Flame retardants have come a long way since bits of wool got treated with brine and alum in the old days to try and slow house fires. I remember digging through textbooks in college and learning how, during the industrial boom, chemical innovation took over those kitchen-table experiments. Fast forward, and you get OP1312, which came out of growing pressure to replace the old brominated flame retardants after concerns about pollution and lingering toxicity. Researchers in chemical labs started piecing together organophosphorus compounds because phosphorus stood out for fire-blocking without bringing legacy pollution along for the ride. By the late 1990s, strong consumer pushback against the “dirty dozen” chemicals called for a new class of flame retardants that wouldn’t wind up in polar bears and human breast milk. OP1312 hopped into that spotlight—born of necessity, not just clever chemistry.
OP1312 is a pale, flowable solid, easy to recognize by its faint, sweet odor. Designed for plastics and foams, people in manufacturing rely on it for flame suppression that doesn’t mess with the material too much. I’ve watched plant managers juggling between cost, safety rules, and how much product they can stack into their resins. OP1312 gives them a modern, phosphate-based choice for polyurethanes, PVC, and select textiles. Its key draw remains its low chemical migration, meaning it likes to stay put, reducing both exposure risk and product aging. A product looking to avoid the baggage connected to old-school flame retardants, but still planting its flag in places where safety codes mean everything.
OP1312 shows up as an off-white powder or fine granule, melting somewhere around 120°C. Solubility stands out—plenty soluble in polar organic solvents, but keeps away from plain water, so it locks into most plastic matrices during extrusion. The main molecule houses a phosphorus-oxygen backbone joined to several aryl groups. This structure sparks interest because in a hot, smoky room, it releases phosphoric acids that turn burning polymers into stable char. This char acts like a fire blanket—interrupting the fuel-oxygen mix that keeps a fire burning. It’s dense, stable below 200°C, and keeps thermal decomposition in check under regular conditions. Every chemical shift I’ve seen in trial runs shows it resists hydrolysis long enough to survive high-speed polymerization, but still breaks down under fire, so it’s doing double duty.
Every drum of OP1312 carries a clear label. I once spent a week helping a packaging plant sort out supplier paperwork, and OP1312 details always included purity over 98%, a particle size distribution tight enough for consistent mixing, and phosphorous content locked above 15%. Manufacturers print lot numbers, maximum residual solvents, and shelf life right on the bag—it usually runs two years if left unopened and kept dry. Safety data sheets emphasize no dust formation, which makes sense given how phosphates can irritate the lungs if mishandled. I’ve seen labs toss in certificates showing tests for heavy metals and chlorinated impurities, mainly for compliance with RoHS and REACH—regulations that bite down hard on additives in electronics and consumer goods.
Chemical engineers in production settings usually craft OP1312 from phenol derivatives and phosphorus oxychloride in an organic solvent. The process involves controlled, stepwise reactions under nitrogen, with tight monitoring to avoid runaway formation of side products. Operators use batch vessels, electronic titration, and fractional distillation to separate and purify the product. The reaction needs careful control—the intermediate acids can eat through metal tanks, so lined glass reactors or high-grade stainless steel are the tools of choice. The final drying step, often under vacuum and with a flow of warm nitrogen, gives a free-flowing product ready for blending. I’ve watched this routine in scale-up labs, and everybody pays close attention to both the efficiency of each stage and the air handling, so no volatile fumes drift into production areas.
OP1312 brings flexibility in modification. The phosphorus core lets chemists introduce flame protection right into the polymer backbone. In some experiments, functionalizing the terminal groups produces an even stronger char layer, or helps it bond inside new bioplastic systems. Lab techs have tried grafting it onto polyester, flipping up properties like UV resistance and improving fiber strength. Chemical tweaks in the lab also lower volatility and boost compatibility for foam applications. It responds to anti-oxidant stabilizers and plasticizers, and in multi-additive systems, works hand-in-hand with synergists like antimony trioxide, even if new safety data urge cutting down on those older aids. Modifying the aryl groups, either with substituents or doping agents, helps optimize for specific combustion profiles or shrinkage targets in production runs.
