NITE - Chemical Management Field

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

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	79-34-5
Chemical Name	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (Acetylene tetrachloride)
Substance ID	m-nite-79-34-5_v2
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.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (ICSC (2005)).	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
7	Flammable solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
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.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (ICSC (2005)).	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
10	Pyrophoric solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
11	Self-heating substances and mixtures	Not classified	- -	-	-	It is not combustible (ICSC (2005)).	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
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).	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
13	Oxidizing liquids	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.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available. Besides, there is information that aluminum is inappropriate as a container and that steel is resistant (Hommel (1991)).	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
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 reports (6 data) of LD50 values of 200 mg/kg (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010)), 250 mg/kg (ATSDR (2008)), 319 mg/kg (ATSDR (2008), ACGIH (7th, 2001)), 330 mg/kg (ATSDR (2008)), 800 mg/kg (ATSDR (2008)), 1,000 mg/kg (CICAD 3 (1998)), 250-330 mg/kg (CICAD 3 (1998)), 200-800 mg/kg, (IRIS TR (2010)), and 250-800 mg/kg (SIDS (2005)) for rats. Based on the GHS classification guidance for the Japanese government, it was classified in Category 4 to which the larger number of data (4 cases) corresponds. Besides, 2 cases correspond to Category 3. New information sources (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), IRIS TR (2010), ATSDR (2008), SIDS (2005)) were added, and the category was revised.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Not classified	- -	-	-	Based on multiple reports of LD50 values within the range of 3,990-8,200 mg/kg for rabbits (ATSDR (2008), SIDS (2005), ACGIH (7th, 2001), CICAD 3 (1998)), it was classified as "Not classified."	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Liquid (GHS definition)	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Category 3	Danger	H331	P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P311 P321 P405 P501	Based on reports of LC50 values (4 hours) of 640 ppm (SIDS (2005)), 1,000 ppm (PATTY (6th, 2012), ACGIH (7th, 2001)), and 1,200 ppm (IRIS TR (2010), ATSDR (2008), SIDS (2005)) for rats, it was classified in Category 3. Besides, since LC50 values were lower than 90% of the saturated vapour concentration (6,078 ppm), the reference value in units of ppm was applied as a vapour without a mist.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Category 2	Warning	H315	P302+P352 P332+P313 P362+P364 P264 P280 P321	There is a report that it showed severe irritation with the primary skin irritation index of 6 (maximum value of 8) when 0.01 mL of the undiluted liquid of this substance was applied by open patch to the skin of rabbits for 24 hours (SIDS (2005)). In addition, in other tests with rabbits, there is a report that hyperemia, edema and severe blisters were observed (ATSDR (2008)), and there is a report that since erythema was observed, and the skin primary irritation score was 2.6 (maximum value of 8), it was moderately irritating (IUCLID (2000)). From the above results, it was classified in Category 2.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Category 2A	Warning	H319	P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P264 P280	There is a report that it was "irritating" based on the eye irritation score of 42.5/110 in a test in which 0.1 mL of the undiluted liquid of this substance was applied to rabbits' eyes (SIDS (2005)). There are reports that "it was irritating" by exposure of guinea pigs to the vapour (ACGIH (7th, 2001), CICAD 3 (1998), ATSDR (2008)). Moreover, irritation was observed in humans (ATSDR (2008)). From the above results, it was classified in Category 2A.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
4	Skin sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Category 2	Warning	H341	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	As for in vivo, it was negative in a dominant lethal test with rats, weakly positive (female) and negative (male) in a chromosomal aberration test with rats bone marrow cells, positive in a peripheral blood micronucleus test with mice (male and female), positive or negative in an unscheduled DNA synthesis test with mouse hepatocytes, and positive in DNA bond tests with the liver, kidney, lung and stomach of mice and rats (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), ATSDR (2008), SIDS (2005), NTP DB (Access on September 2014), IARC 71 (1999)). As for in vitro, it was positive or negative in bacterial reverse mutation tests, negative in gene mutation tests and chromosomal aberration tests with cultured mammalian cells, and positive in sister chromatid exchange tests with cultured mammalian cells (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), OEL Documentations (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH)), 1984, SIDS (2005), ATSDR (2008), CICAD 3 (1998), NTP DB (Access on September 2014)). From the above, according to the GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government, it was classified in Category 2.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
