REGULATORY UPDATE | FOOD CONTACT MATERIALS
On July 27, 2026, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published an updated scientific opinion on 27 emerging and novel brominated flame retardants (BFRs) in food, incorporating toxicological, food-occurrence and human-exposure information collected since its previous assessment in 2012. EFSA identified genotoxic, carcinogenic, neurotoxic, reproductive or developmental concerns for several BFRs, but substantial data gaps prevented robust risk characterisation for most of the substances assessed.
The opinion also discusses food-contact materials and kitchen utensils made from recycled plastics as a potential exposure source. Although EFSA considered this contribution likely to be minor compared with the broader uncertainties, the finding highlights the importance of controlling plastic inputs, separating waste streams and assessing chemical contamination. This scientific opinion does not, by itself, establish a new EU prohibition, migration limit or mandatory testing requirement for recycled plastic food-contact materials.
Quick Navigation
Jump to the key sections of this article.
What Did EFSA Conclude About the 27 BFRs?
Brominated flame retardants are used to reduce the flammability of materials found in electrical and electronic equipment, plastics, textiles and other consumer products. Some BFRs are persistent and bioaccumulative and may enter the human body through food, dust and other environmental exposure pathways.
EFSA’s Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain reached the following principal conclusions:
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate (TDBPP, CAS 126-72-7), dibromoneopentyl glycol (DBNPG, CAS 3296-90-0) and tribromoneopentyl alcohol (TBNPA, CAS 1522-92-5) were considered genotoxic and carcinogenic.
4-(1,2-Dibromoethyl)-1,2-dibromocyclohexane (DBE-DBCH) was considered genotoxic, based on positive in vitro mutagenicity results in mammalian cells.
Reproductive or developmental toxicity and/or neurotoxic or neurodevelopmental effects were reported for DBNPG, bis(2-ethylhexyl) tetrabromophthalate (BEH-TEBP), 2-ethylhexyl 2,3,4,5-tetrabromobenzoate (EH-TBB), decabromodiphenyl ethane (DBDPE) and TDBP-TAZTO.
Reference points could be identified for six substances, but EFSA could not derive a health-based guidance value for any of the 27 BFRs.
Occurrence data were submitted to EFSA for only eight substances. Because quantitative data were insufficient for several of them, dietary exposure based on the submitted occurrence data could be estimated only for BTBPE and HBB. Risk characterisation could not be completed for those two substances because suitable reference points were unavailable.
Using limited dietary exposure estimates reported in scientific literature, EFSA was able to perform risk characterisation for BEH-TEBP, EH-TBB and DBDPE. The Panel concluded that current dietary exposure did not raise a health concern for the effects and exposure scenarios assessed. This conclusion should not be extended to the other BFRs, for which hazard, food-occurrence or exposure data remain insufficient.
EFSA recommended collecting additional food-occurrence data, biomonitoring data, genotoxicity information and toxicological studies. It also called for improved access to original study data.
Why Are Recycled Plastic Food-Contact Materials Relevant?
EFSA referenced a 2024 study that analysed 203 consumer products purchased in the United States, including food-serving products and kitchen utensils manufactured from recycled plastics. Approximately 15% of the food-contact items tested contained BFRs.
The researchers suggested that the substances may have entered the recycled materials through contamination of recycling streams with electronic-waste plastics or other plastics originally manufactured with flame retardants.
The study does not demonstrate that 15% of recycled plastic FCMs on the EU market contain BFRs, nor does detection alone establish migration into food or regulatory non-compliance. Nevertheless, it illustrates a practical contamination pathway that recyclers and FCM suppliers should address.
BFRs generally have no intended function in food-contact materials. Their presence may indicate that electrical and electronic waste, automotive plastics, flame-retarded engineering plastics or other unsuitable waste streams have entered material intended for food-contact recycling.
What Does the Opinion Mean Under EU Recycled Plastic FCM Rules?
The EFSA opinion does not amend Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/1616, which governs recycled plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with food.
Under the Regulation, recycled plastic must be manufactured using an appropriate regulatory pathway based on a suitable recycling technology or a novel technology under development. EFSA assesses relevant recycling processes and technologies, while the European Commission and EU Member States are responsible for regulatory authorisation decisions.
The existing framework already places considerable emphasis on:
the origin and quality of plastic input;
collection, sorting and pre-processing controls;
decontamination performance;
operation of recycling installations under defined conditions;
quality assurance, good manufacturing practice and traceability; and
supporting compliance documentation.
The European Commission's guidance on plastic recycling for food-contact applications explains that chemical contaminants may arise from previous use, misuse or cross-contamination during waste collection. Because the identities and concentrations of such contaminants may be unpredictable, feedstock and process controls are essential.
The new EFSA opinion reinforces this existing compliance principle: chemical safety cannot be demonstrated by checking the polymer type or recycled-content percentage alone.
Priority Actions for Recyclers and FCM Suppliers
1. Map and Control the Recycling Stream
Companies should document where the recycled feedstock originates, how it was collected and sorted, and whether non-food-contact waste could enter the stream. Controls should specifically address electronic waste, automotive plastics and flame-retarded engineering plastics where these sources are relevant.
2. Strengthen Supplier Evidence and Traceability
Supplier specifications should define acceptable input materials, excluded waste streams, polymer-purity criteria and contamination-control measures. Supporting records should enable affected batches to be traced back to their material sources and processing conditions.
3. Apply a Risk-Based Screening Strategy
Where the material source or sorting history indicates a potential BFR risk, companies may consider a tiered analytical strategy. Total-bromine screening can serve as an initial indicator, followed where justified by targeted confirmation using methods such as GC-MS or LC-MS/MS.
Screening results should be interpreted in the context of the material, intended food-contact use and applicable regulatory requirements. A total-bromine result does not identify an individual BFR, while detection of a substance does not by itself establish its migration into food.
4. Keep Contamination Assessment Separate from Process Validation
Targeted contaminant screening and recycling-process challenge testing answer different compliance questions. Contaminant screening investigates the possible presence of specific substances, whereas challenge testing evaluates the decontamination efficiency of a recycling process under defined conditions.
Neither activity should be treated as a substitute for feedstock control, process management or complete compliance evidence.
5. Monitor EFSA and EU Risk-Management Developments
The opinion identifies substantial gaps in food-occurrence, exposure and toxicological data. Recyclers, FCM suppliers and downstream users should monitor whether EFSA’s recommendations lead to additional monitoring programmes, data calls or subsequent EU risk-management measures.
How REACH24H Can Support Recycled Plastic FCM Compliance
Companies manufacturing, supplying or using recycled plastics for food-contact applications may need to connect feedstock controls, decontamination evidence, analytical planning and regulatory documentation within a single compliance strategy.
REACH24H can support businesses through:
pre-application regulatory compliance assessment;
preparation and coordination of EFSA recycling-process safety assessment applications;
challenge-test strategy development and study supervision; and
regulatory communication and ongoing EU regulatory monitoring.
Need Support with EU Recycled Plastic FCM Compliance?
Learn more about our EU recycled plastic FCM authorization and EFSA safety assessment services, or contact REACH24H to discuss the applicable pathway for your recycling technology, process or food-contact application.
Recommended Reading
EU Recycled Plastic FCM Authorization & EFSA Safety Assessment
EU Proposes Amendments to Regulation (EU) 2022/1616 on Recycled Plastic Food Contact Materials
浙公网安备 33011002014301号