GHS Classification Results by the Japanese Government

Japanese



GENERAL INFORMATION
Item Information
CAS RN 111-42-2
Chemical Name 2,2'-Iminodiethanol
Substance ID R03-C-017-MHLW
Classification year (FY) FY2021
Ministry who conducted the classification Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW)
New/Revised Revised
Classification result in other fiscal year FY2011   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 -
-
-
- - -
2 Flammable gases -
-
-
- - -
3 Aerosols -
-
-
- - -
4 Oxidizing gases -
-
-
- - -
5 Gases under pressure -
-
-
- - -
6 Flammable liquids -
-
-
- - -
7 Flammable solids -
-
-
- - -
8 Self-reactive substances and mixtures -
-
-
- - -
9 Pyrophoric liquids -
-
-
- - -
10 Pyrophoric solids -
-
-
- - -
11 Self-heating substances and mixtures -
-
-
- - -
12 Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases -
-
-
- - -
13 Oxidizing liquids -
-
-
- - -
14 Oxidizing solids -
-
-
- - -
15 Organic peroxides -
-
-
- - -
16 Corrosive to metals -
-
-
- - -
17 Desensitized explosives -
-
-
- - -

HEALTH HAZARDS
Hazard class Classification Pictogram
Signal word 		Hazard statement
(code) 		Precautionary statement
(code) 		Rationale for the classification
1 Acute toxicity (Oral) -
-
-
- - -
1 Acute toxicity (Dermal) -
-
-
- - -
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases) -
-
-
- - -
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours) -
-
-
- - -
1 Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists) -
-
-
- - -
2 Skin corrosion/irritation -
-
-
- - -
3 Serious eye damage/eye irritation -
-
-
- - -
4 Respiratory sensitization -
-
-
- - -
4 Skin sensitization Category 1A


Warning
H317 P302+P352
P333+P313
P362+P364
P261
P272
P280
P321
P501 		[Rationale for the Classification]
Based on (1) to (4), it was classified in Category 1A. Also, based on the new findings, the classification result was changed.

[Evidence Data]
(1) The Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH) classified this substance in occupational skin sensitizers Group 2 (Recommendation of Occupational Exposure Limits (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2017)).
(2) It was reported that, in a patch test on 251 workers in Germany who were suspected of dermatitis caused by cutting fluid during metal working, positive reactions were observed in 6 (3%) of the 200 workers who were tested with a 2% solution of this substance (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances (Ministry of the Environment, 2021), Recommendation of Occupational Exposure Limits (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2017), ACGIH (8th, 2009)).
(3) It was reported that, in a patch test on 144 workers in Germany who were engaged in metal working and suspected of occupational dermatitis, positive reactions were observed in 2 (2%) of the 100 workers who were tested with a 2% solution of this substance (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances (Ministry of the Environment, 2021), Recommendation of Occupational Exposure Limits (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2017)).
(4) It was reported that the patch test results collected by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) showed that, in patch tests on 8,791 workers with a 2% solution of this substance conducted from 1992 to 2007, positive reactions were observed in 157 workers (1.8%) and 60 out of the 157 workers had work experience in metal working. It was also reported that, as for the positive rates in 7,112 male workers, 3,835 workers who had no work experience in the metal working industry had a positive rate of 1.0%, while 3,277 workers who had work experience in the metal working industry had a significantly high positive rate of 3.1%, and 669 workers among them, who had exposed to cutting fluids, had a significantly high positive rate of 7.5% (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances (Ministry of the Environment, 2021), Recommendation of Occupational Exposure Limits (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2017)).

[Reference Data, etc.]
(5) In the DFG, it was classified in skin sensitization Sh.
(6) It was reported that, in a maximization test (OECD TG 406, GLP, intradermal injection: 5% solution) using guinea pigs (n=20), the positive rate at 24 hours after challenge was 10% (2/20 animals) and the positive rate at 48 hours was 5% (1/20 animals), and this substance was negative (SIAR (2001), AICIS IMAP (2013), REACH registration dossier (Accessed Oct. 2021)).
5 Germ cell mutagenicity -
-
-
- - -
6 Carcinogenicity -
-
-
- - -
7 Reproductive toxicity -
-
-
- - -
8 Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure -
-
-
- - -
9 Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure -
-
-
- - -
10 Aspiration hazard -
-
-
- - -

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) -
-
-
- - -
11 Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic) -
-
-
- - -
12 Hazardous to the ozone layer -
-
-
- - -


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