Implementation Of GHS Research Articles

Impact of the GHS on Chemical Management in Japan

It has been a long time since the global trend of chemical management has been in the direction of a voluntary approach, but that of Japan remains a compliance approach, in which employers attempt to prevent accidents and diseases by means of only regulated specific chemicals and measures against them. However, since the implementation of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) in Japan, there has been a gradual shift of chemical management toward a voluntary approach. In this paper, the history of chemical management in Japan is considered, focusing on the GHS implementation.

GHS Implementation to Strengthen Global Chemical Hazard Communication: Will We Ever Get There?

The establishment of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) is one of the global initiatives to promote effective chemical hazard communication worldwide. Ultimately, the GHS aims to enhance safe use of chemicals, as well as to facilitate chemical trading across national borders. Countries that are now adopting GHS into their respective national legislations include the EU, US, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Malaysia. Nonetheless, challenges exist that might impede GHS implementation worldwide. These challenges have been identified and are discussed in this paper, namely, (i) adoption of different versions of the GHS document, (ii) adoption of building blocks, (iii) list of classified chemicals, (iv) different chemical mixture classification throughout the supply chain, and (v) the definition of GHS implementation. The challenges discussed in this paper are not to discourage countries from implementing GHS but, rather, to serve as input for the relevant entities to further strengthen GHS implementation worldwide.

Experience of the Globally Harmonized System’s Implementation at an Anatomy Laboratory

Anatomy laboratories and amphitheaters general practice requires constant chemical substances usage. Previous classification systems used in laboratories around the globe exposed wide margins of confusion, no symbology consensus and were open to interpretation, associated with occupational injuries, workplace related diseases and a lack of students and workers protection. For this reason, it was necessary to establish a universal, homogenized, technical and internationally recognized by scientific community system: the Globally Harmonized System of classification and labeling of chemical products (GHS).The GHS was proposed with the purpose of harmonizing the characteristics and data sheets of different substances, reagents and components. When projected by the UN, this system was standardized according to international protocols. Even the Intergovernmental Forum for Chemical Safety recommends that all countries implement the GHS as soon as possible, being one of the main reasons the fact that student’s misunderstanding of labeling of chemical substances can result in unsafe behavior that may cause accidents or disasters.Our aim is to describe and evaluate the main differences between the implementation of the GHS compared to previouslly used classification systems. A documentary analysis of United Nations purple book on the updated official report of the globally harmonized system was carried out, together with documents from previous organization systems.As a main finding, nine danger pictograms are set (previously eight), that harmonize criteria to avoid physical, health and/or environmental danger situations. For each sheet the use of specific danger pictograms, warning words, hazard instructions and precautionary statements is stablished. These sheets must be accompanied by a hazard communication paper that includes detailed information about identification, manufacturer, importer and/or supplier, classification, hazards, precautionary measures and emergency procedures, among others.The implementation of the GHS in an anatomy laboratory consists in four principles: checklist of hazardous materials in stock, labeling of hazardous materials, preparation of material safety datasheets with the format and the requirement of at least a 3‐h training course for eligible students and workers.The GHS implementation together with an easy divulgation of hazards and the Occupational Health and Safety requirement (BS OHSAS 18001) which is a framework that contains necessary policies, procedures and controls that helps workspaces achieve the best possible working conditions, aligned with internationally recognized best practices, leads to optimized human and environmental protection, besides constituting a guide system for those countries that lacked one, reducing the need to test chemical products and facilitating the trade of dangerous substances.Support or Funding InformationAnatomy Laboratory, Universidad de los Andes, School of Medicine.

The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals—Explaining the Legal Implementation Gap

The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) is a system for classifying and labelling chemicals according to their intrinsic hazardous properties. The GHS is one of the cornerstones of sound chemicals management, an issue consistently on the international sustainable development agenda since 1992. In 2002, it was agreed under the United Nations that all countries should be encouraged to implement the GHS by 2008. However, to date, it is unclear where, how, and to what extent the GHS has been implemented and what factors best explain any differences in implementation coverage. The aim of this paper is to provide a global overview of current GHS implementation status in national legislation using primary and secondary data, and explain differences between countries based on theory on motivational and capacity-related factors for implementation of international standards. We conclude that there seems to be broad support from countries for enhanced international collaboration in the field of sound chemicals management. However, several drivers and barriers for national GHS implementation co-exist, and there is a clear positive correlation between the financial and regulatory capacities of a country and its GHS implementation status. At the same time, our data suggest that it is possible to increase the global implementation coverage by using a combination of motivational and capacity related strategies.

