR, 2003). If acute toxicity data are used for a trophic level for which chronic toxicity data are not obtained, there are data: 24-hour EC50 = 2.3 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (EU-RAR, 2003). However, it is rapidly degradable ("ready biodegradability" demonstrated by meeting the criteria within the 10-day window (EU-RAR, 2003)), and low bioaccumulation is estimated (log Kow = -1.36 (ICSC, 2000)). Therefore, it is classified as "Not classified." By drawing a comparison between the above results, it is classified in Category 2. Because the chronic toxicity value was obtained, a concern for chronic toxicity is suggested in the case of the continuous discharge of this substance. However, because the substance is known to readily decompose in the actual environment, it was classified as "Not classified" by expert judgment.
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