The Italian approach to the safety assessment of coatings intended for food contact application

Similar documents
Current state of play on FCMs, including the risk assessment Eric Barthélémy, EFSA FCM team

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2,3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

Scientific Opinion on the safety evaluation of the substance, copper hydroxide phosphate, CAS No , for use in food contact materials 1

Scientific Opinion on the safety assessment of the substance ethylene glycol dipalmitate, CAS No , for use in food contact materials 1

EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2,3. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy

Scientific Opinion on the safety evaluation of the substance, 3,4-diacetoxy-1-butene, CAS No , for use in food contact materials 1

Recent Progress in the Risk Assessment of FCMs. Laurence Castle

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

Genotoxicity Testing Strategies: application of the EFSA SC opinion to different legal frameworks in the food and feed area

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

Statement on the Safety Evaluation of Smoke Flavourings Primary Products: Interpretation of the Margin of Safety 1

Scientific Opinion on the safety evaluation of the substance glycolic acid for use in food contact materials 1

Risk Assessment and FCMs the Role of EFSA

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

Approach for safety assessment of glass fibre-sizing agents in glass fibre-reinforced plastics for food contact

Preventing contamination from food packaging and other food contact materials

Scientific Opinion on the safety evaluation of the substance bis(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)carbodiimide for use in food contact materials 1

a 1 st list of substances for food contact materials

Draft Scientific Opinion on

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

ADOPTED: 8 September 2015 PUBLISHED: 29 September 2015

Opinion of the Scientific Panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food (AFC) on a request related to

Opinion. of the Scientific Committee on Food

Safety assessment of the substance 2,3,3,4,4,5,5- heptafluoro-1-pentene, for use in food contact materials

Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety Global Partnerships for Chemical Safety. Contributing to the 2020 Goal

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2,3

Official Journal of the European Union REGULATIONS

FOOD SAFETY LEGISLATION INDUSTRY LEAFLET

SAFETY ASSESSMENT OF FOOD CONTACT MATERIALS. Threshold of Toxicological Concern Lisette Krul

Scientific Opinion on the safety evaluation of the substance, titanium nitride, nanoparticles, for use in food contact materials 1

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

Migration and Exposure Considerations Jessica Cooper, PhD

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2,3

The European Commission non-food Scientific Committees Scientific Committee on consumer safety - SCCS

UV/EB-curing printing inks

The EFSA Journal (2005) 217, 1-5

Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on an additional list of monomers and additives for food contact materials (adopted the 18 September 1998)

Using the TTC for evaluation of substances ingested at low levels through food: Challenges and perspectives

Criteria for toxicological characterization metabolites and testing strategy

Incorporating Computational Approaches into Safety Assessment

FOOD CONTACT COMPLIANCE DECLARATION

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2,3

Scientific Opinion on the safety evaluation of the substance, 2,4-diamino-6-hydroxypyrimidine, CAS No , for use in food contact materials 1

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2,3

Food Packaging Forum Workshop 5 October 2017 Zürich, Switzerland

SCIENTIFIC / TECHNICAL REPORT submitted to EFSA

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) / of XXX

Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on the 14th additional list of monomers and additives for food contact materials

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) / of XXX

OPINION ON AN ADDITIONAL LIST OF MONOMERS AND ADDITIVES FOR FOOD CONTACT MATERIALS

Food additives and nutrient sources added to food: developments since the creation of EFSA

1 OJ L 354, , p OJ L 80, , p. 19.

Scientific Opinion on the safety assessment of the active substances, palladium metal and hydrogen gas, for use in active food contact materials 1

The Exposure Matrix Project

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

How end-consumer concerns drive raw material innovation in food packaging

Navigating the Regulatory Environment for Food Contact Applications in the USA. PMA 2014 Annual Meeting

Dr.Jörg-Peter Langhammer Vice-President Global HSE+Sustainability. Siegwerk Druckfarben AG & Co KGaA

OpenFoodTox and Other Open Source In silico EFSA. Jean Lou Dorne Senior Scientific Officer Scientific Committee and Emerging Risks Unit EFSA

The EFSA Journal (2004) 161, 1-13

Federation of EU Specialty Food Ingredients Industries

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) / of XXX

Delegations will find attached document D044711/03 - Annex 1.

