The Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) 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 (the 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 19 bicyclic secondary alcohols, ketones and related esters evaluated by JECFA at the 63rd meeting. This revision of FGE.87 is made due to new information on annual production volume, allowing the calculation of maximised survey-derived daily intake (MSDI) for 4,4a,5,6-tetrahydro-7-methylnaphthalen-2(3H)-one [FL-no: 07.136]. In addition, new data on uses and use levels for the substances [FL-no: 07.089, 07.0136, 07.153 and 07.159] have been provided and considered for the estimation of exposure (mTAMDI approach). For [FL-no: 07.136], the Panel agrees with the Procedure as applied by JECFA and with JECFA conclusion: 'No safety concern at estimated levels of intake as flavouring substance', when based on the MSDI approach. For the other 18 substances considered in FGE.87Rev3, the same conclusion was already drawn in FGE.87Rev2. For [FL-no: 07.136], the mTAMDI exposure estimate is below the TTC for structural class II substances. Accordingly, no further data are required in the context of the current evaluation programme. For [FL-no: 07.089, 07.153, 07.159], mTAMDI exposure estimates are above the TTC for structural class II substances; therefore, more reliable data on uses and use levels should be provided in order to refine the exposure assessment and to finalise their safety evaluation. For the remaining 15 substances, use levels are needed to calculate the mTAMDIs in order to identify those flavouring substances that need more refined exposure assessments and to finalise the evaluation. Information on specifications for the materials of commerce is considered adequate for all 19 substances.

This guidance document applies to applications for a new authorisation as well as for a modification of an existing authorisation of a food additive, submitted under Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. It defines the scientific data required to evaluate if the food additive is safe under the proposed conditions of use, in accordance with Articles 1 and 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. The data requirements pertain to the characterisation of the proposed food additive, including the description of its identity, manufacturing process, specifications, stability, reaction and fate in foods and methods of analysis in food; the proposed uses and use levels and the dietary exposure; the safety data, including information on the genotoxic potential of the food additive, toxicological data other than genotoxicity and information on the safety for the environment. For the toxicological studies, a tiered approach is applied, for which the testing requirements, key issues and triggers are described. Applicants should provide data in accordance with this guidance document to support the safety assessment of the proposed food additive. Based on the submitted data, EFSA will assess the safety of the food additive in line with the risk assessment principles described in this document and conclude whether or not it presents risks to human health and to the environment, if applicable, under the proposed conditions of use.

The Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) 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 consideration concerns a group of five epoxides evaluated by JECFA at the 65th meeting. This revision of FGE.82 is made due to new information on stereoisomeric composition, toxicity studies, uses and use levels for beta-ionone epoxide [FL-no: 07.170]. In addition, new data on uses and use levels for the substances [FL-no: 16.015, 16.018, 16.040 and 16.043] have been provided and considered for the estimation of exposure (modified theoretical added maximum daily intake (mTAMDI) approach). The Panel considered that the information on the stereochemical composition of [FL-no: 07.170] is sufficient. The Panel did not agree with the application of the Procedure for the epoxides as performed by JECFA, because in the absence of experimental data, the extent of detoxification of these epoxides remains uncertain. Therefore, [FL-no: 07.170] was assessed via the B-side of the Procedure. In the 90-day toxicity study on [FL-no: 07.170], substance-related findings were observed in adrenal glands of male rats. Based on this observation, the Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 39 mg/kg bw per day and concluded that for [FL-no: 07.170] there is 'no safety concern at estimated levels of intake as flavouring substance', when based on the maximised survey-derived daily intake (MSDI) approach. Based on new information on uses and use levels for [FL-no: 07.170, 16.015, 16.018, 16.040 and 16.043], the mTAMDI exposure estimates are above the toxicological threshold of concern (TTC) for their structural class III. The Panel concluded that more reliable data on uses and use levels would be needed for these five substances.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF Panel) provides a scientific opinion on the safety assessment of the proposed use of pectin rich extract derived from Coffea arabica L. as a food additive. The proposed food additive consists of 70%–85% dietary fibres (of which the major part is pectin), 4%–6.5% proteins and substances of potential concern including caffeine, chlorogenic acid, ■■■■■, caffeic acid, ■■■■■, trigonelline. The Panel integrated all available information including existing EFSA evaluations on pectins, coffee fruit pulp, and conducted a new quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR) analysis for the substances of potential concern. Studies from literature confirmed that the pectins are not absorbed intact but extensively fermented by intestinal microbiota. No adverse effects were reported in two 90‐day toxicity studies in rats up to 7.8 g/kg body weight (bw) per day and in one human study on sugar beet pectin at 0.2 g/kg bw per day for 4 weeks. The calculated MOE for ■■■■■ indicated that there is a low concern from a public health point of view. The Panel considered that the exposure to caffeine, caffeic acid, ■■■■■, chlorogenic acid, ■■■■■ and trigonelline from use of the proposed food additive would contribute only to a minimal increase over existing dietary exposure and is not of safety concern. Considering the composition of the proposed food additive, the absence of genotoxic concern of its components and lack of adverse effects of the major component (i.e. pectins), the Panel considered that there was no need for a numerical acceptable daily intake. The Panel concluded that the use of pectin‐rich extract derived from Coffea arabica as a new food additive does not raise a safety concern at the proposed use and use levels.