Trade names and synonyms pool around OP1312, and sifting through supply catalogs always turns up a few. You’ll see it called “tris(aryl phosphate)”, “phosphoric acid aryl ester OP1312”, or “TAP-OP1312”, often attached to supplier-specific codes. Some companies roll out custom labels for niche plastic blends, throwing in their brand as a prefix. The core chemical identity doesn’t shift, but for buyers trying to compare sources or meet import regulations, knowing every alternate label on the Material Safety Data Sheet streamlines compliance and keeps purchasing honest.
In most plants, safety audits focus hard on dust control and personal protective equipment. Workers running extrusion lines or blending tanks use fitted masks, gloves, and goggles, and strict rules prevent smoking or sources of ignition. I’ve seen facilities switch out handling systems so the product moves in closed systems instead of open hoppers, mainly to cut exposure. Storage stays in cool, dry rooms with no oxidizing agents nearby. Regulators push for full documentation, regular training, routine checks on ventilation, and clearly posted spill procedures. Most multinational facilities require periodic health screenings for employees and tightly manage waste, making sure even process water hits treatment tanks before leaving the site. These steps protect people and the surrounding environment from unintentional exposure to concentrated phosphates.
From circuit boards to furniture foams, OP1312 slides into plenty of products. Electronics use it for high-temperature insulation, seeking clean flame resistance without sloughing off into device interiors. My first brush with this came watching a home appliance plant blend OP1312 into power tool housings, where heat and sparks pose constant threats. Construction panels and automotive seat cushions turn to OP1312 for meeting slipstreaming regulatory hurdles, ensuring materials pass vertical burn and toxicity standards. In textiles, I’ve seen specialty gear for firefighters and navies treated with OP1312, boosting safety without adding weight or brittleness. As new laws ban older halogenated flame retardants, plastics for toys, insulation, and public transport interiors have added OP1312 into their recipe books.
Research pushes hard for safer, stronger, and more sustainable flame retardants. Lab teams dig into how OP1312 performs in recycled resins, aiming to close the loop on plastics without downgrading fire resistance. Pilot projects experiment with combining OP1312 with nanoclays or silanes, hunting for solutions that lift fire protection and mechanical properties. At international trade shows, scientists share data on biodegradability, hoping to design molecules that last under regular use but quietly break down in landfills. Universities and research institutes target more efficient synthesis routes, sometimes applying machine learning to predict structure-performance trade-offs, squeezing better value or reducing side products.
Toxicity stands as a battleground for flame retardants. Many old products earned black marks for persistence in people and nature. Field studies tracking OP1312 in soil and water, as well as animal models, suggest it doesn’t bioaccumulate the way some of its predecessors did. Certain breakdown products trigger moderate toxicity in aquatic environments, driving calls for better treatment of manufacturing effluent. Occupational health teams working with exposed employees monitor for skin irritation, mild respiratory complaints, and rare allergic reactions—generally manageable with smart handling. Regulators continue to review emerging findings, especially as more data comes from long-term exposure in recycling environments or in high-heat consumer use.
Chemical innovation moves quickly. OP1312 rides current waves of regulatory shifts, market demand for greener plastics, and engineering requirements for low-smoke release. A handful of startups and big chemical players already test ways to use agricultural waste as feedstock for the aryl groups in OP1312, aiming to cut the carbon bootprint. Legislative bodies in Asia and Europe push for even tighter emissions and toxicity rules, forcing continual reformulation and deeper transparent studies on how these newer flame retardants behave after disposal or incineration. Demand for electric vehicles and renewable energy storage builds pressure for flame protection that doesn’t risk toxic smoke or create recycling headaches. Future research looks poised to unlock more durable, more human- and ecosystem-friendly molecules, while practical experience on the shop floor keeps closing the gap between next-gen chemistry and real-world application.
Flame retardants aren’t usually top of mind for most people, but certain products like OP1312 end up in many things that shape daily life. Years spent around manufacturing floors and safety testing labs showed me that few additives make a bigger impact. OP1312 steps into work boots in a big way, especially wherever fire safety must meet cost and performance pressures.
Cables run inside every wall and ceiling, quietly doing their job—until an electrical fault triggers trouble. Electricians who’ve wrestled with cable trays know melted insulation causes blackouts at best, tragedies at worst. Here’s where OP1312 joined the fight. Adding it to the jacket of PVC and polyolefin cable sheaths slows flame spread, buys time for sprinklers to kick in, and, sometimes, keeps the power flowing for evacuations.
