NITE - Chemical Management Field

GHS Classification Results by the Japanese Government

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	7786-34-7
Chemical Name	Dimethyl 1-methoxycarbonyl-1-propene-2-yl phosphate; Mevinphos
Substance ID	R02-B-056-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" based on a flash point of 175 deg C (o.c.) (ICSC (2008)). Besides, because it was changed to 175 deg C (ICSC (2008)) from data used in the previous classification (ICSC (1998)), the category was revised.
7	Flammable solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
8	Self-reactive substances and mixtures	Type G	- -	-	-	There is a chemical group associated with self-reactive properties (P-O) present in the molecule, but because it is classified in Division 6.1 in UNRTDG (UN3018), and it is considered to be not applicable to self-reactive substances and mixtures, hazards of the highest precedence, it was classified in Type G.
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	Because it is classified in Division 6.1 in UNRTDG (UN3018), and it does not correspond to pyrophoric substances, hazards of the highest precedence, it was classified as "Not classified."
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	- -	-	-	It contains a metalloid (P), but it was classified as "Not classified" because it is estimated that it does not react vigorously with water from information that it is entirely mixable with water (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)).
13	Oxidizing liquids	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	The substance is an organic compound containing oxygen (but not fluorine or chlorine), which is chemically bonded to the element other than carbon or hydrogen (P). However, the classification is not possible due to no data.
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 iron, stainless steel, and brass (ICSC (2008)).
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 1	Danger	H300	P301+P310 P264 P270 P321 P330 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 1 from (1) - (7). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats: 2.2 mg/kg (JMPR (1997)) (2) LD50 for rats: females: 2.2 mg/kg, males: 4.1 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)) (3) LD50 for rats: females: 2.3 mg/kg, males: 3.5 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)) (4) LD50 for rats: 3-12 mg/kg (EHC 63 (1986)) (5) LD50 for rats: females: 3.4 mg/kg, males: 6.1 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2003)) (6) LD50 for rats: females: 3.7 mg/kg, males: 6.1 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)) (7) LD50 for rats: females: 6.0 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2003))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Category 1	Danger	H310	P302+P352 P361+P364 P262 P264 P270 P280 P310 P321 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 1 from (1) - (8). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats: 1-90 mg/kg (EHC 63 (1986)) (2) LD50 for rats: 4 mg/kg (IPCS PIM G001 (1998)) (3) LD50 for rats: females: 4.2 mg/kg, males: 4.7 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2003), Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)) (4) LD50 for rats: > 20 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)) (5) LD50 for rabbits: 16-34 mg/kg (EHC 63 (1986)) (6) LD50 for rabbits: males: 33.8 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2003)) (7) LD50 for rabbits: males: 51 mg/kg, females: 60 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)) (8) LD50 for rabbits: males: 57 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013))
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)	Category 1	Danger	H330	P304+P340 P403+P233 P260 P271 P284 P310 P320 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 1 from (1) - (3). Besides, because exposure concentrations were higher than the saturated vapor pressure concentration (0.002 mg/L), a reference value in the unit of mg/L was applied as mist. [Evidence Data] (1) LC50 for rats (1 hour): 0.0098 mg/L (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 0.0025 mg/L) (ACGIH (7th, 2003)) (2) LC50 for rats (1 hour): females: 14 ppm (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 0.033 mg/L) (HSDB (Access on May 2020)) (3) LC50 for rats (1 hour): 0.132 mg/L (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 0.033 mg/L) (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)) (4) Vapor pressure of this substance: 0.000128 mmHg (20 deg C) (HSDB (Access on May 2020)) (converted value for the saturated vapor pressure concentration: 0.002 mg/L) [Reference Data, etc.] (5) LC50 for rats: females: 7.3 mg/L, males: 12 mg/L: all animals died after 3 hours (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013))
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1) - (3). The classification result was changed due to new data obtained. [Evidence Data] (1) In a skin irritation test with rabbits, slight erythema in 5/6 animals and edema in all animals were observed, but most of the effects had disappeared by 72 hours (JMPR (1996)). (2) An eye irritation test and a skin irritation test with rabbits were conducted, and slight irritation to the eye mucous membrane and skin was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)). (3) In skin irritation tests, there was a report that reactions that were reversible within 72 hours were observed, while there was a report that symptoms were completely lacking (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)).