Consultation Response

Use of TTC and Human Relevance George E. N. Kass, PhD

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) 2, 3

Regarding Establishment of a Uniform Limit in a Positive List System concerning Agricultural Chemicals Residues in Food etc.

GSC CODEX MESSAGE CCFA48/2016/25

Scientific Challenges in the Risk Assessment of Food Contact Materials 2017 Workshop of the Food Packaging Forum Foundation

Dr. Joerg Feesche November 2016 How to Determine Safety of a Food Contact Adhesive

Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in Contact with Food

cccta 17ème Journées Scientifiques, Les Diablerets VD

Technical guidelines for compliance testing in the framework of the plastic FCM Regulation (EU) No 10/2011

POLIKAP PVDC COATED FILMS 0Y26, 0X26,0X48

The EFSA Journal (2004) 24, 1-13

On behalf of the Italian National Food Safety Committee (CNSA) 05/04/13

Reporting and interpretation of uncertainties for risk management

PACKAGING MIGRATION AND HARMFUL ELEMENT COMPLIANCES. By : Mr. Dilip Singh National Manager SGS India Pvt. Ltd.

Emanuela Turla Scientific Officer Nutrition Unit - EFSA

Risk Management Option Analysis Conclusion Document

Comprehensive analysis of the total migrate from can coatings: Solvents vs. simulants vs. foods

CHEMICAL IDENTITY. INCI NAME: propylene glycol IUPAC: propane-1,2-diol CAS: EC NUMBER: EMPIRICAL FORMULA: C3H8O2 STRUCTURAL FORMULA:

Pesticide risk assessment: changes and perspectives for mammalian toxicology in the new EC regulation 1107/2009

TEXTS ADOPTED Provisional edition. P8_TA-PROV(2016)0384 Implementation of the Food Contact Materials Regulation

FAQs on bisphenol A in consumer products

FÜR RISIKOBEWERTUNG BUNDESINSTITUT

Trigger values for active substances, relevant and non-relevant metabolites in Ground Water/ Drinking water

Transcription:

The Italian approach to the safety assessment of coatings intended for food contact application Riccardo CREBELLI, Maria Rosaria MILANA Istituto Superiore di Sanità Roma ( ITALY) FIP Network - EFSA ( TC) 16 february 2017

The italian legislation: an overview Plastic* Rubber Paper & Board DM 21/3/73 + ca.50 Regenerated Cellulose* amendments Glass (last in 2016) Stainless steel Ceramic * DM 4/4/85 Tin plate DM 18/2/84 Tin free steel DM 1/6/88 Aluminium D 18/4/2007 * Partially or totally harmonized with EU legislation

Evaluation flow for risk assessment in IT Ministerial decree 21 /03/1973 : national guidelines Ministerial Decree 3/06/1994 : SCF Guidelines + Note for Guidance (European Commission) NB: the protocol has the function of a guidance. Other data can be requested whenever necessary) RA body: ISS, Rome National Institute for Health)

Coatings: annual workload On demand Impossible to foreseen a flow In IT no separate positive list therefore no necessary in a number of cases a specific petition A number of requests to Competent Authority of interpretation of the IT legislation

Coatings: how? No separate positive list for coatings ( as for plastics, paper and boards etc) In general: extension of rules for plastics to coatings ( art. 9.4 Ministerial Decree 21.3.73 and amendments) No specific national guideline for the safety assessment of coatings intended to come in contact with food

Coatings: where in IT legislation? Therefore in place: Positive list of substances ( Reg. Ue 10/2011) Positive list of polymers ( resins) : DM 21/3/73 Migration limits: OML, SML NIAS : (art. 10 DM 21.3.73) should be compliant to Art.3 Reg 1935/2004/EC )

RA & RM for substances/materials : the steps Ministry of Health Receiving technical dossier ISS: Checking the quality of the submitted data or information Evaluation of non toxicological & toxicological data Risk assessment ( safe exposure?) Ministry of Health Acceptance or rejection Higher council of Health ( CSS) Acceptability for the proposed use, conditions of acceptance Positive list or specific rules for decrees on new materials Decrees according to the Italian legislative procedures

Toxicological data Full dossier Reduced dossier Specific issues standard as for SCF/EFSA for plastic tiered with the exposure /migration Case by case request, for specific points

Non toxicological data Physicochemical data identity, physicochemical constants etc Detailed information on manufacturing and /or application manufacturing, techn. function, application process, To know purity and byproducts, not only the starting subst and NIAS Detailed Information on final use Migrability which packaging, maximum amount, which foods, in which conditions migration test, calculations for total transfer, modelling, screening etc.

