NITE - Chemical Management Field

GHS Classification Result

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	57-06-7
Chemical Name	Allyl isothiocyanate
Substance ID	25B0057
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	FY2009
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 applicable	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.
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	Category 3	Warning	H226	P303+P361+P353 P370+P378 P403+P235 P210 P233 P240 P241 P242 P243 P280 P501	It was classified in Category 3 from a flash point of 46 deg C (closed-cup) (ICSC (1997)).
7	Flammable solid	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
8	Self-reactive substances and mixtures	Type G	- -	-	-	There is a chemical group associated with self-reactive properties (unsaturated bond) present in the molecule. However, because it is classified in Division 6.1, Subsidiary Risk 3, PG II (stabilized (BHT)) (UN1545) in UNRTDG, it was judged as Type G.
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It does not correspond to the hazards of the highest precedence, pyrophoric substances because it is classified in Division 6.1, Subsidiary Risk 3, PG II (stabilized) (UN1545) in UNRTDG.
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	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no oxygen, fluorine or chlorine.
14	Oxidizing solids	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
15	Organic peroxides	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule.
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	It was classified in Category 4 based on reports on LD50 values of 339 mg/kg and 490 mg/kg (NTP TR234 (1982), IARC 73 (1999), EPA Pesticide (1993)).
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Category 2	Danger	H310	P302+P352 P361+P364 P262 P264 P270 P280 P310 P321 P405 P501	It was classified in Category 2 based on a report on an LD50 value for rabbits of 88 mg/kg (RTECS (2008), E.H. Vernot, et al. (1977)).
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not applicable	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Category 2	Warning	H315	P302+P352 P332+P313 P362+P364 P264 P280 P321	It was classified in Category 2 because it is described that in humans, this substance irritates the mucous membranes and induces eczematous or vesicular skin reactions, and the substance strongly irritates the skin and mucous membranes (IARC 73 (1999)).
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. Besides, it is described in HSDB (Access on December 2013) that this substance has a very pungent odor, and its vapour can cause keratitis which interferes with vision.
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.
4	Skin sensitization	Category 1	Warning	H317	P302+P352 P333+P313 P362+P364 P261 P272 P280 P321 P501	This substance was classified in Category 1 because it is listed as a sensitizer in the Frosch contact allergen list (Frosch et al. Contact Dermatitis 5th Ed. (2011)). Besides, the information in IUCLD (2000) was reported in the previous classification, but it could not be identified in this review.
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. As for in vivo, it was negative in dominant lethal tests with mice and rats (IARC 73 (1999)), negative in micronucleus tests with bone marrow cells and peripheral blood of mice and chromosomal aberration tests with bone marrow cells of mice and rats (there is an equivocal result in a chromosomal aberration test with mouse bone marrow cells), and positive in a sister chromatid exchange test with mouse bone marrow cells (NTP DB (Access on September 2013), IARC 73 (1999)). As for in vitro, there are negative and positive results in bacterial reverse mutation tests and chromosomal aberration tests with cultured mammalian cells, and it was positive in a mouse lymphoma test (NTP DB (Access on September 2013), IARC 73 (1999)). Besides, because the sister chromatid exchange test with mouse bone marrow cells that gave a positive result employed intraperitoneal administration using DMSO as a vehicle, its validity is questionable.
6	Carcinogenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Because IARC classified it in Group 3 (IARC 73 (1999)), it was classified as "Classification not possible" according to the revised GHS classification guidance for the Japanese government. Besides, 103-week oral administration tests with rats and mice were conducted, and in rats, males showed transitional-cell papilloma in the urinary bladder, which was not found in the control group, and females showed an increased trend of subcutaneous fibrosarcoma, but an increase in the tumor incidence was not observed in mice. As a result, it is reported that it was carcinogenic in male rats, there was equivocal evidence of carcinogenicity in females, and it was not carcinogenic in mice of either sex (NTP TR234 (1982)).
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It is reported that no effects were observed in fetuses at the dose where maternal toxicity was seen in a developmental toxicity test with rats in the oral route (gavage) (IARC 36 (1985)). And it is reported that in developmental toxicity tests with mice, rats, hamsters, and rabbits in the oral route (gavage), no treatment-related maternal toxicity or teratogenicity was found in any animal species, however, deaths and resorptions of fetuses increased only in mice in the highest dose group (28 mg/kg/day), but it was not significant (deaths or resorptions, the highest dose group: 38/276; the control group: 15/264, the average number of live pups per litter, the highest dose group: 9.92; the control group: 11.3) (IARC 36 (1985)). It was classified as "Classification not possible" because developmental toxicity occurred at the dose that produced maternal toxicity, but it was not significant, and because no test reports on fertility were obtained.
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. Besides, gavage administration (200-400 mg/kg) to rats caused reversible inactivity, watery eyes, and ruffled fur (NTP TR234 (1982)), and inactivity, ruffled fur, and thickening and necrosis of mucosal surface of the stomach were observed in a gavage administration test with mice (100-800 mg/kg) (NTP TR234 (1982)). The findings in the stomach mucosa were estimated to be caused by irritation of this substance. The other findings were judged to be insufficient to assign the category for the specific target organ, and it was classified as "Classification not possible."
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 2 (liver, kidney, urinary bladder)	Warning	H373	P260 P314 P501	It is described that effects on the kidney (histological changes indicative of renal dysfunction) were observed at the dose (40 mg/kg/day; (converted guidance value: 18.5 mg/kg/day)) corresponding to Category 2 in a 6-week gavage administration test with rats (IARC 73 (1999)), and epithelial hyperplasia in the urinary bladder (rats) and cytoplasmic vacuolization in the liver (mice) were found within the dose range (12-25 mg/kg/day) for Category 2 in 2-year gavage administration tests with rats and mice (NTP TR234 (1982)). Therefore, it was classified in Category 2 (liver, kidney, urinary bladder). Besides, the previous classification was conducted based on the results of NTP's 14-day and 13-week administration tests alone, but the target organs were specified this time by taking account of the description in IARC and the results of NTP's 2-year administration tests as well.
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 96-hour LC50 = 0.077 mg/L for fish (Oryzias latipes) (ECETOC TR91, 2003).
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term)	Category 1	Warning	H410	P273 P391 P501	It was classified in Category 1 due to being not rapidly degradable (BIOWIN), and 28-day NOEC = 0.0085 mg/L for fish (Oryzias latipes) (ECETOC TR91, 2003).
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