GHS Classification Result
GENERAL INFORMATION
REFERENCE INFORMATION
PHYSICAL HAZARDS
HEALTH HAZARDS
ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS
NOTES:
Updated date:
GENERAL INFORMATION
| Item | Information |
|---|---|
| CAS number | 923-26-2 |
| Chemical name | 2-Hydroxypropyl methacrylate |
| Substance ID | 23A5123 |
| Fiscal year of classification conducted | FY2011 |
| Classifier(s) (Ministries) | Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare （MHLW）, Ministry of the Environment （MOE） |
| New/Revised | New |
| Download in Excel format | Excel file |
| Item | Information |
|---|---|
| Guidance used for classification (External link) |
Physical Hazards & Health Hazards: GHS Classification Guidance by the Japanese Government （July, 2010）
Environmental Hazards: UN GHS Document （4th revised edition） |
| Definitions / Abbreviations (Excel file) | Definitions / Abbreviations |
| Model Label by MHLW (External link) | MHLW Website （in Japanese Only） |
| Model SDS by MHLW (External link) | MHLW Website （in Japanese Only） |
| OECD/eChemPortal (External link) | eChemPortal |
| Hazard class | Classification |
Pictogram (Code: symbol) Signal word |
Code (Hazard statement) |
Code (Precautionary statement) |
Rationale for the classification | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Explosives | Not applicable | - | - | - | There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule. |
| 2 | Flammable gases （including chemically unstable gases） | Not applicable | - | - | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 3 | Aerosols | Not applicable | - | - | - | Not an aerosol product. |
| 4 | Oxidizing gases | Not applicable | - | - | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 5 | Gases under pressure | Not applicable | - | - | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 6 | Flammable liquids | Not classified | - | - | - | A flash point of 101 degrees C [closed cup] (IUCLID (2000)) is above 93 degrees C. |
| 7 | Flammable solids | Not applicable | - | - | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 8 | Self-reactive substances and mixtures | Classification not possible | - | - | - |
There is a chemical group present in the molecule associated with a self-reactive property (unsaturated bond), but the classification is not possible due to no data. Besides, there is the information that a marketed product contains 100 to 200 mg/L hydroquinone monomethyl ether (polymerization inhibitor) as a stabilizer (Verschueren (4th, 2001)). And there is the information about methacrylate esters that "they are stabilized by adding hydroquinone or pyrogallol." (HSDB (2002)). And there is the information that "inhibitor of polymerization: 200 ppm hydroquinone. Typical inhibitor level: 1200ppm monomethyl ether hydroquinone" for this substance (HSDB (2002)). |
| 9 | Pyrophoric liquids | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 10 | Pyrophoric solids | Not applicable | - | - | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 11 | Self-heating substances and mixtures | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No established test method suitable for liquid substances. |
| 12 | Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases | Not applicable | - | - | - | Not containing metals or semimetals (B, Si, P, Ge, As, Se, Sn, Sb, Te, Bi, Po, At). |
| 13 | Oxidizing liquids | Not applicable | - | - | - | An organic compound does not contain fluorine or chlorine but contains oxygen which is not chemically bonded to elements other than carbon or hydrogen. |
| 14 | Oxidizing solids | Not applicable | - | - | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 15 | Organic peroxides | Not applicable | - | - | - | An organic compound that does not contain -O-O- structure. |
| 16 | Corrosive to metals | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| Hazard class | Classification |
Pictogram (Code: symbol) Signal word |
Code (Hazard statement) |
Code (Precautionary statement) |
Rationale for the classification | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Acute toxicity （Oral） | Not classified | - | - | - | From an LD50 value of >2000 mg/kg bw and no death in rats (OECD TG 401; GLP) (English abstract of Report on Toxicity Tests of Chemical Substances, MHLW (Access on Aug. 2011)), it was classified as "Not classified." |
| 1 | Acute toxicity （Dermal） | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 1 | Acute toxicity （Inhalation: Gases） | Not applicable | - | - | - | "Liquids" according to GHS definition. |
| 1 | Acute toxicity （Inhalation: Vapours） | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 1 | Acute toxicity （Inhalation: Dusts and mists） | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 2 | Skin corrosion/irritation | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 3 | Serious eye damage/eye irritation | Category 2A |  |
H319 |
P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P264 P280 |
After the application of a drop of an undiluted isomer mixture containing 80 % of this substance to three rabbit eyes, slight irritation, conjunctivitis, keratitis, and corneal opacity within 1 hour and purulent conjunctivitis and iritis on the next day were observed. Slight recoveries were observed in 2 animals during a 7-day observation period, but keratitis and corneal opacity remained. (SIDS (2007)) It is conceivable that more than seven days are necessary for recovery from above results. It was classified in Category 2A by taking R36 in EU classification (EC-JRC (ESIS) (Access on July. 2011)) into consideration. |
| 4 | Respiratory sensitization | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 4 | Skin sensitization | Category 1 | |
H317 |
P302+P352 P333+P313 P261 P272 P280 P321 P363 P501 |
