How we specify the food-contact bag
A bulk carton liner and a printed retail pouch have different jobs. The liner needs to sit properly in the case, hold the agreed fill and stay intact through frozen handling. A retail pouch also needs a controlled artwork version and a closure that suits the way the buyer will store, open and use it. In both cases, we start with the bag that will touch the food. The outside dimensions of the carton do not tell us which film is in contact with the product.
At quotation and sample review, we confirm the frozen ingredient, fill weight, bag dimensions, nominal film thickness, pack format and intended use with the buyer. The material description should identify the contact face and the finished bag. Where a bag is printed or laminated, the relevant ink, adhesive and layer information comes from the packaging supplier. Two pouches with the same dimensions can have different constructions or restrictions.
GreenLand product photograph: apricot halves in a bulk liner. The fold and the food-contact face are visible.
Tell us whether the food stays frozen in the pack until opening, thaws in the bag, or is intended to be heated in it. Include the food type, likely contact period and destination market. A pack chosen for frozen storage alone calls for a fresh review if the instructions later say to heat the food in the bag. We ask for evidence covering the proposed use and record any restriction alongside the pack specification.
The supplier's document should identify the same finished article or explain its relation to the proposed bag. We use the material code, construction, revision and use conditions to connect it to the order. If the supplier sends a report for unprinted film and the order calls for a printed laminate, we ask it to document what that report covers and supply any missing evidence for the changed construction.
Where the buyer needs a sample, we agree whether it is for fit, artwork, seal evaluation or food-contact review. A pouch that fits the case settles a practical packing question. The applicable declaration and supporting tests settle separate questions about the contact material. Keeping those decisions in the same specification gives both teams a clear basis for later approval.
Four packaging samples and their test scope
The Shandong Institute for Product Quality Inspection issued these reports on samples submitted by packaging manufacturers. Each report lists 100 submitted bags and describes the samples as visually intact. That figure is the quantity submitted, not the replicate count for each test. The batch-number fields have no entry. The report numbers and sample dimensions identify the evidence shown here; they cannot identify a current production or shipment lot on their own.
Jump to an individual report
Illustration: the pouch dimensions and seal layout help identify which article the report describes.
Three reports concern laminated pouches: PET/PE, BOPA/LDPE and BOPA/CPP. PET is polyethylene terephthalate; PE is polyethylene; BOPA is biaxially oriented polyamide (nylon); LDPE is low-density polyethylene; CPP is cast polypropylene. The retail bag is a separate sample with a client-declared polyethylene-based contact-layer blend. Read the materials alongside the dimensions, seal layout and declared use in each report. A similar commercial material name does not establish that the finished bags are identical.
The laboratory made its decisions against the requirements cited in each dated report. The assigned conclusions apply to the submitted samples and the assessed items. In the three laminated pouch reports, the isocyanate residue and calculated migration rows carry no individual judgment. In the BOPA/LDPE report, the two solvent residue rows also carry no judgment. These are results you can read and discuss with a supplier; the tables preserve the empty verdicts.
The order review uses the applicable requirements at the time of approval. The Chinese food-contact standards announcement includes GB 4806.7-2023 for plastic materials and articles, GB 4806.13-2023 for composite materials and articles and GB 31604.1-2023 for migration testing. The retail bag report retains the GB 4806.7-2016 edition it cited. The later requirements are reviewed separately against the actual construction and use; the historical reports keep their original dates and limits.
Full test results by bag
The item numbers, subitems, units and verdicts below follow the reports. An em dash means the field had no entry. "No verdict reported" means the laboratory gave a result without an individual decision. A result beginning with "<" is below the stated reporting value; it is not a measured zero. We use "not detected" only where the report uses that wording.
