Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 203, Revision 2 (FGE.203Rev2): α,β-unsaturated aliphatic aldehydes and precursors from chemical subgroup 1.1.4 of FGE.19 with two or more conjugated double-bonds and with or without additional non-conjugated double-bonds

The Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids of the European Food Safety Authority was requested to evaluate the genotoxic potential of flavouring substances from subgroup 1.1.4 of FGE.19 in the Flavouring Group Evaluation 203 Revision 2 (FGE.203Rev2). In FGE. 203 Revision 1, the Panel concluded that the genotoxic potential could not be ruled out for the flavouring substances in this FGE. The Flavour Industry provided additional genotoxicity studies for the representative substances of FGE.19 subgroup 1.1.4, namely deca-2(trans),4(trans)-dienal [FL-no: 05.140] and hexa-2(trans),4(trans)-dienal [FL-no: 05.057]. In addition, new studies on hepta-2,4-dienal [FL-no: 05.084], 2,4-octadienal [FL-no: 05.186] and tr-2,tr-4-nonadienal [FL-no: 05.194] were provided that are evaluated in the present revision of FGE.203, i.e. FGE.203Rev2. Hepta-2,4-dienal [FL-no: 05.084], 2,4-octadienal [FL-no: 05.186] and tr-2,tr-4-nonadienal [FL-no: 05.194] did not induce gene mutations in bacteria. Hexa-2(trans),4(trans)-dienal [FL-no: 05.057] did not induce gene mutations in vitro in mammalian cells. Hexa-2(trans),4(trans)-dienal [FL-no: 05.057] was also tested in an in vivo gene mutation assay giving negative results. Both hexa-2(trans),4(trans)-dienal [FL-no: 05.057] and deca-2(trans),4(trans)-dienal [FL-no: 05.140] were tested in vivo for the induction of micronuclei in rats bone marrow and peripheral reticulocytes after oral or intraperitoneal administration. None of the two substances induced increased frequencies of micronuclei. The Panel concluded that the concern for genotoxicity can be ruled out for the representative substances hexa-2(trans),4(trans)-dienal [FL-no: 05.057] and deca-2(trans),4(trans)-dienal [FL-no: 05.140] and therefore also for the other substances in this group [FL-no: 02.139, 02.153, 02.162, 02.188, 05.064, 05.071, 05.081, 05.084, 05.101, 05.108, 05.125, 05.127, 05.141, 05.173, 05.186, 05.194, 05.196, 09.573]. These 20 substances can be evaluated using the Procedure for the evaluation of flavouring substances.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme α-amylase from a genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis (strain NZYM-AV)

The food enzyme is an α‐amylase (4‐α‐d‐glucan glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.1) produced with the genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis strain NZYM‐AV by Novozymes A/S. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme does not contain the production microorganism or its DNA; therefore, there is no safety concern for the environment. The α‐amylase is intended to be used in starch processing for the production of glucose syrups and distilled alcohol production. Residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed by distillation and by the purification steps applied during the production of glucose syrups (by > 99%). Consequently, dietary exposure was not calculated. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The subchronic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rodents. The Panel derived a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) at the highest dose level of 796 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day. The allergenicity was evaluated by comparing the amino acid sequence to those of known allergens and one match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended condition of use, the risk of allergic sensitisation and elicitation reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is considered low. Based on the microbial source, the genetic modifications, the manufacturing process, the compositional and biochemical data, the removal of TOS during the intended food production processes and the toxicological and genotoxicity studies, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme glucose oxidase from a genetically modified Aspergillus oryzae (strain NZYM-KP)

The food enzyme is a glucose oxidase (beta‐d‐glucose:oxygen 1‐oxidoreductase; EC 1.1.3.4) produced with a genetically modified strain of Aspergillus oryzae strain NZYM‐KP by Novozymes A/S. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme does not contain the production organism or DNA; therefore, there is no safety concern for the environment. The glucose oxidase is intended to be used in baking processes. Based on the maximum use levels recommended and individual consumption data from the EFSA Comprehensive European Food Consumption Database, dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.156 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. The food enzyme did not induce gene mutations in bacteria or chromosome aberrations in human lymphocytes. The subchronic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rodents. A no‐observed‐adverse‐effect level was derived (341 mg TOS/kg bw per day), which compared with the estimated dietary exposure results in a sufficiently high margin of exposure. The allergenicity was evaluated by comparing the amino acid sequence to those of known allergens and one match with a fungal contact allergen was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended condition of use, the risk of allergic sensitisation and elicitation reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is considered low. Based on the microbial source, the genetic modifications, the manufacturing process, the compositional and biochemical data, the estimated dietary exposure and the findings in the toxicological studies, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme alpha-amylase from a genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis (strain NZYM-AN)