The present opinion deals with the re-evaluation of sucralose (E 955) as food additive and with the safety of a proposed extension of use in food category (FC) 7.2 'Fine bakery wares'. Based on the available data, no safety concerns arose for genotoxicity of sucralose (E 955) and its impurities and degradation products. Based on the weight of evidence (WoE), the Panel considered the decrease in body weight observed in rats as the relevant endpoint for the derivation of a reference point (RP). The Panel performed a benchmark dose (BMD) analysis on the data from the longest study (combined chronic and carcinogenicity study) with a modified benchmark dose response to account for the poor palatability of sucralose. The resulting RP was 55 mg/kg bw per day (benchmark dose lower confidence limit; BMDL). The Panel considered it appropriate to derive chemical-specific assessment factor for sucralose and concluded that there is no need to revise the current ADI of 15 mg/kg bw per day of sucralose (E 955) previously established by the Scientific Committee on Food. The exposure estimates considering the currently authorised uses did not exceed the ADI. Therefore, the Panel concluded that there is no safety concern at the reported uses and use levels of sucralose (E 955). The overall exposure did not increase substantially when considering the proposed extension of use. However, based on the available data and the identified uncertainties regarding the potential formation of chlorinated compounds under the wide range of baking processes that may be applicable for FC 7.2, the Panel could not conclude on the safety of the proposed extension of use of E 955 in this FC. The Panel issued recommendations to the European Commission, primarily to consider a revision of the EU specifications for sucralose.

The food additive vegetable carbon (E 153) was re-evaluated by the EFSA ANS Panel in 2012. During that re-evaluation, data gaps were identified, in particular with respect to impurities and particle characterisation. Following a European Commission call for data to address these gaps, one interested business operator (IBO) submitted analytical data on toxic elements, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and particle size distribution of commercial samples of E 153. The present opinion deals with the assessment of the data provided by the IBO in response to the European Commission call. Based on the analytical data provided, the Panel concluded that the information on toxic elements supports a revision of the current EU specification limits for arsenic, cadmium, mercury and lead, and the introduction of a limit for aluminium. Regarding PAHs, the Panel assessed the risks associated with benzo[a]pyrene and PAH4 under several scenarios and concluded that the resulting margins of exposure (MOE) were above the level of concern but recommended lowering the current limit for benzo[a]pyrene and introducing a limit for PAH4 in the EU specifications for E 153. For what concerns the data on particle size distribution and morphology, the Panel considered that, due to methodological limitations, these data did not allow a full characterisation of the materials used as a food additive and did not adequately support an amendment of the specifications in relation to particle properties. Nevertheless, the Panel concluded that a fraction of small particles, including nanoparticles, is present in vegetable carbon (E 153) and noted that the substance is insoluble in water. Therefore, in line with the EFSA Guidance on Particles-TR, the Panel concluded that the risk assessment of E 153 performed by the EFSA ANS Panel in 2012 should be complemented with nanoscale considerations.