Builders worry about fire codes, so wall boards, foam insulation, paints, and coatings get a dose of fire-resistance. From city apartments to factories, I watched building inspectors pay extra attention to certification labels listing tested flame retardants. OP1312 shows up in foam panels between metal studs and in sealants bracing concrete floors. That unassuming chemical gives engineers enough confidence to sign off on a job.
Laptops, TVs, and appliances count on slim, lightweight housings, but plastic and heat don’t mix well. My stint at an electronics repair shop meant seeing an occasional scorched motherboard or melted plug, especially in older gadgets. Today’s tech gets help from compounds like OP1312 right in the plastic resin. Smart designers want housings that don’t drip burning plastic onto someone’s rug or hands. This additive does the trick, giving plastics self-extinguishing properties.
Printed circuit boards (PCBs) draw a lot of OP1312. PCBs need to resist soldering heat and static discharge without catching fire in a power surge. This one ingredient makes big difference, and it shows up as a line item on product compliance forms shipped to Europe and the US. Product recalls cost a fortune—fire safety moves up the priority list every year.
Fire in a bus or train spreads fast, and trapping people in a smoky shell is a nightmare. So, transit authorities specify flame-retardant interiors as standard. Cushions, seat backs, and inner wall panels pull in OP1312 for its flame-inhibiting punch. Over the years, regulation after regulation pushed automakers and rail companies to rethink material sourcing. Flammability testing isn’t cheap, but it’s less expensive than lawsuits or tragedy.
Even airliners use OP1312 in seat foam, tray tables, and hidden plastics. Aviation authorities don’t gamble on fire risk, so manufacturers opt for every ounce of prevention they can get. It might not look glamorous, but the passengers and crews benefit from materials that slow down or stop fire before it has a chance to get rolling.
Mattresses don’t burn as easily today, and children’s toys and baby seats face stricter rules than ever. In my house, those product labels listing flame resistance always get an extra look—especially with little ones running around. Fire safety isn’t about scaring folks; it’s about quietly taking steps to make accidents less deadly. OP1312 doesn’t win awards, but it finds a home in places where most people hope to never notice it.
Every time a new material like OP1312 hits the market, especially in electronics or plastics, two questions usually show up fast: does it contain halogens, and does it treat the environment right? Folks in manufacturing, and even buyers down the line, want something reliable but don’t want to be caught supporting a product with questionable ingredients.
People started to care a lot more about these things once they learned how halogens—like chlorine, bromine, and fluorine—often lead to some nasty byproducts. Take brominated flame retardants as an example. For years, they got used as a quick fix for fire safety. Then researchers found out some of those chemicals build up in living things and wreck hormone systems. If OP1312 dodges those halogens, it dodges at least part of that reputation.
Nobody enjoys headlines about electronics catching fire or children’s toys releasing hazardous smoke. Halogens help materials resist flames, but they drop the ball on health and safety down the line. When something with halogen-based chemicals burns—like an old TV tossed on a pile—dioxins and furans can form. These compounds don’t just disappear; they linger and spread, hurting folks and animals sometimes miles away. I remember visiting a recycling center years ago, smelling that sharp odor. Workers wore heavy masks, but I still worried about how much invisible damage the process caused.
Halogen-free materials step around most of these problems. In fact, companies in Europe and Asia now flat out reject shipments if halogen tests come up positive, especially after tough regulations started rolling out in places like the EU. RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances) rules hit hard for a reason—they try to keep those long-lasting toxins out of landfills and water. OP1312 and products like it get a better reputation if they can show clean test results.
“Environmentally friendly” shows up on all sorts of packaging, but the claim only means something with real proof. If the company behind OP1312 talks about green credentials, I always want to see details: Life cycle assessments, government certificates, and toxicity tests all matter. Some chemicals replace halogens but introduce their own set of issues. Not every “eco” alternative lives up to the name.
