NITE - Chemical Management Field

Latest GHS Classification Results by the Japanese Government (edited by NITE)

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	100-52-7
Chemical Name	Benzaldehyde
Substance ID	m-nite-100-52-7_v1
Download of Excel format	Excel file

REFERENCE INFORMATION

Item	Information
Guidance used for the classification (External link)	To Guidance List
UN GHS document (External link)	To UN GHS document
FAQ（GHS classification results by the Japanese Government）	To FAQ
List of Information Sources (Excel file)	List of Information Sources
List of Definitions/Abbreviations	Definitions/Abbreviations
Sample Label by MHLW (External link)	To Workplace Safety Site (MHLW)
Sample SDS by MHLW (External link)	To Workplace Safety Site (MHLW)
OECD/eChemPortal (External link)	To OECD/eChemPortal (External link)

PHYSICAL HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification	Classification year (FY)	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government
1	Explosives	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
6	Flammable liquids	Category 4	- Warning	H227	P370+P378 P210 P280 P403 P501	Based on a flash point of 63 deg C (closed cup) (ICSC (2006)), it was classified in Category 4. Besides, it is classified in Class 9: miscellaneous hazardous materials, PGIII (UN 1990) in UNRTDG, and it is subject to regulations on container/transportation unit. However, a class which corresponds to GHS classification category for flammable liquids is not allocated in UNRTDG.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
7	Flammable solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
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.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is estimated that it does not ignite at normal temperatures from an autoignition temperature of 192 deg C (ICSC (2006)).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
11	Self-heating substances and mixtures	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Test methods applicable to liquid substances are not available.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
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).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
13	Oxidizing liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	The substance is an organic compound containing oxygen (but not fluorine or chlorine) which is chemically bonded only to carbon or hydrogen.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
17	Desensitized explosives	-	- -	-	-	-	-	-