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1) - (4). The classification result was changed due to new data obtained. [Evidence Data] (1) In an eye irritation test with rabbits, slight temporary ocular irritation was observed (JMPR (1996)). (2) An eye irritation test and a skin irritation test with NZW rabbits were conducted, and slight irritation to the eye mucous membrane and skin was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)). (3) The irritative effects of this substance on the rabbit eyes were minor (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)). (4) This substance is not known to be an eye irritant (HSDB (Access on May 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), (2). The classification result was changed due to new data obtained. [Evidence Data] (1) In a skin sensitization test in which this substance (purity 93.6%) was applied to guinea pigs, it was reported to be negative (JMPR (1996)). (2) This substance was not sensitizing in guinea pigs (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013), GESTIS (Access on May 2020)).
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1) - (3). [Evidence Data] (1) As for in vivo, it was reported to be negative in a dominant lethal test with mice and a chromosomal aberration test with mouse bone marrow cells (JMPR (1996), Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)). (2) As for in vitro, it was reported to be positive and negative in bacterial reverse mutation tests, positive in a mutation test and a sister chromatid exchange test using Chinese hamster ovary cells, and negative in an unscheduled DNA synthesis test with rat primary culture hepatocytes (JMPR (1996), Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013), ACGIH (7th, 2003)). (3) It is described in the Risk Assessment Report (Food Safety Commission of Japan) that it was considered that it did not have genotoxicity that could pose a problem in vivo (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)).
6	Carcinogenicity	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] There was no available report in humans. It was classified as "Not classified" from (1) - (3). [Evidence Data] (1) As for classification results by domestic and international organizations, it was classified A4 by ACGIH (ACGIH (7th, 2003)) and NL (Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans) by EPA (EPA Annual Cancer Report 2019 (Access on July 2020): classified in 2000). (2) In a combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity test by 2-year gavage administration of this substance to male and female rats, a significant dose relationship in the incidences of hepatocellular tumors was observed in females, but the incidences were low and within the range of the background data, and it was concluded that there was no evidence of carcinogenicity for the administration of this substance (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)). (3) In a carcinogenicity test by 18-month diet administration of this substance to male and female mice, no neoplastic lesions for which the incidences increased by the administration of this substance were observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)).
7	Reproductive toxicity	Category 2	Warning	H361	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1), a decrease in brain acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity, reduced body weight gain, effects on the nervous system, etc. were observed in parent animals; decreases in mating and fertility index were observed in male parent animals; and a reduced number of corpora lutea was observed in female parent animals. Since reproductive toxicity was not proven to be a secondary effect of parental toxicity, it was classified in Category 2. A new information source was used and the classification results were changed from the previous classification. [Evidence Data] (1) In a two-generation reproductive study with rats dosed by feeding, in a group of 0.5 mg/kg/day, in P parent animals, a decrease in brain AChE activity in males and females, and ataxia, tremor, miosis, and salivation in females were observed; and in F1 parent animals, growth inhibition, reduced body weight gain, and a decrease in brain AChE activity in males and females, decreases in absolute testis and epididymis weight, and decreases in mating and insemination in males, and a decrease in relative ovary weight, and a reduced number of corpora lutea in females were observed. In offspring, in a group of 0.5 mg/kg/day, in F1 generation, reduced body weight gain and a decrease in brain AChE activity were observed in males and females; and in F2 generation, growth inhibition was observed in males (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)). This Risk Assessment Report stated "it was suggested that decreases in absolute testis and epididymis weight were associated with reduced body weight gain, and lower mating rate and insemination rate compared to the control group were considered to be associated with a decrease in testis weight." [Reference Data, etc.] (2) In a developmental toxicity study with female rats dosed by gavage on days 6 to 15 of gestation, no effect was observed in fetuses even at a dose at which maternal toxicity (salivation, tremor, death (death rate: 29.2%)) was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)). (3) In a developmental toxicity study with female rabbits dosed by gavage on days 7 to 19 of gestation, no effect was observed in fetuses even at a dose at which maternal toxicity (death (1/20), a decrease in corrected body weight, a decrease in erythrocyte AChE activity) was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)).