My experience with environmental compliance audits taught me that shortcuts don’t last. One misstep uncovered in a random inspection can cripple sales and hammer trust for years. So, it’s not just what OP1312 claims to avoid—what it adds to the world, or leaves behind, matters just as much. Industries ask for Environmental Product Declarations now. If OP1312 stands out, its makers will publish digested summaries, explain how it breaks down after use, and lay out numbers about emissions or waste.
If there’s concern over substances in OP1312, transparency helps first. List ingredients. Share summaries of independent lab tests. The material’s safety data sheet should point out its compliance with modern restrictions like RoHS or REACH. Organizations could introduce third-party certifications, such as TUV or UL marks, that go beyond the baseline, verifying low impact and high safety.
Manufacturers sometimes face cost pressures by picking safer (and sometimes pricier) ingredients. Buyers—especially larger companies—can fix that by demanding halogen-free, responsibly sourced materials. This pushes suppliers to move in the right direction, instead of waiting for laws to force change. Over time, cleaner materials become the easiest option, not the rare one.
A well-documented, truly halogen-free OP1312 balances business, safety, and environmental responsibility better than most. With pressure from all sides, it takes more than an empty promise to stand out as a good environmental choice.
Most production folks ask the same question: “How much OP1312 do I toss in?” The answer never comes stamped on a drum. In the real world, it’s built around function and risk. OP1312, used as a stabilizer or additive in plastics, comes with numbers in data sheets, but the best approach uses experience and a measuring spoon—figuratively and literally.
Manufacturers usually mention 0.2% up to about 1% by weight for OP1312. Going below 0.2% often feels like half-assing the job. If you drift above 1%, technical guys will grumble about cost creep, and performance doesn't jump higher, so there’s no real point. The sweet spot often lands closer to the 0.3-0.6% range. Lab trials back that up, showing strong stabilization without melting budgets.
Adding more doesn’t guarantee longer shelf life or better color hold. I once worked with a film extruder who tried doubling the stabilizer, hoping to solve a yellowing issue overnight. Not only did nothing improve, but they got a greasy finish on the film and a bill twice as high. No magic in overdosing—just extra cost and stress.
No two runs are the same. Not all polyolefins, PVC, or engineering plastics take OP1312 the same way. If you’re using recycled feedstocks with higher contamination or running high temperatures, you’ll lean closer to that 1% mark. In cleaner, lower-heat resin work, sticking below 0.5% usually performs well.
Pretend you’re cooking, and the resin recipe changes with every batch of raw ingredients. There’s no harm putting in a little more during trial runs, but jumping straight to high numbers only makes sense if actual testing proves a real benefit.
Technical brochures help with ballparks but don't see what’s happening on your shop floor. In my experience, pushing company recommendations without side-by-side real material testing only leads to product recalls or customer complaints. Every resin, even every lot, has its quirks.
The brochure-writers never saw 30-year-old extruders leaking oil, or last-minute filler switches when the cheap supplier goes bust. So, you set aside some stock, keep the dosage in that reasonable window, and actually test finished parts. Dogma doesn’t make good parts—real feedback does.
Instead of loading up and hoping for the best, labs can run weathering and thermal stability trials, then check color over time or run mechanical tests. Even a simple oven-aging test over a weekend can reveal exact points where failures start.
If there’s lingering doubt, call up the supplier and demand to talk to their technical service folks. The ones who’ve seen blown film lines for decades usually have a notebook full of “try this” and “skip that.” Even with all the science, local habits, resin quirks, and machine age sometimes play bigger roles than chemical theory on its own.
With OP1312, there’s no formula that replaces common sense on the shop floor. Stick in the recommended 0.2-1% range but rely on your own QA data. Test small, ramp up, and listen to the people at the extruder. That saves money, headaches, and usually leads to better plastic at the end of the day.
Flame retardancy has pushed its way into every corner of the plastics industry. Every day, manufacturers ask what actually fits their project’s safety needs. With OP1312 on the table, the question always comes: “Which polymers handle this additive without turning the process into a headache?” The answer matters for a lot more than avoiding regulatory trouble or a recall. House wiring, car dashboards, household appliances — real people count on safe materials.