HEALTH HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification	Classification year (FY)	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government
1	Acute toxicity (Oral)	Category 4	Warning	H302	P301+P312 P264 P270 P330 P501	There are 9 cases of reported LD50 values for rats of 1,292 mg/kg (female) (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)), 1,300 mg/kg (male, female) (3 cases) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014), DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002), SIDS (2002), NTP TR378 (1990), JECFA FAO Nutrition Meetings Report Series 44a (1967)), 1,502 mg/kg (male), 2,279 mg/kg (male), 2,400 mg/kg, 2,850 mg/kg (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)), and 1,300-2,850 mg/kg (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). Since 5 cases correspond to Category 4, and 3 cases correspond to "Not classified" (Category 5 in UN GHS classification), it was classified in Category 4 by adopting the category with a larger number of data. Besides, since one case is a value that is a summary of multiple data, it was not adopted for this classification.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. Besides, there is a report of an LD50 value of > 1,250 mg/kg for rabbits (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002), SIDS (2002), NTP TR378 (1990)), but the category cannot be determined only from this data.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Not classified	- -	-	-	There is a report that itching, burns, and hyperemia were observed in humans exposed to this substance, but they recovered upon removal of the substance (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). There is also a report that irritation was not observed as a result of occlusive application of this substance (4%) to volunteers for 48 hours (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). As for animal tests, it is reported that irritation was not observed by the application of this substance in a test with guinea pigs (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). From the above, it was classified as "Not classified" (Category 3 in UN GHS classification). Besides, in this reclassification, the category was changed according to the GHS classification guidance for the Japanese government or by a review of the information sources. In addition, there are two reports that in skin irritation tests with rabbits, as a result of the application of this substance for 24 hours, moderate irritation was observed (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). However, they were not adopted for the classification due to the 24-hour application tests.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 2A	Warning	H319	P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P264 P280	There are reports that in an eye irritation test with rabbits, as a result of application of this substance, moderate irritation was observed (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)), and eye irritation, blepharospasm, lacrimation, and conjunctival hyperemia were seen (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). In addition, there is a report that in another eye irritation test with rabbits, mild irritation was observed (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). Furthermore, there is a report of eye irritation in volunteers who were exposed to this substance (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). From the above, since moderate irritation was reported in animal tests, it was classified in Category 2A. Besides, in this reclassification, the category was changed according to the GHS classification guidance for the Japanese government or by the review of the information sources.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
4	Skin sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	There are reports that in a maximization test with guinea pigs, sensitization by this substance was not observed (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), SIDS (2002)), and that it was negative in an open epicutaneous test with guinea pigs (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). On the other hand, there is one report that it was positive in a maximization test (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). As for humans, there are reports that positive reactions were observed in 10 as a result of the patch test on 100 volunteers (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), NTP TR 378 (1990), SIDS (2002), DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)), and that sensitization was not observed in the patch test in 25 volunteers (NTP TR 378 (1990), SIDS (2002), DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). It is stated in DFGOT that this substance was widely used in general and could not be judged to have a sensitizing potential only from a few case reports of sensitization (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). From the above, it was classified as "Classification not possible" for this hazard class. The category was changed based on the description in DFGOT.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. There is no in vivo data. As for in vitro, bacterial reverse mutation tests were negative, and as for tests with cultured mammalian cells, a mouse lymphoma test was positive, and there were negative and positive results in chromosomal aberration tests (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014), DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002), SIDS (2002), NTP TR378 (1990)).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
6	Carcinogenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	There is no information on human carcinogenicity. As for experimental animals, in a 2-year carcinogenicity test with rats or mice dosed by gavage, no increase in tumor development was observed at up to 400 mg/kg/day in both sexes in rats, however, in mice, a slight increase in the incidence of squamous epithelial papillomas of the forestomach was observed at 400 mg/kg/day in males and at 300 and 600 mg/kg/day in females. Hyperplasia in the forestomach was also observed in these groups, and this was regarded as tumor development from administration of the test substance (NTP TR 378 (1990), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014), DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002), SIDS (2002)). Regarding the results of this test, it is concluded in NTP that there was no evidence of carcinogenicity in female and male rats, and some evidence of carcinogenicity in female and male mice (NTP TR 378 (1990), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014)). On the other hand, it is stated in DFGOT that the squamous epithelial papillomas of the forestomach in mice were probably due to an irritation effect by this substance and are not applicable to humans because they were tumors at a species-specific site, and it was concluded that there is no evidence for carcinogenicity of this substance in either rats or mice (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). From the above, it is unclear at this moment whether the tumor development of the forestomach in mice could be evidence of carcinogenicity in humans, and there are also no classification results by other organizations. Therefore, classification was not possible due to lack of data.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. Besides, there is a report of unknown details that after 5 mg/kg of this substance were orally administered to female rats on alternate days for 32 weeks including the mating period, they were mated with untreated males, but no effect due to the administration of this substance was found in the number of pregnant animals, the number of pups born, and the postnatal body weight and the survival rate (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014), SIDS (2002)).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 2 (central nervous system), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects)	Warning	H371 H335 H336	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P405 P501 P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312	This substance is irritating to the respiratory tract in humans, and other than reports of sore throat by inhalation exposure or oral ingestion (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002), HSDB (Access on November 2015), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014)), there are reports of narcotic effects (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002), HSDB (Access on November 2015)). As for experimental animals, narcotic effects, coma, sedation, tremors, and paralysis of the hind legs were observed in oral administration (1,000-2,850 mg/kg, equivalent to Category 2) to rats (DFGOT Vol. 17 (2002)). From the above, this substance has the property of respiratory tract irritation and narcotic effects other than effects on the central nervous system, and it was classified in Category 2 (central nervous system), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects). Besides, in this reclassification, findings from SIDS in the previous classification could not be confirmed. In addition, the information sources were reviewed.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 2 (central nervous system, blood system, liver, respiratory organs)	Warning	H373	P260 P314 P501	There are no data on humans. As for experimental animals, in a 14-day inhalation toxicity test with rats, at 1,000 ppm (converted guidance value: 0.68 mg/L), which is within the range of Category 2, disorders of the central nervous system such as abnormal gait, convulsions and straub tail, decreases in erythrocytes and values of hemoglobin and hematocrit, an increase in absolute and relative liver weight, and increased AST concentration in the serum were observed, and in a 4-week inhalation toxicity test with guinea pigs, at 500 ppm (converted guidance value: 0.48 mg/L), which was within the range of Category 2, metaplasia/hyperplasia of the respiratory epithelia was seen (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). Therefore, it was classified in Category 2 (central nervous system, haemal system, liver, respiratory organs). Besides, the description in the previous classification that "depression was seen in small amounts, and convulsions were seen in large amounts" in humans, is considered to be a description of an acute effect.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. Besides, the kinematic viscosity is calculated to be 1.258 mm2/sec (25/15 deg C) from the numerical data (viscosity: 1.321 m*Pas (25 deg C), density (specific gravity): 1.050 (15 deg C)) listed on HSDB (Access on November 2015).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification	Classification year (FY)	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Short term (Acute)	Category 2	- -	H401	P273 P501	From 96-hour LC50 = 1.07 mg/L for fish (Lepomis macrochirus) (SIDS, 2002, ECETOC TR91, 2003, Initial Risk Assessment (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014)), it was classified in Category 2.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Category 3	- -	H412	P273 P501	If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified in Category 3 due to being rapidly degradable (a degradation rate by 14-day BOD = 66%, a degradation rate by TOC = 98%, a degradation rate by HPLC = 100% (Official Bulletin of Ministry of International Trade and Industry, 1980)), and 7-day NOEC (lethal, growth) = 0.22 mg/L for fish (Pimephales promelas) (Initial Risk Assessment (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). 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" due to rapid degradability and a low bioaccumulation estimate (log Kow = 1.48 (PHYSPROP Database, 2009)) although 48-hour EC50 = 50 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 12 (Ministry of the Environment, 2014)). By drawing a comparison between the above results, it was classified in Category 3.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
12	Hazardous to the ozone layer	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))

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