GHS実施状況に関する比較調査 欧州，米国およびアジア（フィリピン，マレーシア，日本）

GHS実施状況に関する比較調査 欧州，米国およびアジア（フィリピン，マレーシア，日本）

Employee Impact and Attitude Analysis for GHS Implementation in Taiwan

The employee impact and attitude analysis for GHS implementation in Taiwan was investigated in this study. An impact assessment on the new regulations or changes in regulations for government, potential costs, benefits, and the global trade in chemicals to industries and hazard communication program for workers was studied by the methods of the questionnaire design and Delphi expert method. A survey was conducted using questionnaires and taking 200 experts from government's expert database and 500 selected respondents from case company. Results from present study revealed that the barrier associated with GHS implementation is existed; it is feasible to overcome. Both experts and employees think that business entities are insufficient to test and classify chemicals on their own, and the technical guidance from the government is needed. Data analyzed by the logistic regression revealed that more hours an employee spends on education and trainings of new GHS systems; the employee thinks implementation of GHS will improve hazard awareness for transporters. The weak labeling ability affects deployment of the new GHS system.

Flash-Point Prediction of Binary Partially Miscible Aqueous-Organic Mixtures from UNIFAC Group Contribution Methods

Flash point is one of the most important variables used to characterize fire and explosion hazard of liquids. This paper predicts the flash point of binary partially miscible aqueous mixtures by using the flash point prediction model of Liaw et al. handling non-ideal behavior through liquid phase activity coefficients evaluated with UNIFAC-type models, which do not need experimentally regressed binary parameters. Validation of this entirely predictive model is conclusive with the experimental data over the entire flammable composition range. Overall, the proposed method predicted the experimental data very well. Potential application for this approach concerns the classification of flammable liquid mixtures in the implementation of GHS.

‘China REACH’: Assessing the implications for non-Chinese companies producing and exporting new substances to China

Legislation concerning the environmental management of new chemical substances in China was amended on October 15 2010 by the enactment of the Measures for the Environmental Management of New Chemical Substances by the Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP). Viewed in the context of the implementation of REACH and the ongoing implementation of GHS in China, the amended regulation incorporates some concepts also included in REACH such as GHS-based criteria hazard communication, registration tonnage bands, post-notification tracking and acceptance of notifications only by legal-entities within the jurisdiction of the regulation. The amended measures aim to control the environmental risk posed by new chemicals to ensure public health and ecological maintenance. Despite many significant differences existing between REACH and the China REACH, most notably in the registration scope and testing requirements, the comparison can be used as a frame of reference for non-Chinese companies formulating a compliance strategy.

Prediction of miscible mixtures flash-point from UNIFAC group contribution methods

Flash point is one of the most important variables used to characterize fire and explosion hazard of liquids. This paper predicts the flash point of miscible mixtures by using the flash point prediction model of Liaw and Chiu (J. Hazard. Mater. 137 (2006) 38–46) handling non-ideal behavior through liquid phase activity coefficients evaluated with UNIFAC-type models, which do not need experimentally regressed binary parameters. Validation of this entirely predictive model is conclusive with the experimental data over the entire flammable composition range for twenty four flammable solvents and aqueous–organic binary and ternary mixtures, ideal mixtures as well as Raoult's law negative or positive deviation mixtures. All the binary-mixture types, which are known to date, have been included in the validated samples. It is also noticed that the greater the deviation from Raoult's law, the higher the probability for a mixture to exhibit extreme (minimum or maximum) flash point behavior, provided that the pure compound flash point difference is not too large. Overall, the modified UNIFAC-Dortmund 93 is recommended, due to its good predictive capability and more completed database of binary interaction parameters. Potential application for this approach concerns the classification of flammable liquid mixtures in the implementation of GHS.

Indicators as a tool for the evaluation of effective national implementation of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS)

This paper briefly outlines the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) and what is meant by GHS implementation in terms of policy-related information for decision-makers plus a framework of actions to enable such policies to be effectively undertaken. The paper discusses the need for simple indicators to measure progress with GHS implementation. Two groups of indicators have been described that comprehensively reflect basic components of GHS implementation. The first group was presented as aggregated indicators or indices, for national capability evaluation. Indicators to evaluate management performance linked to stated objectives were presented as the second group. Information from an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published questionnaire on GHS implementation and a questionnaire by the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS) on chemical safety that included GHS have provided the basic information for applying the management capability indicators approach. Through the use of information in these two questionnaires, country-relevant and regional progress with GHS implementation was illustrated. Despite the GHS implementation target of 2008 set by the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, very few countries have reported they have achieved this target. The simple management indicators proposed in this paper are based on adoption of a questionnaire and a numerical scoring system that could be used to chart progress towards GHS implementation. It was concluded, therefore, that the use of indicators as described in this paper does provide a quick survey of the overall situation in a country and facilitates comparison between countries across regions in terms of GHS implementation. Furthermore such results may indicate which countries require additional assistance with GHS implementation thus strengthening policies and actions across all sectors and involving governments, business, trade, and civil society.