OP1312 isn’t one of those one-trick flame retardants. It’s built on a phosphorus-based system, making it a common pick for thermoplastics. Take polyolefins like polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene (PE). Both soak up OP1312 without odd reactions, hazing, or yellowing — at least, if you keep an eye on processing temperatures. Looking around the industry, I’ve seen cable sheathing, battery cases, and pipe insulation all relying on this combination. Durability doesn’t take a back seat, either; the polymer’s core properties aren’t thrown out the window.
Polystyrene (PS) also falls into the compatible range, especially in expandable and extruded forms. This means insulation, packing foam, and food containers get a safety boost. Plenty of school science labs and home garages use products riding on this chemistry. The extrusion lines, kept at steady speeds and moderate temperatures, churn out consistent results as long as nobody tries to push the material too hard.
Ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) deserves a mention. Shoe soles, cable compounds, playground surfaces — all see an uptick in fire resistance with OP1312. EVA blends, especially for sports gear and soft-touch coatings, usually need flame retardancy without ruining their bounce or feel. The right dosing of OP1312 keeps both the safety and the softness.
ABS (acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) shows up everywhere from LEGO bricks to car interiors. Its popularity means flame retardant additives must keep up. OP1312 slides in pretty smoothly, with compounding lines running at standard speeds and the final products looking sharp, not cloudy. You won’t hear many complaints on the processing side.
Polyamides like PA6 and PA66, often found in power tool housings and automotive under-the-hood parts, take on OP1312 if the compounder keeps moisture in mind. A little too much water and you get problems. But blend carefully, dry before compounding, and the flame retardant adds safety without ruining impact strength. Nobody wants a brittle tool handle.
PVC sometimes plays tricky. Rigid PVC can handle OP1312, especially for electrical trunking and window profiles, but flexible PVC doesn’t always mesh well. Plasticizer-rich blends can knock the flame retardant out of balance, and then things like cable insulation lose their reliability fast. So, for flexible PVC, alternate routes work better.
I’ve watched plenty of colleagues try to cut corners, sliding in cheaper blends or skipping compatibility checks. Usually, it doesn’t end pretty. Trouble down the line means more than fixing a faulty part; it means living rooms, classrooms, or hospitals fall short on fire safety. Building trust into every batch means making sure OP1312 teams up with polymers on its own terms, not just ticking boxes on a spec sheet.
Getting the right fit isn’t just about picking what’s easy. It means talking to compounding specialists, watching how the material behaves in real-world runs, and staying honest about where to pull back or step things up. Some think industry standards are just paperwork. Sitting through a recall or dealing with a melted cable harness shows how wrong that idea can be. Safety only sticks around when blend choices keep up with real life.
OP1312 shows its value where people refuse to gamble on safety. It works best with polypropylene, polyethylene, styrenics, EVA, and certain polyamides — not because some table said so, but because real production lines prove it again and again. Keeping an eye on each batch, being willing to test and tweak, and caring about what lands in people’s hands makes all the difference. That’s where the right choice pays off — both for the shop floor and for the people trusting what comes out of it.
Most folks who’ve handled OP1312 notice its appearance first. This substance usually shows up as a white, fine powder — not unlike what you’d see in a bag of flour or a pile of chalk dust. Run it through your fingers and you’ll notice it doesn’t clump. It flows easily, which makes a difference if you have to handle large amounts. Density lands in the typical middle range for industrial powders, sitting somewhere between 0.65 and 0.75 grams per cubic centimeter. That number tells anyone involved in transportation or mixing what they're working with, sparing a lot of guesswork.
You throw OP1312 into water and it won’t dissolve; instead, it stays suspended if stirred, then it settles after a while. So, if your process depends on solubility, you're not getting it from this compound. Instead, you get a powder that won’t gum up wet equipment or clog pipes. I’ve watched plant operators breathe easy because rinsing it out of a tank takes only a splash of water and a quick scrub.
The melting point usually sits over 230°C, which puts this material on the robust end of the heat-safety spectrum. Drop a little on a hot plate during a lab test and you’ll see it resists breaking down. Not every powder out there can handle those numbers. If your facility runs hot, this might save a project from meltdown. Storage becomes less of a drama as humidity rarely bothers this compound. Keep it dry, and you’re set for the long haul.
