NITE - Chemical Management Field

GHS Classification Results by the Japanese Government

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	38640-62-9
Chemical Name	Diisopropylnaphthalene
Substance ID	R02-A-097-METI, MOE
Classification year (FY)	FY2020
Ministry who conducted the classification	Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI)/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 (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
UN GHS document (External link)	UN GHS document
Definitions/Abbreviations (Excel file)	Definitions/Abbreviations
Model Label by MHLW (External link)
Model SDS by MHLW (External link)
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 (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products.
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	A flash point was 152-156 deg C (closed cup) (GESTIS (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
7	Flammable solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
8	Self-reactive substances and mixtures	Not classified (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 > 425 deg C (ECHA (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not classified (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 classified (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 classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no oxygen, fluorine or chlorine.
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule.
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.
17	Desensitized explosives	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.

HEALTH HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification
1	Acute toxicity (Oral)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1), (2). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats (males): > 2,000 mg/kg (OECD TG 401, GLP) (Toxicity Testing Results for Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (year: unknown)) (2) LD50 for rats (females): > 2,000 mg/kg (OECD TG 401, GLP) (Toxicity Testing Results for Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (year: unknown))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1), (2). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats: > 4,500 mg/kg (OECD TG 402, GLP) (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)) (2) LD50 for rats: > 9,250 mg/kg (OECD TG 402) (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Liquid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). Besides, it was regarded as a test on mist because an exposure concentration exceeded the saturated vapor pressure concentration (0.0057 mg/L). [Evidence Data] (1) LC50 for rats (4 hours): > 5.64 mg/L (OECD TG 403, GLP) (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020))
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) It is reported that in a skin irritation test with rabbits (n = 3) (OECD TG 404, GLP, occlusive, 4-hour application, 14-day observation), all the animals showed desquamation after 7 days but recovered after 14 days, and the primary dermal irritation index (PDII) was calculated as 1.5 (erythema/eschar score: 1/1/1, edema score: 0.3/0/0.7) (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). [Reference Data, etc.] (2) It is reported that in a skin irritation test with rabbits (n = 6) (OECD TG 404, occlusive, 4-hour application, 72-hour observation), slight erythema was seen by 72 hours (mean erythema/eschar score: 0.8, mean edema score: 0) (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 2	Warning	H319	P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P264 P280	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 2 from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) It is reported that in an eye irritation test with rabbits (n = 6) (OECD TG 405, 72-hour observation), conjunctival redness persisted during the 72-hour observation period after application in all the animals (corneal opacity score: 0/0/0/0/0/0, iritis score: 0/0/0/0/0/0, conjunctival redness score: 2/2/2/1.3/2/2, chemosis score: 1.3/1.3/1.7/1.3/0.3/1.3) (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). [Reference Data, etc.] (2) It is reported that in an eye irritation test with rabbits (n = 3) (OECD TG 405, GLP, 72-hour observation), slight conjunctival redness was observed after 1 hour in all the animals but disappeared after 24 hours (corneal opacity score: 0/0/0, iritis score: 0/0/0, conjunctival redness score: 0/0/0, chemosis score: 0/0/0) (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.
4	Skin sensitization	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) It is reported that in a Buehler test with guinea pigs (n = 10) (OECD TG 406, GLP, topical administration: undiluted), the positive rate was 0% (0/10) at both 24, 48 hours after a challenge (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). [Reference Data, etc.] (2) It is reported that in a maximization test with guinea pigs (n = 20) (equivalent to OECD TG 406, GLP, intradermal administration: 10% solution), the positive rate in the test group was 85% (17/20), 90% (18/20) at 24, 48 hours after a challenge, but the positive rate in the negative control group (a challenge without intradermal administration) was 35% (7/20), 100% (20/20) at 24, 48 hours after a challenge, and no significant difference was seen between the groups (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (5), it was classified as "Not classified." [Evidence Data] (1) In a micronucleus test using the bone marrow cells of mice (OECD TG 474, single intraperitoneal injection, GLP), negative results were reported (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). (2) In a bacterial reverse mutation test, negative results were reported (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020), JECDB (Accessed Dec. 2020)). (3) In a gene mutation test using the mouse lymphoma cells (L5178Y) (OECD TG 476, GLP), negative results were reported (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). (4) In a chromosome aberration test using the cultured mammalian cells (CHL) (OECD TG 473, GLP), positive (+S9) and negative (-S9) results were reported (JECDB (Accessed Dec. 2020)). (5) In a chromosome aberration test using the cultured mammalian cells (CHO) (OECD TG 473, GLP), negative results were reported (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
