kSIST FprEN 18120-3:2025

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
01-oktober-2024
Embalaža - Načrtovanje, ki omogoča recikliranje plastične embalaže - 3. del:
Postopek za ocenjevanje možnosti sortiranja plastične embalaže
Packaging - Design for recycling of plastic packaging - Part 3: Sortability evaluation
process for plastic packaging
Verpackung - Recyclingorientierte Gestaltung von Kunststoffverpackungsprodukten - Teil
3: Bewertung von Sortierverfahren von Kunststoffverpackungen
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: prEN 18120-3
ICS:
13.030.50 Recikliranje Recycling
55.020 Pakiranje in distribucija blaga Packaging and distribution of
na splošno goods in general
83.080.20 Plastomeri Thermoplastic materials
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024 en,fr,de
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
DRAFT
EUROPEAN STANDARD
prEN 18120-3
NORME EUROPÉENNE
EUROPÄISCHE NORM
September 2024
ICS 55.020; 13.030.50; 83.080.20
English Version
Packaging - Design for recycling of plastic packaging - Part
3: Sortability evaluation process for plastic packaging
Verpackung - Recyclingorientierte Gestaltung von
Kunststoffverpackungsprodukten - Teil 3: Bewertung
von Sortierverfahren von Kunststoffverpackungen
This draft European Standard is submitted to CEN members for enquiry. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee
CEN/TC 261.
If this draft becomes a European Standard, CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations
which stipulate the conditions for giving this European Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration.

This draft European Standard was established by CEN in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other
language made by translation under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC
Management Centre has the same status as the official versions.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Republic of North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Türkiye and
United Kingdom.
Recipients of this draft are invited to submit, with their comments, notification of any relevant patent rights of which they are
aware and to provide supporting documentation.

Warning : This document is not a European Standard. It is distributed for review and comments. It is subject to change without
notice and shall not be referred to as a European Standard.

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION

EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels
© 2024 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. prEN 18120-3:2024 E
worldwide for CEN national Members.

oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Contents Page
European foreword . 3
Introduction . 4
1 Scope . 6
2 Normative references . 6
3 Terms and definitions . 6
4 Sortability of plastic packaging waste . 9
4.1 Introduction . 9
4.2 Facilities . 11
4.3 Evaluation of the sortability of plastic packaging waste . 13
4.4 Principles . 14
4.5 Samplings . 16
4.6 Test method . 17
4.7 Test report . 17
4.8 Evaluation . 17
Annex A (normative) Experimental determination of the sortability of plastic packaging samples
............................................................................................................................................................................. 19
A.1 Principle . 19
A.1.1 Apparatus and settings . 19
A.1.2 Reagents and consumables . 20
A.1.3 Sampling . 21
A.1.4 Assessment of ease of emptying . 21
A.1.5 Sample preparation . 22
A.1.6 Unit operations to assess sortability . 22
A.1.7 Split factors . 27
A.1.8 Expression of results . 28
Annex B (informative) Overview of the unit operations of a state of the art sorting centre . 29
Annex C (normative) Assessment of component separation . 31
C.1 Principle . 31
C.2 Procedure . 31
C.3 Expression of results . 31
C.4 Test report . 31
Annex D (informative) Target fractions for packaging waste – examples . 33
Bibliography . 34

oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
European foreword
This document (prEN 18120-3:2024) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 261
“Packaging”, the secretariat of which is held by AFNOR.
This document is currently submitted to the CEN Enquiry.
This document has been prepared under a standardization request addressed to CEN by the European
Commission. The Standing Committee of the EFTA States subsequently approves these requests for its
Member States.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Introduction
EN 18120 consisting of 15 parts aims via a series of guidelines and protocols to establish consistency and
improvement for the design for recycling of household, industrial and commercial plastic packaging.
— Part 1: Definitions and principles for design-for-recycling of plastic packaging
— Part 2: Process and governance to evaluate the recyclability of plastic packaging
— Part 3: Sortability evaluation process for plastic packaging
— Part 4: Guideline for PET bottles
— Part 5: Guideline for PET rigid packaging (except bottle)
— Part 6: Guideline for PE and PP rigid packaging
— Part 7: Guideline and protocols for PE and PP flexible packaging
— Part 8: Guideline for PS and XPS packaging
— Part 9: Guideline for EPS packaging
— Part 10: Recyclability evaluation process for plastic packaging — Protocols for PET bottles
— Part 11: Recyclability evaluation process for plastic packaging — Protocols for PET other rigid
packaging
— Part 12: Recyclability evaluation process for plastic packaging — Protocols for PE and PP rigid
packaging
— Part 13: Recyclability evaluation process for plastic packaging — Protocols for PE and PP flexible
packaging
— Part 14: Recyclability evaluation process for plastic packaging — Protocols for PS and XPS packaging
— Part 15: Recyclability evaluation process for plastic packaging — Protocols for EPS packaging
Design for recycling guidelines are a common way of describing compatibility with plastic packaging
collection, sorting and recycling into high quality recycled plastic into state-of-the-art facilities. They
provide guidance on the level compatibility, defined as:
— green: Packaging constituents with full compatibility with recycling;
— yellow: Packaging constituents with limited compatibility with recycling;
— red: Packaging constituents which are not compatible with recycling.
Recyclability guidelines will require regular review and improvement to reflect innovations in design,
collection, sorting and recycling.
The design for recycling guidelines provided in this series of standards are representative of the state of
the art in Europe and cover all steps from design for recycling, packaging waste collection, sorting,
recycling into recycled plastic and to use in a new application.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Packaging recyclability is the combination of five parameters: packaging designed for recycling,
packaging waste collection, sorting when necessary, recycling and use of recycled plastic in a new
application. This series of standards covers one parameter: the design for recycling.

oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
1 Scope
This document is an input for a standard on the recyclability evaluation process of plastic packaging with
respect to compatibility of the design with the collecting and sorting processes for the plastic used.
This document covers any household plastic packaging where the main body is made of PET, PE, PP or
PS material.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
prEN 18120-1, Packaging — Design for recycling of plastic packaging — Part 1: Definitions and principles
for design-for-recycling of plastic packaging
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in prEN 18120-1 and the following
apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp/
— IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/
3.1
near infrared
NIR
wavelength range from 0,75 µm to 1,9 µm, in which certain infrared instruments operate
Note 1 to entry: The spectral range of many NIR sensors is typically from 0,90 µm to 1,70 µm.
[SOURCE: ISO 10878:2013, definition 1.84]
3.2
visual spectrum
VIS
visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum
Note 1 to entry: Used for the colour sorting of plastic packaging waste.
Note 2 to entry: Most optical sorters combine VIS detection with NIR detection.
3.3
eddy current
electric current induced in a conductive material by a varying magnetic field
[SOURCE: EN ISO 12718:2019, definition 3.1.12]
3.4
ferromagnetic
term applied to materials that can be magnetized or strongly attracted by a magnetic field
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
[SOURCE: ISO 15463:2003, definition 4.1.40]
3.5
(over-band) magnet
device intended for the separation of packaging waste made of or containing ferromagnetic metals
3.6
ballistic separator
device that uses different impact behaviour for separation
Note 1 to entry: in the application for sorting plastic packaging, the separation of flexible and rigid packaging is
intended. A typical use is to separate two-dimensional packaging waste (such as flexible packaging) from three-
dimensional packaging waste (such as bottles).
3.7
eddy current separator
device intended for the separation of packaging waste made of or containing non-ferromagnetic metals
Note 1 to entry: Eddy current seperators will also separate ferromagnetic metals if they are part of the input.
However, eddy current separators are generally used behind a (over-band) magnet, which removes such metals.
3.8
windshifter
device intended for the separation of packaging waste into a light fraction and a heavier fraction
Note 1 to entry: A typical use is to separate flexible packaging waste from other types of waste such as bottles.
3.9
drum sieve
trommel sieve
device intended for the separation of packaging waste based on differences in size
3.10
optical sorter
sensor-based sorting
device intended for the separation of packaging waste based on spectroscopy in the NIR and/or VIS range,
detecting and classifying objects based on their material and/or colour
3.11
material recovery facility
MRF
plant for sorting and pre-processing materials from comingled waste for resource recovery
Note 1 to entry: A Material Recovery Facility (MRF) typically receives the input from a separate collection scheme
for consumer packaging (including out-of-home collection) and utilizes a series of sorting steps, allowing to
separate on a packaging level the collected packaging waste into a different types of bales (per material type and/or
colour), which will subsequently be sent to either a PRF or reprocessor.
Note 2 to entry: A MRF is generally a facility that sorts and prepares collected household plastic packaging waste
into (target) fractions suitable for onward dispatch to a PRF and/or reprocessor.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
3.12
plastic recovery facility
PRF
facility that sorts and prepares mixed plastic packaging waste fractions into separate (target) fractions
for onward use at reprocessors
Note 1 to entry: A Plastic Recovery Facility (PRF) further separates mixed plastic packaging streams on a packaging
article level into more fractions (material type and/or colour) than typically created by a MRF.
3.13
reprocessor
business that takes materials which have been sorted (e.g. at a MRF) and uses them to produce new
secundary raw materials
Note 1 to entry: A reprocessor (sometimes also called a recycler or reclaimer) typically receives pre-sorted bales
from MRF’s and/or PRFs and uses a reprocessing process (mechanical or advanced recycling including but not
limited to dissolution recycling, depolymerization, pyrolysis, gasification) to convert them typically into recycled
pellets, that can be used again in plastic applications (within or outside packaging), replacing virgin resin.
Reprocessors can also have a series of devices to pre-sort the packaging (on a packaging article level) prior feeding
it into a reprocessing system.
Note 2 to entry: Sorting equipment at a reprocesser which is different from that at a MRF/PRF (e.g. delabellers)
will be considered in the relevant packaging format specific guideline parts of this series of standards. (e.g. PET
Bottle Guidelines part 003 in case of delabellers)
3.14
plastic packaging test sample
(plastic packaging to be assessed via this document, e.g. the SAMPLE): the packaging under investigation
Note 1 to entry: Plastic packaging test sample can be both in market packages as well as new innovate packaging
developments not placed in market yet.
3.15
C&I waste
commercial and industrial packaging waste (typically (but not limited to) collected at retailers and
businesses)
3.16
target fraction
intended type of packaging or material for a plastic packaging to be identified as in the sorting process
Note 1 to entry: It is the desired stream so it can enter the preferred reprocessing (examples are given in Annex D).
3.17
test facility
location where this test methodology is executed
Note 1 to entry: Differentiation is made between:
— lab scale testing (including single unit operation testing): facility that has 1 or few Unit operation tests
in place, typically not connected to each other;
— pilot scale testing (facility having multiple industrial equipment in place that are connected but only
being used for testing);
— industrial scale testing (MRF): commercial automated MRF/PRF.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
3.18
sortability
ability of a packaging to be identified and separated from a packaging waste stream into an intended
plastic packaging or material fraction for further reprocessing
3.19
sortability yield
percentage of the valuable material reporting to the concentrate (target material sorting fraction) with
reference to the amount of material in the feed
Note 1 to entry: Also sometimes called percent recovery.
Note 2 to entry: A Plastic Recovery Facility (PRF) further separates mixed plastic packaging streams on a packaging
article level into more fractions (material type and/or colour) than typically created by a MRF.
4 Sortability of plastic packaging waste
4.1 Introduction
This document provides a sorting protocol to test household plastic packaging test samples consisting of
