NITE - Chemical Management Field

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

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	127-00-4
Chemical Name	1-Chloro-2-propanol
Substance ID	m-nite-127-00-4_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 present in the molecule associated with explosive properties.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	"Liquids" according to GHS definition.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not an aerosol product.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	"Liquids" according to GHS definition.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	"Liquids" according to GHS definition.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
6	Flammable liquids	Category 3	Warning	H226	P303+P361+P353 P370+P378 P403+P235 P210 P233 P240 P241 P242 P243 P280 P501	From a flash point of 52 degrees C (closed cup) (GESTIS (Access on June 2015)), it was classified in Category 3. 　Besides, it is classified in class 6.1, subsidiary risk 3, PGII in UNRTDG (UN2611).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
7	Flammable solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	"Liquids" according to 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	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Due to no data, the classification is not possible.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	"Liquids" according to 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	- -	-	-	No established test method suitable for liquid substances.	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)	- -	-	-	Not containing 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)	- -	-	-	It is an organic compound which does not contain fluorine but contains chlorine and oxygen and the chlorine and oxygen are not chemically bonded to the elements other than carbon or hydrogen.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	"Liquids" according to GHS definition.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	It is an organic compound that does not contain 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	- -	-	-	Due to no data, the classification is not possible.	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 3	Danger	H301	P301+P310 P264 P270 P321 P330 P405 P501	Because an LD50 value of 100 to 300 mg/kg for rats is reported (PATTY (6th, 2012), ACGIH (7th, 2002), NTP TR 477 (1998)), it was classified in Category 3.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Category 3	Danger	H311	P302+P352 P361+P364 P280 P312 P321 P405 P501	An LD50 value of 440 mg/kg for rats (ACGIH (7th, 2002)) and LD50 values of 480 mg/kg and about 500 mg/kg (PATTY (6th, 2012)), 530.6 mg/kg (PATTY (6th, 2012), ACGIH (7th, 2002)) for rabbits were reported for this substance of technical grade (consisting of 75% this substance and 25% 2-chloro-1-propanol). Therefore, it was classified in Category 3. 　Besides, 1-chloro-2-propanol and 2-chloro-1-propanol have the equivalent toxicity in acute toxicity (oral) (because an oral LD50 value of 1-chloro-2-propanol is 100 to 300 mg/kg and an oral LD50 of 2-chloro-1-propanol is 218 mg/kg, both substances are classified in Category 3). Therefore, they are considered to have the equivalent toxicity also in a dermal route.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	"Liquids" according to GHS definition.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Category 3	Danger	H331	P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P311 P321 P405 P501	From a reported LC50 value (4 hours) of 1,000 ppm for rats for this substance (ACGIH (7th, 2002)), it was classified in Category 3. 　Besides, a reference value in the unit of ppm was applied as vapour without mist because the LC50 value is lower than 90 % of the saturated vapour pressure concentration (6,447 ppm).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Due to lack of data, the classification is not possible.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	The classification is not possible due to lack of data. 　Besides, there is the information that 2-chloro-1-propanol, an isomer of this substance, is irritating to skin (HSDB (Access on June 2015)).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	The classification is not possible due to lack of data. 　Besides, there is the information that 2-chloro-1-propanol, an isomer of this substance, is irritating to eyes (HSDB (Access on June 2015)).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Due to lack of data, the classification is not possible.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
4	Skin sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Due to lack of data, the classification is not possible.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Category 2	Warning	H341	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	There are reports on this substance of technical grade (75% this substance and 25% 2-chloro-1-propanol). 　As for in vivo, it is reported a micronucleus test using peripheral blood of mice by drinking water administration was negative, however, it is reported a chromosomal aberration test using bone marrow cells of rats by oral administration was positive and a chromosomal aberration test using mammalian (details unknown) was positive (NTP DB (Access on June 2015), ACGIH (7th, 2002)). 　As for in vitro, it is reported a bacterial reverse mutation test, a mouse lymphoma test, a chromosomal aberration test, a micronucleus test and a sister chromatid exchange test using cultured mammalian cells were all positive. (NTP DB (Access on June 2015), ACGIH (7th, 2002), NTP TR 477 (1998), PATTY (6th, 2012)) 　Because there is the information that 1-chloro-2-propanol is slightly less mutagenic than an isomer mixture in ACGIH (2002) and they are considered to show almost the equivalent mutagenicity, it was classified based on the data of an isomer mixture. 　From the above, because positive results were observed in multiple in vitro tests in addition to positive result of in vivo chromosomal aberration tests, it was classified in Category 2.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
6	Carcinogenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	There is no information of carcinogenicity in humans by exposure to this substance only. 　In a cohort study with male workers in plant manufacturing chlorohydrin compounds including this substance and 2-chloro-1-propanol (an isomer of this substance), increased mortality from pancreatic carcinoma and lymphohematopoietic tumors was first reported. 　However, later the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) conducted a human carcinogenicity evaluation on related compounds including propylene chlorohydrin (another name of 2-chloro-1-propanol) (IARC vol. 20 (1978)) and considered the report of carcinogenicity at the plant manufacturing chlorohydrin compounds was insufficient as the epidemiological evidence of carcinogenicity. The process in which the IARC concluded that there is no increased carcinogenic risk for any tumors is quoted in ACGIH (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). Furthermore, following the IARC evaluation, in the epidemiological studies of other three chlorohydrin compounds production facilities, it is also reported that there is no association between work in the plants and an increase in pancreatic cancer incidences (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). However, ACGIH pointed out that the follow-up period of the report that concluded no association was a short time of 25 years against the 35-year cohort follow-up period of the study in which the increased mortality from pancreatic carcinoma was reported, and ACGIH made a remark that they could not concluded yet if there is the association between exposure to this substance and carcinogenicity from the epidemiological studies (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). 　