The food enzyme is an α‐amylase (4‐α‐d‐glucan glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.1) produced with a genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis strain NZYM‐AN by Novozymes A/S. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme does not contain the production organism or recombinant DNA; therefore, there is no safety concern for the environment. The α‐amylase is intended to be used in starch processing for the production of glucose syrups and distilled alcohol production. Residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed by distillation and by the purification steps applied during the production of glucose syrups (by > 99%). Consequently, dietary exposure was not calculated. Genotoxicity tests with the food enzyme did not raise a safety concern. The amino acid sequence of the food enzyme did not match to those of known allergens. The Panel considered that under the intended condition of use, the risk of allergic sensitisation and elicitation reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is considered low. Based on the microbial source, the genetic modifications, the manufacturing process, the compositional and biochemical data, the removal of TOS during the intended food production processes and the findings in the genotoxicity studies, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety assessment of the process 'Linpac', based on Linpac super clean technology, used to recycle post-consumer PET into food contact materials

This scientific opinion of the EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF Panel) deals with the safety assessment of the Linpac recycling process (EU register number RECYC0148), which is based on the Linpac super clean technology. The input to this process is hot washed and dried poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) flakes originating from collected post-consumer PET containers, containing no more than 5% PET from non-food consumer applications. In this technology post-consumer washed and dried PET flakes are heated in continuous driers under gas flow before being extruded. Having examined the results of the challenge test provided, the Panel concluded that the decontamination in the driers (steps 2 and 3) are the critical steps that determine the decontamination efficiency of the process. The operating parameters controlling its performance are well defined and are residence time, 'air flow per mass of flakes' and temperature in the driers. It was demonstrated that, depending on the operating conditions, the recycling process under evaluation is able to ensure that the level of migration of potential unknown contaminants into food is below a conservatively modelled migration of 0.15 μg/kg food, derived from the exposure scenario for toddlers. The Panel concluded that recycled PET obtained from the process is not of safety concern when used at up to 100% to make articles intended for contact with all types of foodstuffs, except packaged water. These articles should be used at conditions covered by migration testing of 10 days at 20°C. The articles are not intended to be used, and should not be used, in microwave and conventional ovens.

Metabolome disruption of pregnant rats and their offspring resulting from repeated exposure to a pesticide mixture representative of environmental contamination in Brittany

The use of pesticides exposes humans to numerous harmful molecules. Exposure in early-life may be responsible for adverse effects in later life. This study aimed to assess the metabolic modifications induced in pregnant rats and their offspring by a pesticide mixture representative of human exposure. Ten pregnant rats were exposed to a mixture of eight pesticides: acetochlor (246 μg/kg bw/d) + bromoxynil (12 μg/kg bw/d) + carbofuran (22.5 μg/kg bw/d) + chlormequat (35 μg/kg bw/d) + ethephon (22.5 μg/kg bw/d) + fenpropimorph (15.5 μg/kg bw/d) + glyphosate (12 μg/kg bw/d) + imidacloprid (12.5 μg/kg bw/d) representing the main environmental pesticide exposure in Brittany (France) in 2004. Another group of 10 pregnant rats served as controls. Females were fed ad libitum from early pregnancy, which is from gestational day (GD) 4 to GD 21. Urine samples were collected at GD 15. At the end of the exposure, mothers and pups were euthanized and blood, liver, and brain samples collected. 1H NMR-based metabolomics and GC-FID analyses were performed and PCA and PLS-DA used to discriminate between control and exposed groups. Metabolites for which the levels were significantly modified were then identified using the Kruskal-Wallis test, and p-values were adjusted for multiple testing correction using the False Discovery Rate. The metabolomics analysis revealed many differences between dams of the two groups, especially in the plasma, liver and brain. The modified metabolites are involved in TCA cycle, energy production and storage, lipid and carbohydrate metabolism, and amino-acid metabolism. These modifications suggest that the pesticide mixture may induce oxidative stress associated with mitochondrial dysfunction and the impairment of glucose and lipid metabolism. These observations may reflect liver dysfunction with increased relative liver weight and total lipid content. Similar findings were observed for glucose and energy metabolism in the liver of the offspring, and oxidative stress was also suggested in the brains of male offspring.