Check the unit and sampling location before comparing numbers. The PET/PE report gives 44.9 N/15 mm for the side heat seal against its own minimum of 10 N/15 mm. The BOPA/LDPE report gives the side seal peel force in N, under its own requirements. A change in the specimen width, procedure or seal position can change the comparison. The same care applies to chemical tests: the earlier evaporation residue entries are in mg/L, while the retail bag's overall migration entries are in mg/dm².
Illustration: a strip test applies force to a sampled section of seal. The report identifies where the strip was taken.
PET/PE laminated pouch
PL0501534-2024 · 42 numbered items
Sample dimensions: 210 × 160 × 0.095 mm
Manufactured / received: 2024-04-12 / 2024-04-15
Test dates: 2024-04-16 to 2024-04-28
Report date: 2024-04-30
Samples submitted / batch no.: 100 / not stated
Recorded test environment: 23°C; 50% relative humidity
Client's description: Printed Class A pouch with three sealed sides; declared contents mass 280 g and use temperature below 60°C.
Test scope: Full panel plus isocyanate residues and calculated migration.
Test references: GB/T 10004-2008; GB/T 7707-2008; GB/T 6673-2001; GB/T 6672-2001; GB/T 8808-1988; GB/T 1040.3-2006; QB/T 1130-1991; QB/T 2358-1998; GB/T 8809-2015; GB/T 1037-2021; GB/T 1038.1-2022; GB 9683-1988; GB 31604.23-2016; GB 31604.8-2021; GB 31604.2-2016; GB 31604.9-2016; GB 31604.45-2016; GB 31604.1-2015.
Decision basis: Q/370782DH 001-2024, Multilayer laminated plastic films and pouches for food packaging (manufacturer's enterprise standard).
Report conclusion: The laboratory reported that the submitted sample met the requirements of Q/370782DH 001-2024.
On narrow screens, scroll the table to see the result and decision columns.
| No. | Test item or condition | Unit | Report requirement | Result | Lab decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Appearance | - | See Q/370782DH 001-2024, clause 5.2, Table 3 | Meets requirement | Conforms |
| 2a | Print quality: registration error in main areas | mm | ≤0.20 | 0.11 | Conforms |
| 2b | Print quality: registration error in secondary areas | mm | ≤0.35 | 0.13 | Conforms |
| 3 | Length deviation | mm | ±3 | -2 | Conforms |
| 4 | Width deviation | mm | ±3 | 0 | Conforms |
| 5 | Mean thickness deviation (%) | - | ±10 | -1.1～0 | Conforms |
| 6 | Peel force, longitudinal | N/15 mm | ≥3.5 | Could not be peeled apart | Conforms |
| 7 | Peel force, transverse | N/15 mm | ≥3.5 | Could not be peeled apart | Conforms |
| 8 | Breaking force, longitudinal | N | ≥30 | 58.1 | Conforms |
| 9 | Breaking force, transverse | N | ≥30 | 56.0 | Conforms |
| 10 | Tear force, longitudinal | N | ≥1.5 | 8.9 | Conforms |
| 11 | Tear force, transverse | N | ≥1.5 | 8.6 | Conforms |
| 12 | Heat seal strength, side | N/15 mm | ≥10 | 44.9 | Conforms |
| 13 | Heat seal strength, top | N/15 mm | ≥10 | 46.6 | Conforms |
| 14 | Pendulum impact energy | J | ≥0.8 | >4.50 | Conforms |
| 15 | Water vapor transmission rate | g/(m² · 24 h) | ≤55 | 2.94 | Conforms |
| 16 | Oxygen transmission rate | cm³/(m² · 24 h · 0.1 MPa) | ≤160 | 94.4 | Conforms |
| 17 | Pressure resistance | - | No leakage or rupture | No leakage or rupture observed | Conforms |
| 18 | Drop performance | - | No rupture | No rupture observed | Conforms |
| 19 | Total solvent residues | mg/m² | ≤5 | 0.46 | Conforms |
| 20 | Benzene-series solvent residues | mg/m² | Not detected | Not detected (<0.01) | Conforms |
| 21 | Sensory assessment: appearance | - | Flat and free of wrinkles, with sound sealed edges. No cracks, pores or separation of laminate layers. | Meets requirement | Conforms |
