Eye-Kraft Optical and PFAS, what the company told Minnesota

Eye-Kraft Optical has filed 6 PFAS disclosures with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, covering 6 products and naming 1 compound across 1 component. Everything below is the company’s own statement to a regulator, not our assessment.

Disclosures filed
6
Products covered
6
Compounds named
1
Declared uses
1

All 6 filings

550EyeKraft
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 KraftEyeKraft
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

DESEyeKraft
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

NaturalEyeKraft
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 BlueEyeKraft
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 EliteEyeKraft
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 companies that have filed

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.