Safety evaluation of food enzyme glucan 1,4-α-maltohydrolase produced with a genetically modified Bacillus subtilis (strain MAM)

The food enzyme considered in this opinion is a glucan 1,4‐α‐maltohydrolase (maltogenic α‐amylase; EC 3.2.1.133) produced with the genetically modified Bacillus subtilis strain MAM by the company DSM Food Specialties B. V. The food enzyme contains neither the production microorganism nor recombinant DNA; therefore, no environmental risk assessment is required. However, the Panel emphasises that this conclusion only covers the food enzyme recovered via filter press. The glucan 1,4‐α‐maltohydrolase is intended for use in baking processes. Based on the maximum use levels recommended and individual consumption data from the EFSA Comprehensive European Food Consumption Database, dietary exposure to the food enzyme‐total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.175 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rodents. A no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) was derived (986 mg TOS/kg bw per day for both males and females), which, compared with the dietary exposure, results in a sufficiently high margin of exposure. The allergenicity was evaluated by comparing the amino acid sequence to those of known allergens; one match was found. However, the Panel considered that there are no indications for food allergic reactions to this glucan 1,4‐α‐maltohydrolase by dietary exposure. No safety concerns were identified in relation to the genetic modifications, the manufacturing process, the compositional data provided, as well as the exposure, allergenicity and systemic toxicity assessments. However, owing to the incompleteness of the genotoxicity data, the Panel is not able to conclude on the safety of the food enzyme.

Scientific opinion on flavouring group evaluation 77, revision 3 (FGE.77Rev3): consideration of pyridine, pyrrole and quinoline derivatives evaluated by JECFA (63rd meeting) structurally related to pyridine, pyrrole, indole and quinoline derivatives evaluated by EFSA in FGE.24Rev2

The Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids of the EFSA was requested to consider evaluations of flavouring substances assessed since 2000 by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and to decide whether further evaluation is necessary, as laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2000. The present consideration concerns a group of 22 pyridine, pyrrole and quinoline derivatives evaluated by JECFA (63rd meeting). The revision of this consideration is made since additional genotoxicity data have become available for 6-methylquinoline [FL-no: 14.042]. The genotoxicity data available rule out the concern with respect to genotoxicity and accordingly the substance is evaluated through the Procedure. For all 22 substances [FL-no: 13.134, 14.001, 14.004, 14.007, 14.030, 14.038, 14.039, 14.041, 14.042, 14.045, 14.046, 14.047, 14.058, 14.059, 14.060, 14.061, 14.065, 14.066, 14.068, 14.071, 14.072 and 14.164] considered in this Flavouring Group Evaluation (FGE), the Panel agrees with the JECFA conclusion, 'No safety concern at estimated levels of intake as flavouring substances' based on the Maximised Survey-derived Daily Intake (MSDI) approach. Besides the safety assessment of these flavouring substances, the specifications for the materials of commerce have also been evaluated, and the information is considered adequate for all the substances. For the following substances [FL-no: 13.134, 14.001, 14.030, 14.041, 14.042, 14.058, 14.072], the Industry has submitted use levels for normal and maximum use. For the remaining 15 substances, use levels are needed to calculate the modified Theoretical Added Maximum Daily Intakes (mTAMDIs) in order to identify those flavouring substances that need more refined exposure assessment and to finalise the evaluation.

Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 74, Revision 4 (FGE.74Rev4): Consideration of aliphatic sulphides and thiols evaluated by JECFA (53rd and 61st meeting) structurally related to aliphatic and alicyclic mono-, di-, tri- and polysulphides with or without additional oxygenated functional groups from chemical group 20 evaluated by EFSA in FGE.08Rev5

The Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids of the European Food Safety Authority was requested to consider evaluations of flavouring substances assessed since 2000 by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), and to decide whether further evaluation is necessary, as laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2000. The present revision of this FGE is on the assessment of recently submitted toxicity data on methyl propyl trisulfide [FL‐no: 12.020], being the representative for a group of seven additional flavouring substances: diallyl trisulfide [FL‐no: 12.009], dimethyl trisulfide [FL‐no: 12.013], dipropyl trisulfide [FL‐no: 12.023], methyl allyl trisulfide [FL‐no: 12.045], diallyl polysulfides [FL‐no: 12.074], methyl ethyl trisulfide [FL‐no: 12.155] and diisopropyl trisulphide [FL‐no: 12.280]. Specifications have been provided for all substances. The Panel decided that the 90‐day study submitted for [FL‐no: 12.020] can be considered only once it is clearly demonstrated that the material tested is representative of the material of commerce and that potential reaction products of the components are not of safety concern. Therefore, no conclusion on the safety of the eight flavouring substances [FL‐no: 12.009, 12.013, 12.020, 12.023, 12.045, 12.074, 12.155 and 12.280] can be reached. For 2‐methyl‐4‐oxopentane‐2‐thiol [FL‐no: 12.169] and 2‐mercapto‐2‐methylpentan‐1‐ol [FL‐no: 12.241], additional subchronic toxicity data are required. The remaining nine substances [FL‐no: 12.088, 12.179, 12.198, 12.212, 12.238, 12.239, 12.255, 12.257 and 12.291] in this FGE are not considered of safety concern under the intended conditions of use.

Scientific Opinion of Flavouring Group Evaluation 406 (FGE.406): (S)-1-(3-(((4-amino-2,2-dioxido-1H-benzo[c][1,2,6]thiadiazin-5-yl)oxy)methyl)piperidin-1-yl)-3-methylbutan-1-one

The Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) of EFSA was requested to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of the use of the substance (S)-1-(3-(((4-amino-2,2-dioxido-1H-benzo[c][1,2,6]thiadiazin-5-yl)oxy)methyl)piperidin-1-yl)-3-methylbutan-1-one [FL-no: 16.129], as a flavouring substance. The substance is intended to be used in the form of its sodium salt as a flavour modifier in beverages. The Panel concluded that [FL-no: 16.129] would not raise a concern with respect to genotoxicity under conditions where it remains stable and does not undergo photodegradation. However, the data provided do not rule out genotoxicity for the degradation products. A 90-day toxicity study with [FL-no: 16.129] in rats showed no adverse effects at exposure up to 100 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day. No developmental toxicity was observed in rats at dose levels up to 1,000 mg/kg bw per day. An adequate margin of safety was calculated for [FL-no: 16.129]. The Panel concluded that [FL-no: 16.129] and its sodium salt are not expected to be of safety concern at the estimated levels of intake. This conclusion applies only to the use of the substance as a flavour modifier at levels up to those specified in beverages, but not to the degradation products that may be formed upon exposure to ultraviolet-A (UV-A) light. The conditions protecting [FL-no: 16.129] from photodegradation have not been adequately investigated. It is also unclear if degradation occurs in the absence of UV light. Based on the data provided, the Panel cannot conclude on the safety of [FL-no: 16.129] when used as a flavour modifier.

Safety assessment of the process 'Concept Plastic Packaging', based on Starlinger Decon technology, used to recycle post-consumer PET into food contact materials

This scientific opinion of the EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF Panel) deals with the safety evaluation of the recycling process Concept Plastic Packaging (EU register No RECYC151), which is based on the Starlinger Decon technology. The decontamination efficiency of the process was demonstrated by a challenge test. The input of this process is hot caustic washed and dried poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) flakes originating from collected post-consumer PET containers, mainly bottles, containing no more than 5% of PET from non-food consumer applications. In this technology, washed and dried PET flakes are preheated before being submitted to solid-state polycondensation (SSP) in a continuous reactor (one single reactor or several reactors in parallel) at high temperature under vacuum and gas flow. Having examined the challenge test provided, the Panel concluded that the preheating (step 2) and the decontamination in the continuous SSP reactor (step 3) are the critical steps that determine the decontamination efficiency of the process. The operating parameters that control the performance of the process are well defined and are temperature, pressure, residence time and gas flow for steps 2 and 3. Under these conditions, it was demonstrated that the recycling process under evaluation, using the Starlinger Decon technology, is able to ensure that the level of migration of potential unknown contaminants into food is below a conservatively modelled migration of 0.1 μg/kg food. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the recycled PET obtained from this process intended to be used up to 100% for the manufacture of materials and articles for contact with all types of foodstuffs for long-term storage at room temperature, with or without hotfill, is not considered of safety concern. Trays made of this PET are not intended to be used, and should not be used, in microwave and conventional ovens.

