NITE - Chemical Management Field

GHS Classification Results by the Japanese Government

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	598-78-7
Chemical Name	2-Chloropropionic acid
Substance ID	R02-B-036-MHLW, MOE
Classification year (FY)	FY2020
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 (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)	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 (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule. It was classified as "Not classified."
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products. It was classified as "Not classified."
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It was classified as "Not classified" from a flash point of 107 deg C (closed cup) (NFPA (14th, 2010)).
7	Flammable solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
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. It was classified as "Not classified."
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It was classified as "Not classified" because it is estimated that it does not ignite at normal temperatures from an autoignition temperature of 500 deg C (NFPA (14th, 2010)).
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
11	Self-heating substances and mixtures	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification is not possible because 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). It was classified as "Not classified."
13	Oxidizing liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	The substance is an organic compound containing chlorine and oxygen (but not fluorine) which are chemically bonded only to carbon or hydrogen. It was classified as "Not classified."
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule. It was classified as "Not classified."
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available. Besides, there is information that it attacks many metals (ICSC (2006)).
17	Desensitized explosives	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule. It was classified as "Not classified."

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	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 4 from (1) - (3). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats: males: 800 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2001), GESTIS (Access on May 2020), HSDB (Access on May 2020)) (2) LD50 for rats: 800 mg/kg (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015), GESTIS (Access on May 2020)) (3) LD50 for rats: females: 15.4 mmol/kg (1,671 mg/kg) (HSDB (Access on May 2020))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Category 2	Danger	H310	P302+P352 P361+P364 P262 P264 P270 P280 P310 P321 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 2 from (1) - (3). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for guinea pigs: 126 mg/kg (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)) (2) LD50 for guinea pigs: 126-1,258 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2001), HSDB (Access on May 2020)) (3) LD50 for guinea pigs: 127-1,270 mg/kg (GESTIS (Access on May 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. Besides, the information source in the previous classification was not adopted as the rationale because it could not be confirmed at this time.
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] 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	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 1 from (1) - (3). [Evidence Data] (1) This substance was corrosive to the eye, skin, and respiratory tract, and contact with the skin or entry into the eye caused erythema, pain, and severe burns (ACGIH (7th, 2001), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)). (2) In a skin irritation test with rabbits on this substance, there was localized necrosis with later formation of a scab (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)). (3) The pH of this substance was < 1 (20 deg C) (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)).
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 1	Danger	H318	P305+P351+P338 P280 P310	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 1 from (1) - (4). [Evidence Data] (1) This substance was corrosive to the eye, skin, and respiratory tract, and contact with the skin or entry into the eye caused erythema, pain, and severe burns (ACGIH (7th, 2001), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)). (2) In an eye irritation test with rabbits using a 50% aqueous solution of this substance (1 drop, pH 0.5-1), a milky opacity of the cornea and necrosis were observed after 1 hour (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)). (3) The pH of this substance was < 1 (20 deg C) (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)). (4) This substance was classified in Category 1 in skin corrosion/irritation.
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) This substance was negative in a skin sensitization test in guinea pigs (ACGIH (7th, 2001), GESTIS (Access on May 2020), HSDB (Access on May 2020), REACH registration dossier (Access on July 2020)).
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data. [Evidence Data] (1) As for in vitro, it was reported to be negative in a bacterial reverse mutation test (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)).
6	Carcinogenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] No data available.
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification was not possible due to lack of data. [Reference Data, etc.] (1) In a two-generation reproduction toxicity test with rats given an optical isomer (L-CPA) of this substance by feeding, at a dose at which toxicity effects in parental animals (neurologic symptoms (biting the bars of the cage, erection of the tail, etc., which appeared to be triggered by external stimuli, unsteady gait, tremors, and clonic convulsions), sacrifice in emergency) were observed, an increase in deaths (details unknown) was observed in pups (REACH registration dossier (Access on Jun 2020)). (2) In an oral toxicity test with rats dosed by feeding for 38 days at the concentration of 0.1% (78 mg/kg/day), 42 days at the concentration of 0.25% (171 mg/kg/day), and 7 days at the concentration of 1% (320 mg/kg/day), atrophy of the testes and seminiferous epithelium was observed in each dose group (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances, Vol. 13, (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)). (3) In an oral toxicity test in which male rats were administered Na salt of this substance at 353 mg/kg/day for 12 weeks, adynamia of the hindlimbs, abnormal gait, and reduced body weight gain were observed. As effects on the nervous system, a significant delay in conduction velocity of the tibial nerve and sural nerve and significant reductions of the tibial nerve area, perimeter, and diameter were observed. As effects on the male reproductive system, decreases in absolute weight of the testes and epididymis, maturation arrest of the testes, degeneration of reproductive cells, a marked decrease of reproductive cells, an absence of mature sperm cells or sperms in the seminiferous tubule, and severe edema in the seminiferous tubules were seen, and the seminiferous tubules having only Sertoli cells were also observed (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances, Vol. 13, (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)).
