Testing to Substantiate Food Contact Material Labeling in the EU

The glass-and-fork symbol indicates that a material or article is suitable for contact with food. Under the EU Framework Regulation, an article that is not already in contact with food when placed on the market—such as kitchenware, reusable bottles, storage containers, bowls, or lids—should carry that symbol or another appropriate indication of its food-contact suitability where its intended use is not otherwise evident.

Using the symbol, or wording such as “for food contact,” is not simply a design choice. The underlying article must comply with the Framework Regulation and any relevant material-specific requirements. The central principle is that a food-contact material must not transfer constituents to food in quantities that could endanger human health, bring about an unacceptable change in the food’s composition, or adversely affect its taste or odour.

For procurement, the food-contact indication should be reviewed against the actual item rather than a broad product family. Identify the container and lid, the food-contact layers or coatings where relevant, the food types, and the expected temperature and contact duration. Then ask for documentation and supporting evidence that identify that configuration and intended use. If a record cannot be related to the proposed article or does not state the conditions it covers, do not treat the food-contact symbol as a conclusion for the intended project.

The glass-and-fork symbol, or appropriate substitute wording, addresses food-contact suitability. Voluntary performance labels serve a different purpose: they tell the user how an article may be used. An oven-safe, dishwasher-safe, microwave-safe, or freezer-safe statement should therefore be supported by testing that reflects the particular performance being claimed.

The relevant question is not whether one material is generally associated with a use. It is whether the finished article remains functional and shows no relevant damage under the stated test conditions. The buyer should request the test method, the article identification, the claimed conditions and limitations, the pass criteria, and the result. A claim should not be extended from one configuration, temperature range, or use cycle to another without confirming the scope.

EN 13834 sets out a procedure for evaluating cookware safety and performance in domestic ovens. Under the procedure described by that standard, an article is heated for one hour at a temperature 20 °C above its recommended maximum temperature; if no maximum is specified, the reference temperature is 250 °C. The article is then examined for damage.

An oven-safe claim should therefore be connected to a stated maximum temperature and the precise article tested. A buyer considering an oven-use label should ask whether the test covers the finished configuration, including components that will be exposed to the oven condition. A container tested without a lid should not automatically support an oven-use statement for a container-and-lid combination.

Do not proceed with an oven-safe label where the maximum temperature is absent, the tested construction differs from the proposed article, or the documentation does not show how the claim relates to the intended use.

Dishwashing resistance is commonly assessed using EN 12875-1 and EN 12875-2. The methods use a specified number of washing cycles to simulate the stresses imposed by household dishwashers, followed by an inspection for damage. An article may be described as dishwasher-safe when it withstands 125 cycles without visible damage; a higher cycle count, such as 250 or 500 cycles, can be used to demonstrate a higher level of resistance.

For plastic articles, EN 12875-1 may also be relevant to assessing whether an item should be classified as single-use plastic under the SUP Directive: the source standard cited for this purpose uses 25 washing cycles. This durability assessment does not replace food-contact migration assessment for repeated use. Where repeated-use plastic food-contact requirements apply, the evidence should also cover the relevant migration testing.

Ask for the number of cycles completed, the inspection criteria, the tested article and any food-contact evidence required for repeated use. Do not describe an article as dishwasher-safe merely because it is reusable, because a similar product survived a limited wash trial, or because the supplier has used the label for another product.

EN 15284 is commonly used to evaluate the suitability of food-contact articles for microwave heating. In the test approach, the article is subjected to microwave heating at 650 W for both a short cycle of 1 minute 51 seconds and a longer cycle of 12 minutes. After each cycle, the item is inspected for damage such as cracking, melting, deformation, or colour change.

Surface temperature is also measured to assess whether the article becomes excessively hot during microwave heating. In the approach described by the standard, an item should not show visual damage or reach a surface temperature in the relevant 56–60 °C range, depending on the material, to support a microwave-safe assessment.

A microwave-safe claim needs careful scope control. Confirm the power, heating duration, food load or test medium, the presence or absence of a lid, venting instructions where applicable, and the exact configuration tested. A microwave label on a package should not be approved for a proposed bowl-and-lid system when the available evidence identifies another construction or does not cover the proposed microwave condition.

There is no international or European reference standard for freezer resistance comparable to the standards commonly used for oven, dishwasher, or microwave claims. Freezer assessment is therefore often conducted using a defined in-house method. A typical example is storing an article at -18 °C for 24 hours and inspecting it afterwards.

To support a freezer-safe claim, the article should retain its functionality, show no relevant visual changes, and develop no off-odour under the defined method. Because methods can differ, the label should be accompanied by a clear test scope rather than a vague assertion of cold resistance. The buyer should ask for the storage temperature, duration, article configuration, inspection criteria, and any limitations on use after freezing.

Do not compare freezer-safe claims as equivalent when the suppliers have used different methods without disclosing the conditions. If no method, result, or product identification is available, retain the claim as unsubstantiated rather than placing it on the product or consumer instructions.

For each proposed food-contact label, prepare one request that links the claim to the reviewed article:

1. Identify the article: the container, lid, coating or liner, and any other relevant component. 2. State the intended food-contact use: food type, contact temperature, contact duration, and whether the article is intended for single or repeated use. 3. State the voluntary performance claim exactly as it would appear, such as oven-safe, dishwasher-safe, microwave-safe, or freezer-safe. 4. Request the applicable test method or defined method, the test conditions, the pass criteria, the result, and records that identify the tested article. 5. Check that the documentation reaches the proposed configuration and the consumer-facing instruction before using the claim.

When submitting an inquiry to TakeawayPack, buyers can provide the product category, material, size or capacity, expected quantity, customization requirements, and destination. The inquiry can also address structure, coating, capacity, and lid matching. Those inputs help define what needs to be reviewed; they do not by themselves demonstrate that a specific TakeawayPack item has passed a performance test or is suitable for a particular use.

The practical conclusion is straightforward: use food-contact and performance labels only when the finished article has evidence that corresponds to the exact claim and intended conditions. Where the claim scope, test method, result, or product identification is unclear, pause the label decision, obtain a product-specific response, and align the final consumer instruction with the supported use.