NITE - Chemical Management Field

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

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	120-12-7
Chemical Name	Anthracene
Substance ID	m-nite-120-12-7_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 molecules.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
7	Flammable solids	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
8	Self-reactive substances and mixtures	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive or self-reactive properties present in the molecule.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not classified	- -	-	-	Even if it contacts the normal temperature air, it does not ignite spontaneously (ignition temperature 540degC (Lide,88th,2007)).	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
11	Self-heating substances and mixtures	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
12	Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Metals or metalloids (B, Si, P, Ge, As, Se, Sn, Sb, Te, Bi, Po, At) are not included.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
13	Oxidizing liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	It is an organic compound not containing oxygen, fluorine or chlorine.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	The organic compound not including peroxy group in molecule.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Test methods applicable to solid substances are not available.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
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	- -	-	-	From a description of LD50 value of 8,120 mg/kg (EU-RAR (2007)) in the oral administration test employing rats, it was classified into "Not classified".	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Not classified	- -	-	-	Since there was no mortality with test doses in the dermal administration test, it was written that LD50 value of rats was >1,320 mg/kg, and LD50 value of rabbits was >4,000 mg/kg (EU-RAR (2007)) . Based on the latest LD50 value with >4,000 mg/kg of rabbits tested to higher concentration, it was classified into "Not classified".	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Since it was a solid by the definition of GHS and inhalation in gas was not assumed, it was classified into "Not applicable".	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	In the 4th volume of MOE Risk Assessment (2005), it has been described that "the short term exposure slightly irritates the skin and causes redness of the skin" as an impact to humans. For animals, although it has been described that "fume may produce mild irritation on the skin" (EHC 202 (1998)), there was no description of "fume" in the cited literature (National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection (1989)) and experimental conditions could not be confirmed. Therefore, this data cannot be adopted. Moreover, although there is a description of "slightly irritating with Draize score of 0.79" (EU-RAR (2007)) in a 24-hour coating test employing rabbits (US Code of Federal Regulations), the result is from 10% solution. As mentioned above, classification is not possible with insufficient data.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 2	Warning	H319	P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P264 P280	"Congestion of a palpebral edema and a conjunctiva" (EU-RAR (2007)) is described about the impact to humans. It has been described that it has "non-irritant" (EU-RAR (2007)) for animals since "In the medication test to the conjunctival sac employing rabbits (US Code of Federal Regulations), there is no influence to cornea and iris, slight to moderate redness of conjunctiva was seen in 4/6 rabbits, and Draize score is 1.0. Moreover, there is also a description of "no cornea damage" (EU-RAR (2007)) in the dropping test to conjunctival sac employing a rabbit. According to Fig. 3.3.1 of the U.N. GHS second edition, it was classified into Category 2 employing the human data described in EU-RAR (2007) which is the information source of List1.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification is not possible since there is no data.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
4	Skin sensitization	Category 1	Warning	H317	P302+P352 P333+P313 P362+P364 P261 P272 P280 P321 P501	There is a description of "negative" in the test examining contact sensitizing employing guinea pig (using adjuvant) (EU-RAR (2007)). On the other hand, it has been described that "skin sensitization to ultraviolet stimulation increased" in the test processing with this substance followed by ultraviolet exposure to hairless mice and guinea pig (EHC202 (1998)). Also for humans, there are two cases reporting that "redness, hives, or pomphus was observed" by ultraviolet irradiation after the skin application of the substance (the 4th volume of MOE risk assessment (2005)), and in one of them, it has been described that "redness was not observed in the control group only with ultraviolet irradiation" (the 4th volume of MOE risk assessment (2005)). Therefore, the substance was classified as Category 1 since it was presumed to indicate photosensitizing to human skin.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Not classified	- -	-	-	Based on description of "negative" (EHC 202 (1998), EU-RAR (2007)) in the body cell in vivo mutagenicity test (micronucleus test employing each of the bone marrow and the red corpuscle of a mouse ), it was classified into "Not classified". The body cell in vivo genotoxicity test (SCE test employing the bone marrow of the Chinese hamster) is also "negative" (EU-RAR (2007)), and EHC 202 (1998) describes as "negative" as a whole except for some exceptions for the genetic toxicity of this substance.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