Safety assessment of the process 'EstPak Plastik', based on Starlinger Decon technology, used to recycle post-consumer PET into food contact materials

This scientific opinion of the EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF Panel) deals with the safety evaluation of the recycling process EstPak Plastik (EU register No RECYC150), which is based on the Starlinger Decon technology. The decontamination efficiency of the process was demonstrated by a challenge test. The input of this process is hot caustic washed and dried poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) flakes originating from collected post-consumer PET containers, mainly bottles, containing no more than 5% of PET from non-food consumer applications. In this technology, washed and dried PET flakes are preheated before being submitted to solid-state polycondensation (SSP) in a continuous reactor (one single reactor or several reactors in parallel) at high temperature under vacuum and gas flow. Having examined the challenge test provided, the Panel concluded that the preheating (step 2) and the decontamination in the continuous SSP reactor (step 3) are the critical steps that determine the decontamination efficiency of the process. The operating parameters that control the performance of the process are well defined and are temperature, pressure, residence time and gas flow for steps 2 and 3. Under these conditions, it was demonstrated that the recycling process under evaluation, using the Starlinger Decon technology, is able to ensure that the level of migration of potential unknown contaminants into food is below a conservatively modelled migration of 0.1 μg/kg food. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the recycled PET obtained from this process intended to be used up to 100% for the manufacture of materials and articles for contact with all types of foodstuffs for long-term storage at room temperature, with or without hotfill, is not considered of safety concern. Trays made of this PET are not intended to be used, and should not be used, in microwave and conventional ovens.

Safety assessment of the active substance selenium nanoparticles, for use in active food contact materials

This scientific opinion of the EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) deals with the safety assessment of selenium nanoparticles, FCM substance No 1070, which is intended to be used as an antioxidant. Selenium nanoparticles are incorporated into the adhesive middle layer of multilayer laminates with an outside polyethylene terephthalate (PET) layer and an inner polyolefin (food contact) layer. The final materials are intended to be used for contact with all food types that are susceptible to oxidation. The specific migration of total selenium was tested using multilayer pouches containing selenium nanoparticles at 0.002 mg/dm2 and filled with 3% acetic acid and 20%, 50% or 95% ethanol for 10 days at 60°C. In all tests, migration of selenium was not detectable. Taking into account current knowledge on the diffusional properties of nanoparticles in polymers, the CEF Panel concluded that there is no safety concern for the consumer if selenium nanoparticles are used in multilayer films and separated from the food by a polyolefin food contact layer for any type of food and under any food contact conditions.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme xylanase from a genetically modified Bacillus subtilis strain TD160(229)

The food enzyme considered in this opinion is an endo-1,4-β-xylanase (EC 3.2.1.8) produced with a genetically modified Bacillus subtilis strain from Puratos N.V. (Belgium). The genetic modifications do not raise safety concerns. The food enzyme contains neither the production organism nor recombinant DNA. The endo-1,4-β-xylanase is intended to be used in baking processes. Based on the maximum use levels recommended for the baking processes, dietary exposure to the food enzyme-total organic solids (TOS) was estimated on the basis of individual data from the EFSA Comprehensive European Food Consumption Database. This exposure estimate is up to 0.008 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. The food enzyme did not induce gene mutations in bacteria nor clastogenic activity in human lymphocytes. Therefore, there is no concern with respect to genotoxicity. The subchronic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90-day oral toxicity study in rodents. A no observed adverse effect level was derived, which, compared with the dietary exposure, results in a sufficiently high margin of exposure. The allergenicity was evaluated by searching for similarity of the amino acid sequence to those of known allergens; no matches were found. The Panel considered that there are no indications for food allergic reactions to this xylanase. Based on the microbial source, genetic modifications performed, the manufacturing process, the compositional and biochemical data provided, the findings in the toxicological studies and allergenicity assessment, this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety assessment of the process 'Morssinkhof Plastics', used to recycle high-density polyethylene and polypropylene crates for use as food contact materials

