NITE - Chemical Management Field

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

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	7439-97-6
Chemical Name	Mercury
Substance ID	m-nite-7439-97-6_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.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (Hommel (1996)).	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
7	Flammable solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
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.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (Hommel (1996)).	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
11	Self-heating substances and mixtures	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (Hommel (1996)).	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
12	Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases	Not classified	- -	-	-	The substance is a metal (Hg), but from water solubility data of 0.06 mg/L (SRC Phys Prop (Access on Oct. 2011)), it is estimated that it does not react vigorously with water.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
13	Oxidizing liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Inorganic compounds containing no oxygen or halogen.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	It is an inorganic compound.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It attacks aluminum and many other metals and produces amalgams (ICSC,2004), but the classification is not possible due to no data. And there is information that stainless steel, steel, iron, glass, ceramics, and many synthetic substances are resistant (Hommel (1996)).	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
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)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Category 1	Danger	H330	P304+P340 P403+P233 P260 P271 P284 P310 P320 P405 P501	From the death of 20 out of 32 animals after 2-hour exposure of rats to mercury vapour at 0.027 mg/L (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 0.019 mg/L) (CICAD 50 (2003)), an LC50 value was 0.019 mg/L/4 hours or less, corresponding to Category 1.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Data are lacking. Besides, as for effects in humans, it is reported that inhalation, oral, or dermal exposure to mercury resulted in erythematous and pruritic skin rashes, heavy perspiration, reddened and peeling of the skin on the palms of the hands and soles of the feet, typically associated with acrodynia (CICAD (J) (2005)). However, because it was impossible to determine direct effects due to contact with the skin in the above, it was classified as "Classification not possible."	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 2	Warning	H319	P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P264 P280	It was classified in Category 2 because it is reported that red and burning eyes and conjunctivitis have been observed in persons exposed to high concentrations of mercury vapours (CICAD (J) (2005), ATSDR (1999)).	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
4	Skin sensitization	Category 1	Warning	H317	P302+P352 P333+P313 P362+P364 P261 P272 P280 P321 P501	It was classified in Category 1 because the Japan Society for Occupational Health (JSOH) classified it in occupational skin sensitizers Group 1 (Recommendation of Occupational Exposure Limits Vol. 53 (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2011)). Besides, in humans, there is a report on allergic contact dermatitis from metallic mercury, and there is a report on a case in a dentist who had a positive patch test and patch test results in which positive reactions to mercury were found in 62% of 29 patients with amalgam fillings and oral lichen planus as compared with 3% in controls (IARC 58 (1993)).	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data were found on tests using experimental animals or cultured cells for this substance itself. However, there are some reports from epidemiological surveys in humans, and reports include the following. There was no increased incidence of structural chromosomal aberrations due to occupational exposure to metallic mercury, but a significant increase in the incidence of aneuploidy or acentric fragments was seen (IARC 58 (1993)), no chromosomal effects were observed; a negative result (IARC 58 (1993)), and an increased rate of sister chromatid exchange in somatic cells was found (IARC 58 (1993)). However, it is described that the significance of these results was limited because of inadequate methods, because no confounders were taken into account, or because there was no dose-response relationship between the urine mercury levels (exposure concentration) and the observed effects, and the genotoxic potential of elemental mercury cannot be evaluated conclusively (DFGMAK-Doc 15 (2001)). Therefore, it was classified as "Classification not possible."	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
6	Carcinogenicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	It was classified as "Classification not possible" because it was classified in Group 3 for carcinogenicity by IARC (IARC 58 (1993)), A4 by ACGIH, and D by EPA. Besides, there are no appropriate data in animal tests. As for humans, epidemiological surveys by cohort studies or case-control studies were conducted in the United States, Sweden, Australia, Italy, and Canada, and there are multiple reports on increased risks of lung cancer, brain tumors, etc. from exposure to mercury (IARC 58 (1993)), while there are reports on contradicting results that there was no association between tumor incidences and exposure (IARC 58 (1993)), and data are insufficient for classification.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