6	Carcinogenicity	Category 1B	Danger	H350	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] As for carcinogenicity, there is no sufficient report indicating carcinogenicity in humans. In tests conducted according to appropriate test guidelines and GLP standards, (1) and (2), clear evidence of carcinogenicity was observed in two animal species including malignant tumors. Therefore, it was classified in Category 1B. Besides, the same test results as for the previous classification were used for the classification this time. However, the category was revised by putting importance on the fact that the substance was judged to be carcinogenic in animals in Results from Carcinogenicity Studies (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare), and that guidelines were issued by the ministry from concerns on carcinogenicity after discussions in the small committee of hazard evaluation. [Evidence Data] (1) In a carcinogenicity test in which rats were dosed in the diet at 8,000-50,000 ppm for two years, significant increases in incidences of liver tumors (hepatocellular adenoma, hepatocellular carcinoma) and urinary bladder tumors (transitional cell carcinoma or papilloma) in male rats, and of kidney tumors (combined incidence of renal cell adenoma and carcinoma) in females rats were observed, and it is concluded that it is thought to be clear evidence for the carcinogenicity of this substance (Results from Carcinogenicity Studies (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 1998)). (2) In a carcinogenicity test in which mice were dosed in the diet at 3,200-20,000 ppm for males and at 8,000-50,000 ppm for females for two years, a significant increase in an incidence of liver tumors (hepatocellular adenoma, hepatocellular carcinoma) was observed in female mice, and it is concluded that it is thought to be clear evidence for the carcinogenicity of this substance. In male mice, an increased incidence of tumors was not observed (Results from Carcinogenicity Studies (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 1998)). (3) As for classification results by domestic and international organizations, IARC classified it in Group 3 (IARC 71 (1999)), and EPA classified it in D (IRIS (1991)). IARC re-classified it again in Group 3 in 2010 (IARC 92 (2010)). Besides, results of (1) and (2) were not used in the classification above. [Reference Data, etc.] (4) As for humans, it is report ed that three workers who had handled crude anthracene (40%) developed epithelioma in the hand, cheek, and wrist, two of them had been exposed for 30-32 years, but workers who had handled purified anthracene in the same factory did not develop tumors (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol. 5 (Ministry of the Environment, 2006), EU-RAR (2008)). (5) Based on paragraph (3) of Article 28 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act, this substance is subject to guidelines in order to prevent the impairment of worker's health caused by the chemical substances decided by the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare (Public announcement on guidelines in order to prevent the impairment of worker's health, No. 23, Oct 10, 2012).	FY2018	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	There are descriptions as follows in the 90 day oral administration study using mice, " The average weight of ovaria and body weight ratios significantly increased statistically" but "There is no tissue change, " and "it is considered to be accidental, unrelated to toxicity."(EU-RAR (2007). Classification is not possible due to insufficiency of data, because there is no other appropriate datum with regard to reproductive developmental toxicity.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 3 (Respiratory tract irritation)	Warning	H335	P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312 P405 P501	As for humans, there are descriptions of "irritation of upper airway" and of "headache, nausea, delayed the response and debility" as acute symptoms by exposure (EU-RAR (2007)), and another description that "a respiratory tract is stimulated slightly and a cough and a pain in the throat appear" (the 4th volume (2005) of MOE risk assessment). However, it was not adopted as classified evidence since "headache, nausea, and reaction delay"cannot be regarded as material impacts. As for animals, it is described that "sprays exposure by this article stimulates an airway" (EHC 202 (1998)). As mentioned above, it classified into Category 3 (Respiratory tract irritation). In addition, the influence of congestion etc. at liver, lien and kidneys, etc. were looked in oral or dermal administration test using rats, mice, rabbit, etc. (EU-RAR (2007)), however, they were not adopted since the conditions in the concentration were well exceeding the guidance value of Category 2.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It has been described that, in the forced oral administration test employing mice (GLP), "Significant affections due to exposure were not found in clinical symptoms, hematological findings, organ weight, macroscopic and histopathological manifestation, etc." at the concentration greatly exceeding the guidance value of Category 2. (EU-RAR (2007))Moreover, there is also a description that, in the mixed feed administration test employing rats, even if it was administered for 78 weeks at the concentration within the range of the guidance value of Category 2, "The affection on the clinical findings and tissues was not seen."(MOE Risk Assessment, Volume 4 (2005)). On the other hand, although there is a description of "Hemoglobin reduction, reticulocytosis, leukopenia, etc., were produced."(EU-RAR (2007)) in the aerosol inhalation exposure test employing rats, the exposure period is unknown (Original literature is not available.), and the classification cannot be specified. As mentioned above, classification is not possible due to insufficient data.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification is not possible because there is no data. In addition, although the substance is hydrocarbon, the kinematic viscosity is unknown. Moreover, there is no description about chemical pneumonia in ICSC.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）

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	It was classified into Category 1 from 96 hours LEC50=0.00278mg/L of the fish (Bluegill) (MOE Risk Assessment vol. 5 (2006)).	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Category 1	Warning	H410	P273 P391 P501	Since acute toxicity was Category 1 and there were no rapid degradability (not readily degradable, the decomposition by BOD: 1.9% (standard test method (2 weeks)) (Existing Chemical Safety Inspections Data (1977))), it was classified into Category 1.	FY2008	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （Sep, 2008）
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