Item | Information |
---|---|
CAS RN | 2867-47-2 |
Chemical Name | 2-(Dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate |
Substance ID | R03-C-018-MHLW, MOE |
Classification year (FY) | FY2021 |
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 | FY2007 FY2006 |
Download of Excel format | Excel file |
Item | Information |
---|---|
Guidance used for the classification (External link) | GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0)) |
UN GHS document (External link) | UN GHS document |
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 Signal word |
Hazard statement (code) |
Precautionary statement (code) |
Rationale for the classification | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Explosives | - |
- |
- | - | - |
2 | Flammable gases | - |
- |
- | - | - |
3 | Aerosols | - |
- |
- | - | - |
4 | Oxidizing gases | - |
- |
- | - | - |
5 | Gases under pressure | - |
- |
- | - | - |
6 | Flammable liquids | - |
- |
- | - | - |
7 | Flammable solids | - |
- |
- | - | - |
8 | Self-reactive substances and mixtures | - |
- |
- | - | - |
9 | Pyrophoric liquids | - |
- |
- | - | - |
10 | Pyrophoric solids | - |
- |
- | - | - |
11 | Self-heating substances and mixtures | - |
- |
- | - | - |
12 | Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases | - |
- |
- | - | - |
13 | Oxidizing liquids | - |
- |
- | - | - |
14 | Oxidizing solids | - |
- |
- | - | - |
15 | Organic peroxides | - |
- |
- | - | - |
16 | Corrosive to metals | - |
- |
- | - | - |
17 | Desensitized explosives | - |
- |
- | - | - |
Hazard class | Classification | Pictogram Signal word |
Hazard statement (code) |
Precautionary statement (code) |
Rationale for the classification | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Acute toxicity (Oral) | - |
- |
- | - | - |
1 | Acute toxicity (Dermal) | - |
- |
- | - | - |
1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases) | - |
- |
- | - | - |
1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours) | - |
- |
- | - | - |
1 | Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists) | - |
- |
- | - | - |
2 | Skin corrosion/irritation | - |
- |
- | - | - |
3 | Serious eye damage/eye irritation | - |
- |
- | - | - |
4 | Respiratory sensitization | - |
- |
- | - | - |
4 | Skin sensitization | Category 1 |
Warning |
H317 | P302+P352 P333+P313 P362+P364 P261 P272 P280 P321 P501 |
[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (3), it was classified in Category 1. Also, based on the new findings, the classification result was changed. [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that, in a study of 1,632 patients in the dental field conducted in 1995 to 2004, a patch test with 0.2% of this substance was given to 48 patients who showed positive reactions to one or more methacrylate compounds and positive reactions were observed in 4 people (2 dental patients and 2 dental workers) (DFG MAK (2014)). (2) From several case reports indicating positive results in patch tests with this substance in patients having eczema, it could be concluded that this substance induced sensitization in humans (DFG MAK (2014)). (3) It was reported that patch tests on 79 dentists (72 women, 7 men) and 46 dental nurses (women) in Poland who were suspected of occupational allergic contact dermatitis were conducted in 1990 to 2000, and as a result, one person showed positive reactions to this substance (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2007), Environmental Risk Assessment for Chemical Substances, Tentative Hazard Assessment Sheet (Ministry of the Environment, 2006), DFG MAK (2014)). [Reference Data, etc.] (4) It was reported that, in a maximization test (OECD TG 406, GLP, intradermal induction: 1% solution) with guinea pigs (n=20), the positive rate was 0% (0/20 animals) (Initial Risk Assessment Report (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008), Hazard Assessment Report (CERI, NITE, 2007), DFG MAK (2014), REACH registration dossier (Accessed Oct. 2021)). (5) In the ECHA, it was classified in Skin Sens. 1. (6) In the DFG, it was classified in Sh. |
5 | Germ cell mutagenicity | - |
- |
- | - | - |
6 | Carcinogenicity | - |
- |
- | - | - |
7 | Reproductive toxicity | - |
- |
- | - | - |
8 | Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure | - |
- |
- | - | - |
9 | Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure | - |
- |
- | - | - |
10 | Aspiration hazard | - |
- |
- | - | - |
Hazard class | Classification | Pictogram Signal word |
Hazard statement (code) |
Precautionary statement (code) |
Rationale for the classification | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
11 | Hazardous to the aquatic environment Short term (Acute) | Category 2 |
- |
H401 | P273 P501 |
It was classified in Category 2 from 72-hour ErC50 = 9.0 mg for algae (Raphidocelis subcapitata) (Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Ministry of the Environment in Japan (Ministry of the Environment, 1997)). |
11 | Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic) | Category 2 |
- |
H411 | P273 P391 P501 |
If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified in Category 2 due to being not rapidly degradable (BIOWIN) and 21-day NOEC = 0.48 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, 1997)). If acute toxicity data are used for a trophic level for which chronic toxicity data are not obtained (fish), then it is classified in Category 3 due to being not rapidly degradable and 96-hour LC50 = 19 mg/L for fish (Oryzias latipes) (Results of Aquatic Toxicity Tests of Chemicals conducted by Ministry of the Environment in Japan (Ministry of the Environment, 1997), Initial Risk Assessment (NITE, CERI, NEDO, 2008)). By drawing a comparison between the above results, it was classified in Category 2. The classification result was revised from the previous classification by changing how to classify it in chronic toxicity and using new information. |
12 | Hazardous to the ozone layer | Classification not possible |
- |
- | - | This substance is not listed in the Annexes to the Montreal Protocol. |
|