Abstract The European Commission requested EFSA to assess the acute exposure to glycerol (E 422) from slush ice drinks and de‐alcoholised wine. The acute exposure assessment was conducted on a single‑consumption‑event basis considering the reported use levels and analytical data of glycerol in slush ice drinks and the proposed maximum level of 50,000 mg glycerol/L in de‐alcoholised wine. The Panel considered that a conservative dose above which unintended pharmacological effects would occur should be used for the determination of the acute reference dose (ARfD). Based on Wald and McLaurin (1982) study, the Panel derived an ARfD of 125 mg glycerol/kg body weight for a single consumption event. The Panel concluded that the acute exposure to glycerol per single consumption event from slush ice drinks, assuming a consumption of 250 mL and 500 mL for children and other population groups, respectively, would exceed the ARfD for all population groups. The Panel also concluded that the P95 acute exposure estimates for glycerol, at the proposed maximum level, from the potential use of de‑alcoholised wine, assumed to be consumed by children and adolescents as a substitute for flavoured drinks and by other population groups as a substitute for wine and wine‐like drinks, would exceed the ARfD for all population groups. As requested by the European Commission, the Panel calculated the maximum single consumption event volume of beverages containing E 422 that can be consumed by different populations groups without exceeding the ARfD. The Panel also calculated the theoretical maximum levels of E 422 when used as a food additive in beverages, including slush ice drinks and de‐alcoholised wine, at which exposure does not exceed the ARfD in different population groups. The Panel recommends the European Commission to consider establishing numerical maximum levels for glycerol (E 422) when used in beverages.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additive and Flavourings (FAF Panel) provides a scientific opinion on the safety of blue galdieria extract as a food additive. Blue galdieria extract is an enzymatically treated C‐phycocyanin extract derived from the lysed biomass of the microalgae Galdieria sulphuraria. The extract is mainly composed of C‐phycocyanin (over 25%), along with other proteins, carbohydrates and dietary fibres. Information and studies provided showed that its components, including the chromophore phycocyanobilin, were metabolised like normal dietary constituents and with a similar fate and efficiency as bile pigments. Blue galdieria extract was not genotoxic. In the 90‐day oral toxicity study, no treatment‐related adverse effects were observed up to the highest dose tested. The risk for allergenicity of blue galdieria extract was expected to be low. The Panel acknowledged the similarity of C‐phycocyanins from G. sulphuraria and Arthrospira platensis (commonly known as spirulina) and therefore considered existing toxicity data on spirulina. The Panel derived an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 7 mg/kg bw per day expressed as C‐phycocyanin, based on a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 4000 mg blue galdieria extract/kg bw per day, corresponding to 1332 mg C‐phycocyanin/kg bw per day, from the 90‐day toxicity study, applying an uncertainty factor (UF) of 200, to account for the uncertainties associated with the results of the developmental toxicity studies on spirulina. At the proposed maximum use levels, the Panel noted that the 95th percentile estimates of dietary exposure exceeded or was at the level of the ADI of 7 mg C‐phycocyanin/kg bw in toddlers and children, respectively. The Panel concluded that there is no safety concern for blue galdieria extract as a food additive at the proposed uses and typical use levels. The Panel could not conclude on the safety for the proposed uses at quantum satis as a Group II food additive due to the absence of use levels to estimate the resulting exposure.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF Panel) provides a scientific opinion on the safety of a modified manufacturing process for the food additive enzymatically produced steviol glycosides (E 960c). The new process converts purified steviol glycosides extracted from Stevia rebaudiana leaves through enzymatic bioconversion catalysed by glucosyltransferase and sucrose synthase enzymes, both produced using three newly developed genetically modified strains of Escherichia coli (CDX-044 W3110-TKO, CDX-045 W3110-TKO and CDX-047 W3110-TKO). This modification of the manufacturing process yields two distinct preparations of steviol glycosides: SBP1, composed predominantly of rebaudioside M, and SBP2, composed predominantly of rebaudioside D. The modification leads to changes in the definition of the food additive, residual protein, residual solvents, microbiological criteria and particle size. The Panel concurred with the applicant's proposal to introduce two new entries in Commission Regulation (EU) No. 231/2012 corresponding to SBP1, predominantly rebaudioside M, and SBP2, predominantly rebaudioside D. The manufacturing process does not raise a safety concern since no viable cells nor DNA of the production strains remained in the final product; in addition, the food enzyme-total organic solid (TOS) are removed to at least 99%, and consequently, the exposure to the food enzyme-TOS via consumption of SPB1 and SPB2 can be considered negligible. The Panel considered that rebaudioside M and D produced by this new manufacturing process have the same physicochemical characteristics as the corresponding rebaudioside M and D present in E 960c(i), (ii) and (iii); therefore, the biological and toxicological data considered in previous evaluations will also apply to the safety assessment of SBP1 and SBP2. The Panel concluded that there is no safety concern with respect to the proposed modification of the food additive enzymatically produced steviol glycoside E 960c related to the use of the new genetically modified strains of E. coli in the production process of SBP1 and SBP2.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) evaluated the genotoxic potential of two flavouring substances, 2-phenylcrotonaldehyde [FL-no: 05.062] and 5-methyl-2-phenylhex-2-enal [FL-no: 05.099] from subgroup 3.3 of FGE.19, in the Flavouring Group Evaluation 216 revision 3 (FGE.216Rev3). In FGE.216Rev2, the Panel concluded that the use of the flavouring [FL-no: 05.062] at the reported use levels in several food categories would raise a concern for aneugenicity and requested substance-specific data for the other related compounds [FL-no: 05.099, 05.100, 05.175 and 05.222]. New data were provided only for [FL-no: 05.062 and 05.099]. For [FL-no: 05.062], the results of a new plasma analysis of the exposed animals were considered to be sufficient to rule out a concern for systemic aneugenicity of the substance. However, the data available do not overrule the concern for aneugenicity of 2-phenylcrotonaldehyde at the site of contact, where the concentrations will be maximal, taking into account that the positive findings in the in vitro micronucleus (MN) assay were seen only in the absence of metabolic activation. Therefore, in line with the principles described in the EFSA Scientific Committee guidance on aneugenicity, the Panel compared the lowest concentration resulting in aneugenicity in the in vitro MN assay (20 μg/mL) with the reported use levels of 2-phenylcrotonaldehyde [FL-no: 05.062] in food (up to 2 mg/kg) and noted that they are one order of magnitude below the concentration for which an aneugenic effect was observed in the in vitro MN assay. Based on this comparison, the Panel concluded that the use of the flavouring substance [FL-no: 05.062] in foods, including beverages, would not raise a concern for aneugenicity if the use levels were not greater than 2 mg/kg or mg/L. For [FL-no: 05.099], based on the new data available, the Panel concluded that there is no concern for genotoxicity.