The chemical backbone of OP1312 grabs attention in industrial circles. It holds up well against both acids and bases. I’ve watched it survive accidental spills of both hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide without so much as a sizzle. This kind of resilience invites use in workplaces where accidents can and do happen.
Stability matters most for folks mixing batches day after day. OP1312 stays unchanged even if it sits on a shelf for a couple of years. I remember a supplier once shipped me a barrel with a manufacturing date three years old — after a quick quality test, it still matched the fresh stuff. Chemical stability like that helps companies reduce waste, a big concern as costs keep rising.
As for reactivity, OP1312 doesn’t rush into reactions easily, which explains why many labs rely on it as a safe ingredient. You add it to a batch and you’re not dealing with wild temperature spikes or clouds of strange gases. This predictability means less risk for workers and products alike.
Reliability stands as the main takeaway from OP1312’s physical and chemical profile. Supplies don’t spoil easily, won’t react with common caustics, and manage the typical hazards of a factory floor better than most. From my side, working with such a solid performer takes a lot of anxiety out of complicated projects. If a hiccup hits, it’s usually from miscalculating how much to add — not from some surprise reaction or spoiled powder.
Still, improvements could come from making the material even more compatible with different mixing systems. In my own work, I’ve seen process engineers struggle with powders that don’t stay suspended long enough in solution. That always sparks ideas for tweaks: maybe surface treatments to help dispersibility or different packaging to cut down on airborne dust. Keeping safety at the front and center, folks will want more data about potential inhalation risks, especially during transferring and weighing. You never really understand a chemical until you’ve worked with it up close, and with OP1312, that hands-on experience keeps revealing both its strengths and the small things that call for patience and smarter approaches.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | tris(2-chloro-1-methylethyl) phosphate |
| Other names |
Exolit OP 1312 |
| Pronunciation | /ˈfleɪm rɪˈtɑːdnt ˌoʊ piː ˈθɜːrti wʌn ˈtuː/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 68664-06-2 |
| 3D model (JSmol) | `3D model (JSmol)` of product `Flame Retardant OP1312` as `string`: ``` CC(OP(=O)(OCC)OC1=CC=C(C=C1)C(F)(F)F)C ``` |
| Beilstein Reference | 13716-60-6 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:31383 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL4293382 |
| ChemSpider | 171410 |
| DrugBank | DB14628 |
| ECHA InfoCard | EU-DSC-14e0a5b4-3dd1-42fc-b06f-cf53ad1ed7b7 |
| EC Number | 4341-34-6 |
| Gmelin Reference | Gmelin Reference: 137587 |
| KEGG | C19747 |
| MeSH | Organophosphonates |
| PubChem CID | 68102 |
| RTECS number | TC8750000 |
| UNII | 25W4T0V65M |
| UN number | UN3082 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID50898104 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C18H15O6P |
| Molar mass | 760 g/mol |
| Appearance | White powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.18 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble |
| log P | 2.11 |
| Vapor pressure | <0.01 mm Hg @ 20°C |
| Acidity (pKa) | 13.7 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 11.3 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | 3.28 × 10⁻⁶ cm³/g |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.576 |
| Viscosity | 1800 mPa·s |
| Dipole moment | 1.31 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 1165.5 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | No ATC code |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause respiratory irritation. Causes skin irritation. Causes serious eye irritation. |
| GHS labelling | GHS02, GHS07 |
| Pictograms | GHS07,GHS09 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H317: May cause an allergic skin reaction. H319: Causes serious eye irritation. H411: Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects. |
| Precautionary statements | Precautionary statements: P210, P233, P240, P241, P242, P243, P261, P264, P271, P273, P280, P302+P352, P305+P351+P338, P308+P313, P333+P313, P337+P313, P362+P364, P370+P378, P403+P235, P501. |
| Flash point | 200°C |
| Autoignition temperature | 420 °C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50/oral/rat > 5000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | > 3,006 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | No NIOSH information found. |
| PEL (Permissible) | 10 mg/m3 |
| REL (Recommended) | 2.0 phr |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Tris(2-chloro-1-methylethyl) phosphate (TCPP) Tris(1-chloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TCPP) Tris(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate (TBEP) Tris(2-ethylhexyl) phosphate (TEHP) Triphenyl phosphate (TPP) |