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 2 (central nervous system), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation)	Warning	H371 H335	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P405 P501 P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (3), it was classified in Category 2 (central nervous system) and Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation). Available information was carefully examined and the classification result was changed. [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that vapors would be expected to be irritating to the respiratory tract (ACGIH (7th, 2001)). (2) In a 4-hour inhalation exposure test with rats (700 mg/m3, within the range for Category 1), irritation to the eyes and respiratory organs was observed on the first day after the exposure (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)). (3) In an acute oral toxicity test with rats (800 mg/kg bw, within the range for Category 2), hematuria, cramps, exhaustion, and tremor were observed, and cerebellar damage was observed in surviving animals (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)).
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 2 (central nervous system, reproductive organs (male))	Warning	H373	P260 P314 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) and (2), it was classified in Category 2 (central nervous system, reproductive organs (males)). [Evidence Data] (1) In a repeated dose toxicity study with rats dosed by feeding (0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 1% (equivalent to 78, 171, 220, 207 to 330 mg/kg/day), at 0.1% for 38 days, at 0.25% for 42 days, and tests at 0.5% and higher were terminated on the sixth and the fourth day, respectively, because general conditions of rats deteriorated and some rats died), atrophy of the testes and seminiferous epithelium (seminiferous tubule epithelial cells) was observed at or above 0.1% (equivalent to 78 mg/kg/day (converted guidance value: 33 mg/kg/day, within the range for Category 2)) and reduced body weight gain, signs of ataxia, increased sensitivity to stimulation (particularly sound), and necrosis of cerebellar granule cells were observed at 0.25% (equivalent to 171 mg/kg/day (converted guidance value: 80 mg/kg/day, within the range for Category 2)) (ACGIH (7th, 2001), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances, Vol. 13, (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)). (2) In a 3-month oral toxicity test with rats dosed by feeding, transient sensitivity reaction was observed at 62 mg/kg/day (within the range for Category 2), and reduced body weight gain, ataxia, enhanced startle reaction to sound, reduced grip strength of the forelimbs and hindlimbs, spasm, tremors, landing footsplay of the hindlimbs, sensitivity reaction, ataxia, tremors, increases in serum ALT and ALP, multifocal necrosis of ganglion cells in the granular layer of the cerebellar cortex, and also a decrease in testicular weight associated with degeneration of the seminiferous epithelium in males were observed at 325 mg/kg/day (exceeding Category 2) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances, Vol. 13, (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)). [Reference Data, etc.] (3) In an oral toxicity test in which male rats were administered Na salt of this substance at 353 mg/kg/day for 12 weeks, adynamia of the hindlimbs, abnormal gait, and reduced body weight gain were observed. As effects on the nervous system, a significant delay in conduction velocity of the tibial nerve and sural nerve and significant reductions of the tibial nerve area, perimeter, and diameter were observed. As effects on the male reproductive system, decreases in absolute weight of the testes and epididymis, maturation arrest of the testes, degeneration of reproductive cells, a marked decrease of reproductive cells, an absence of mature sperm cells or sperms in the seminiferous tubule, and severe edema in the seminiferous tubules were seen, and the seminiferous tubules having only Sertoli cells were also observed (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances, Vol. 13, (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)).
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 3	- -	H402	P273 P501	It was classified in Category 3 from 72-hour EC50 = 73.4 mg/L for algae (Raphidocelis subcapitata) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)). The classification result was changed from the previous classification by reviewing existing information and using new information.
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Not classified	- -	-	-	If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified as "Not classified" because it was rapidly degradable (a 4-week degradation rate by BOD: 97% (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, METI, 2001)) and due to 72-hour NOEC = 25 mg/L for algae (Raphidocelis subcapitata) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)). 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 was rapidly degradable (a 4-week degradation rate by BOD: 97% (Biodegradation and Bioconcentration Results of Existing Chemical Substances under the Chemical Substances Control Law, METI, 2001)) and due to a low bioaccumulation estimate (log Kow < -2.4 (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015))), despite 48-hour EC50 = 74.4 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 13 (Ministry of the Environment, 2015)). From the above results, it was classified as "Not classified". The classification result was changed from the previous classification by reviewing existing information and using new information.
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