The present opinion deals with the re-evaluation of acesulfame K (E 950) as a food additive. Acesulfame K (E 950) is the chemically manufactured compound 6-methyl-1,2,3-oxathiazin-4(3H)-one-2,2-dioxide potassium salt. It is authorised for use in the European Union (EU) in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. The assessment involved a comprehensive review of existing authorisations, evaluations and new scientific data. Acesulfame K (E 950) was found to be stable under various conditions; at pH lower than 3 with increasing temperatures, it is degraded to a certain amount. Based on the available data, no safety concerns arise for genotoxicity of acesulfame K (E 950) and its degradation products. For the potential impurities, based on in silico data, a concern for genotoxicity was identified for 5-chloro-acesulfame; a maximum limit of 0.1 mg/kg, or alternatively, a request for appropriate genotoxicity data was recommended. Based on the synthesis of systematically appraised evidence of human and animal studies, the Panel concluded that there are no new studies suitable for identification of a reference point (RP) on adverse effects. Consequently, the Panel established an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 15 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day based on the highest dose tested without adverse effects in a chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity study in rats; a study considered of moderate risk of bias and one of two key studies from the previous evaluations by the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). This revised ADI replaces the ADI of 9 mg/kg bw per day established by the SCF. The Panel noted that the highest estimate of exposure to acesulfame K (E 950) was generally below the ADI in all population groups. The Panel recommended the European Commission to consider the revision of the EU specifications of acesulfame K (E 950).

