GHS Classification Result

日本語で表示



GENERAL INFORMATION
Item Information
CAS RN 108-99-6
Chemical Name 3-Methylpyridine
Substance ID H28-B-042, C-057B
Classification year (FY) FY2016
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 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

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
 From a flash point of 38 deg C (closed cup) (ICSC (1999)), it was classified in Category 3. It is classified in Class 3, PG III (UN2313, Picolines) in UNRTDG.
7 Flammable solids 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 Not classified
-
-
- -  It is estimated that it does not ignite at normal temperatures from an autoignition temperature of 500 deg C (Slovent pocket book (1997)).
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
 Based on the LD50 values of 400 to 800 mg/kg for rats (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007)), and 400 mg/kg for rats (NTP TR580 (2014)), this substance was classified in Category 4.
1 Acute toxicity (Dermal) Category 3


Danger
H311 P302+P352
P361+P364
P280
P312
P321
P405
P501
 It is reported that the LD50 values for rabbits were 800 to 2,000 mg/kg (PATTY (6th, 2012)). Since these values correspond to Category 3 to 4, the category with the higher hazard was adopted. It was classified in Category 3.
 Although it is reported that the LD50 value for rabbits is < 1,000 mg/kg (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007)), therefore, it was not adopted for the classification since it is not possible to specify the category from this value.
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
 It is reported that the LC50 (4 hours) values for rats were 1,300 to 3,300 ppm (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007), PATTY (6th, 2012)). Since these values correspond to Category 3 to 4, the category with the higher hazard was adopted. It was classified in Category 3.
 Since the LC50 value is less than 90% of the saturated vapor concentration (7,985 ppm), a reference value in the unit of ppm was applied as vapor without mist.
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists) Classification not possible
-
-
- -  Classification not possible due to lack of data.
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
 Since in a skin irritation test using rabbits (applied for 4 hours), a corrosive nature was observed (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007)), this substance was classified in Category 1.
3 Serious eye damage/eye irritation Category 1


Danger
H318 P305+P351+P338
P280
P310
 Severe irritation was observed in eye irritation tests using rabbits, and symptoms were also observed after 21 days (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007)), therefore, this substance was classified in Category 1.
4 Respiratory sensitization Classification not possible
-
-
- -  Classification not possible due to lack of data.
4 Skin sensitization Classification not possible
-
-
- -  It is described in Chemical Substance Hazard Data (CERI, 2002) that the skin sensitization was not shown in a skin sensitization test using guinea pigs. However, because there is only the one report, it was classified as "Classification not possible."
5 Germ cell mutagenicity Classification not possible
-
-
- -  This substance 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, micronucleus tests using peripheral blood from mice were negative (NTP TR580 (2014)). As for in vitro, bacterial reverse mutation tests and a mammalian cell gene mutation test were negative (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007), NTP TR580 (2014), PATTY (6th, 2012), HSDB (Access on June 2016)).
6 Carcinogenicity Category 2


Warning
H351 P308+P313
P201
P202
P280
P405
P501
 In a 2-year carcinogenic study using rats or mice administered orally (drinking water), in rats, an increase in the incidences of alveolar/bronchiolar adenoma and alveolar/bronchiolar adenoma or carcinoma (combined) were observed in females, but no increase in tumors was observed in males, and in mice, an increase in alveolar/bronchiolar adenoma in males were observed, along with increase in incidences of hepatocellular adenomas or carcinomas, and combined incidence of hepatocellular adenomas or hepatoblastoma, increase in the incidence of alveolar/bronchiolar carcinoma and increase in the incidence of alveolar/bronchiolar adenoma or carcinoma (combined) in females were observed (NTP TR580 (2014)). From the results of this study, it was concluded that for carcinogenicity there is no evidence in male rats, some evidence in female rats, equivocal evidence in male mice and clear evidence in female mice (NTP TR580 (2014)).
 In addition, NTP considered that, in this discussion, the lung is the target organ for this substance, and that lung tumors found in female rats and male and female mice were induced by this substance (NTP TR580 (2014)).
 Therefore, considering the weight of evidence, it was judged to be appropriate that this substance was classified in Category 2.
7 Reproductive toxicity Classification not possible
-
-
- -  Classification not possible due to lack of data.
8 Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects)


Warning
H335
H336
P304+P340
P403+P233
P261
P271
P312
P405
P501
 There is a description that the vapor of this substance is irritating to the respiratory tract (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 5 (Ministry of the Environment, 2006)). Also, in acute toxicity studies using rats, mice or rabbits administered by oral, inhalation or dermal, symptoms including lethargy, loss of consciousness, prostration, labored breath, abnormal gait and loss of the righting reflex were observed (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007)).
 Therefore, this substance was classified in Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects).
 In a previous classification, based on two case reports on a worker who was exposed to the vapor of this substance and showed autonomic disturbances, bradycardia, hypotonia, and mild central nervous system disturbances etc. (the Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007), PATTY (6th, 2012)), the substance was classified in Category 1 (nervous system). However, as a result of careful examination of the data, it was found that the original papers are the same and it is highly possible that these cases are the same one.
 It was judged that one case was not enough for evidence to adopt the nervous system as the target organ, and the classification result was changed.
9 Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure Category 1 (liver)


Danger
H372 P260
P264
P270
P314
P501
 As for humans, in occupational exposure, in a male worker exposed by mainly this substance for 11 years without exposure protection measures, headaches, nausea, right hypochondralgia, aphonia and rash were seen (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007)). It is also reported that increases in ALT activity and AST activity and bilirubinemia, suggesting hepatocyte toxicity were observed. These findings suggest the possibility of liver disorder in humans (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007)). In addition, for this case, increases in (S) GOT activity and in (S) GPT activity were reported in Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 5 (Ministry of the Environment, 2006), PATTY (6th, 2012).
 As for experimental animals, there are not enough reports. It is reported that in a 2-week repeated exposure study using rats by inhalation, there were no effects other than increase in liver weights, which had recovery properties (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 5 (Ministry of the Environment, 2006)).
 As described above, it was classified in Category 1 (liver) because it showed the possibility of effects on the liver in humans.
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 3
-
-
H402 P273
P501
 From 72-hour EC50 = 15 mg/L for algae (Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 2 (Ministry of the Environment, 2003)), it was classified in Category 3.
11 Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term) Category 2


-
H411 P273
P391
P501
 If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified in Category 2 due to being not rapidly degradable (a degradation rate by BOD: 3% (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, 2002)), 72-hour NOEC (r) = 1.0 mg/L for algae (Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata), and 21-day NOEC (reproduction) = 1.0 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (both Initial Risk Assessment (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007), Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Environment Agency in Japan (Environment Agency, 1996), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 2 (Ministry of the Environment, 2003)).
 If acute toxicity data are used for a trophic level for which chronic toxicity data are not obtained, then it is classified as "Not classified" because it is not rapidly degradable (a degradation rate by BOD: 3% (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, 2002)), but no bioaccumulation is estimated (BCF was < 2.2-< 3.0 and < 24-< 29 when test concentration was set at 0.50 mg/L and 0.05 mg/L (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, 2002)), and 96h LC50 for fish (Oryzias latipes) is >100 mg/L (Initial Risk Assessment (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007), Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Environment Agency in Japan (Environment Agency, 1996), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 2 (Ministry of the Environment, 2003)).
 It was classified in Category 2 by drawing a comparison between the above results.
12 Hazardous to the ozone layer Classification not possible
-
-
- -  No data available.


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 (GHS) in United Nations.

To GHS Information