7	Reproductive toxicity	Category 1A	Danger	H360	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	There are multiple epidemiological survey reports on the reproductive effects of exposure to mercury vapour in humans. It is reported that in a survey in female dentists occupationally exposed, total mercury levels in the hair were higher than those in the unexposed control group, and there were more anomalies such as spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, and congenital anomaly (spina bifida) than in the control (OEL Documentations Vol. 40 (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 1998)), and in a study in 349 women exposed to mercury vapour in the workplace, complications of parturition (toxicosis, abortions, prolonged parturition, hemorrhagic parturition) were increased compared with 215 unexposed controls (CICAD (J) (2005)). As above, because adverse reproductive effects of exposure to mercury in women were reported, it was classified in Category 1A. Besides, as for experimental animals, rats were exposed by inhalation to 2.5 mg/m3 for 3 weeks before fertilization and during gestational days 7-20, and there is a report on a significant decrease in the number of live pups after birth compared with the unexposed control group, and the cause of death of pups was unknown, although some of the death was attributed to a failure of lactation in the dams (IRIS (2002)).	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 1 (respiratory system, cardiovascular system, kidney, liver, central nervous system)	Danger	H370	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P321 P405 P501	It is described that respiratory disorders (bronchitis/bronchiolitis, interstitial pneumonia, dyspnea) and renal tubular disorders were observed after acute exposure to high levels of mercury vapour in humans, and in serious cases, death from respiratory failure or renal failure may occur (OEL Documentations Vol. 40 (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 1998)), and it is reported that short-term exposure to high concentrations of mercury vapour resulted in a range of effects from proteinuria, hematuria, and oliguria, to acute renal failure, with degeneration or necrosis of the proximal tubules (CICAD (J) (2005)). Therefore, it was classified in Category 1 (respiratory system, kidney). Furthermore, it was classified in Category 1 (cardiovascular system) because increases in heart rate and blood pressure have been reported after acute inhalation exposure to high concentrations of metallic mercury in humans (ATSDR (1999)), and it is reported that cellular degeneration with some necrosis of heart tissue was observed after exposure of rabbits to 0.0288 mg/m3 (corresponding to the guidance values for Category 1) for 2-30 hours (CICAD (J) (2003)). Also, it was classified in Category 1 (central nervous system) because it is described that the central nervous system is probably the most sensitive target for elementary mercury vapour exposure (CICAD 50 (2003)), and it is reported that marked cellular degeneration and widespread necrosis in the brain were found after exposure of rabbits to 0.0288 mg/m3 (corresponding to the guidance values for Category 1) for 2-30 hours (CICAD (J) (2003)). On the other hand, it is reported that inhalation of mercury vapours resulted in acute poisoning in a young child, and hepatocellular effects such as increases in ALT and serum bilirubin were seen, there is a case report on one man who died following short-term high-level exposure to mercury vapours and was found to have hepatomegaly and central lobular vacuolation at autopsy (CICAD (J) (2005), ATSDR (1999)). Therefore, it was classified in Category 1 (liver). From the above, it was classified in Category 1 (respiratory system, cardiovascular system, kidney, liver, central nervous system) for this hazard class.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 1 (nervous system, cardiovascular system, blood, liver, gingiva)	Danger	H372	P260 P264 P270 P314 P501	Tremor and behavioral and personality changes were observed in chronic exposure to high concentrations in humans, subjective symptoms such as toothache as well as gingivitis and excessive salivation occur in the oral cavity (OEL Documentations Vol. 40 (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 1998)), and workers who had worked in a plant for some years developed symptoms such as tremor, dizziness, unsteady gait, slow mental response, gingivitis, and gum pain due to occupational exposure (CICAD (J) (2005)). Also, signs such as abnormal nerve conduction velocities, weakness, paresthesia, and muscle cramps were reported in workers in a chloralkali plant (CICAD (J) (2005)). From the above, it was classified in Category 1 (nervous system, gingiva). Furthermore, it was classified in Category 1 (blood) because it is reported that elevated white blood cell count was seen in a 12-year-old girl with 6-month exposure to mercury vapour resulted from a spill of elementary mercury in her family, and in another family, frequent nosebleeds and thrombocytopenia were found in two of four family members exposed to mercury vapour (CICAD (J) (2005)). Also, workers occupationally exposed to mercury vapour for at least 5 years reported an increased incidence of palpitations and slightly reduced cardiovascular reflex responses, and in another plant, a high incidence of hypertension and an increased likelihood of death due to ischemic heart and cerebrovascular disease were reported in workers (ATSDR (1999)). Therefore, it was classified in Category 1 (cardiovascular system). On the other hand, it was classified in Category 1 (liver) because effects ranging from moderate pathological changes to marked cellular degeneration and some necrosis occurred in the liver after 12-week inhalation exposure of rabbits (0.86-6 mg/m3, exposure time: 7 hours/day) (CICAD 50 (2003)), and the exposure concentrations were within the guidance value range for Category 1. From the above, it was classified in Category 1 (nervous system, cardiovascular system, blood, liver, gingiva) for this hazard class. Besides, as for the kidney, it was not adopted as the target organ because data could not be found on adverse effects of repeated exposure.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）

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 in Category 1 from 96-hour LC50 = 0.006 mg/L for crustacea (Artemia salina) (AQUIRE, 2011).	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Category 1	Warning	H410	P273 P391 P501	If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified in Category 1 due to unknown behavior of the metal in water and 72-hour EC10 = 0.001 mg/L for algae (Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata) (AQUIRE, 2012). If acute toxicity data are used for a trophic level for which chronic toxicity data are not obtained, then it is classified in Category 1 due to unknown behavior of the metal in water and 96-hour LC50 = 0.006 mg/L for crustacea (Artemia salina) (AQUIRE, 2012). From the above results, it was classified in Category 1.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
12	Hazardous to the ozone layer	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	This substance is not listed in the Annexes to the Montreal Protocol.	FY2011	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）

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