• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.156-163
• /
• 2013

Objectives: Numerous poisonous substances are used in paint manufacture, but there are differences in the results of GHS classification between the Ministry of Labor(MOL) and the Ministry of Environment(MOE). Therefore, paint manufacturers suffer confusion as to how to classify a given chemical's risk and hazard level. This paper was designed to compare the classification results of chemicals by the MOL and the MOE and suggest a harmonization measure. Methods: After selecting 25 poisonous substances from among the organic solvents, pigments, and additives used in paint manufacturer, the GHS classification results by MOL and MOE were compared. Further the logic and classification of the GHS proposed by each Ministry was analyzed. Based on the derived results, a harmonization plan was proposed. Results: Based on the GHS classification of the poisonous substances, the concordance is 10.0-66.6 %, excluded flammable liquid. The GHS classifications differed based on the suggested building blocks, the sub-classification method used, the references(data sources), and subjective judgment of the experts from each Ministry. In order to pursue the harmonization plan, cooperation is demanded from the MOL and MOE.

• Fire Science and Engineering
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.84-90
• /
• 2007

The UN recommends to the member of OECD to implement the GHS (Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals) that harmonized the flammable materials for classification, labelling, production, transport, storage, handling, usage and discard. There are no significant differences between UN and GHS because GHS is based on physico-chemical hazard and acute toxity of classification and labelling of UN regulation for the classification and transportation of flammable materials. In this paper it was analyzed that the classification, labelling and test method of flammable materials for GHS and the national law of safety management of flammable materials.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.140-148
• /
• 2012

Objectives: This study was performed to provide harmonized guidelines on health and environmental classification criteria and its results of chemicals in Korea. Methods: Firstly, The history of GHS implementation in UN and Korea was reviewed. Secondly, the differences in classification criteria on health and environmental hazards among UN GHS and two Korean government agencies, Korea Ministry of Employment and Labour (KMoEL) and Korea Ministry of Environmental (KMoE). The classification results were compared between classifications of Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA) based on KMoEL and classifications of Korea National Institute of Environmental Research (KNIER) based on KMoE. Finally, an inter-agency harmonization on the classification criteria and the results was suggested by comparing the classification results of 5 chemicals; Benzene, carbon disulfide, formaldehyde, toluene-2,4-diisocyanate, and trichloroethylene. Results: KMoEL and KMoE revised regulations on chemical management and published a Notices on GHS classification criteria according to UN GHS document. However, the hazard to the ozone layer contained in the latest edition of UN GHS document published in 2011 was not included yet. The differences in classifications of 5 chemicals between KOSHA and KNIER were 36.2% in health hazards and 23.4% in environmental hazards, respectively. In conclusion, we suggested that a new revision be needed to include newly contained hazard and inter-agency working party be organized to harmonize classification results.

• Fire Science and Engineering
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.108-115
• /
• 2017

This study evaluated a preventive information communication system for the storage, handing, and transportation of hazardous materials according to the hazardous materials safety management law of Korea. At present, the chemical management system has very little information on accident responses due to a problem in the initial response. Therefore, this study was designed to improve the hazardous materials safety management law as an advanced method for simultaneous accident prevention and response, such as GHS system. This can also cause confusion in industry, such as manufacturing and import-export companies, because safety management laws and the GHS system are very different from the hazard classification systems. This study suggests a harmonization plan between the hazardous materials safety management law and the GHS classification system through an analysis of the hazardous materials classification system of major advanced countries.

• Environmental Analysis Health and Toxicology
• /
• v.21 no.2 s.53
• /
• pp.197-208
• /
• 2006

The hazards of chemicals can be classified using classification criteria that are based on physical, chemical and ecotoxicological endpoints. These criteria may be developed be iteratively, based on scientific or regulatory processes. A number of national and international schemes have been developed over the past 50 years, and some, such as the UN Dangerous Goods system or the EC system for hazardous substances, are in widespread use. However, the unnecessarily complicated multiplicity of existing hazard classifications created much unnecessary confusion at the user level, and a recommendation was made at the 1992 Rio Earth summit to develop a globally harmonized chemical hazard classification and compatible labelling system, including material safety data sheets and easily understandable symbols, that could be used for manufacture, transport, use and disposal of chemical substances. This became the globally harmonized system for the Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). The developmental phase of the GHS is largely complete. Consistent criteria for categorizing chemicals according to their toxic, physical, chemical and ecological hazards are now available. Consistent hazard communication tools such as labelling and material safety data sheets are also close to finalizations. The next phase is implementation of the GHS. The Intergovernmental Forum for Chemical Safety recommends that all countries implement the GHS as soon as possible with a view to have the system fully operational by 2008. When the GHS is in place, the world will finally have one system for classification of chemical hazards.