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) provides a scientific opinion on the safety of d‐α‐tocopheryl polyethylene glycol‐1000 succinate (Vitamin E TPGS) as a new food additive to be used in several food categories as emulsifier. In 2007, the EFSA AFC Panel assessed TPGS as a source of tocopherol intended to be used in foods for particular nutritional uses. The Panel considered the AFC Panel assessment relevant for the present new food additive. Compositional data showed that the proposed food additive is composed of Vitamin E TPGS monoesters (> 82% w/w of the whole preparation) and diesters (< 20% w/w of the whole preparation). Data on the hydrolysis of Vitamin E TPGS showed that the ester bond between d‐α‐tocopherol and succinic acid is stable under the tested conditions, as no increase in free d‐α‐tocopherol was observed. Vitamin E TPGS is poorly absorbed and does not represent a source of Vitamin E in the healthy population. Vitamin E TPGS does not raise a concern with respect to genotoxicity and no adverse effects on reproductive and developmental parameters were observed up to 1000 mg TPGS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested and identified as a reference point. Due to the limitations in the available data (e.g. in reporting), the Panel decided to use an MOE approach instead of deriving an ADI. The Panel considered the calculated MOEs sufficient. Based on the available data, the Panel concluded that the use of Vitamin E TPGS as a new food additive does not raise a safety concern at the proposed use and use levels.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of 3‐[3‐(2‐isopropyl‐5‐methyl‐cyclohexyl)‐ureido]‐butyric acid ethyl ester [FL‐no: 16.136] as a new flavouring substance, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008. The substance has not been reported to occur naturally and it is chemically synthesised. The information provided on the manufacturing process, the composition and the stability of [FL‐no: 16.136] was considered sufficient. The chronic dietary exposure to [FL‐no: 16.136] estimated using the added portions exposure technique (APET) is calculated to be 860 μg/person per day for a 60‐kg adult and 540 μg/person per day for a 15‐kg 3‐year‐old child. [FL‐no: 16.136] did not show genotoxic effects in bacterial mutagenicity and mammalian cell micronucleus assays in vitro. No ADME studies on [FL‐no: 16.136] were provided. In a prenatal developmental toxicity study, no maternal or fetal toxicity was observed in rats dosed up to 1000 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day. In a 90‐day toxicity study in rats, no adverse effects were observed. In this study, the Panel considered that the NOAEL is 777 and 923 mg/kg bw per day (the highest dose tested) for male and female rats, respectively. Considering the lowest NOAEL of 777 mg/kg bw per day, as a reference point, adequate margins of exposure of 55 × 103 and 21 × 103 were calculated for adults and children, respectively, when considering the chronic APET dietary exposure estimates. The Panel concluded that the use of 3‐[3‐(2‐isopropyl‐5‐methylcyclohexyl)‐ureido]‐butyric acid ethyl ester [FL‐no: 16.136] as a flavouring substance under the proposed conditions of use does not raise a safety concern at the dietary exposure estimates calculated using the APET approach.

Abstract The present opinion deals with the re‐evaluation of pullulan (E 1204) when used as a food additive and with the new application on the extension of use to several food categories. Pullulan (E 1204) is obtained by fermentation of a food‐grade hydrolysed starch with non‐genetically modified Aureobasidium pullulans ■■■■■. Based on the available information, the Panel considered that the manufacturing process of pullulan (E 1204) using this microorganism does not raise a safety concern. The Panel confirmed that pullulan (E 1204) is of no concern for genotoxicity. In vitro, pullulan (E 1204) is broken down by salivary and pancreatic amylase and intestinal iso‐amylase and it is further metabolised to short chain fatty acids in the colon by fermentation. Human adult volunteer studies suggested that effects of pullulan (E 1204) are similar to the effects of other poorly digestible carbohydrate polymers including modified celluloses and that mild undesirable gastrointestinal symptoms (i.e. abdominal fullness, flatulence, bloating and cramping) may occur at doses of 10 g pullulan per day and greater. The Panel compared the dose of 10 g pullulan per day with the dietary exposure estimates to pullulan (E 1204) in its currently permitted uses and considering the proposed changes to the currently permitted uses. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for pullulan (E 1204) and there is no safety concern for the currently reported uses and use levels. Additionally, the Panel concluded that the exposure estimates considering the proposed changes to the currently permitted uses and use levels of pullulan (E 1204) are of no safety concern. The estimates for dietary exposure to pullulan (E 1204) indicate that individuals with a high level of exposure, principally coming from food supplements, may experience mild gastrointestinal symptoms at the currently reported uses and use levels.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF Panel) provides a scientific opinion on the safety of the proposed amendment of the EU specifications of Rebaudioside M produced via enzyme‐catalysed bioconversion (E960c(i) or E 960c(ii)), to include a different microorganism strain in the definition. Rebaudioside M is produced via enzymatic bioconversion from Stevia leaf extract, using the genetically modified yeast strain K. phaffii CGMCC 7539. The final product is composed mostly of rebaudioside M (> 97%) and a mixture of rebaudiosides A, B and D at various concentrations. The Panel considered that the proposed amendment of the specifications is justified with respect to the inclusion of a new microorganism strain, taking into account that the manufacturing process and the submitted analytical data are already covered by the parameters listed in the existing EU specifications for E 960c(i) and E 960c(ii). The Panel considered that it is in the remit of the risk managers to decide whether the proposed changes in the specifications should result in an amendment of the already existing EU specifications of E960c(i) or E960c(ii). Viable cells and DNA from the production strain are not present in the final product; hence, the manufacturing process does not raise a safety concern. The Panel considered that the proposed food additive has the same physicochemical characteristics of E 960c(i) or E 960c(ii); therefore, the biological and toxicological data considered in previous evaluations will also apply to the safety assessment of Rebaudioside M produced from K. phaffii CGMCC 7539. The Panel concluded that there is no safety concern with respect to the proposed amendment to the EU specifications of E 960c(i) or E 960c(ii) related to the use of the new genetically modified strain K. phaffii CGMCC 7539 in the manufacturing process of the food additive Rebaudioside M produced via enzyme‐catalysed bioconversion.