According to a skin disease survey about acrylate compounds by Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, positive responses to this compound were observed in 15 out of 124 patients with occupational exposure in the 1990s. (SIDS (2007)) On the other hand, a 38-year-old female patient sensitized to a glue containing 2 components of an acrylic compound showed a positive response to this substance in a patch test. (SIDS (2007)) Furthermore, in a survey of 93 dental technicians with suspected occupational skin disease, 50% was diagnosed with allergic contact dermatitis and 16 humans showed positive responses to this substance. (SIDS (2007)) And 1619 patients were suspected of occupational contact dermatitis in the 1990s and 2 out of 9 patients sensitized to acrylate resin showed positive responses to this substance in a patch test in the occupational exposures. (SIDS (2007)) Because including above reports, there are many epidemiological survey reports and case reports showing allergic dermatitis by this substance or an acrylic compound including this substance (DFGMAK-Doc.16 (2001), SIDS (2007)), it was classified in Category 1. Besides, it is classified in R43 in EU classification (EC-JRC (ESIS) (Access on July. 2011)), and an acrylic compound is listed as allergic substance in Contact Dermatitis (Frosch) (Contact Dermatitis (4th Ed. (2006)), corresponding to List 1). |
| 5 | Germ cell mutagenicity | Classification not possible | - | - | - |
The classification is not possible due to no in vivo test data. Besides, as in vitro tests, despite a negative in an Ames test (OECD TG 471 and 472, GLP) (Report on Toxicity Tests of Chemical Substances, MHLW (Access on Aug. 2011)), positives in a chromosomal aberration test using Chinese hamster cultured cells (CHL/IU) (OECD TG 473, GLP) (Report on Toxicity Tests of Chemical Substances, MHLW (Access on Aug. 2011)) and a gene mutation test using L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells (SIDS (2007)) were reported. |
| 6 | Carcinogenicity | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 7 | Reproductive toxicity | Classification not possible | - | - | - |
In a combined repeated oral dose toxicity test with reproductive developmental toxicity test in rats (OECD TG 422, GLP), effects of the test substance on sexual function and fertility such as copulation index, a number of pregnant animals, length of gestation, fertility index, implantation index, and birth index were not observed. A number of pups born, delivery index, a number of live pups born, live birth index, and viability index on lactation day 4 were not different from those in a control group. And effects on newborn were not observed. (English abstract of Report on Toxicity Tests of Chemical Substances, MHLW (Access on Aug. 2011)) But, the classification is not possible because data on effects on fetal development including teratogenicity were insufficient. |
| 8 | Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure | Classification not possible | - | - | - |
As a result of a single oral dose toxicity test in rats (OECD TG401; GLP), it is reported that salivation right after administration in 2000 mg/kg group in males was only observed, but abnormal clinical signs in groups of 500 and 1000 mg/kg in both males and females or necropsy abnormality in all groups in males and females were not observed. (Report on Toxicity Tests of Chemical Substances, MHLW (Access on Aug. 2011)) It corresponds to "Not classified" in an oral route, but, it was classified as "Classification not possible" in specific target organ toxicity (single exposure) because effects in other routes (dermal, inhalation) are unknown due to no data. |
| 9 | Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure | Classification not possible | - | - | - |
In a combined repeated oral dose toxicity test with reproductive/developmental toxicity test in rats (OECD TG 422, GLP), it is reported that two males and one female died and symptoms of salivation, a decrease in locomotor activity, and ptosis in 1000 mg/kg group were observed, and a NOEL was 300 mg/kg bw/day above a range of Category 2 in Guidance values (10 to 100 mg/kg bw/day) (converted to a 90-day equivalent: males 163, females 123 mg/kg bw/day). (English abstract of Report on Toxicity Tests of Chemical Substances, MHLW (Access on Aug. 2011)) Therefore, it corresponds to "Not classified" in an oral route, but, it was classified as "Classification not possible" in specific target organ toxicity (repeated exposures) because effects in other routes (dermal, inhalation) are unknown due to no data. |
| 10 | Aspiration hazard | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| Hazard class | Classification |
Pictogram (Code: symbol) Signal word |
Code (Hazard statement) |
Code (Precautionary statement) |
Rationale for the classification | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Hazardous to the aquatic environment （Acute） | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 11 | Hazardous to the aquatic environment （Long-term） | Classification not possible | - | - | - | No data. |
| 12 | Hazardous to the ozone layer | Classification not possible | - | - | - | This substance is not listed in Annexes to the Montreal Protocol. |
NOTES:
|
* Hazard statement or Precautionary statement will show when hovering the mouse over a code of Hazard statement or Precautionary statement. Hazard statement and Precautionary statement are also provided in the Excel file. * Classification was conducted by relevant Japanese Ministries in accordance with GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government, and is intended to provide a reference for preparing GHS labelling and SDS for users. * This is a provisional English translation of classification results and is subject to revision without notice. * The responsibility for any resulting GHS labelling and SDS referenced from this site is with users. |
Updated date:
|
2016/12/19 Addition of Rationale for the classification |