| 22 | Sensory assessment: pouch immersion liquid | - | No off-taste, off-odor, turbidity or color loss. | Meets requirement | Conforms |
| 23 | Toluenediamine (4% acetic acid; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤0.004 | <0.001 | Conforms |
| 24 | Evaporation residue (4% acetic acid; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤30 | <10.0 | Conforms |
| 25 | Evaporation residue (65% ethanol; room temperature; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤30 | <10.0 | Conforms |
| 26 | Evaporation residue (n-hexane; room temperature; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤30 | 13.0 | Conforms |
| 27 | Potassium permanganate consumption (water; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤10 | <1.0 | Conforms |
| 28 | Heavy metals (as Pb; 4% acetic acid; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤1 | <1 | Conforms |
| 29 | Toluene-2,6-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 30 | 4,4′-Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 31 | Toluene-2,4-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 32 | Naphthalene-1,5-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 33 | Phenyl isocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 34 | Cyclohexyl isocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 35 | Hexamethylene diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 36 | Toluene-2,6-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 37 | 4,4′-Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 38 | Toluene-2,4-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 39 | Naphthalene-1,5-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 40 | Phenyl isocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 41 | Cyclohexyl isocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 42 | Hexamethylene diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
Test conditions and report notes
- For the transmission tests, the heat-seal face was oriented toward the low-pressure, low-humidity side as described in the report. Water vapor: condition B, water vapor transmission instrument, weight-loss method. Oxygen: pressure sensor method. Pendulum impact: type B striker.
- The enterprise standard was filed and published by the named manufacturer on 12 April 2024 at 09:10, according to the report.
- Isocyanate migration was calculated under clause 6.2 of GB 31604.1-2015, assuming all the residue migrated through the food-contact face into the simulant. No individual requirements or verdicts are shown for rows 29–42.
- Migration preparation: pouch method, S/V = 6 dm²/1000 mL. Solution concentrations are volume fractions.
BOPA/LDPE laminated pouch
PL0501535-2024 · 48 numbered items
Sample dimensions: 295 × 198 × 0.12 mm
Manufactured / received: 2024-04-12 / 2024-04-15
Test dates: 2024-04-16 to 2024-04-28
Report date: 2024-04-30
Samples submitted / batch no.: 100 / not stated
Recorded test environment: 23°C; 50% relative humidity
Client's description: Printed Class A pouch with three sealed sides; side and bottom seals each 10 mm, declared contents mass 500 g and use temperature below 60°C.
Test scope: Full panel plus solvent residues, isocyanate residues and calculated migration.
Test references: QB/T 1871-1993; GB/T 10004-2008 (reference); GB 31604.45-2016; GB 31604.1-2015.
Decision basis: QB/T 1871-1993, Biaxially oriented polyamide (nylon) / low-density polyethylene laminated films and pouches.
Report conclusion: The laboratory judged the sample to pass under QB/T 1871-1993.
On narrow screens, scroll the table to see the result and decision columns.
