Presentation on Migration from Food Packaging Materials- Concerns and Opportunities by Dr. Ziynet Boz, Dr. Claire Sand, and Javiera Rubilar With 30 years of experience across the food science and packaging spectrum, Dr Claire Sand through her company, Packaging Technology & Research, offers clients solutions using Strategy, Technology, Consulting and Coaching. Want to know more about how this article affect your business? Reach out to Dr Sand on Linked In - https://www.linkedin.com/in/clairekoelschsand Want to keep learning from Dr. Sand? View more of her presentations and articles at http://www.packagingtechnologyandresearch.com/thought-leadership.html Dr. Claire Sand | Owner, Packaging Technology & Research, LLC; Adjunct Professor, Michigan State University; Columnist for Food Technology Magazine http://www.packagingtechnologyandresearch.com/

1. Created by PTR
Learn more at : www.PackagingTechnologyAndResearch.com
Migration from
Food Packaging
materials -
Concerns and
Opportunity
Ziynet Boz, Ph.D.
Packaging Technology and Research
LLC.
Claire Koelsch Sand, Ph.D., Packaging
Technology and Research LLC.
Javiera Rubilar
Penn Color Inc.
June 2019
29th IAPRI Symposium

2. Migrants of Concern
Intentionally Added
Substances
Non-Intentionally
Added Substances
Risk Mitigation
Recommendations
Modeling Approach

3. Introduction: Motivation and Objectives
• Review of IAS and NIAS sand
their global limits
• Modeling efforts
• Proactive testing of actual
migration
• Recommend risk mitigating
strategies based on available
research on packaging migrants
• Increased concerns related to
migration of chemicals into
foods
• Recycled materials
• Fillers
• Active compounds
• Nanocompounds
• Processing technology
changes
• New materials
• Global regulatory variabilities

4. Introduction: Motivation and Objectives
•The variability of substances is quite high and this limits
direct food contact with recycled polymers and paperboard
•Risks increase as food and package fraud increases
•Processing aids to reduce energy costs or yield improved
mechanical or chemical properties are known
•Migration occurs as a function of the food, time of exposure
and the nature of the migrant itself within the packaging matrix

5. Migration Mechanism
• Migration mechanism in food-
packaging systems
• Several affecting factors
• Numerous packaging
technologies, conditions,
food types
• Databases generated with
food simulants for
compliance
PACKAGING SUBSTRATE
FOOD
INK OR COATING
Migration
Temperature
Concentratio
n
MW
Solubility
Time
Composition
s
Partition
Coefficients
Surface/Volu
me Ratio
Contact type
Mobility

6. Introduction: Motivation and Objectives

7. IAS : Known Migrants
• BPA Starting material for synthesis, epoxy resins,
polysulfones; Brightness, clearness, toughness
• Phthalates Flexibility, transparency, durability, PVC
softening
• Styrene Precursor to copolymers, ”known carcinogen”
• Vinyl Chloride PVC production, occupational hazard
• Melamine Approved as adhesives, coatings, paperboard
component, Reduced exposure limits

8. IAS : Emerging Migrants
• BPS Building block in polycarbonates, epoxies, & fast curing, enables “BPA Free”
• BPF Epoxies, thickness and durability of the materials, chronic low-level
exposure, not regulated
• BPAF New BPA analogue, hormone disruptors in fish
• Bisphenol PH polycarbonates, epoxies, not regulated, synthesis of polyester
polymers such as PC, epoxy resins, polyurethanes, polyesters, polyarylates and
polyethers, children’s cups, sippy cups
• (Per- and polyfluoroalkyl) PFAS cancers, toxicity, immunotoxicity,
fluorinated chemicals in grease-resistant packaging, high fluorine content in pkg.
• (Perfluorooctanoic acid) PFOA contaminants of paper coatings

9. IAS : Nanocompounds
• Carbon black
• Synthetic amorphous silicon dioxide (SAS)
• Bentonite : Respirable crystalline silica
• Aluminosilicate
• Nano-sized titanium nitride: Better heat transfer during PET
stretching
• Carbon nanotubes
• Nanocellulose
Bott et al. 2014

