NITE - Chemical Management Field

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

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	106-46-7
Chemical Name	p-Dichlorobenzene
Substance ID	m-nite-106-46-7_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)	MHLW Website (in Japanese Only)
Sample SDS by MHLW (External link)	MHLW Website (in Japanese Only)
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)	- -	-	-	Solid (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)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
7	Flammable solids	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It is described in ICSC (2003) that it is combustible, but the classification is not possible due to no data.	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 (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is estimated that it does not ignite at normal temperatures from the data that it does not ignite up to 500 deg C (HSDB (Access on August 2015)).	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 solid (melting point <= 140 deg C) 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)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	The substance is an organic compound containing chlorine (but not fluorine or oxygen) which is chemically bonded only to carbon or hydrogen.	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	- -	-	-	A melting point is 53 deg C, and it is solid to which the UNRTDG test method is applicable, but there is no information that the test was conducted.	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)	Not classified	- -	-	-	There are 10 reports of LD50 values for rats: 500 mg/kg (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 1 (Ministry of the Environment, 2002)), 500-1,000 mg/kg (DFGOT vol. 4 (1992), IARC 29 (1982)), > 2,000 mg/kg (EU-RAR (2004), DFGOT Vol. 4 (1992)), 2,515 mg/kg (DFGOT Vol. 4 (1992)), 2,512 mg/kg (NICNAS (2000)), 3,863 mg/kg (males), 3,790 mg/kg (females) (EPA Pesticide (2008), ATSDR (2006), NICNAS (2000), DFGOT Vol. 4 (1992)), 4,000 mg/kg > and > 1,000 mg/kg (NTP TR 319 (1987)), 1,625-3,863 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2001)), and 2,515-3,863 mg/kg (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)). Two values correspond to Category 4, five correspond to "Not classified" (of which four correspond to Category 5 in UN GHS classification), and one corresponds to "Classification not possible." Accordingly, this substance was classified as "Not classified" (Category 5 in UN GHS classification) to which the larger number of data corresponds. Besides, since two values were based on compilations of multiple pieces of data, they were not adopted as evidence of the classification.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Not classified	- -	-	-	Based on reports of LD50 values for rats of > 2,000 mg/kg (EU-RAR (2004), DFGOT vol. 4 (1992)) and > 6,000 mg/kg (EPA Pesticide (2008), ATSDR (2006), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), ACGIH (7th, 2001), NICNAS (2000), DFGOT vol. 4 (1992)), and an LD50 value for rabbits of > 5,010 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2001)), this substance was classified as "Not classified."	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Not classified	- -	-	-	Based on reports of LC50 values (4 hours) for rats of > 5.07 mg/L (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), EU-RAR (2004), NICNAS (2000), DFGOT vol. 4 (1992)) and > 6.00 mg/L (EPA Pesticide (2008)), this substance was classified as "Not classified." Besides, the reference value for dust was applied as a test substance was a solid.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Not classified	- -	-	-	There are descriptions that in a skin irritation test with rabbits (OECD TG 404), as a result of application of 500 mg of this substance for four hours, slight erythema was observed, but resolved after seven days (EU-RAR (2004), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)). There is a report that in another skin irritation test with rabbits, moderate to severe erythema was observed but resolved after 72 hours, and the Primary Irritation Index (PII) was 2.9 (EPA Pesticide (2008)). In addition, there is a description that this substance is irritating to the skin (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 1 (Ministry of the Environment, 2002)). From the above, this substance was classified as "Not classified" (Category 3 in UN GHS classification) based on the result of the test complying with an OECD testing guideline.