1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6-tridecafluorooctane, CAS 80793-17-5

1 company has told Minnesota that this compound is intentionally added to 6 of their products, in 6 filings across 1 component. Each row names the product, where in it the compound sits and what it is there to do.

Disclosures
6
Companies
1
Products
6
CAS number
80793-17-5

All 6 filings

Where in the product,
OTC Pro-1200 Hydro
What it is doing,
Finishing agents
How much the filer reports,
1,000 ppm to <10,000 ppm (1%)

SKU 550 · Minnesota disclosure MN-2GS8BJS · published 2026-09-12

Clear KraftEyeKraftEye-Kraft Optical
Where in the product,
OTC Pro-1200 Hydro
What it is doing,
Finishing agents
How much the filer reports,
1,000 ppm to <10,000 ppm (1%)

SKU CK2 · Minnesota disclosure MN-2GS8BJS · published 2026-09-12

Where in the product,
OTC Pro-1200 Hydro
What it is doing,
Finishing agents
How much the filer reports,
1,000 ppm to <10,000 ppm (1%)

SKU DES · Minnesota disclosure MN-2GS8BJS · published 2026-09-12

NaturalEyeKraftEye-Kraft Optical
Where in the product,
OTC Pro-1200 Hydro
What it is doing,
Finishing agents
How much the filer reports,
1,000 ppm to <10,000 ppm (1%)

SKU NAT · Minnesota disclosure MN-2GS8BJS · published 2026-09-12

Tech Sheild BlueEyeKraftEye-Kraft Optical
Where in the product,
OTC Pro-1200 Hydro
What it is doing,
Finishing agents
How much the filer reports,
1,000 ppm to <10,000 ppm (1%)

SKU TSB · Minnesota disclosure MN-2GS8BJS · published 2026-09-12

Tech Sheild EliteEyeKraftEye-Kraft Optical
Where in the product,
OTC Pro-1200 Hydro
What it is doing,
Finishing agents
How much the filer reports,
1,000 ppm to <10,000 ppm (1%)

SKU TSE · Minnesota disclosure MN-2GS8BJS · published 2026-09-12

Other compounds in the filings

Source, manufacturer filings made to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency under the state’s PFAS in Products law and published through PRISM, run by the Interstate Chemicals Clearinghouse. These are the manufacturers’ own statements, not our grades and not laboratory results. A filing covers the product as sold in Minnesota and says nothing about products or formulations the company did not file. Reporting was still open when this was pulled, so absence from the set is not evidence a product is PFAS-free.