Rank: New forum user 
|
On A SDS sheet you have a section containing the GHS classiciation pictograms and then further down a list of hazard statements. We have a cleaning product that only shows the classification pictogram for GHS05 (corrosive) and GHS07 (irritant). It does not show the GHS09 (environment). However when you read the list of hazard statements it states H412 Harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects. Can anyoen give me some idea why there would be no pictogram for environment when H412 is stated below because the bottle itself only shows pictograms and not the additional list of hazards which for us operating a boat company is more important and easily missed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The environmental pictogram is only mandated in regulation for
H410: Very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects - with signal word WARNING
and
H411: Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects - no signal word No signal word or pictogram are required for classifications H412: Harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects
or H413: May cause long lasting harmful effects to aquatic life
|
 4 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The environmental pictogram is only mandated in regulation for
H410: Very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects - with signal word WARNING
and
H411: Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects - no signal word No signal word or pictogram are required for classifications H412: Harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects
or H413: May cause long lasting harmful effects to aquatic life
|
4 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Yes, as explained above. If this is particularly important to you as you mention, you will need to look for the hazard phrase and not just a pictogram. That it's corrosive should also be a clue that it's likely to be harmful to aquatic life, as corrosives will be either strongly acidic or strongly alkaline (either of which almost no life likes) and this may well be the mechanism of harm in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: twcorthorn  the bottle itself only shows pictograms and not the additional hazards
Sorry should have addressed this point.
Labelling must include as applicable pictograms, a signal word Warning or Danger, Hazard and Precautionary statements (although the number is permitted to be abridged) Guidance https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/clp/labelling If they have only applied the pictograms on the label the supplier is not complying with regulation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: twcorthorn the bottle itself only shows pictograms and not the additional hazards
Sorry should have addressed this point.
Labelling must include as applicable pictograms, a signal word Warning or Danger, Hazard and Precautionary statements (although the number is permitted to be abridged) Guidance https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/clp/labelling If they have only applied the pictograms on the label the supplier is not complying with regulation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
From the HSE poit of view COSHH should have an extra H in it, control of substances hazardouse to HUMAN health. while anything dangerouse to aquatic life should be carefully considered, the HSE would not look at it. If anyone used the old COSHH Essentials web package you would notice some of the hazard phrases were missing - like flamable which HSE think is safey risk and part of your fire RA not COSHH.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
It's true that harm to aquatic life, and flammability, are not part of COSHH, but it is both customary and logical to consider the environmental and fire risks along with the health risks when carrying out a task risk assessment involving chemicals, which then customarily gets labelled a COSHH assessment.
In fact the question was a CLP question not a COSHH question but does it really matter?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Beware goods purchased from overseas if environmental hazards are important.
In some jurisdcistions such as the USA their adoption of the Globally Harmonised System does not include mandatory consideration of environmental hazards as Safety Data Sheets are defined under OSHA regulation and not EPA
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Beware goods purchased from overseas if environmental hazards are important.
In some jurisdcistions such as the USA their adoption of the Globally Harmonised System does not include mandatory consideration of environmental hazards as Safety Data Sheets are defined under OSHA regulation and not EPA
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: Kate It's true that harm to aquatic life, and flammability, are not part of COSHH, but it is both customary and logical to consider the environmental and fire risks along with the health risks when carrying out a task risk assessment involving chemicals, which then customarily gets labelled a COSHH assessment.
In fact the question was a CLP question not a COSHH question but does it really matter?
Did i not say it should still be carefully considered, But the question is headed COSHH Query, hence my comment
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
always read the exam question twice.... ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.