Related to this, in a cohort study on death cases from pancreatic carcinoma and lymphohematopoietic tumors of 1,361 male workers at an ethylene and propylene chlorohydrin production plant in the U.S., no increased risk of pancreatic carcinoma and lymphohematopoietic tumors was described (PATTY (6th, 2012)). 　On the other hand, as for experimental animals, there was no increased incidence of tumors in any tissues in a test in which rats or mice were administrated for two years in drinking water with this substance of technical grade (consisting of 75% this substance and 25% 2-chloro-1-propanol) (ACGIH (7th, 2002), PATTY (6th, 2012)). Also, this substance was also negative in a bioassay using an increased number of pulmonary adenomas in strain A mice as a parameter (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). 　As above, there is no evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. However, because of the multiple positive results in the genotoxicity tests on this substance and the judgment that no conclusion could be reached on the association between exposure to this substance and human carcinogenicity from the human epidemiological data, ACGIH classified this substance and 2-chloro-1-propanol in A4 in carcinogenicity (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). 　From the above, taking the ACGIH’s position into account, the substance was classified as "Classification not possible" in this hazard class.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	There is no information of human reproductive toxicity on this substance. 　As for experimental animals, there is the information that as a result of a continuous breeding test using rats in an oral route (drinking water), this substance causes no adverse effects on fertility over F0 and F1 generations and causes adverse effects on male reproductive organs such as testis weights and abnormal sperm production but no adverse effects on female reproductive organs (Environ. Health Perspect., vol. 105, Suppl. 1, 291-292 (1997)). 　Also, as for a teratogenicity test, there is the information that in a pilot test in which pregnant rats were administered by gavage on gestational days 6 to 15, no malformation effects on the fetuses were observed in up to 125 mg/kg/day (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). However, a statistical analysis was not conducted and the test conditions such as an animal number and the details of results are not clear. There are no available data for the classification including this. 　Besides, in a continuous breeding test in which this substance of technical grade (consisting of 75% this substance and 25% 2-chloro-1-propanol) was orally administered (in drinking water) to rats, it is reported no adverse effects on fertility of parent animals were observed because the average number of litters per pair was not different from that of the control group even at the dose where lower maternal body weights at deliveries and during a nursing period and lower body weights of F1 offspring persistently until the time of weaning were observed (ACGIH (7th, 2002), PATTY (6th, 2012)). 　From the above, it is considered that this substance including one of technical grade has no effects on fertility, but there are not sufficient test reports on developmental toxicity effects including teratogenicity. Therefore, it was classified as "Classification not possible" due to lack of data.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 3 (Narcotic effects)	Warning	H336	P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312 P405 P501	As for experimental animals, although it is not possible to identify this substance alone or an isomer mixture, narcosis were observed by oral administration in rats and guinea pigs (ACGIH (7th, 2002)). There is no knowledge on humans. 　From the above, it was classified in Category 3 (narcotic effects).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 1 (blood system, liver), Category 2 (kidney, pancreas)	Danger Warning	H372 H373	P260 P264 P270 P314 P501	There is no information on humans of this substance. There is no information on repeated dose toxicity of this substance alone but repeated dose toxicity information was obtained on this substance of technical grade (this substance: 75%, 2-chloro-1-propanol: 25%). In ACGIH (7th, 2002), TLV-TWA of this substance and 2-chloro-1-propanol was the same 1 ppm based on the data of this substance of technical grade. Therefore, assuming that the toxicity of each isomer is equivalent, this substance was classified based on the data on this substance of technical grade. 　As for experimental animals, in a 14-week drinking water administration test using rats, minimal to mild anemia at 5 mg/kg/day or higher corresponding to Category 1, cytoplasmic vacuolization of the liver at 10 mg/kg/day or above corresponding to Category 2, and degeneration/fatty change of pancreatic acinar cells at 100 mg/kg/day or higher were observed. Besides these, degeneration of tubular epithelium in the kidney or decreased epididymis weights, and increased abnormal sperm were found at 220 mg/kg/day corresponding to "Not classified." 　In a 14-week drinking water administration test using mice, cytoplasmic vacuolization of the liver at 5 mg/kg/day or higher corresponding to Category 1 and tubular vacuolization of the kidney at 100 mg/kg/day corresponding to Category 2 were observed. Besides these, degeneration/fatty change of pancreatic acinar cells and slight anemia were found at 220 mg/kg/day corresponding to "Not classified" (NTP TR477 (1998), ACGIH (7th, 2002), PATTY (6th, 2012)). 　Other than the above, in a 2 to 15-time inhalation exposure test using rats, congestion and perivascular edema in the lung was observed within a range of Category 1 and in dead cases, enlargement/vacuolization of hepatocytes in the liver and interstitial pneumonia in the lung were observed. 　However, because the data are insufficient due to small animal numbers of 2 to 4/sex/group and small numbers of administration, they were not used for the classification. 　Therefore, the substance was classified in Category 1 (blood system, liver), Category 2 (kidney, pancreas) in an oral route.	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Due to lack of data, the classification is not possible.	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)	Not classified	- -	-	-	It was classified as "Not classified" from 96-hour LC50 = 245000 micro g/L for fish (Pimephales promelas) (AQUIRE, 2016).	FY2015	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1))
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Not classified	- -	-	-	Reliable chronic toxicity data were not obtained. 　Because it is not poorly water soluble (water solubility = 138200 mg/L, PHYSPROP Database, 2009) and is classified as "Not classified" in acute toxicity, it was classified as "Not classified."	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.	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