| No. | Test item or condition | Unit | Report requirement | Result | Lab decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Width deviation | mm | ±4.0 | -1.0 | Pass |
| 2 | Length deviation | mm | ±4.0 | -2.0～-1.0 | Pass |
| 3 | Thickness deviation (%) | - | ±12 | -0.8 | Pass |
| 4 | Side seal width deviation | mm | ±2.0 | 0 | Pass |
| 5 | Bottom seal width deviation | mm | ±2.0 | 0 | Pass |
| 6 | Appearance | - | See QB/T 1871-1993, clause 4.2 | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 7 | Breaking force, longitudinal | N | ≥40 | 72 | Pass |
| 8 | Breaking force, transverse | N | ≥40 | 82 | Pass |
| 9 | Elongation at break, longitudinal (%) | - | ≥35 | 116 | Pass |
| 10 | Elongation at break, transverse (%) | - | ≥35 | 76 | Pass |
| 11 | Right-angle tear force, longitudinal | N | ≥3.5 | 14.7 | Pass |
| 12 | Right-angle tear force, transverse | N | ≥3.5 | 15.4 | Pass |
| 13 | Interlayer peel force, longitudinal | N | ≥2.5 | Could not be peeled apart | Pass |
| 14 | Interlayer peel force, transverse | N | ≥2.5 | Could not be peeled apart | Pass |
| 15 | Seal peel force, side | N | ≥20 | 48.2 | Pass |
| 16 | Seal peel force, bottom | N | ≥20 | 47.3 | Pass |
| 17 | Pendulum impact energy | J | >0.8 | 2.57 | Pass |
| 18 | Oxygen transmission rate | cm³/(m² · 24 h · 0.1 MPa) | ≤50 | 45.3 | Pass |
| 19 | Water vapor transmission rate | g/(m² · 24 h) | ≤12 | 6.21 | Pass |
| 20 | Heat resistance | - | No significant deformation, delamination or seal splitting | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 21 | Cold resistance (%) | - | ≥60 | 95 | Pass |
| 22 | Oil resistance (%) | - | ≤30 | 11 | Pass |
| 23 | Pressure resistance | - | No leakage or rupture | No leakage or rupture observed | Pass |
| 24 | Drop resistance | - | No leakage or rupture | No leakage or rupture observed | Pass |
| 25 | Sensory assessment: appearance | - | Flat and free of wrinkles, with sound sealed edges. No cracks, pores or separation of laminate layers. | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 26 | Sensory assessment: pouch immersion liquid | - | No off-taste, off-odor, turbidity or color loss. | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 27 | Toluenediamine (4% acetic acid; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤0.004 | <0.001 | Pass |
| 28 | Evaporation residue (4% acetic acid; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤30 | <10.0 | Pass |
| 29 | Evaporation residue (n-hexane; room temperature; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤30 | 13.9 | Pass |
| 30 | Evaporation residue (65% ethanol; room temperature; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤30 | <10.0 | Pass |
| 31 | Potassium permanganate consumption (water; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤10 | <1.0 | Pass |
| 32 | Heavy metals (as Pb; 4% acetic acid; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤1 | <1 | Pass |
| 33 | Total solvent residues | mg/m² | - | 0.21 | No verdict reported |
| 34 | Benzene-series solvent residues | mg/m² | - | Not detected (<0.01) | No verdict reported |
| 35 | Toluene-2,6-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 36 | 4,4′-Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 37 | Toluene-2,4-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 38 | Naphthalene-1,5-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 39 | Phenyl isocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 40 | Cyclohexyl isocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 41 | Hexamethylene diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 42 | Toluene-2,6-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 43 | 4,4′-Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 44 | Toluene-2,4-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 45 | Naphthalene-1,5-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 46 | Phenyl isocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 47 | Cyclohexyl isocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 48 | Hexamethylene diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
Test conditions and report notes
- Solvent residues were tested with reference to GB/T 10004-2008. The laboratory gave no requirements or individual verdicts for those results (rows 33–34).
- Isocyanate migration was calculated under clause 6.2 of GB 31604.1-2015, assuming complete transfer of residues through the food-contact face into the simulant. Rows 35–48 have no individual requirements or verdicts.
- Pendulum impact: striker diameter 12.7 mm. Water vapor and oxygen tests used the heat-seal face toward the low-pressure, low-humidity side. Water vapor: condition B, water vapor transmission instrument, weight-loss method. Oxygen: pressure sensor method.
- Migration preparation: pouch method, S/V = 6 dm²/1000 mL. Solution concentrations are volume fractions.