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 2	Warning	H319	P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P264 P280	It is reported that, in an eye irritation test with rabbits (OECD TG 405), as a result of application of 500 mg of this substance for 24 hours, conjunctival erythema and oedema were observed, but resolved after 72 hours, and it was slightly irritating to the eyes (EU-RAR (2004), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)). In another eye irritation test with rabbits, this substance was reported to be moderately irritating since conjunctivitis, iritis, corneal opacity, and corneal vascularization were observed, but resolved within 13 days after application, and an irritation score was 20 (maximum value: 47) (EPA Pesticide (2008)). In addition, there is a report of severe eye irritation in human occupational exposure (NICNAS (2000), ACGIH (7th, 2001)), and there is a description that it is irritating to the eyes and it markedly causes opacity of eyeballs (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 1 (Ministry of the Environment, 2002)). From the above, this substance was classified in Category 2 based on the result of the test complying with an OECD testing guideline. Besides, this substance was classified as "Eye. Irrit. 2 H319" in the EU CLP classification (ECHA CL Inventory (Access on September 2015)).	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	Category 1	Warning	H317	P302+P352 P333+P313 P362+P364 P261 P272 P280 P321 P501	It is reported that in a maximization test with guinea pigs, sensitization was observed in 14 out of 24 animals (score 1; 9/24 animals, score 2; 4/24 animals, score 3; 1/24 animal), and there is a sensitization (EU-RAR (2004), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)). As for humans, a case of a 69-year-old male who developed allergic purpura through dermal contact with an armchair that had been treated with this substance is reported (NICNAS (2000)). Based on the above, this substance was classified in Category 1.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	As for in vivo, a dominant lethal test with mice was negative, micronucleus tests with rat kidney cells and mouse bone marrow cells were positive and negative results, a micronucleus test with mouse peripheral blood erythrocytes was negative, a chromosome aberration test with rat bone marrow cells was negative, a comet assay with rat kidney, and mouse liver, lung, spleen, kidney, and bone marrow were positive, DNA-adduct formation tests with lung and stomach of rats or mice were positive, DNA-adduct formation tests with rat liver and kidney were positive and negative results, and it was positive in unscheduled DNA synthesis tests with rat kidney and mouse liver and in replicative DNA synthesis tests with liver and kidney of rats, and liver of mice (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), IARC 73 (1999), ACGIH (7th, 2001), ATSDR (2006), EU-RAR (2004), NICNAS (2000), NTP TR 319 (1987)). As for in vitro, in bacterial reverse mutation tests, mammalian cell genetic mutation tests, mouse lymphoma tests, micronucleus tests, and sister chromatid exchange tests, there were many negative results but positive results also existed, and it was negative in mammalian cell chromosome aberration tests and positive in DNA damage tests (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), IARC 73 (1999), NTP TR 319 (1987), ACGIH (7th, 2001), ATSDR (2006), EU-RAR (2004), NICNAS (2000)). From the above, the reproducibility of the positive findings in the micronucleus test could not be confirmed, or was non-standard tests. Therefore, based on the weight-of-evidence principle, it was judged to have no relevant genotoxicity (EU-RAR (2004)). In accordance with the GHS classification guidance for the Japanese government, this substance was classified as "Classification not possible."	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
6	Carcinogenicity	Category 2	Warning	H351	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	In humans, although there is one report of five cases of leukemia, epidemiological studies that can evaluate the relationship between exposure specific to this substance and carcinogenicity are considered to be inadequate (NTP RoC (13th, 2014), IARC 73 (1999)). As for experimental animals, 2-year carcinogenicity studies with rats and mice dosed by gavage, in rats, an increased incidence of tubular epithelium cell carcinoma in males, and in mice, increased incidences of hepatocellular adenomas and carcinomas in both sexes were observed (IARC 73 (1999), ACGIH (7th, 2001)). For the inhalation route, in tests in which rats or mice were exposed by inhalation to the vapor of this substance for 76 weeks or 56 weeks, respectively, no increases in incidence of tumors were observed (IARC 73 (1999), ACGIH (7th, 2001)). But, IARC pointed out that the dosage period was short (IARC 73 (1999)). However, it is reported that in a 2-year study in which rats or mice were exposed by inhalation to the vapor of this substance, in a mice test, increased incidences of hepatocellular carcinomas and histiocytic sarcomas in males, and hepatocellular carcinomas, hepatocellular adenomas and bronchiolar-alveolar carcinomas in the lung in females were observed (Results from Carcinogenicity Studies (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare) (Access on August 2015)). As for classification results by other organizations, it was classified in Group 2B by IARC (IARC 73 (1999)), in A3 by ACGIH (ACGIH (7th, 2001)), in Group 2B by Japan Society For Occupational Health (Recommendation of Occupational Exposure Limits (2015)), in R by NTP (NTP RoC (13th, 2014)), and in Carc. 3 by EU (EU-RAR (2004)), respectively. From the above, it was classified in Category 2 for this hazard class.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