• Journal of Environmental Science International
• /
• v.19 no.6
• /
• pp.715-735
• /
• 2010

This study is designed to assess the priority order of the chemicals to cause to generate occupational diseases in order to understand the fundamental data required for the preparation of health protective measure for the workers dealing with chemicals. The 41 types of 51 ones of chemicals to cause to generate the national occupational diseases were selected as the study objects by understanding their domestic use or not, and their occupational diseases' occurrence or not among 110,608 types of domestic and overseas chemicals. To assess their priority order the sum of scores was acquired by understanding the actually classified condition based on a perfect score of physical riskiness(90points) and health toxicity(92points) as a classification standard by GHS, the priority order on GHS riskiness assessment, GHS toxicity assessment, GHS toxic xriskiness assessment(sum of riskiness plus toxicity) was assessed by multiplying each result by each weight of occupational disease's occurrence. The high ranking 5 items of chemicals for GHS riskiness assessment were turned out to be urethane, copper, chlorine, manganese, and thiomersal by order. Besides as a result of GHS toxicity assessment the top fives were assessed to be aluminum, iron oxide, manganese, copper, and cadium(Metal) by order. On the other hand, GHS toxicity riskiness assessment showed that the top fives were assessed to be copper, urethane, iron oxide, chlorine and phenanthrene by order. As there is no material or many uncertain details for physical riskiness or health toxicity by GHS classification though such materials caused to generate the national occupational diseases, it is very urgent to prepare its countermeasure based on the forementioned in order to protect the workers handling or being exposed to chemicals from health.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.347-362
• /
• 2009

The United Nation agreed to adopt the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) until 2008 to solve the significant differences enough to result in different labels or MSDS for the same chemical in different jurisdictions. Though the GHS is an ideal solution in the respect of pursuing only one format of a MSDS throughout the world, it may cause confusion at the beginning due to lack of information. So the Korean Ministry of Labor (MOL) revised the Industrial Safety and Health Act (ISHA) and related public notice on the classification & labelling of chemicals according to the GHS in 2006. The transition period for the implementation of the GHS for substances was set until Jun 30, 2010, and for mixtures until Jun 30, 2013. To promote the implementation of the GHS in Korea, we developed an application program for constructing MSDS database and a management program for providing MSDS contents on the web in accordance with the GHS. We analyzed the sixteen sections of MSDS by the GHS guideline, and the result showed the necessity to construct logically connected DB for chemical identifier, hazard classification, label, standard phrases and regulatory information. Each section of a MSDS was divided into sub-databases to update the database efficiently. According to Relational Database Management System (RDBMS), the sub-databases were automatically assembled and subsequently a full MSDS is produced. At present, MSDS database for 6,314 substances has been built and provided through internet as the MSDS Editing program. During the service period from January 1 to March 31, 13,666 users have searched MSDSs for 33,401 substances. During program review, some comments about the classification results and other MSDS element sources were reported but no technical bug reported. We expect that the MSDS DB management system in accordance with GHS will accelerate the implementation of the GHS in Korea.

• The Korean Journal of Pesticide Science
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.326-340
• /
• 2016

GHS was compared with that of current RDA directives in skin and eye irritation for plant protection products (PPPs). According to the result of evaluation and classification of skin and eye irritation by RDA directives and GHS for 59 PPPs, 25.5% of PPPs were changed the classification of skin irritation from slightly and moderately by RDA directives to Not Classified by GHS, and 45.8% of PPPs were changed the classification of eye irritation from slightly by RDA directives to Not Classified by GHS. 6.8% of PPPs in skin irritation and 5.1% in eye irritation were classified more highly as category 1 by GHS because of irreversible effect. According to the result of comparison with GHS classification by data of irritation study for PPPs and by GHS classification and concentration of active substances, 25.5% was changed more lowly and 3.4% more highly in skin irritation, and 25.4% was changed more lowly and 11.9% more highly in eye irritation. It is needed to draw a plan to supplement for other results between GHS and RDA directives.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.62-71
• /
• 2008

The use of chemical products to enhance and improve life is a widespread practice worldwide. But alongside the benefits of these products, there is also the potential for adverse effects to people or the environment. As a result, a number of countries or organizations have developed laws or regulations over the years that require information to be prepared and transmitted to those using chemicals, through labels or Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS). While these existing laws or regulations are similar in many respects, their differences are significant enough to result in different labels or MSDS for the same product in different countries. Given the reality of the extensive global trade in chemicals, and the need to develop national programs to ensure their safe use, transport, and disposal, it was recognized that a Globally harmonization system of classification and labeling of chemicals(GHS) would provide the foundation for such programs. This study offered complementary details of GHS classification criteria adopted in Korea by analyzing the differences in chemical classification system between UN and Korea Ministry of Labor. Also it is proposed that mutual agreement of information DB used is required by comparing classification results of chemicals in Korea, Japan, and EU. We offered the lists of information sources useful for chemical classification.

• Safety and Health at Work
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.152-158
• /
• 2020

Background: The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) was developed to enhance chemical classification and hazard communication systems worldwide. However, some of the elements such as building blocks and data sources have the potential to cause "disharmony" to the GHS, particularly in its classification results. It is known that some countries have developed their own lists of classified chemicals in accordance with the GHS to "standardize" the classification results within their respective countries. However, the lists of classified chemicals may not be consistent among these countries. Method: In this study, the lists of classified chemicals developed by the European Union, Japan, Malaysia, and New Zealand were selected for comparison of classification results for carcinogenicity, germ cell mutagenicity, and reproductive toxicity. Results: The findings show that only 54%, 66%, and 37% of the classification results for each Carcinogen, Mutagen and Reproductive toxicants hazard classes, respectively are the same among the selected countries. This indicates a "moderate" level of consistency among the classified chemicals lists. Conclusion: By using classification results for the carcinogenicity, germ cell mutagenicity, and reproductive toxicity hazard classes, this study demonstrates the "disharmony" in the classification results among the selected countries. We believe that the findings of this study deserve the attention of the relevant international bodies.