6	Carcinogenicity	Category 1B	Danger	H350	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1), it was classified in Category 1B because, in an adequate test with only one species of animals (mice), an increasing tendency and an increased incidence of hepatocellular carcinomas were observed in both males and females and it was judged that there was sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity in an animal test. Also, based on the new findings, the classification result was changed. [Evidence Data] (1) In a carcinogenicity study with rats and mice dosed by gavage for 78 weeks (after the dosing period, rats were observed for 32 weeks and mice were observed for 12 weeks before sacrifice), an increasing tendency and an increased incidence of hepatocellular carcinomas were observed in both male and female mice (males and females: 0, 142, 282 mg/kg/day). In the test with rats (males: 0, 62, 108 mg/kg/day, females: 0, 43, 76 mg/kg/day), no significant increase in the incidence of liver tumors (hepatocellular adenomas or hepatocellular carcinomas combined) was observed in males in the high-dose group but the incidence exceeded the historical data. In addition, hepatocellular carcinomas observed in 2/49 animals was a rare tumor in rats of this strain (Osborne-Mendel) (IARC 106 (2014), IRIS (2010), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), ACGIH (7th, 2001)). (2) This substance is a target substance in the public announcement on 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 based on paragraph (3) of Article 28 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act (guidelines in order to prevent the impairment of worker's health, announcement No. 27 on February 7, 2020). (3) As for the classification results by domestic and international organizations, the IARC classified this substance in Group 2B (IARC 106 (2014)), the Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH) classified it in Group 2B (Recommendation of Occupational Exposure Limits (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2021): proposed in 2015), the EPA classified it in L (Likely to be carcinogenic to humans) (IRIS (2010)), the ACGIH classified it in A3 (ACGIH (7th, 2001)), and the DFG classified it in Category 4 (List of MAK and BAT values (2020)).	FY2021	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
7	Reproductive toxicity	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No effects on male fertility and offspring were observed in a reproductive toxicity test with rats (mating exposed males with unexposed females) by the inhalation route (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), ATSDR (2008), SIDS (2005), ACGIH (7th, 2001)). However, since this test was conducted with only 1 concentration (0 or 2 ppm), the reliability was poor. There are reports that decreases in the fetal body weight and resorptions were observed at doses where maternal toxicity (decreased body weight gain, death) was observed in a teratogenicity test (dose-finding study) with rats and mice by the oral route (feeding) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), SIDS (2005), NTP (1991)). It is described in SIDS (2005) that it is not possible to draw valid assessment from these limited data on developmental toxicity. There are reports that decreased testicular and epididymal weights, testicular atrophy, decreased sperm motility and altered estrous cycles were observed in repeated dose toxicity tests with rats and mice by the oral route (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), SIDS (2005), CICAD 3 (1998)). However, its relevance to decreased body weight gain was pointed out (NTP TOX 49 (2004)), and no effects on the genetic organs were observed in further long-term tests (78 weeks) with rats and mice (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), SIDS (2005), CICAD 3 (1998)). On the other hand, there were few data on the reproductive function and fertility. Therefore, it was classified as "Classification not possible" due to lack of data.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 1 (central nervous system, liver, kidney), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects)	Danger Warning	H370 H335 H336	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P321 P405 P501 P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312	This substance had respiratory tract irritation and narcotic effect (SIDS (2005), ACGIH (7th, 2001), ATSDR (2008), CICAD 3 (1998)). There is a description that the main effects of this substance were those on the central nervous system, liver and kidney (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), ACGIH (7th, 2001), CICAD 3 (1998), PATTY (6th, 2012)). In humans, abdominal pain, cough, sore throat, headache, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, lethargy, confusion, tremors and convulsions were observed by the inhalation exposure, and abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting were observed in the oral ingestion. Additionally, although the route was unknown, in reports of cases of suicidal or accidental poisonings, and of exposure in workers or volunteers, effects on the central nervous system such as confusion, loss of equilibrium, drowsiness, convulsions, coma, tremor, dizziness, functional decline of the central nervous system, loss of consciousness, incoordination, anesthesia and somnolence, hepatic effects such as liver cytolysis, liver degeneration, hepatic congestion, hepatic necrosis, fatty