7	Reproductive toxicity	Category 2	Warning	H361	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	There is no information on the reproductive effects in humans. As for experimental animals, in two-generation reproductive toxicity tests with rats dosed by the inhalation or the oral (gavage) route, at doses where general toxicity effects (reduced body-weight gain, effects on the liver (weight increase, hepatocyte hypertrophy), and effects on the kidney (weight increase, nephrosis), etc. (F0 and F1 males and females (inhalation), F0 and F1 males (oral)) were manifested in parental animals in both routes, increased pre- and postnatal mortality, decreased litter sizes, low value of body weights or decreased body weight gain by weaning, and delayed developmental parameters, etc. in the F1 and F2 pups were observed, but no effects of reproductive toxicity in the parental animals of either generation were shown (EU-RAR (2004), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), ATSDR (2006)). With regard to developmental toxicity, in tests in which pregnant rats or pregnant rabbits were exposed by inhalation to the vapor of this substance during organogenesis period, no anomalies were observed in either the parental animals or the fetuses at up to the highest doses (508 ppm (rats), 800 ppm (rabbits)) (EU-RAR (2004), ACGIH (7th, 2001), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), ATSDR (2006)). In addition, in a test in which pregnant rats were dosed by gavage during organogenesis period, reduced body weight gain in maternal animals was observed at or above 500 mg/kg/day, and in the fetuses, an increase in the frequency of skeletal variations (extra ribs) at 500 mg/kg/day and decreased fetal weight at 1,000 mg/kg/day were only observed (EU-RAR (2004), ACGIH (7th, 2001), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), ATSDR (2006)). Based on the above findings of the effects of reproductive and developmental toxicity in experimental animals, the Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH) classified this substance in Reproductive Toxicants Group 3 (OEL Documentations, 2014), Recommendation of Occupational Exposure Limits (2015)). As above, as the result of the two-generation reproduction toxicity tests with rats dosed by inhalation and oral routes, there were no adverse effects on the fertility of parental animals, but adverse effects on the occurrence and development at and after birth such as decreased live pups at birth, low value of body weights, and growth delay until weaning were observed at doses where general toxicity effects were manifested in the parental animals. In addition, the classification by the Japan Society For Occupational Health also corresponds to Category 2. Therefore, it was classified in Category 2 for this hazard class. Besides, in the previous classification (FY 2009), it was classified in Category 1B since adverse effects in the pups were observed at a dose (90 mg/kg/day) where toxicity was not manifested in the F1 parental animals in the two-generation reproductive toxicity test with rats orally dosed. However, there is a description of an effect on the liver (an increase in relative liver weights) in the males also in the group of 90 mg/kg/day in F1 parental animals (EU-RAR (2004)). In this evaluation, taking into account that symptoms of general toxic effects were manifested in the liver in parental animals from the mid-dose, as a result of classification according to the GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government, the category was changed to Category 2.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 1 (central nervous system, blood system, liver), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation)	Danger Warning	H370 H335	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P321 P405 P501 P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312	This substance is irritating to the respiratory tract (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 1 (Ministry of the Environment, 2002), OEL Documentations (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 1998), ACGIH (7th, 2001), EU-RAR (2004), NICNAS (2000), DFGOT vol. 20 (2003)). As for human cases, there are reports of cough, jaundice, acute hemolytic anemia, and methemoglobinuria in an accident case of a three-year-old boy who orally ingested moth-repellent crystals, of vertigo and anemia in a case of inhalation exposure of a male in a closed room, and of kidney damage in a case of dermal exposure of a male (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 1 (Ministry of the Environment, 2002), OEL Documentations (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 1998), ACGIH (7th, 2001), EU-RAR (2004), NICNAS (2000), IARC 73 (1999), ATSDR (2006)). There are further descriptions that acute symptoms associated with this substance include effects on the liver, headache, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, central nervous system depression, convulsive seizures, agitation, weakness, methemoglobinemia, and