GHS Classification Result
GENERAL INFORMATION
REFERENCE INFORMATION
PHYSICAL HAZARDS
HEALTH HAZARDS
ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS
NOTE:
GENERAL INFORMATION
| Item | Information |
|---|---|
| CAS RN | 127-00-4 |
| Chemical Name | 1-Chloro-2-propanol |
| Substance ID | H27-A-004, C-004A_P |
| Classification year (FY) | FY2015 |
| 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) | GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1)) |
| 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 |
| 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 present in the molecule associated with explosive properties. |
| 2 | Flammable gases (including chemically unstable gases) | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 3 | Aerosols | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Not an aerosol product. |
| 4 | Oxidizing gases | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 5 | Gases under pressure | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 6 | Flammable liquids | Category 3 |
 Warning |
H226 |
P303+P361+P353
P370+P378 P403+P235 P210 P233 P240 P241 P242 P243 P280 P501 |
From a flash point of 52 degrees C (closed cup) (GESTIS (Access on June 2015)), it was classified in Category 3. Besides, it is classified in class 6.1, subsidiary risk 3, PGII in UNRTDG (UN2611). |
| 7 | Flammable solids | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | "Liquids" according to 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 |
- |
- | - | Due to no data, the classification is not possible. |
| 10 | Pyrophoric solids | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 11 | Self-heating substances and mixtures | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | No established test method suitable for liquid substances. |
| 12 | Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Not containing metals or metalloids (B, Si, P, Ge, As, Se, Sn, Sb, Te, Bi, Po, At). |
| 13 | Oxidizing liquids | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | It is an organic compound which does not contain fluorine but contains chlorine and oxygen and the chlorine and oxygen are not chemically bonded to the elements other than carbon or hydrogen. |
| 14 | Oxidizing solids | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 15 | Organic peroxides | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | It is an organic compound that does not contain bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule. |
| 16 | Corrosive to metals | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | Due to no data, the classification is not possible. |
| Hazard class | Classification |
Pictogram Signal word |
Hazard statement (code) |
Precautionary statement (code) |
Rationale for the classification | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Oral) | Category 3 |
 Danger |
H301 |
P301+P310
P264 P270 P321 P330 P405 P501 |
Because an LD50 value of 100 to 300 mg/kg for rats is reported (PATTY (6th, 2012), ACGIH (7th, 2002), NTP TR 477 (1998)), it was classified in Category 3. |
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Dermal) | Category 3 |
Danger |
H311 |
P302+P352
P361+P364 P280 P312 P321 P405 P501 |
An LD50 value of 440 mg/kg for rats (ACGIH (7th, 2002)) and LD50 values of 480 mg/kg and about 500 mg/kg (PATTY (6th, 2012)), 530.6 mg/kg (PATTY (6th, 2012), ACGIH (7th, 2002)) for rabbits were reported for this substance of technical grade (consisting of 75% this substance and 25% 2-chloro-1-propanol). Therefore, it was classified in Category 3. Besides, 1-chloro-2-propanol and 2-chloro-1-propanol have the equivalent toxicity in acute toxicity (oral) (because an oral LD50 value of 1-chloro-2-propanol is 100 to 300 mg/kg and an oral LD50 of 2-chloro-1-propanol is 218 mg/kg, both substances are classified in Category 3). Therefore, they are considered to have the equivalent toxicity also in a dermal route. |
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases) | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours) | Category 3 |
Danger |
H331 |
P304+P340
P403+P233 P261 P271 P311 P321 P405 P501 |
From a reported LC50 value (4 hours) of 1,000 ppm for rats for this substance (ACGIH (7th, 2002)), it was classified in Category 3. Besides, a reference value in the unit of ppm was applied as vapour without mist because the LC50 value is lower than 90 % of the saturated vapour pressure concentration (6,447 ppm). |
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists) | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | Due to lack of data, the classification is not possible. |
| 2 | Skin corrosion/irritation | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - |
The classification is not possible due to lack of data. Besides, there is the information that 2-chloro-1-propanol, an isomer of this substance, is irritating to skin (HSDB (Access on June 2015)). |
| 3 | Serious eye damage/eye irritation | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - |
The classification is not possible due to lack of data. Besides, there is the information that 2-chloro-1-propanol, an isomer of this substance, is irritating to eyes (HSDB (Access on June 2015)). |
| 4 | Respiratory sensitization | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | Due to lack of data, the classification is not possible. |
| 4 | Skin sensitization | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | Due to lack of data, the classification is not possible. |