This scientific opinion of the EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF Panel) deals with the safety evaluation of the recycling process 'Morssinkhof Plastics', EU register No RECYC0142. The input consists of crates, boxes, trays, pallets and containers, hereafter termed 'crates', used in food contact, made of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) or polypropylene (PP). It comprises unused damaged crates, prewashed used crates and parts of crates originating from closed and controlled product loops. The process separates crates by material type and food type (fruit, vegetables and prepacked meat vs unpacked meat). Flakes from recycled HDPE or PP are produced that will be used by customers to manufacture new crates for food contact. The Panel considered that the management system put in place to ensure compliance of the origin of the input with Commission Regulation (EC) No 282/2008 and to provide full traceability from input to final product is the critical process step. It concluded that the input of the process 'Morssinkhof Plastics' originates from product loops which are in closed and controlled chains designed to ensure that only materials and articles which have been intended for food contact are used and that any contamination can be ruled out when run under the conditions described by the applicant. The recycling process 'Morssinkhof Plastics' is, therefore, able to produce recycled HDPE and PP suitable for manufacturing HDPE and PP crates intended to be used in contact with dry food, fruits and vegetables, prepacked and unpacked meat. The use of regrind from 'external' recyclers only based on private agreements, does not give reassurance to fall under the scope of Art. 4 c (i) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 282/2008 and is excluded from the present evaluation.

Safety assessment of the process 'Envases Ureña', based on Starlinger Decon technology, used to recycle post-consumer PET into food contact materials

This scientific opinion of the EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF Panel) deals with the safety evaluation of the recycling process Envases Ureña (EU register No RECYC0147), which is based on the Starlinger Decon technology. The decontamination efficiency of the process was demonstrated by a challenge test. The input of this process is hot caustic washed and dried poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) flakes originating from collected post-consumer PET containers, mainly bottles, containing no more than 5% of PET from non-food consumer applications. In this technology, washed and dried PET flakes are preheated before being submitted to solid-state polycondensation (SSP) in a continuous reactor (one single reactor or several reactors in parallel) at high temperature under vacuum and gas flow. Having examined the challenge test provided, the Panel concluded that the preheating (step 2) and the decontamination in the continuous SSP reactor (step 3) are the critical steps that determine the decontamination efficiency of the process. The operating parameters that control the performance of the process are well defined and are temperature, pressure, residence time and gas flow for steps 2 and 3. Under these conditions, it was demonstrated that the recycling process under evaluation, using the Starlinger Decon technology, is able to ensure that the level of migration of potential unknown contaminants into food is below a conservatively modelled migration of 0.1 μg/kg food. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the recycled PET obtained from this process intended to be used up to 100% for the manufacture of materials and articles for contact with all types of foodstuffs for long-term storage at room temperature, with or without hotfill, is not considered of safety concern. Trays made of this PET are not intended to be used and should not to be used in microwave and conventional ovens.

Safety assessment of the substance isobutane, for use in food contact materials

The substance isobutane is intended to be used as a foaming agent at max 4.5% to produce expanded polystyrene (EPS) to be used for packaging foods, such as fruits, vegetables, meat, fish and cheese, at room temperature or lower. Isobutane is approved in Europe as a food additive (E 943b) to be used quantum satis as a gas propellant only in vegetable oil pan spray (for professional use only) and water-based emulsion spray according to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. The purity requirements for the use of isobutane as a food additive are described in Commission Regulation (EU) No 231/2012. The substance is a gas at room temperature. It is a saturated hydrocarbon, obtained with a high level of purity, and is not expected to react under the processing conditions used to make foamed polystyrene materials and articles. Data on migration of isobutane from trays at 20°C for 10 days ranged from 0.2 to 0.4 mg/kg food. Considering the intended applications, estimated exposure is extremely low based on migration data. In the absence of genotoxicity alerts and given the very low toxicity following repeated exposure with no observed adverse effect concentration (NOAEC) of several thousands of mg/m3 by inhalation, it was considered that the use of isobutane as a foaming agent, at the expected exposure from food, does not raise a safety concern.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme peroxidase obtained from soybean (Glycine max) hulls

The food enzyme considered in this opinion is a peroxidase (hydrogen‐peroxide oxidoreductase; EC 1.11.1.7) obtained from hulls of soybeans (Glycine max) by the company Kerry Ingredients & Flavours. The compositional data provided were considered sufficient. The manufacturing process did not raise safety concerns. The enzyme is intended to be used in baking processes. Based on the maximum recommended use level, dietary exposure to the food enzyme total organic solids (TOS) was estimated on the basis of individual data from the EFSA Comprehensive European Food Consumption Database. This exposure estimate is lower than the exposure to the fraction of soybean comparable to the food enzyme TOS resulting from the consumption of whole soybean‐derived foods by roughly an order of magnitude. As the food enzyme is derived from edible parts of soybean, in line with the requirements of the guidance document on food enzyme assessment, the Panel concluded that the provision of toxicological data was unnecessary. The potential allergenicity was evaluated by searching for similarity between the amino acid sequence of soybean peroxidase retrieved from the database Uniprot and the sequences of known food allergens; no match was found. Peroxidase from soybean hulls is not listed as an allergen in allergen databases. However, several soybean‐ and soybean hull proteins are known to be respiratory or food allergens. Based on the origin of the food enzyme from edible parts of soybean, the enzyme manufacturing process, the compositional and biochemical data provided, and the dietary exposure assessment, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use. However, the Panel noted that this food enzyme may contain allergenic soybean proteins, thus, adverse reactions in susceptible soybean‐allergic individuals cannot be ruled out.