Abstract Citric acid esters of mono‐ and diglycerides of fatty acids (E 472c) was re‐evaluated in 2020 by the Food Additives and Flavourings Panel (FAF Panel) along with acetic acid, lactic acid, tartaric acid, mono‐ and diacetyltartaric acid, mixed acetic and tartaric acid esters of mono‐ and diglycerides of fatty acids (E 472a,b,d,e,f). As a follow‐up to this assessment, the FAF Panel was requested to assess the safety of citric acid esters of mono‐ and diglycerides of fatty acids (E 472c) for its use as food additive in food for infants below 16 weeks of age belonging to food categories (FCs) 13.1.1 (Infant formulae as defined by Directive 2006/141/EC) and 13.1.5.1 (Dietary foods for infants for special medical purposes and special formulae for infants). In addition, the FAF Panel was requested to address the recommendation of the re‐evaluation of E 472c as a food additive to update the EU specifications in Commission Regulation (EU) No 231/2012. For this, a call for data was published to allow interested partied to provide the requested information for a risk assessment. The Panel concluded that the technical data provided by the interested business operators support an amendment of the EU specifications for E 472c. Regarding the safety of the use of E 472c in food for infants below 16 weeks of age, the Panel concluded that there is no safety concern from its use at the reported use levels and at the maximum permitted levels in food for infants below 16 weeks of age (FCs 13.1.1 and 13.1.5.1).

The Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) provides a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of oxygen (E 948) and hydrogen (E 949) as food additives. Their currently permitted use in food in the European Union (EU) is in all food categories, including in foods for infants and young children at quantum satis (QS). They can also be used in food additive preparations, food enzymes and nutrients also at QS. No interested business operators (IBOs) provided information in response to the call for data published by EFSA to support their re-evaluation. The original evaluation by the EU in 1990 indicated their use as packaging gases, and in the case of oxygen (E 948), also as propellant. The Panel considered the two gases to be of low toxicological concern when used as food additives and their dietary exposure very low. The Panel concluded that the use of oxygen (E 948) and hydrogen (E 949) as food additives does not raise a safety concern. The Panel made some recommendations for amending existing EU specifications for both oxygen (E 948) and hydrogen (E 949).