degeneration, severe liver disorder, jaundice and liver enlargement, effects on the kidney such as renal tubular damage, pulmonary congestion, pulmonary edema, bleeding in the epicardium or endocardia, congestion in the esophagus or stomach mucosa, and death were reported (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010), ACGIH (7th, 2001), CICAD 3 (1998), PATTY (6th, 2012), HSDB (Access on August 2014), OEL Documentations (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 1984), SIDS (2005), ATSDR (2008)). As for experimental animals, after sub-lethal concentration exposure, the main target organs were the central nervous system, and there is a report of delayed anesthesia-like symptoms and the liver with degenerative lesions (observed at the end of the two-week observation period) (SIDS (2005)). Moreover, there are reports that reflex reactivity in mice was reduced by the inhalation exposure (30 minutes) at 1091 ppm (7.49 mg/L), and that a decrease in spontaneous motor activity was seen in rats by the inhalation exposure (6 hours) at 200 ppm (1.37 mg/L) (ACGIH (7th, 2001)). In addition, ataxia, prostration and narcosis were reported (ATSDR (2008)). From the above, since effects on the central nervous system, liver and kidney, respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects in humans were regarded as effects, it was classified in Category 1 (central nervous system, liver, kidney), Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation, narcotic effects). Besides, since the effects on the lung (pulmonary congestion, pulmonary edema) were considered to be secondary effects, it was not adopted for category.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 1 (central nervous system, liver)	Danger	H372	P260 P264 P270 P314 P501	In an epidemiological study in which 380 Indian workers were occupationally exposed to this substance at concentrations of 63-686 mg/m3, symptoms on the central nervous system (tremor, headache, dizziness) and symptoms on the digestive system (loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain) were observed (ATSDR (2008), SIDS (2005), ACGIH (7th, 2001), CICAD 3 (1998), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010)). In an epidemiological study in which Hungarian workers were exposed to this substance at concentrations of 10-1,700 mg/m3, it was described that about half of the workers were diagnosed with hepatitis in manipulation and hepatic function tests, and disorder of hepatic function and enlarged liver were observed in some workers, and symptoms such as loss of appetite, headache and stomach pain were observed (ATSDR (2008), SIDS (2005), ACGIH (7th, 2001), CICAD 3 (1998), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.8 (Ministry of the Environment, 2010)). Based on the above descriptions, the central nervous system, liver and gastrointestinal tract were considered to be target organs. However, as for symptoms on the digestive system, it was described that specific symptoms were not associated with exposure concentrations, and these disappeared early after stopping exposure (ATSDR (2008)). Therefore, it was considered that qualitative and objective evidence was lacking in order to adopt the digestive system organs to be the specific target organ. As for experimental animals, based on descriptions that in tests with rats and mice dosed by feeding for 14 weeks, hepatic effects (hepatocellular vacuolization, hepatocyte hypertrophy, necrosis, pigmentation, increased serum ALT and SDH (sorbitol dehydrogenase)) were observed in rats at doses within the range of Category 2 (20-80 mg/kg/day), and that increased relative liver weight and elevated serum SDH were observed in mice at 80 mg/kg/day (IRIS (2010), ATSDR (2008), PATTY (6th, 2012)), the liver was regarded as a target organ. Moreover, in a test with rats dosed by feeding for 3 weeks, adding to hepatic effects (hepatocyte hypertrophy, vacuolation), lethargy as a symptom of the central nervous system was observed at doses corresponding to Category 2 (104-208 mg/kg/day (converted guidance value: 24-48 mg/kg/day)) (SIDS (2005), ATSDR (2008)). Additionally, though in a test with only 1 concentration, it was described that central nervous system depressing symptoms were observed in early period at 560 ppm (3,850 mg/m3: corresponding to "Not classified") in a 15-week inhalation exposure test with rats (SIDS (2005)). From the above, based on the hazardous findings in humans and experimental animals, it was classified in Category 1 (central nervous system, liver).	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification not possible due to lack of data. Besides, although kinematic viscosity at 20 deg C was 1.11 mm2/sec (calculation value: HSDB (Access on August 2014)), it is not a "hydrocarbon," therefore, it was not applicable to the criteria for classification.	FY2014	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.0))

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	Classified into Category 2 from its 48h-EC50 = 9.3 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (SIDS, 2005), etc.	FY2010	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Not classified	- -	-	-	Classified as "Not classified" based on 28d-NOEC = 6.9 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (SIDS, 2005), etc., though its acute toxicity is Category 2.	FY2010	GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
12	Hazardous to the ozone layer	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	This substance is not listed in Annexes to the Montreal Protocol.	FY2010	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