BOPA/CPP laminated pouch
PL0501536-2024 · 50 numbered items
Sample dimensions: 230 × 150 × 0.080 mm
Manufactured / received: 2024-04-12 / 2024-04-15
Test dates: 2024-04-16 to 2024-04-29
Report date: 2024-04-30
Samples submitted / batch no.: 100 / not stated
Recorded test environment: 23°C; 50% relative humidity
Client's description: Dry-laminated, gravure-printed three-side-seal pouch of declared semi-high-temperature cooking grade, without a barcode. Side seal 10 mm; top seal 40 mm. The client stated a cooking temperature of 121°C and contents mass of 110 g.
Test scope: Appearance, printing, dimensions, peel, seals, breaking force, nominal strain, right-angle tear, impact, barrier, pressure, drop, friction, heat and media resistance, hygiene, solvents, marking and isocyanate screening.
Test references: GB/T 10004-2008; GB 31604.45-2016; GB 31604.1-2015.
Decision basis: GB/T 10004-2008, Plastic laminated films and pouches for packaging, dry lamination and extrusion lamination.
Report conclusion: The laboratory judged the assessed items on the submitted sample to pass under GB/T 10004-2008.
On narrow screens, scroll the table to see the result and decision columns.
| No. | Test item or condition | Unit | Report requirement | Result | Lab decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Appearance | - | See GB/T 10004-2008, clause 5.1, Table 1 | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 2 | Print quality: gravure printing | - | Meets the requirements of GB/T 7707-2008 | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 3 | Length deviation | mm | ±4 | -1～0 | Pass |
| 4 | Width deviation | mm | ±4 | 0～+1 | Pass |
| 5a | Seal width deviation (%), side | - | ±20 | 0 | Pass |
| 5b | Seal width deviation (%), top | - | ±20 | +1.2～+8.8 | Pass |
| 6a | Distance from seal to bag edge, side | mm | ≤4 | 0 | Pass |
| 6b | Distance from seal to bag edge, top | mm | ≤4 | 2.0～3.0 | Pass |
| 7 | Mean thickness deviation (%) | - | ±10 | +3.8～+7.5 | Pass |
| 8 | Peel force, longitudinal | N/15 mm | ≥3.5 | Could not be peeled apart | Pass |
| 9 | Peel force, transverse | N/15 mm | ≥3.5 | Could not be peeled apart | Pass |
| 10 | Heat seal strength, side | N/15 mm | ≥25 | 64.4 | Pass |
| 11 | Heat seal strength, top | N/15 mm | ≥25 | 47.6 | Pass |
| 12 | Breaking force, longitudinal | N | ≥40 | 61.0 | Pass |
| 13 | Breaking force, transverse | N | ≥40 | 71.5 | Pass |
| 14 | Nominal strain at break, longitudinal (%) | - | ≥35 | 1.5×10² | Pass |
| 15 | Nominal strain at break, transverse (%) | - | ≥35 | 81 | Pass |
| 16 | Right-angle tear force, longitudinal | N | ≥6.0 | 10.8 | Pass |
| 17 | Right-angle tear force, transverse | N | ≥6.0 | 11.3 | Pass |
| 18 | Pendulum impact energy | J | ≥0.6 | >4.50 | Pass |
| 19 | Water vapor transmission rate | g/(m² · 24 h) | ≤15.0 | 6.09 | Pass |
| 20 | Oxygen transmission rate | cm³/(m² · 24 h · 0.1 MPa) | ≤120 | 54.6 | Pass |
| 21 | Pressure resistance | - | No leakage or rupture | No leakage or rupture observed | Pass |
| 22 | Drop performance | - | No rupture | No rupture observed | Pass |
| 23 | Static coefficient of friction (inner surface against steel plate) | - | ≤0.4 | 0.208 | Pass |
| 24 | Dynamic coefficient of friction (inner surface against steel plate) | - | ≤0.4 | 0.173 | Pass |
| 25 | Heat resistance | - | No visible deformation, interlayer peeling, separation at heat seals or similar abnormalities | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 26 | Resistance to high-temperature media | - | See GB/T 10004-2008, clause 5.4.10 | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 27 | Marking | - | Each package must carry a product conformity slip and identify the product name, specifications, quantity, mass, batch number, production date, inspector code, manufacturer name and address, and applicable standard number, among other details. | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 28 | Sensory assessment: appearance | - | Flat and free of wrinkles, with sound sealed edges. No cracks, pores or separation of laminate layers. | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 29 | Sensory assessment: pouch immersion liquid | - | No off-taste, off-odor, turbidity or color loss. | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 30 | Toluenediamine (4% acetic acid; 120°C; 40 min) | mg/L | ≤0.004 | <0.001 | Pass |
