GHS Classification Result
GENERAL INFORMATION
REFERENCE INFORMATION
PHYSICAL HAZARDS
HEALTH HAZARDS
ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS
NOTE:
GENERAL INFORMATION
| Item | Information |
|---|---|
| CAS RN | 80-62-6 |
| Chemical Name | Methyl methacrylate |
| Substance ID | H29-B-034 |
| Classification year (FY) | FY2017 |
| Ministry who conducted the classification | Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW)/Ministry of the Environment (MOE) |
| New/Revised | Revised |
| Classification result in other fiscal year | FY2006 |
| Download of Excel format | Excel file |
REFERENCE INFORMATION
| Item | Information |
|---|---|
| Guidance used for the classification (External link) | GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2013 revised edition (Ver. 1.1)) |
| UN GHS document (External link) | UN GHS document |
| Definitions/Abbreviations (Excel file) | Definitions/Abbreviations |
| Model Label by MHLW (External link) | |
| Model SDS by MHLW (External link) | MHLW Website (in Japanese Only) |
| OECD/eChemPortal (External link) | eChemPortal |
| Hazard class | Classification |
Pictogram Signal word |
Hazard statement (code) |
Precautionary statement (code) |
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 |
- |
- | - | Liquid (GHS definition) |
| 3 | Aerosols | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Not aerosol products. |
| 4 | Oxidizing gases | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Liquid (GHS definition) |
| 5 | Gases under pressure | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Liquid (GHS definition) |
| 6 | Flammable liquids | Category 2 |
 Danger |
H225 |
P303+P361+P353
P370+P378 P403+P235 P210 P233 P240 P241 P242 P243 P280 P501 |
Based on a flash point of 10 deg C (closed cup), and a boiling point of 101 deg C (GESTIS (Access on June 2017)), it was classified in Category 2. Besides, it is classified in Class 3, PGII in UNRTDG (UN 1247, stabilized). |
| 7 | Flammable solids | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Liquid (GHS definition) |
| 8 | Self-reactive substances and mixtures | Type G |
- |
- | - | There is a chemical group associated with self-reactive properties (ethylene group) in the molecule, but the stabilized one is classified in Class 3, PGII in UNRTDG (UN 1247) and does not correspond to self-reactive substances and mixtures, hazard class with the highest precedence. |
| 9 | Pyrophoric liquids | Not classified |
- |
- | - | It is estimated that it does not ignite at normal temperatures from an autoignition temperature of 421 deg C (ICSC (J) (2003)). |
| 10 | Pyrophoric solids | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Liquid (GHS definition) |
| 11 | Self-heating substances and mixtures | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | Test methods applicable to liquid substances are not available. |
| 12 | Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases | 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). |
| 13 | Oxidizing liquids | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | The substance is an organic compound containing oxygen (but not fluorine or chlorine) which is chemically bonded only to carbon or hydrogen. |
| 14 | Oxidizing solids | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Liquid (GHS definition) |
| 15 | Organic peroxides | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule |
| 16 | Corrosive to metals | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | No data available. |
| Hazard class | Classification |
Pictogram Signal word |
Hazard statement (code) |
Precautionary statement (code) |
Rationale for the classification | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Oral) | Not classified |
- |
- | - | Based on reports of LD50 values of 7,800 mg/kg (ACGIH (7th, 2015)), 7,900 mg/kg, 8,500 mg/kg, 9,400 mg/kg (above ECETOC JACC30 (1995)) for rats, this substance was classified as "Not classified." |
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Dermal) | Not classified |
- |
- | - | Based on a report of an LD50 value of > 5,000 mg/kg (EU-RAR (2002)) for rabbits, this substance was classified as "Not classified." |
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases) | Not applicable |
- |
- | - | Liquid (GHS definition) |
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours) | Category 4 |
 Warning |
H332 |
P304+P340
P261 P271 P312 |
Based on a report that an LC50 value in a 4-hour inhalation test with rats was 7,093 ppm (ECETOC JACC30 (1995), EU-RAR (2002), ACGIH (7th, 2015)), this substance was classified in Category 4. In the previous classification, it was judged as "Not classified" for the same LC50 value, and it was classified in Category 5 based on a report that symptoms such as respiratory tract irritation, weakness, fever, dizziness were observed at lower concentrations in humans (ECETOC JACC30 (1995)). However, since the LC50 value data was reexamined carefully and it was confirmed that it corresponded to Category 4, the classification result was changed. Besides, since the LC50 value was lower than 90% of the saturated vapor pressure concentration (38,614 ppm), a reference value in the unit of ppm was applied as vapour with little mist. |
| 1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists) | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | Classification not possible due to lack of data. |
| 2 | Skin corrosion/irritation | Category 2 |
Warning |
H315 |
P302+P352
P332+P313 P362+P364 P264 P280 P321 |