10. Risk Mitigation for Migrants
• Replacement - R&D
• Accurate low-dose assessment
• Strategic partnerships and collaborations with consortiums -
E.g. National Toxicology Program, FDA, NIEHS, CLARITY
BPA
• Avoid phthalates for high fat foods
• Replacement of PVC with PE
• Look for synergistic health effects
• Prolonged exposure to nanomigrants should be avoided

11. NIAS
• From recycling paperboard
• From recycling polymers
• Substances formed during food processing
• Adulterants
• Flavoring and Enrichment Substances

12. Risk Mitigation for NIAS
• Ease of separation for indirect contact
• Employing barrier in paperboard
• Reusable recycled content- cleaning
• Chain of Custody from packaging supplier/converter for direct
food contact recycling
• Ease of sorting of polymers
• Chemical recycling

13. Risk Mitigation : Ensure Proper Testing
• Engage with advanced methods
• Confirm that the food simulant is the highest possible
migration to prevent underrepresenting migration
• NIAS: UPLC-Q-TOF-MS analysis of non-volatile migrants for
characterization
• Assess nanomigrants carefully, additional testing methods,
ICP-MS, AF4, AAS, XRD, HRMS
• Reducing migration: nanoparticles fully incorporated into a
polymer matrix
• Understand the impact of inconsistent dispersion of NMs

14. Risk Mitigation: Regulatory Compliance
• Global regulations-US : FDA (FCN,
FAP, TOR)
• Global regulations-EU : Polymer-
focused
• Global regulations-South America :
MERCOSUR

15. Migration Modeling
• Experimental procedures are time-
intensive, costly
• Numerous combinations of packaging-
food-environment
• Risk assessment in decision-making
• Limited migration packaging design
• Lowering the additive diffusivity during
synthesis
• Monomers, antioxidants, stabilizers,
antimicrobials etc.
𝜕𝐶𝐴
𝑃
𝜕𝑡
= 𝐷𝐴
𝑃
𝜕2 𝐶𝐴
𝑃
𝜕𝑥2
𝐾𝑝 =
𝐶𝐴
𝑃
(∞)
𝐶𝐴
𝐹
(∞)
𝛼 =
𝑀𝐴
𝐹
(∞)
𝑀𝐴
𝑃
(∞)
=
𝐶𝐴
𝐹
(∞)
𝐶𝐴
𝑃
(∞)
=
𝑉 𝐹
𝐾𝑝 𝑉 𝑃

16. Regulatory Opinions on Modeling
• Current state of the models in compliance
• Accepted models for FCMs are oversimplified, deterministic, “worst case”
scenario
• Initial Conditions: uniform distributions, no-migrant in
• Boundary Conditions: No interface resistance
• No spatial distribution after migration
• Total migration amount is constant (No reaction / generation)
• High solubility of migrant in food (Partition coefficient = 1)
• If result is lower than SML

17. Current Approach
• FDA Model, EU Piringer model -> Overestimation 95%
• E.g. HDPE-food simulant, PET-water, AO-Tenax®, Photoinitiator-paper-
Tenax®
• Oversimplification and assumptions: Over- or under-estimated
migration
• Possibility of rejecting potentially safe materials and chemicals
• Trained professionals
• Only for known chemicals IAS
• Target group: Converters and Chemical Industry
• High-throughput models only suitable for multiple migrants

18. Research Needs in Migration Models
• A more realistic estimation of diffusion coefficients are needed
• Effects of swelling phenomenon
• Environment-package-food systems should be considered
• Data needed beyond regulatory compliance but a food quality perspective
• Actual interactions should be considered E.g. Oxygen effects, Flavor desorption
etc.
• Models of migrants from multilayer materials with numerical methods
• Industrial tools to assess the migration: Practical, Robust
• Non-plastic materials: E.g. paper and paperboard
• Nanomaterial migration assessment
• Emerging modeling methods E.g. Molecular modeling, molecular
thermodynamics, coupled models with human exposure

19. Thank you! Let’s Connect
Claire@PackagingTechnologyAndResearch.com
www.PackagingTechnologyAndResearch.com
Ziynet@PackagingTechnologyAndResearch.com
For a reference list, please contact us!