Abstract The present opinion deals with the re‐evaluation of neotame (E 961) as a food additive. Neotame is the chemically manufactured compound N‐[N‐(3,3‐dimethylbutyl)‐l‐α‐aspartyl]‐l‐phenylalanine 1‐methyl ester. The main impurity of neotame (E 961) is also a degradation product (de‐esterified form), N‐[N‐(3,3‐dimethylbutyl)‐l‐α‐aspartyl]‐L‐phenylalanine (NC‐00751) and the primary metabolite. No new data were received following the call for biological and toxicological data. A summary of the toxicological studies available in the EFSA opinion of 2007 is presented and studies gathered from the literature are summarised. Neotame is rapidly absorbed and pre‐systemically metabolised, systemic intact neotame is likely to be excreted in the urine with its metabolites. The potential aneugenic effects at the site of contact are not expected to occur; overall, there is no concern for genotoxicity of neotame (E 961) at the maximum permitted levels or reported use levels. A review of the other endpoints from the already available toxicological database did not indicate an adverse effect for neotame at the highest doses tested. The Panel established an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 10 mg/kg bw per day for neotame based on the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 1000 mg/kg bw per day from a 52‐week chronic and 104‐week carcinogenicity studies in rats. This ADI replaces the ADI of 2 mg/kg bw per day established by EFSA in 2007. The resulting exposure to methanol and its metabolite formaldehyde from the use of neotame at the ADI of 10 mg/kg bw per day does not raise a concern. The dietary exposure estimates of neotame (E 961) for the different population groups of all exposure scenarios did not exceed the ADI. The Panel concluded that there is no safety concern for neotame (E 961) at the currently permitted and reported uses and use levels. The Panel recommended the European Commission to consider revising the EU specifications of neotame (E 961).

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF Panel) provides a scientific opinion on the safety of jagua (genipin‐glycine) blue as a new food additive. Jagua (genipin‐glycine) blue is obtained by water extraction of the ground pulp of the peeled, unripe fruits of Genipa americana L. and is the result of a reaction between genipin (iridoid present in the fruit) and externally added glycine. This reaction leads to the formation of a blue‐coloured polymer and minor colouring components. In vitro Caco‐2 cell permeability test demonstrated a low permeability of jagua (genipin‐glycine) blue, but repeated dose toxicity studies showed organs discoloration and green‐coloured urine, demonstrating some absorption. The toxicological data set comprised acute, sub‐chronic toxicity, genotoxicity studies and also a 12‐month toxicity study including in utero exposure. Jagua (genipin‐glycine) blue was not genotoxic, and no adverse effects were observed in the repeated dose toxicity studies up to the highest doses tested. The Panel derived an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 34 mg/kg bw per day or 12 mg/kg bw per day expressed as blue polymer, based on a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 3385 mg/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, from the 12‐month toxicity study and an uncertainty factor of 100. At the proposed maximum use level exposure assessment scenario, the 95th percentile of exposure approximately ranged from 1 mg/kg bw per day in the elderly to 27 mg/kg bw per day in toddlers. The Panel noted that both the mean and 95th percentile estimates of exposure did not exceed the proposed ADI in all population groups. The same was true for the exposure to the blue polymer assuming a 40% content in the proposed food additive. The Panel concluded there is no safety concern for jagua (genipin‐glycine) blue as a food additive at the proposed use and use levels.

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF Panel) provides a scientific opinion on the safety evaluation of a proposed amendment of the conditions of use of the food additive sorbitan monostearate (E 491) in accordance with Annex III, Part 3 to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008, with respect to the intended use as a food additive in preparations of the food enzyme asparaginase (also known as acrylamide reducing yeast, or ARY). The group of sorbitan esters (E 491-495) was re-evaluated by the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS Panel) in 2017. The ANS Panel established a group ADI of 10 mg sorbitan/kg body weight (bw) per day applicable to the food additives E 491-495. In the present opinion the Panel calculated an updated dietary exposure estimate of sorbitan resulting from the current authorised uses of the group of sorbitan esters (E 491-495), and from the proposed amendment of the conditions of use of sorbitan monostearate (E 491) in enzyme preparations. In updating the dietary exposure with the latest dietary surveys available, the group ADI of 10 mg sorbitan/kg bw per day was exceeded in toddlers and children at the 95th percentile in the refined non-brand loyal scenario for a limited number of dietary surveys. This observation holds true either considering the proposed amendment of the conditions of use of the food additive E 491 or only the currently permitted uses in the exposure calculations. The same conclusions apply to the dietary exposure estimates for consumers of food supplements, for which the ADI is exceeded in children at the 95th percentile. The Panel however concluded that the conservative assumptions made in the refined scenarios have resulted in a clear overestimation of the dietary exposure and therefore that the calculated exceedance of the acceptable daily intake (ADI) is not of safety concern. The Panel concluded that the proposed amendment of the conditions of use of sorbitan monostearate (E 491) in preparations of the food enzyme ARY has little impact on the current dietary exposure to sorbitan resulting from the already permitted uses and reported use levels of sorbitan esters (E 491-495) and would not be of safety concern.