There are multiple case reports showing skin irritation in humans such as a volunteer test applying paraffin or olive oil containing 5% of this substance, in which erythema and eczematous dermatitis were noted in 18 out of 20 (EU-RAR (2002)). In addition, in a skin irritation test with rabbits, after applying this substance for 4 hours, erythema and oedema scores within 72 hours were 2-2.5, 1.5-1, respectively, and erythema and oedema scores after 7 days were 2, 0.5, respectively (EU-RAR (2002)). Therefore, this substance was classified in Category 2. Besides, this substance was classified as "Skin Irrit. 2" in EU CLP classification (ECHA CL Inventory (Access on June 2017)). |
| 3 | Serious eye damage/eye irritation | Category 2 |
Warning |
H319 |
P305+P351+P338
P337+P313 P264 P280 |
There is a report that in an eye irritation test with rabbits, there were no effects on the iris and cornea, and Grade 2 conjunctival redness was observed at 24 hours (EU-RAR (2002)). Also, there is a report that lacrimation, hyperemia, and irritation to the conjunctiva etc. were observed (ACGIH (7th, 2015)). Since there is no detailed data, it is not possible to subcategorize for this hazard class. Therefore, this substance was classified in category 2. |
| 4 | Respiratory sensitization | Category 1 |
 Danger |
H334 |
P304+P340
P342+P311 P261 P284 P501 |
Based on the classifications by the Japan Society For Occupational Health (occupational sensitizers to the airway Group 2) (OEL Documentations (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2002)), this substance was classified in Category 1. |
| 4 | Skin sensitization | Category 1 |
Warning |
H317 |
P302+P352
P333+P313 P362+P364 P261 P272 P280 P321 P501 |
Based on a report of a positive result in a skin sensitization test with guinea pigs (EU-RAR (2002)), and classification results by the Japan Society For Occupational Health (occupational skin sensitizers Group 2) (OEL Documentations (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2002)), this substance was classified in Category 1. Besides, this substance was classified as "Skin Sens. 1" in EU CLP classification (ECHA CL Inventory (Access on June 2017)). |
| 5 | Germ cell mutagenicity | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | The substance was classified as "Classification not possible" because it was not possible to classify a substance as "Not classified" according to the revised GHS classification guidance for the Japanese Government. As for in vivo, the results were negative in a dominant lethal assay with mice, negative in a chromosomal aberration test with mice bone marrow cells, negative and positive in chromosomal aberration tests with rat bone marrow cells (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), ACGIH (7th, 2015), DFGOT vol. 26 (2010), EU-RAR (2002), SIDS (2002), OEL Documentations (Japan Society For Occupational Health (JSOH), 2012), CICAD 4 (1998), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.11 (Ministry of the Environment, 2013), IRIS Tox. Review (1998)). However, the positive result of in vivo chromosomal aberration test is evaluated as poor reliability (EU-RAR (2002), SIDS (2002)). As for in vitro, it was negative in bacterial reverse mutation tests, and positive in mouse lymphoma tests, a micronucleus test, chromosomal aberration tests, and a sister chromatid exchange test with cultured mammalian cells. However, these positive results are results at high doses at which cytotoxicity were observed or results without dose dependency, and are considered inadequate to judge as positive in vitro (EU-RAR (2002), SIDS (2002)). |
| 6 | Carcinogenicity | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - |
There is a report that in epidemiological studies targeting factory workers in US companies of acrylic sheet production, a significant increase in mortality from colon cancer was observed, but the workers had been exposed to ethyl acrylate and volatile byproducts in addition to this substance. However, there is also a report that in epidemiological studies on the workers of a factory in the United States which manufactured this substance, no such effects were observed (IARC 60 (1994), DFGOT Vol. 26 (2010), ACGIH (7th, 2015)). On the other hand, as for experimental animals, an increase in no incidence of tumors was observed in a 2-year carcinogenicity study with rats dosed by drinking water (IARC 60 (1994)). In addition, no evidence of carcinogenicity was shown in both rats or mice in 2-year carcinogenicity studies with rats and mice exposed by inhalation (NTP TR314 (1986), IARC 60 (1994)). Since there is inadequate evidence in humans for carcinogenicity and there is evidence suggesting lack of carcinogenicity in experimental animals, this substance was classified in Group 3 for carcinogenicity by IARC (IARC 60 (1994)). Other than this, as for classifications by other organizations, it was classified as NL (Not Likely to be carcinogenic to humans) by the EPA (IRIS (1998)) and in A4 by ACGIH (ACGIH (7th, 2015)). From the above, it was classified as "Classification not possible" based on the classification results of carcinogenicity by IARC and ACGIH. |
| 7 | Reproductive toxicity | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | In developmental toxicity studies with pregnant rats or pregnant mice dosed by inhalation during the organogenesis period, there were no effects or only a slight effect (reduced fetuses body weights) in fetuses in most of these studies (DFGOT Vol. 26 (2010), ACGIH (7th, 2015)). Among them, in one study with rats, an increase in early/late absorbed embryos at 1,000 ppm was observed, but the result of this study was judged not to be applicable for risk assessment in the EU due to reasons such as inadequate test protocol and poor documentation (DFGOT Vol. 26 (2010)). In addition, in a teratogenic study with rats, fetal toxicity (early fetal deaths, reduced crown-rump length, hematomas) was observed at doses where maternal toxicity (death, reduced body weight, etc.) was manifested, and this was adopted as evidence in the previous classification (Category 2). However, it was considered to be inappropriate to be used for the classification since it is pointed out that this study report is not useful for assessment because of the too high dose (110,000 mg/m3 (26,180 ppm)) (DFGOT Vol. 26 (2010)). From the above, it is considered that developmental effects are mostly slight in the inhalation route, however, since there is no information on the assessment of effects on fertility and sexual function, the classification is not possible due to lack of data. |