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 1 (nervous system)	Danger	H370	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P321 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on information in (1) and (2), effects on the nervous system were observed in humans, and based on (3), effects on the nervous system at doses within the range for Category 1 were observed in experimental animals. Therefore, it was classified in Category 1 (nervous system). [Evidence Data] (1) Warning symptoms of poisoning of this substance were headache, blurred vision, weakness, cramps, diarrhea, pain or tightness in the chest, etc. Symptoms of severe exposure were sweating, miosis, salivation, lacrimation, dyspnea, convulsion, etc. (ACGIH (7th, 2001), ACGIH (7th, 2003)). (2) Acute cases of poisoning were reported among workers in farms and greenhouses, with symptoms including eyestrain, headache, visual disturbances, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, weakness, chest pain or shortness of breath, skin irritation, pruritis, eyelid fasciculation, arm fasciculation, excessive sweating, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and salivation. It was reported that in a case of poisoning by an estimated ingestion amount of about 0.1 mg/kg, initial symptoms of poisoning, such as nausea and vomiting, appeared within 1 to 2 hours after ingestion. Severe poisoning, characterized by unconsciousness, pinpoint pupils, profuse sweating, and salivation, accompanied by acute pancreatis, was reported in a 37-year-old woman who intentionally ingested 200 mL of this substance (ACGIH (7th, 2003)). (3) In an oral toxicity test with rats, at 2 mg/kg (within the range for Category 1), lacrimation, salivation, motility disorder, gait abnormality, clonic convulsion, tonic convulsion, tremor, abnormal behavior, and abnormal reflex were observed, and inhibition of acetylcholinesterase activity was also observed in the brainstem, cerebral cortex, hippocampus, and olfactory region (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013)).
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 1 (nervous system)	Danger	H372	P260 P264 P270 P314 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) and (2), it was reported that effects on the nervous system were observed in humans. Based on (3) and (4), it was reported that effects on the nervous system at doses within the range for Category 1 were observed in experimental animals. Therefore, it was classified in Category 1 (nervous system). [Evidence Data] (1) Main chronic effects of this substance were dose-dependent dysfunctions in the peripheral and central nervous systems by inhibition of cholinesterase (ChE) activity. However, the level was lower compared to acute effects (GESTIS (Access on May 2020)). (2) It was reported that, as a result of 30-day oral administration of this substance in capsules to 5 volunteers per group, a decrease by 20% or more in erythrocyte ChE activity was observed at or above 1.5 mg/person/day (JMPR (1972)). (3) It was reported that, in a 90-day test with rats dosed by gavage, at or above 0.56 mg/kg/day (within the range for Category 1), pinpoint pupils, salivation, ocular discharge, tremors, and a decrease in brain ChE activity were observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2013), JMPR (1996)). (4) It was reported that, in a 13-week test with rats dosed by feeding, at or above 10 ppm (converted guidance value: 0.5 mg/kg/day, within the range for Category 1), decreases in plasma, erythrocyte, and brain ChE activity were observed; and at or above 250 ppm (converted guidance value: 12.5 mg/kg/day, within the range for Category 2), a decrease in hemoglobin level, and an increase in blood urea level were observed (JMPR (1972)).
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 96-hour LC50 = 0.00018 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia pulex) (EPA OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database, 2020).
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Category 1	Warning	H410	P273 P391 P501	Reliable chronic toxicity data were not obtained. It was classified in Category 1 because sufficient data on rapid degradability were not obtained, and it was classified in Category 1 in acute toxicity.
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