Scientific Opinion of Flavouring Group Evaluation 410 (FGE.410): 4',5,7-trihydroxyflavanone from chemical group 25 (phenol derivatives containing ring-alkyl, ring-alkoxy, and side-chains with an oxygenated functional group)

The Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF) of EFSA was requested to deliver a scientific opinion on the implications for human health of the flavouring substance 4′,5,7‐trihydroxyflavanone or naringenin [FL‐no: 16.132], in the Flavouring Group Evaluation 410 (FGE.410), according to Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The substance occurs naturally in grapefruits, oranges and tomatoes. It is intended to be used as a flavouring substance with flavour‐modifying properties in specific categories of food. Information on specifications and manufacturing of [FL‐no: 16.132] were considered adequate; however, data on stability in food are incomplete. The Panel noted that the available genotoxicity studies have significant shortcomings and are insufficient to conclude on the genotoxic potential of naringenin. Therefore, [FL‐no: 16.132] cannot be evaluated through the Procedure. Additionally, the Panel noted that inhibition of CYP 450 by [FL‐no: 16.132] has been clearly demonstrated in animal species in vivo which implies that the substance may interact with the metabolism and elimination of medicines and no convincing information is available that this does not pose a risk to humans at the estimated levels of exposure. To continue with the safety assessment of [FL‐no: 16.132], a bacterial gene mutation assay and an in vitro micronucleus assay (according to OECD guidelines 471, 487 and GLP) are required. Even if these studies do not indicate a genotoxic potential, additional toxicological data are needed to finalise the evaluation.

Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 73, Revision 4 (FGE.73Rev4): consideration of alicyclic alcohols, aldehydes, acids and related esters evaluated by JECFA (59th and 63rd meeting) structurally related to primary saturated or unsaturated alicyclic alcohols, aldehydes, acids and esters evaluated by EFSA in FGE.12Rev5

The EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids was requested to consider evaluations of flavouring substances assessed since 2000 by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), and to decide whether further evaluation is necessary, as laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2000. The present revision of FGE.73 concerns the inclusion of four additional flavouring substances (p‐mentha‐1,8‐dien‐7‐ol [FL‐no: 02.060], myrtenol [FL‐no: 02.091], p‐mentha‐1,8‐dien‐7‐yl acetate [FL‐no: 09.278] and myrtenyl acetate [FL‐no: 09.302]) evaluated by JECFA at the 59th meeting. The substances were evaluated through a stepwise approach integrating information on structure–activity relationships, intake from current uses, toxicological thresholds of concern (TTC), and available data on metabolism and toxicity. In agreement with JECFA, the Panel evaluated 22 and one candidate substances via the A and the B‐side of the Procedure, respectively, and concluded for all substances ‘No safety concern at estimated levels of intake as flavouring substances’ based on the maximised survey‐derived daily intake (MSDI) approach. The specifications for the materials of commerce have also been considered. Adequate specifications, including complete purity criteria and identity data, are available for 22 out of the 23 JECFA substances evaluated in this FGE. For [FL‐no: 09.278], the stereoisomeric composition is not specified. For the six substances with [FL‐no: 02.060, 02.091, 09.034, 09.278, 09.302 and 09.712] evaluated in this FGE, use levels have become available and the modified theoretical added maximum daily intakes (mTAMDIs) were estimated. For two substances [FL‐no: 09.034, and 09.712], the mTAMDI estimates were above the TTC for their structural class and more detailed information is needed to finalise their evaluation. For the remaining 17 substances evaluated through the Procedure, use levels are needed to calculate the mTAMDIs in order to identify those flavouring substances that need more refined exposure assessment in order to finalise the evaluation.

