pc/nametag and PFAS, what the company told Minnesota

pc/nametag has filed 5 PFAS disclosures with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, covering 5 products and naming 1 compound across 1 component. Everything below is the company’s own statement to a regulator, not our assessment.

Disclosures filed
5
Products covered
5
Compounds named
1
Declared uses
1

All 5 filings

Event Badgepc/nametag
Where in the product,
Ink
What it is doing,
Elasticizer
Compound,
poly(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE) (CAS 9002-84-0)
How much the filer reports,
100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)

SKU YNEB · Minnesota disclosure MN-OBC4IT6 · published 2026-09-29

Event Passpc/nametag
Where in the product,
Ink
What it is doing,
Elasticizer
Compound,
poly(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE) (CAS 9002-84-0)
How much the filer reports,
100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)

SKU YNEP · Minnesota disclosure MN-OBC4IT6 · published 2026-09-29

On Site Event Badgepc/nametag
Where in the product,
Ink
What it is doing,
Elasticizer
Compound,
poly(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE) (CAS 9002-84-0)
How much the filer reports,
100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)

SKU YNEO · Minnesota disclosure MN-OBC4IT6 · published 2026-09-29

On Site Event Passpc/nametag
Where in the product,
Ink
What it is doing,
Elasticizer
Compound,
poly(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE) (CAS 9002-84-0)
How much the filer reports,
100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)

SKU YNEO14 · Minnesota disclosure MN-OBC4IT6 · published 2026-09-29

Special Shapepc/nametag
Where in the product,
Ink
What it is doing,
Elasticizer
Compound,
poly(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE) (CAS 9002-84-0)
How much the filer reports,
100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)

SKU YNES · Minnesota disclosure MN-OBC4IT6 · published 2026-09-29

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.