Exposure estimates from the measured migration of all the migrateables (when technically feasible) or calculated from the use level ( total transfer) default assumptions : 1 kg food/day 60 kg body weight 6 dm 2 /kg food.. but ad hoc parameters would be possible for special cases

The outcome of the RA in the positive list No more than what required Tiered restrictions (as for plastics) In positive lists detailed authorization conditions: Maximum amount of use Only for the requested function Only for the requested foods Processing conditions ( if necessary) Surface to volume ( if necessary) Depending on the evaluation, also SML

Evaluation of coatings: a practical example The parent compound XX is a crosslinker ( max use level disclosed, process conditions, intended use) Three main impurities/process by-products are disclosed NIAS: byproducts after application on substrate Oligomers < 1000Da : 1 peak deriving from the use of the substance, exact structure not identified Migration tests: in non fatty food simulants Extraction with solvent for fatty contact Methods provided and some validation performed

Migrants into food simulants: 1. the parent compound XX (sum of isomers): up to 108 µg/kg food; 2. secondary amine, impurity and degradation product: up to 678 µg/kg food; 3. Acid derivative of XX, synthesis intermediate: up to 120 µg/kg food; 4. amino ester of XX, synthesis intermediate and degradation product: up to 74 µg/kg food; 5. ethyl ester of XX, synthesis intermediate and degradation product of XX): up to 67 µg/kg food; 6. DAE (impurity): < 3 µg/kg food: 7. Oligomers of XX: up to 12 µg/kg food ( total transfer);

Approaches used for safety assessment 1. Evaluation of experimental toxicity data 2. Read-across and SAR 3. TTC 4. MoE

1 - Evaluation of experimental toxicity data For compounds [1] (the cross-linker XX) and [2] (the main impurity) migration in food was >50 <5000 ppb. Therefore three genotox tests and an oral 90 tox study are required for safety assesment (intermediate dossier, according to the tiered approach of the SCF for plastic FCM). Both [1] and [2] were evaoluated as non-genotoxic, and a wide margin of safety ( 10,000 or above) could be established from the NOAEL in the 90-day studies. Conclusion: no safety concern

2 - Read across and SAR [3], [4] and [5] are synthesis intermediates of XX: based on the results with XX, they are anticipated to be non-genotoxic. Concerning general toxicity, a NOAEL of 20 mg/kg can be extrapolated for [3] from the NOAEL of [1] which contained 2% of [3] as impurity; [4] and [5] are simple esters expected to be hydrolyzed to the parent compound XX and to ethanol and adipic acid, for which a high ADI is established. Conclusion: no safety concern for the oligomers [7], no genotoxicity is expected due to the lack o genotoxicity of the monomer (FCM Note for Guidance). No other information is considered necessary at the estimated migration level of 12 μg/kg food. Conclusion: no safety concern

3 - Threshold of toxicological concern For the impurity [6], for which no toxicity data were available, the TTC approach was applied. Based on the lack of structural alerts for genotoxicity, a TTC of 1.5 μg/kg bw (Cramer class III) was deemed applicable for [6], which was well above the estimated human exposure (< 0.05 μg/kg bw). Conclusion: no safety concern

4 - Calculation of Margin of Exposure One of the impurities is a secondary amine which can undergo endogenous nitrosation forming a genotoxic carcinogenic nitrosamine. The margin from the highest dose of this secondary amine with no detectable carcinogenic effect when co-administered with a high dose of nitrite to rats, and human exposure from the use of the coating, was > 30,000. Conclusion: no safety concern

The multifaceted approach described is largely based on the following EU and EFSA guidance documents: tiered toxicity testing SCF Guidelines on FCM (2001) read across and SAR EFSA and ECHA guidance in food and non-food areas, with particular reference to the proposed EFSA revised guidance for FCM (2016) threshold of toxicological concern EFSA guidance document on TTC (2012) and revised FCM guideline (2016) margin of exposure relevant EFSA guidance document (2005)

Evaluation of coatings: conclusions IT follows the standard approach for substances that have to enter in the positive list For NIAS, impurities, oligomers, other approaches can be applied NO DEFAULT application of TTC Case by case approach When necessary possibility to set SML for any migrant in addition to the listed substance