Safety of ethyl acrylate to be used as flavouring

The EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF Panel) was requested by the European Commission according to Art. 29 1(a) of the Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 to carry out a review of existing literature on the safety of ethyl acrylate [FL-no: 09.037] when used as a flavouring substance. Ethyl acrylate [FL-no: 09.037] was evaluated in 2010 by EFSA in FGE.71 as a flavouring substance, based on the 2006 JECFA evaluation. The Panel concluded that ethyl acrylate was of no safety concern at estimated level of intake as flavouring substance based on the Maximised Survey-Derived Daily Intake (MSDI) approach. The Panel has evaluated the new literature available and any previous assessments performed by JECFA (2006) and EFSA (2010). Moreover, new data on the use levels of ethyl acrylate as flavouring substance have been provided. For use as flavouring substance, the chronic dietary exposure estimated using the added portions exposure technique (APET), is calculated to be 3,545 μg/person per day for a 60-kg adult and 2,233 μg/person per day for a 15-kg 3-year-old child. Exposure from food contact materials may be up to 6,000 μg/person per day. The Panel considered that based on the available data, which covers all relevant genetic endpoints (i.e. gene mutations, structural and numerical chromosomal aberrations) there is no concern with respect to genotoxicity of ethyl acrylate. The Panel evaluated the available carcinogenicity studies conducted in rats and mice and agreed with the NTP evaluation (1998) concluding that the forestomach squamous cell papilloma and carcinoma observed in rodents were not relevant to humans. Additionally, there was no evidence of systemic toxicity in short-term and subchronic toxicity studies. Therefore, the Panel concluded that there is no safety concern for the use of ethyl acrylate as a flavouring substance, under the intended conditions of use.

Safety of benzophenone to be used as flavouring

Benzophenone [FL-no: 07.032] has been evaluated as a flavouring substance, in FGE.69, by the EFSA Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in Contact with Food in 2008. Benzophenone was evaluated also by JECFA (2011) and by IARC (2013) based on studies that were not considered in the EFSA opinion on FGE.69. Therefore, the Commission requested the CEF Panel to carry out a review of existing literature on the safety of this flavouring substance. In the framework of the evaluation of benzophenone as a food contact material, the CEF Panel established a tolerable daily intake (TDI) of 0.03 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day (2009). In the present Opinion, the Panel considered the already existing evaluations by EFSA, JECFA, IARC and available literature data on benzophenone toxicity. Moreover, new data on the use levels of benzophenone as a flavouring substance have been provided. The Panel considers that there is no concern with respect to genotoxicity. The Panel considers the endocrine activities of benzophenone and its metabolite 4-hydroxybenzophenone as weak and not directly related to the observed toxic effects including the neoplastic effects in rodents. The Panel confirms that the conservative approach taken by EFSA (2009) to derive a TDI of 0.03 mg/kg bw for benzophenone is appropriate to cover the non-neoplastic effects in the chronic toxicity studies and the neoplastic effects induced in the rodent carcinogenicity studies. The TDI is in the same order of magnitude as the chronic dietary exposure of adults and children to benzophenone (10-20 μg/kg bw per day) for the amount of added flavouring substance. The Panel considers that the calculated TDI and exposure estimate are based on conservative assumptions. The Panel concludes that there is no safety concern for benzophenone under the current condition of use as a flavouring substance.

Safety assessment of the process 'Krones' used to recycle post-consumer PET into food contact materials

This scientific opinion of the EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids deals with the safety assessment of the recycling process Krones pellet (EU register number RECYC0149). The input to the process is washed and dried poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) flakes originating from collected post-consumer PET containers and containing no more than 5% PET from non-food consumer applications. In this technology, washed and dried PET flakes are extruded to pellets that are then crystallised and decontaminated in a reactor at high temperature under vacuum. Having examined the results of the challenge test provided, the Panel concluded that two steps, the extrusion (step 2) and the decontamination in the vacuum reactor (step 4), are the critical steps that determine the decontamination efficiency of the process. The operating parameters to control the performance of these critical steps are temperature, residence time and, for the vacuum reactor, also pressure. Under these conditions, it was demonstrated that the recycling process is able to ensure that the level of migration of potential unknown contaminants into food is below the conservatively modelled migration of 0.1 μg/kg food. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the recycled PET obtained from this process when used up to 100% for the manufacture of materials and articles for contact with all types of foodstuffs for long-term storage at room temperature, with or without hotfill, is not considered of safety concern. Trays made of this recycled PET should not be used in microwave and conventional ovens.