| 31 | Evaporation residue (4% acetic acid; 120°C; 40 min) | mg/L | ≤30 | <10.0 | Pass |
| 32 | Evaporation residue (n-hexane; room temperature; 2 h) | mg/L | ≤30 | 14.0 | Pass |
| 33 | Potassium permanganate consumption (water; 120°C; 40 min) | mg/L | ≤10 | <1.0 | Pass |
| 34 | Heavy metals (as Pb; 4% acetic acid; 120°C; 40 min) | mg/L | ≤1 | <1 | Pass |
| 35 | Total solvent residues | mg/m² | ≤5.0 | 0.36 | Pass |
| 36 | Benzene-series solvent residues | mg/m² | Not detected | Not detected (<0.01) | Pass |
| 37 | Toluene-2,6-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 38 | 4,4′-Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 39 | Toluene-2,4-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 40 | Naphthalene-1,5-diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 41 | Phenyl isocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 42 | Cyclohexyl isocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 43 | Hexamethylene diisocyanate residue | mg/kg | - | <0.1 | No verdict reported |
| 44 | Toluene-2,6-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 45 | 4,4′-Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 46 | Toluene-2,4-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 47 | Naphthalene-1,5-diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 48 | Phenyl isocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 49 | Cyclohexyl isocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
| 50 | Hexamethylene diisocyanate migration (calculated) | mg/kg | - | <0.01 | No verdict reported |
Test conditions and report notes
- The marking test did not verify the truth of the marking content. The 121°C client declaration and 120°C for 40 minutes in selected laboratory rows are separate entries.
- Migration preparation: pouch method, S/V = 6 dm²/1000 mL. Solution concentrations are volume fractions.
- Isocyanate migration was calculated under clause 6.2 of GB 31604.1-2015, assuming complete transfer through the food-contact face into the simulant. Rows 37–50 have no individual requirements or verdicts.
- Water vapor: weight-loss method, water vapor transmission instrument. Oxygen: pressure sensor method. Pendulum impact: type B striker.
Illustration of the full immersion preparation noted in the retail-bag report. The table gives the actual test media and conditions.
The retail bag was prepared by full immersion. Its overall migration table has separate rows for 4% acetic acid, 20% ethanol and 95% ethanol. The report explains why 95% ethanol was used in place of the specified vegetable-oil condition. The recorded result for each simulant is kept with its own time, temperature and reporting unit.
Retail packaging bag
PL0503549-2023 · 21 numbered items
Sample dimensions: 300 × 200 × 0.06 mm
Manufactured / received: 2023-07-30 / 2023-08-01
Test dates: 2023-08-03 to 2023-08-15
Report date: 2023-08-17
Samples submitted / batch no.: 100 / not stated
Recorded test environment: 23°C; 50% relative humidity
Client's description: Handleless bag with declared nominal carrying capacity of 1 kg. The client identified the food-contact layer as a blend of an ethylene/1-butene copolymer and polyethylene (ethylene homopolymer).
Test scope: Marking, dimensions, sensory and visual checks, mechanical tests, overall migration, permanganate consumption, heavy metals as Pb and decolorization.