| 5 | Germ cell mutagenicity | Category 2 |
 Warning |
H341 |
P308+P313
P201 P202 P280 P405 P501 |
There are reports on this substance of technical grade (75% this substance and 25% 2-chloro-1-propanol). As for in vivo, it is reported a micronucleus test using peripheral blood of mice by drinking water administration was negative, however, it is reported a chromosomal aberration test using bone marrow cells of rats by oral administration was positive and a chromosomal aberration test using mammalian (details unknown) was positive (NTP DB (Access on June 2015), ACGIH (7th, 2002)). As for in vitro, it is reported a bacterial reverse mutation test, a mouse lymphoma test, a chromosomal aberration test, a micronucleus test and a sister chromatid exchange test using cultured mammalian cells were all positive. (NTP DB (Access on June 2015), ACGIH (7th, 2002), NTP TR 477 (1998), PATTY (6th, 2012)) Because there is the information that 1-chloro-2-propanol is slightly less mutagenic than an isomer mixture in ACGIH (2002) and they are considered to show almost the equivalent mutagenicity, it was classified based on the data of an isomer mixture. From the above, because positive results were observed in multiple in vitro tests in addition to positive result of in vivo chromosomal aberration tests, it was classified in Category 2. |
| 6 | Carcinogenicity | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - |
There is no information of carcinogenicity in humans by exposure to this substance only. In a cohort study with male workers in plant manufacturing chlorohydrin compounds including this substance and 2-chloro-1-propanol (an isomer of this substance), increased mortality from pancreatic carcinoma and lymphohematopoietic tumors was first reported. However, later the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) conducted a human carcinogenicity evaluation on related compounds including propylene chlorohydrin (another name of 2-chloro-1-propanol) (IARC vol. 20 (1978)) and considered the report of carcinogenicity at the plant manufacturing chlorohydrin compounds was insufficient as the epidemiological evidence of carcinogenicity. The process in which the IARC concluded that there is no increased carcinogenic risk for any tumors is quoted in ACGIH (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). Furthermore, following the IARC evaluation, in the epidemiological studies of other three chlorohydrin compounds production facilities, it is also reported that there is no association between work in the plants and an increase in pancreatic cancer incidences (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). However, ACGIH pointed out that the follow-up period of the report that concluded no association was a short time of 25 years against the 35-year cohort follow-up period of the study in which the increased mortality from pancreatic carcinoma was reported, and ACGIH made a remark that they could not concluded yet if there is the association between exposure to this substance and carcinogenicity from the epidemiological studies (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). Related to this, in a cohort study on death cases from pancreatic carcinoma and lymphohematopoietic tumors of 1,361 male workers at an ethylene and propylene chlorohydrin production plant in the U.S., no increased risk of pancreatic carcinoma and lymphohematopoietic tumors was described (PATTY (6th, 2012)). On the other hand, as for experimental animals, there was no increased incidence of tumors in any tissues in a test in which rats or mice were administrated for two years in drinking water with this substance of technical grade (consisting of 75% this substance and 25% 2-chloro-1-propanol) (ACGIH (7th, 2002), PATTY (6th, 2012)). Also, this substance was also negative in a bioassay using an increased number of pulmonary adenomas in strain A mice as a parameter (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). As above, there is no evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. However, because of the multiple positive results in the genotoxicity tests on this substance and the judgment that no conclusion could be reached on the association between exposure to this substance and human carcinogenicity from the human epidemiological data, ACGIH classified this substance and 2-chloro-1-propanol in A4 in carcinogenicity (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). From the above, taking the ACGIHfs position into account, the substance was classified as "Classification not possible" in this hazard class. |
| 7 | Reproductive toxicity | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - |
There is no information of human reproductive toxicity on this substance. As for experimental animals, there is the information that as a result of a continuous breeding test using rats in an oral route (drinking water), this substance causes no adverse effects on fertility over F0 and F1 generations and causes adverse effects on male reproductive organs such as testis weights and abnormal sperm production but no adverse effects on female reproductive organs (Environ. Health Perspect., vol. 105, Suppl. 