GHS and its impact on laboratory safety

In a process that began in the early 1990s, the United States and other countries are moving forward to adopt the United Nations “Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals” (GHS) that seeks to protect human health and the environment by standardizing labeling and hazard information for all chemicals sold or traded in world-wide commerce. GHS will have a significant impact on the chemical industry that manufactures and supplies chemicals and it will also have impact on the users of chemicals. Chemists and other scientists working in laboratories handle collectively thousands of chemicals in relatively small quantities in their experiments, procedures, and other laboratory operations. Recognition of chemical hazards, an essential component of laboratory safety, depends upon the availability of clear and accurate information about specific chemical hazards on labels and other sources, such as Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs). This paper examines the opportunities and challenges for laboratory safety resulting from implementation of GHS. Noteworthy is that the new GHS rating system is the opposite of the existing National Fire Protection Association Diamond rating system.

Update on Implementation of GHS in Korea and Revision of Industrial Safety and Health Act in Relation to GHS

To implement the globally harmonized system of classification and labelling of chemicals (GHS) in Korea, an inter-ministerial GHS committee, involving 8 ministries and an expert working group composed of 9 experts from relevant organizations and one private consultant, have made some progress towards implementation by 2008. As such, the first revision of the official Korean translated version of the GHS in accordance with the GHS purple book revision 1 in 2005, including annexes, started in August, 2006, was completed in December, 2006. The Ministry of Labor also finally revised the Industrial Safety and Health Act (ISHA) relating to the GHS and the detailed notification was announced on Dec 12, 2006 and became effective immediately. The revised ISHA will allow continued use of the existing hazard communication system until Jun 30, 2008. Other revisions of chemical-related regulations will follow soon to facilitate the implementation of the GHS by 2008. Besides, inter-ministerial collaborative efforts on harmonizing regulations and disseminating the GHS in Korea will continue to avoid any confusion or duplication and for the effective use of resources.

Chemical Hazard Communication Comprehensibility in South Africa: Implications for the Adoption of the Globally Harmonised System for Chemical Hazard Classification (GHS).

P-376 Abstract: Chemical hazard communication is a key strategy to prevent illness and disability from potentially hazardous chemicals. The Globally Harmonised System for Chemical Hazard Classification (GHS) was developed to strengthen national capacities for safe management of chemicals. A study of 402 respondents, including 315 workers in the manufacturing, transport and agricultural sectors and 87 consumers was conducted in 2003 to provide data on chemical hazard communication comprehensibility as part of a feasibility study into the possible adoption of the GHS in South Africa. Data were collected using an adaptation of an instrument developed for the International Labour Office (ILO) to support GHS implementation. Less than half of respondents reported any training in their current jobs in health and safety, and only 34% on labels. Agricultural workers were far less likely to have received any training. In general, comprehension of hazard communication labels and safety data sheets (SDSs) was low, varying positively by education and a history of previous training, and negatively if the respondent’s home language was not English. Symbols such as the skull and crossbones (98%) and the flammable (93%) symbol, and pictograms denoting use of protective clothing (93% or more) were relatively well understood (either correct or partly correct responses), but the majority of hazard symbols, warning and activity pictograms, and hazard messages, were of moderate to poor comprehensibility (less than 75% correct or partly correct responses). Significant levels of critical confusions (5% or more) occurred with symbols for corrosive, compressed gas and the hazard statement “do not induce vomiting.” Less than half of all respondents were able to identify correctly information on health and physical hazards, emergency procedures, protective clothing use and storage directions from Safety Data Sheets. Co-workers and supervisors were identified as important sources of information. Multivariate analyses confirmed positive associations with comprehensibility for years of education, increasing age, previous safety training and home language fluency in English, and negative associations with female gender and employment in agriculture. If the GHS is to leave a legacy of safety, there has to be investment in GHS training, with a particular focus on those items causing critical confusion, using peer trainers; hazard statements written in simple local languages; and public awareness through media to reach consumers. If the GHS failes to address problems of comprehensibility, it will only succeed in facilitating trade in chemicals without ensuing adequate safety.