Test references: BB/T 0039-2013; GB 4806.7-2016.
Decision basis: BB/T 0039-2013, Retail packaging bags, and GB 4806.7-2016, National food safety standard for plastic materials and articles in contact with food.
Report conclusion: The laboratory judged the tested items to pass under BB/T 0039-2013 and GB 4806.7-2016.
On narrow screens, scroll the table to see the result and decision columns.
| No. | Test item or condition | Unit | Report requirement | Result | Lab decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Marking | - | See BB/T 0039-2013, clause 5.1 | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 2 | Extreme thickness deviation | mm | +0.010 / -0.010 | +0.0088, -0.0095 | Pass |
| 3 | Mean thickness deviation (%) | - | +9 / -9 | -6.7～-1.7 | Pass |
| 4 | Extreme width deviation | mm | ±20 | +4 | Pass |
| 5 | Extreme length deviation | mm | ±20 | -5 | Pass |
| 6 | Sensory and appearance quality: odor | - | No obvious off-odor in the packaging bag | No obvious off-odor | Pass |
| 7 | Sensory and appearance quality: visual condition | - | Uniform, flat material without folds, impurities, marks, damage, bubbles or pinholes. Text is legible and graphics are intact, without obvious ink stains or missing areas. | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 8 | Sensory and appearance quality: print quality, ink peel-off (%) | - | ≤20 | 0 | Pass |
| 9 | Water leakage | - | No leakage | No leakage observed | Pass |
| 10 | Drop performance (one free fall from 500 mm) | - | No rupture | No rupture observed | Pass |
| 11 | Seal strength | N/15 mm | ≥6 | 15.0 | Pass |
| 12 | Sensory requirements: bag | - | Normal color, with no off-odor or foreign contamination | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 13 | Sensory requirements: immersion liquid | - | No sensory deterioration in the migration-test immersion liquid, including turbidity, sediment or off-odor | Meets requirement | Pass |
| 14 | Overall migration (4% acetic acid; 40°C; 10 days) | mg/dm² | ≤10 | <2.0 | Pass |
| 15 | Overall migration (20% ethanol; 40°C; 10 days) | mg/dm² | ≤10 | <2.0 | Pass |
| 16 | Overall migration (95% ethanol; 40°C; 10 days) | mg/dm² | ≤10 | <2.0 | Pass |
| 17 | Potassium permanganate consumption (water; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/kg | ≤10 | <1.0 | Pass |
| 18 | Heavy metals (as Pb; 4% acetic acid; 60°C; 2 h) | mg/kg | ≤1 | <1 | Pass |
| 19 | Decolorization test (refined corn oil) | - | Negative | Negative | Pass |
| 20 | Decolorization test (absolute ethanol) | - | Negative | Negative | Pass |
| 21 | Decolorization test (immersion liquid) | - | Negative | Negative | Pass |
Test conditions and report notes
- The cover also names the National Inspection and Testing Center for Packaging Product (Jinan). The marking test did not verify the truth of the marking content.
- The overall migration note lists 4% acetic acid, 20% ethanol and vegetable oil at 40°C for 10 days. At the client's request, 95% ethanol at 40°C for 10 days was selected as the substitute for vegetable oil under BS EN 1186-1:2002. Row 16 is the result with that substitute.
- Migration preparation: full immersion, S/V = 6 dm²/1 L. Solution concentrations are volume fractions.
In the BOPA/CPP report, the packaging supplier stated a cooking temperature of 121°C. Selected tests were recorded at 120°C for 40 minutes. These entries describe the sample and the laboratory conditions. For a proposed heated-in-pack application, the buyer and packaging supplier still need to agree on the actual time, temperature, food and pack construction and confirm the evidence for that use.
The laboratory results inform different decisions. Breaking force and tear results describe responses under named tests. Water vapor and oxygen transmission values describe measured barrier performance under the reported method. Seal, pressure and drop results help assess physical performance. Migration and other chemical rows address the listed chemical tests. We use the evidence relevant to the proposed pack and request separate confirmation wherever the product, use or requirement differs.