1, 291-292 (1997)). Also, as for a teratogenicity test, there is the information that in a pilot test in which pregnant rats were administered by gavage on gestational days 6 to 15, no malformation effects on the fetuses were observed in up to 125 mg/kg/day (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). However, a statistical analysis was not conducted and the test conditions such as an animal number and the details of results are not clear. There are no available data for the classification including this. Besides, in a continuous breeding test in which this substance of technical grade (consisting of 75% this substance and 25% 2-chloro-1-propanol) was orally administered (in drinking water) to rats, it is reported no adverse effects on fertility of parent animals were observed because the average number of litters per pair was not different from that of the control group even at the dose where lower maternal body weights at deliveries and during a nursing period and lower body weights of F1 offspring persistently until the time of weaning were observed (ACGIH (7th, 2002), PATTY (6th, 2012)). From the above, it is considered that this substance including one of technical grade has no effects on fertility, but there are not sufficient test reports on developmental toxicity effects including teratogenicity. Therefore, it was classified as "Classification not possible" due to lack of data. |
| 8 | Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure | Category 3 (Narcotic effects) |
 Warning |
H336 |
P304+P340
P403+P233 P261 P271 P312 P405 P501 |
As for experimental animals, although it is not possible to identify this substance alone or an isomer mixture, narcosis were observed by oral administration in rats and guinea pigs (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). There is no knowledge on humans. From the above, it was classified in Category 3 (narcotic effects). |
| 9 | Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure |
Category 1 (haemal system, liver), Category 2 (kidney, pancreas) |
Danger Warning |
H372
H373 |
P260
P264 P270 P314 P501 |
There is no information on humans of this substance. There is no information on repeated dose toxicity of this substance alone but repeated dose toxicity information was obtained on this substance of technical grade (this substance: 75%, 2-chloro-1-propanol: 25%). In ACGIH (7th, 2002), TLV-TWA of this substance and 2-chloro-1-propanol was the same 1 ppm based on the data of this substance of technical grade. Therefore, assuming that the toxicity of each isomer is equivalent, this substance was classified based on the data on this substance of technical grade. As for experimental animals, in a 14-week drinking water administration test using rats, minimal to mild anemia at 5 mg/kg/day or higher corresponding to Category 1, cytoplasmic vacuolization of the liver at 10 mg/kg/day or above corresponding to Category 2, and degeneration/fatty change of pancreatic acinar cells at 100 mg/kg/day or higher were observed. Besides these, degeneration of tubular epithelium in the kidney or decreased epididymis weights, and increased abnormal sperm were found at 220 mg/kg/day corresponding to "Not classified." In a 14-week drinking water administration test using mice, cytoplasmic vacuolization of the liver at 5 mg/kg/day or higher corresponding to Category 1 and tubular vacuolization of the kidney at 100 mg/kg/day corresponding to Category 2 were observed. Besides these, degeneration/fatty change of pancreatic acinar cells and slight anemia were found at 220 mg/kg/day corresponding to "Not classified" (NTP TR477 (1998), ACGIH (7th, 2002), PATTY (6th, 2012)). Other than the above, in a 2 to 15-time inhalation exposure test using rats, congestion and perivascular edema in the lung was observed within a range of Category 1 and in dead cases, enlargement/vacuolization of hepatocytes in the liver and interstitial pneumonia in the lung were observed. However, because the data are insufficient due to small animal numbers of 2 to 4/sex/group and small numbers of administration, they were not used for the classification. Therefore, the substance was classified in Category 1 (blood system, liver), Category 2 (kidney, pancreas) in an oral route. |
| 10 | Aspiration hazard | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | Due to lack of data, the classification is not possible. |
| Hazard class | Classification |
Pictogram Signal word |
Hazard statement (code) |
Precautionary statement (code) |
Rationale for the classification | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Acute) | Not classified |
- |
- | - | It was classified as "Not classified" from 96-hour LC50 = 245000 micro g/L for fish (Pimephales promelas) (AQUIRE, 2016). |
| 11 | Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term) | Not classified |
- |
- | - |
Reliable chronic toxicity data were not obtained. Because it is not poorly water soluble (water solubility = 138200 mg/L, PHYSPROP Database, 2009) and is classified as "Not classified" in acute toxicity, it was classified as "Not classified." |
| 12 | Hazardous to the ozone layer | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | No data. |
NOTE:
|
* A blank or "-" in a cell of classification denotes that the classification of the hazard class was not conducted. * Hazard_statement_and/or_Precautionary_statement will show when hovering the mouse over a code of Hazard_statement_and/or_Precautionary_statement. Hazard_statement_and/or_Precautionary_statement are also provided in the Excel file. * 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. * Codes assigned to each of the hazard statements and codes for each of the precautionary statement are based on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals iGHSj in United Nations. |