6	Carcinogenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification was not possible due to lack of data. [Reference Data, etc.] (1) It was reported that in a two-year combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study with rats dosed by feeding (in a group of 60 rats including 13 rats for interim sacrifice), reduced body weight gain was observed at two high-dose groups (600 and 1,500 ppm), and a reduction in the survival rate due to pneumonia was observed in the administrated groups (At 24 months after administration, the survival rates in three lower dose groups were 43 to 49%, and those in the highest dose group (males and females): 38.3 and 21.3% vs the control group: 72.3 and 53.2%). There was no difference in the incidence of tumors between the control and administrated groups at doses up to 1,500 ppm (males/females: 79/92 mg/kg/day). It was reported that this substance did not show any carcinogenic potential by administration (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification was not possible due to lack of data. In (1), no developmental toxicity effect was observed, but there was no data available on effects on fertility. [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that in a developmental toxicity study with rats dosed by gavage (GLP, days 6-15 of gestation), no developmental toxicity was observed (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 3 (Respiratory tract irritation)	Warning	H335	P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1), it was classified in Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation). [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that in an acute inhalation (mist) toxicity test with rats (OECD TG 403, GLP, for 4 hours), slight to moderate epistaxis, slight to moderate physiological depressive symptoms (hunched posture, piloerection, distended abdomen, tremors, impaired breathing) and red spots in the lung were observed at 5.64 mg/L (in the range corresponding to "Not classified") (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). [Reference Data, etc.] (2) It was reported that in an acute oral toxicity test with rats (OECD TG 401, GLP), no effect was observed at 2,000 mg/kg (upper limit of Category 2) (Toxicity Testing Results for Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, year unknown). (3) It was reported that in an acute oral toxicity test (OECD TG 401) with rats dosed at 1,730, 2,210, 2,780, 3,460, 4,320, 5,380 and 6,720 mg/kg (males) and 2,780, 3,460, 4,320, 5,380 and 6,720 mg/kg (females) (from the range for Category 2 through the range corresponding to "Not classified"), a reduction in activity, a reduction in muscle tonus, toe walking, diarrhea, incontinence, hemic nasal discharge, and emaciation were observed at unknown doses (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). (4) It was reported that in an acute oral toxicity test with rats (OECD TG 401) dosed at 9,250, 13,875, 16,188 and 18,500 mg/kg (in the range corresponding to "Not classified"), apathy, ataxia, slight cyanosis, piloerection, and slightly reduced respiration rate (from 1 hour to 7 days) were observed at unknown doses (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). (5) It was reported that in an acute dermal toxicity test with rats (OECD TG 402, GLP), no effect was observed at LD50 > 4,500 mg/kg (in the range corresponding to "Not classified") (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)). (6) It was reported that in an acute dermal toxicity test with rats (OECD TG 402), no effect was observed at LD50 > 9,250 mg/kg (in the range corresponding to "Not classified") (REACH registration dossier (Accessed Dec. 2020)).
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	＜5次英訳＞ [Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1), it was classified as "Not classified" in the oral route. However, there was not sufficient information available for classification in the other routes. Therefore, classification was not possible due to lack of data. [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that in a 28-day oral toxicity test with rats dosed by gavage, higher total cholesterol levels (females) were observed at 30 mg/kg/day (converted guidance value: 9.33 mg/kg/day, within the range for Category 1); liver effects (higher absolute and relative weight) (males) were observed at 100 mg/kg/day (converted guidance value: 31.1 mg/kg/day, within the range for Category 2); and higher total bilirubin levels, lower TG levels (males), liver effects (slight centrilobular hepatocyte hypertrophy, higher relative liver weight (females)), higher APTT/PT levels or a trend of higher APTT/PT levels, an increase in water intake (females), an increase in urine volume (females), and kidney effects (higher absolute and relative weight) (females) were observed at 300 mg/kg/day (converted guidance value: 93.3 mg/kg/day, within the range for Category 2). It was reported that the hepatocyte hypertrophy was considered to be a change related to the administration of the test substance (Toxicity Testing Results for Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, year unknown).
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] 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 Short term (Acute)	Category 1	Warning	H400	P273 P391 P501	It was classified in Category 1 from 48-hour EC50 = 0.035 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Ministry of the Environment in Japan (Ministry of the Environment, 2004)).
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Category 1	Warning	H410	P273 P391 P501	If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified in Category 1 because it was not rapidly degradable (a 4-week degradation rate by BOD: 0% (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, METI, 1977)) and due to 72-hour NOEC = 0.071 mg/L for algae (Raphidocelis subcapitata) (Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Ministry of the Environment in Japan (Ministry of the Environment, 2004)). If acute toxicity data are used for a trophic level for which chronic toxicity data are not obtained, then it is classified in Category 1 because it was not rapidly degradable (a 4-week degradation rate by BOD: 0% (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, METI, 1977)) and due to 48-hour EC50 = 0.035 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Ministry of the Environment in Japan (Ministry of the Environment, 2004)). From the above results, it was classified in Category 1.
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.
An asterisk “*” in the column of “Classification” denotes that “Not classified (or No applicable)” and/or “Classification not possible” is applicable. Details are described in the column of “Rationale for the classification”. If no English translation is available for “Rationale for the classification,” please refer to the Japanese version of the results.

To GHS Information