What we review at receiving and on the packing line
Our quality control system includes checks on the inner bag, carton, label, net weight and condition of the finished pack. For a specific order, we agree on how to identify the approved bag at receipt and what the packing team should compare with the specification or reference sample. That can include the bag or roll code, dimensions, thickness, print revision, seal layout, visible damage and cleanliness. An unexplained code or a different print version is a reason to check the supply record before the material is used.
For a printed retail order, the useful comparison is between the current approved artwork and the first finished packs. We review the name, pack size, date and lot code, and any agreed private-label details. If a film or artwork version changes during a run, the order's checks should identify the change and the finished packs it affects. The packaging document and the artwork revision each have their own purpose.
The seal has to work on the pack the customer receives. A fold or a small piece of frozen product in the sealing area can interrupt part of the band. A strip from a sound portion of the seal may still record good strength. Where the specification calls for a seal or leak check, we agree on the method, timing and sample condition with the packing site. If the test is meant to represent delivery, include the actual fill and the relevant frozen handling steps.
Illustration: a small piece of food caught across the seal band is a reason to inspect the affected pack.
Pack shape and fill affect which check matters. Whole frozen vegetables can load the film differently from angular frozen cuts or dense portions. A liner can look sound while flat and still be stretched at the fold once the carton is filled. For a new pack, or one going through a different handling route, we can agree a trial with the actual frozen ingredient, case and fill weight. The result can guide where to inspect for stressed folds, puncture, product trapped at a seam or leakage.
GreenLand product photograph: frozen garlic pieces in a blue liner. The packed shape helps determine where to check for stress on the film.
Changes deserve a clear handover. For a new supplier, different film structure or gauge, different ink or adhesive, new fill, or a move from frozen storage to reheating in the pack, we review which supporting documents and physical checks are still applicable. If the agreed evidence or packing check is missing or a defect is found, we confirm the affected material or product range, the follow-up required and the person responsible for the decision. Sampling frequency, tolerances and any retest are set for the actual order and line.
How the packaging evidence follows your order
The buyer's order file ties the agreed packing specification to the actual product and dispatch. Our traceability review can start from a carton mark or finished lot and follow the packing record. Where packaging lot records form part of the agreed file, we check that the packaging code and lot can be matched to the run, finished-food lot and shipment. If a run used more than one material lot, the useful record shows where the change occurred.
That link matters when a buyer reports a split bag. The carton code and packing date help locate the run. A photo of the tear, where it sits relative to the seal, and the condition of neighboring packs help direct the review. The packaging identity and the original order specification help narrow the affected stock to a material lot and show where the line, case or handling records also need review. The historical sample reports can provide context; the affected shipment needs its own trace.
Illustration: keep the material identity, filled pack and shipping case linked in the order records.
For a market-specific file, we ask for the documents applicable to the identified bag and conditions. The European Commission's food-contact guidance describes declarations and supporting documentation for relevant plastic food-contact materials. For a U.S. order, the FDA's component guidance explains why the identity of the components and their conditions of use matter. We coordinate that review around the proposed order and confirm which documents can be supplied for the actual pack.
If your QA team needs material specifications, declarations, test evidence, a seal or filled-pack check, or a trace record, include those requirements when you send the specification. Let us know whether the bag will be opened while frozen, used for thawing, or heated with the food inside. We can review the proposed bag and document set with you before artwork or production is finalized.
Discuss the packaging for your frozen food order
GreenLand-food is a professional frozen food supplier and manufacturer in China, providing factory-direct wholesale supply for importers, food manufacturers, distributors and private-label programs.
Send your product form, specifications, pack size, quantity, intended use, destination, private-label needs and required documents. We will review the bag and the supporting evidence with your purchasing and quality teams.