Fully Automated Workflow for Volatile PFAS Analysis in Food Contact Materials Using GC-Triple Quadrupole MS

Importance of the Topic

PFAS are persistent chemicals widely used in food contact materials (FCMs) such as paper coffee cups. Their resistance to heat, water, and stains makes them valuable for greaseproofing, but also raises concerns about migration into food and potential health risks. Regulatory agencies worldwide are imposing stricter limits on PFAS in FCMs, creating demand for sensitive, reliable, and high-throughput analytical methods.

Study Objectives and Overview

This work aimed to develop and validate a fully automated workflow for quantifying over 30 volatile PFAS in FCMs. By coupling a PAL3 Series 2 RTC autosampler to an Agilent 7010D GC-Triple Quadrupole MS, the study evaluated calibration precision, method sensitivity, extraction efficiency, and reproducibility using paper coffee cup samples as a representative matrix.

Methodology and Instrumentation

Sample preparation steps—including heating-assisted solvent extraction with ethyl acetate, centrifugation, micro-SPE filtration, and direct injection—were executed by the PAL3 autosampler. Nine calibration levels (1–500 ng/mL) with isotopically labeled internal standards were prepared automatically. Concurrent sample preparation and GC/TQ acquisition minimized downtime and maximized throughput.

Used Instrumentation

• PAL3 Series 2 RTC autosampler (liquid handling, vortex, centrifuge, tray cooler)
• Agilent 8890 GC with MMI inlet and splitless liner
• Agilent 7010D triple quadrupole GC/MS with HES 2.0 ion source
• Agilent MassHunter Acquisition 13.0 and Optimizer software

Main Results and Discussion

Calibration curves for all compounds showed R2 > 0.99 (five or more points). Method detection limits (MDLs) ≤ 1 µg/kg for 25 analytes and ≤ 2 µg/kg for six analytes were achieved. Method LOQs validated at 20–200 µg/kg met AOAC SMPR criteria, with recoveries of 65–135% and intrabatch %RSD ≤ 17%. Reproducibility across different batches also yielded %RSD ≤ 20% for most targets. Matrix blanks confirmed minimal PFAS background from consumables, while reagent blanks revealed effective extraction of PFAS from real samples.

Benefits and Practical Applications

• Fully automated workflow reduces manual labor and human errors
• High throughput enables routine monitoring of trace PFAS in FCMs
• Sub-ppb sensitivity supports regulatory compliance and food safety guidance
• Integrated software streamlines method development and data management

Future Trends and Potential Applications

Future work may extend this automated approach to a broader range of PFAS, alternative FCM matrices, and nonvolatile PFAS precursors. Integration with high-resolution MS and artificial intelligence for data analysis could further enhance sensitivity, specificity, and real-time monitoring capabilities. Adapting the workflow for on-site screening or miniaturized systems may support decentralized testing in manufacturing and field laboratories.

Conclusion

The automated PAL3 Series 2 RTC/Agilent 7010D GC/TQ workflow provides a robust, high-throughput, and sensitive solution for volatile PFAS analysis in food contact materials. With reliable MDLs, LOQs, precision, and accuracy, it meets regulatory standards and offers a scalable platform for routine PFAS monitoring and food safety compliance.

Reference

1. Consumer Reports. (2024). Dangerous PFAS Chemicals Are in Your Food Packaging. Consumer Reports.
2. OECD. (2020). PFASs and Alternatives in Food Packaging (Paper and Paperboard). OECD Series on Risk Management, No. 58.
3. Li, D., et al. (2019). Determination of Trace PFAS and Precursors Migrated into Food Simulants by LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS. LCGC North America, 37(7).
4. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Market Phase-Out of Grease-Proofing Substances Containing PFAS.
5. European Commission. (2011). Commission Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 on Plastic Materials and Articles Intended to Come into Contact with Food.
6. European Chemicals Agency. (2023). Annex XV Restriction Report Proposal for PFAS under REACH.
7. Larson, N. (2022). Method Development and Screening of Extractable Organofluorine and Targeted PFAS Analysis in Food Packaging Materials. Bachelor's Thesis, Örebro University.
8. Wong, L., et al. (2024). Accurate Mass Library for PFAS Analysis in Environmental Samples Using GC/Q-TOF. Agilent Technologies Application Note.
9. Wells, G., Prest, H., & Russ, C. W. (2023). Signal, Noise, and Detection Limits in Mass Spectrometry. Agilent Technologies Application Note.
10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2016). Definition and Procedure for the Determination of the Method Detection Limit, Revision 2; EPA 821-R-16-006.
11. AOAC International. (2023). Standard Method Performance Requirements for PFAS in Produce, Beverages, Dairy Products, Eggs, Seafood, Meat Products, and Feed (AOAC SMPR 2023.003).