acute hemolytic anemia (ACGIH (7th, 2001), IARC 73 (1999), ATSDR (2006)). As for experimental animals, there are reports of abnormal gait, hunched posture, an increase in hyaline droplets in the renal cortex (male rats), vacuolation of hepatocytes, and hepatic porphyria (female rats) in oral administration (corresponding to Category 2) to rats. And in inhalation exposure with rats (corresponding to Category 1), there are reports of tremors, reduced reflex, an increase in locomotor activity, piloerection, tremors, loss of reflex, centrilobular hepatocyte hypertrophy, and vacuolation and mild necrosis of hepatocytes, and in males, increased formation of hyaline droplets in the renal cortex (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 1 (Ministry of the Environment, 2002), OEL Documentations (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 1998), ACGIH (7th, 2001), EU-RAR (2004), NICNAS (2000)). In humans, there is only one case with kidney damage in human case of dermal exposure and no findings in the kidney were observed in oral and inhalation route. And, in experimental animals, the increase in hyaline droplets in the renal cortex was seen in male rats. Therefore, effects on the kidney were not adopted on this substance. From the above, effects of this substance were respiratory tract irritation, and those on the central nervous system, haemal system, and liver, and this substance was classified in Category 1 (central nervous system, haemal system, liver), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 1 (nervous system, liver, blood system), Category 2 (respiratory organs, kidney)	Danger Warning	H372 H373	P260 P264 P270 P314 P501	In humans, systemic petechiae, anemia, jaundice, yellow atrophy of the liver, unsteady gait, paresthesia, and aphasia were seen in vapor exposure (EU-RAR (2004), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)), and anemia (hypochromia, microcytic anemia, Heinz bodies) (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)), unsteady gait, tremors of the hands, and decreased mental activity (ACGIH (7th, 2001)) were seen in oral ingestion. As for experimental animals, in a 5-7 month inhalation toxicity test with rats and guinea pigs, increased liver and kidney weights, and degeneration and edema of hepatocytes were observed at 158 ppm (0.965 mg/L) (EU-RAR (2004), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005), ATSDR (2006)). In a 16-day inhalation toxicity test with rats and guinea pigs, interstitial edema, congestion, and alveolar hemorrhage were observed in the lungs at 173 ppm (converted guidance value: 0.22 mg/L) (ATSDR (2006)). In a 4-week toxicity test with rats dosed by gavage, tubular nephropathy with dilation and necrosis of tubules at 150 mg/kg/day (converted guidance value: 46.7 mg/kg/day) and increased liver weights, increased kidney weights, and centrilobular hepatocellular hypertrophy at 300 mg/kg/day (converted guidance value: 93.3 mg/kg/day) were observed (EU-RAR (2004), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)). In a 1-year toxicity test with dogs dosed by gavage, increases in ALT, AST, and GGT activities, increased liver and kidney weights, hepatocellular hypertrophy and pigment deposition, bile duct hyperplasia and hepatic portal inflammation, and renal discoloration and kidney duct epithelial vacuolization were seen at 50 mg/kg/day (EU-RAR (2004), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)). As shown above, in humans, anemia and effects on the central nervous system and liver were seen; in experimental animals, effects were seen in the lung, liver, and kidney. All of these were seen within the range of Category 2. Therefore, this substance was classified in Category 1 (nervous system, liver, haemal system), Category 2 (respiratory organs, kidney). Besides, in the previous classification, it was considered that effects were observed in the respiratory system of experimental animals within the range of Category 1. Upon subsequent confirmation, it was in the range of Category 2, therefore, the category was changed.	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.	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 1	Warning	H400	P273 P391 P501	From 48-hour EC50 = 0.7 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (NICNAS, 2000, EU-RAR, 2004, Initial Risk Assessment (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)), it was classified in Category 1.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Category 1	Warning	H410	P273 P391 P501	Due to being not rapidly degradable (a degradation rate by 4-week BOD = 0%, a degradation rate by HPLC = 0%, a degradation rate by HPLC in an inherent test = 1% (Official Bulletin of Economy, Trade and Industry, 2001)), and 21-day NOEC (reproduction) = 0.1 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Environment Agency in Japan (Environment Agency, 1995), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 1 (Ministry of the Environment, 2002), Initial Risk Assessment (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2005)), it was classified in Category 1.	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