Catalyst, as a declared use for PFAS
1 company has told Minnesota that they put PFAS into products to serve this purpose, in 4 filings covering 4 products and 1 distinct compounds. This is the field that makes the set worth reading, because it records PFAS being chosen for a job rather than turning up as a contaminant.
- Disclosures
- 4
- Companies
- 1
- Products
- 4
- Compounds used
- 1
How much is reported
Concentration bands as filed, heaviest declared first, with filings that give no concentration at the bottom. Counts are of filings, since one product can report more than one compound.
- 1,000 ppm to <10,000 ppm (1%)1 filing
- 100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)3 filings
All 4 filings
- Where in the product,
- 60933-18-8
- What it is doing,
- Catalyst
- Compound,
- Polyfluoroalkyl substances
- How much the filer reports,
- 1,000 ppm to <10,000 ppm (1%)
Part Number 157834 · Minnesota disclosure MN-8ND6ZSQ · published 2026-08-07
- Where in the product,
- 60933-18-8
- What it is doing,
- Catalyst
- Compound,
- Polyfluoroalkyl substances
- How much the filer reports,
- 100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)
Part Number 158563 · Minnesota disclosure MN-8ND6ZSQ · published 2026-08-07
- Where in the product,
- 60933-18-8
- What it is doing,
- Catalyst
- Compound,
- Polyfluoroalkyl substances
- How much the filer reports,
- 100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)
Part Number 158544 · Minnesota disclosure MN-8ND6ZSQ · published 2026-08-07
- Where in the product,
- 60933-18-8
- What it is doing,
- Catalyst
- Compound,
- Polyfluoroalkyl substances
- How much the filer reports,
- 100 ppm to <1,000 ppm (0.1%)
Part Number 164802 · Minnesota disclosure MN-8ND6ZSQ · published 2026-08-07
Other declared uses
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.