Skip to content
  • industrial

(eta-Cumene)-(eta-cyclopentadienyl)iron(II) hexafluoroantimonate

CAS 100011-37-8

Concern score

Not assessed — no hazard data yet.

(eta-Cumene)-(eta-cyclopentadienyl)iron(II) hexafluoroantimonate in plain language

What it is

Also known as (η-cumene)-(η-cyclopentadienyl)iron(II) hexafluoroantimonate · Benzene, (1-methylethyl)-, iron complex · EEC No.: 407-840-0 · R-gen 262

What it does

We don't have a plain-language description for (eta-Cumene)-(eta-cyclopentadienyl)iron(II) hexafluoroantimonate yet.

Recorded functional uses: Photosensitizers

Is it a concern?
We haven't assessed a concern score for this ingredient yet.

Regulation

No restrictions found. (eta-Cumene)-(eta-cyclopentadienyl)iron(II) hexafluoroantimonate appears in these published regulatory listings.

Recorded in these product areas

  • Found in consumer products
  • Industrial
  • USEPAcommercial use observedEPA CPDat observed this chemical in 0 composition records across product categories including unclassified products. EPA CPDat classifies this chemical for functional uses including Photosensitizers.
    • EPA CPDat observed this chemical in 0 composition records across product categories including unclassified products. EPA CPDat classifies this chemical for functional uses including Photosensitizers.Source →

Evidence & sources

No graded research studies for (eta-Cumene)-(eta-cyclopentadienyl)iron(II) hexafluoroantimonate yet. This record is compiled from the published data sources below — registries and regulatory listings, not study findings.

2 data sources

Where this comes from

  • EPA Chemical and Products Database

    exposure · updated 2021-06-08

    Open →
  • EPA DSSTox Identifiers

    chemistry · updated 2025-12-29

    Open →

Suitability

Context-specific fit derived from published classifications and the current ingredient evidence profile.

Fragrance avoidance

Nothing to weigh for this context yet.

No signal in this context

We have no published hazard signal for this ingredient, so we cannot say how it behaves in this context — that is missing evidence, not a clean result.