| 8 | Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure | Category 1 (respiratory organs), Category 3 (narcotic effects) |
Danger Warning |
H370
H336 |
P308+P311
P260 P264 P270 P321 P405 P501 P304+P340 P403+P233 P261 P271 P312 |
In humans, there is a report that in a test in which volunteers were exposed by inhalation to 48-480 ppm of this substance, irritation of the respiratory tract, weakness, fever, dizziness, nausea, headache, and sleepiness were observed after 20-90 minutes (ECETOC JACC30 (1995), EU-RAR (2002), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). As for experimental animals, there is a report that in 2-hour inhalation exposure with rats exposed by inhalation at 100 ppm (converted 4-hour equivalent value: 70.7 ppm) corresponding to Category 1, interalveolar congestion/hemorrhage, pulmonary vasodilatation and pulmonary edema were observed (EU-RAR (2002)). From the above, this substance was classified in Category 1 (respiratory organs), Category 3 (narcotic effects). In the previous classification, it was classified in Category 3 (respiratory tract irritation). However, Category 1 (respiratory organs) was adopted according to the GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government since effects on the lung in experimental animals were observed at the dose corresponding to Category 1. |
| 9 | Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure | Category 1 (nervous system, respiratory organs) |
Danger |
H372 |
P260
P264 P270 P314 P501 |
In humans, conjunctivitis, atrophic rhinitis, laryngitis, an increase in the incidence of coughs and mild airway obstruction, autonomic neuropathy, nervous weakness, headache, dizziness, nervousness, inability to concentrate, memory decline, hypertension, and hypotension are reported (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.11 (Ministry of the Environment, 2013)). As for experimental animals, no effects were observed within the guidance value range for Category 2. In a 21-day repeated dose toxicity test with rats dosed by gavage, effects on the nervous system (decreased locomotor activity/learning ability, increased aggression, an increase in biogenic amine levels in the pons, medulla oblongata and hippocampus, an increase of noradrenaline in the cerebral cortex and corpus striatum, a decrease of dopamine in the corpus striatum, an increase of serotonin in the hypothalamus) were observed at 500 mg/kg (117 mg/kg/day) exceeding the guidance value range for Category 2 (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.11 (Ministry of the Environment, 2013)). However, effects are unknown at doses less than this since this is the lowest dose in this test. Moreover, in 2-year inhalation toxicity studies with rats and mice, inflammation of nasal cavity and degeneration of olfactory epithelium, etc. were observed (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances Vol.11 (Ministry of the Environment, 2013), Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). However, effects are unknown at doses less than this since it is the lowest dose in this test. From the above, this substance was classified in Category 1 (nervous system, respiratory organs) since effects on the nervous system and respiratory organs were observed in humans. |
| 10 | Aspiration hazard | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | Classification not possible due to lack of data. |
| Hazard class | Classification |
Pictogram Signal word |
Hazard statement (code) |
Precautionary statement (code) |
Rationale for the classification | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Acute) | Category 3 |
- |
H402 |
P273
P501 |
From 48-hour EC50 = 48 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (EU RAR: 2002), it was classified in Category 3. |
| 11 | Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term) | Not classified |
- |
- | - | Due to being rapidly degradable (readily biodegradable, a degradation rate by BOD: 94.3% (J-CHECK, 1976)), no bioaccumulation (LogKow: 1.38 (20 deg C) (Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances vol. 11 (Ministry of the Environment, 2013))), 21-day NOEC (reproduction inhibition) = 3.5 mg/L for crustacea (Daphnia magna) (Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Ministry of the Environment in Japan (Ministry of the Environment, 2017)), and 72-hour NOEC (rate method) = 86 mg/L for algae (Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata) (Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Ministry of the Environment in Japan (Ministry of the Environment, 2017)), it was classified as "Not classified." |
| 12 | Hazardous to the ozone layer | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | No data available. |
NOTE:
|
* A blank or "-" in a cell of classification denotes that the classification of the hazard class was not conducted. * Hazard_statement_and/or_Precautionary_statement will show when hovering the mouse over a code of Hazard_statement_and/or_Precautionary_statement. Hazard_statement_and/or_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. * Codes assigned to each of the hazard statements and codes for each of the precautionary statement are based on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) in United Nations. |