a PET (Rigids), PE (Rigids and Flexibles), PP (Rigids and Flexibles), PS and XPS (Rigids) or EPS main
component, to determine their sortability into the respective target material fractions.
This protocol covers household plastic packaging formats, including but not limited to:
— flexible packaging;
— pouches;
— bags;
— rigid packaging (inclusive bottles, bottles including spray pumps, boxes…);
— tubes;
— pots;
— cups;
— trays;
— blister packaging.
Plastic packaging often contains multiple components. For example, a clear beverage bottle may be
comprised of a PET bottle, a PE cap and a label. The target fraction for packaging waste is determined by
the material (plastic) representing its main component(s), by weight – in this case the bottle. In this
example of a PET beverage bottle, the target fraction therefore is PET bottles (specifically, the clear and
light blue PET bottle stream). More examples can be found in Annex D.
A plastic packaging test sample containing predominantly (over 50 %) materials other than plastic or
made of different plastics than the ones listed above shall not be tested according to this document.
Out of scope are the following:
— hazardous goods packaging waste;
— manual-only sorting operations;
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
— alternative collection methodologies, such as comingled collection (consumer plastic packaging
mixed with standard household waste);
— items that have a unique collection scheme that do not undergo subsequent automatic sorting;
— non-household packaging waste (like (but not limited to) commercial and industrial (C&I) packaging
waste), given that in majority of cases (if not all) there is no automatic sorting involved;
— advanced sorting technologies (including but not limited to tracer/marker-based, computer vision-
based object recognition: Artificial Intelligence, Digital Watermarks,), currently not widely deployed.
The collecting stage has been included in the scope as in many cases sorting activities are carried out
during collection and/or the waste supply chain will remove automatically certain components of a
package. Therefore, the scope is to evaluate plastic packaging designs for high sortability yields. It allows
to identify if a specific plastic packaging test sample sorts out with high yield into the target fraction
whilst minimizing contamination in other streams (e.g. is the pack design compatible with automated
sorting machinery typically used in a state-of-the-art automated sorting centers?).
Sorting processes for plastic packaging typically occur in an automated state-of-the-art MRF (Material
Recovery Facility), PRF (Plastic Recovery Facility), at a reprocessor or a combination thereof (some
operations include handpicking which is not part of this document). This document only focuses on
sorting at MRFs and PRFs, not at reprocessors as there is no test facility that can replicate machine
settings and there is no harmonization of how waste gets sorted at reprocessors (basically Waste
Operators just decides themselves based on their target recyclate quality).
Household plastic packaging includes both
— Kerbside collected (example (but not limited to) system-compliant light-weight packaging collected
at consumer’s doorstep and/or drop of points), as well as
— Out-of-Home collected (examples include (but not limited to) businesses (separate collection bins in
offices, public spaces like airports, etc.), separate collection bins at public parks/beaches, Reverse
Vending Machines/DRS (Deposit Return Schemes), Store drop off systems (e.g. leave excess
packaging at stores before taking home), etc.).
No tests shall be conducted reflecting manual inspection, as this is very country specific / waste company
specific and cannot be considered state of the art. For completeness, below is a quick description of what
happens when manual inspections are in place -for reference only. During the manual inspection, the
quality of the sorted streams is further improved by removing unwanted material from the different
automatically sorted material fractions. Based on the product residue in the packaging (for instance
silicone) or specifications of unwanted materials, manual removal of certain packaging is standard
practise.
— Annex A of this document describes a methodology that can be applied at a test facility at lab scale
and pilot scale (facilities using industrial sized sorting equipment) or at industrial scale (using the
sorting equipment installed at a state-of-the-art MRF/PRF/reprocessor) to determine the sorting
behaviour and the resulting reprocessing stream of plastic packaging test sample.
— Annex B provides an overview of the unit operation of the state-of-the-art sorting centre.
— Annex C of this document provides a method to determine packaging component removal, either by
the consumer (when putting a used packaging in a collection bin) and/or during the
collection/sorting process.
— Annex D provides an overview of typical target fractions for packaging waste.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
4.2 Facilities
Every Country/Packaging Recovery Organization and Waste Operator has their own strategy in terms of
setting up their sorting facilities. Even within countries there can be large differences, making it difficult
to specify specific settings of machinery and/or work with a European representative layout of a
MRF/PRF.
This document aims to model as accurately as possible how current European state-of-the-art automated
sorting facilities operate on an industrial scale. Representative European sorting facilities deploy the
following sorting technologies (a layout example of a state-of-the-art automated sorting facility can be
found in Annex B):
— sieving;
— windshifting;
— magnetic separation;
— eddy current separation;
— ballistic separation;
— a series of optical sorters.
This document provides a process to identify design issues that limit proper sorting into a desired plastic
fraction and/or can misdirect plastic packaging into a non-desired plastic fraction and/or into the
fraction of ferrous metals, liquid packaging cartons, non-ferrous metals, paper or residues (including but
not limited to fines, missorted items and non-target materials) in and from which plastic is typically not
recovered.
It provides a test methodology and provides benchmark recommendations to guide the interpretation of
the results.
If testing is undertaken, the relevant unit operations listed in Table 1 (except sieve testing) shall be tested.
As an example, it does not make sense to run a magnet test if there are no ferromagnetic materials present
in any of the packaging test sample components.
The test method described in Annex A follows the steps (unit operations) which occur in state-of-the-art
sorting centres for household plastic packaging waste and seeks to simulate each operation on a pilot or
industrial scale. The relevant unit operations are shown in Table 2. The flow in a representative state-of-
the-art automated sorting centre is shown just for reference in Figure B.1.
Table 1 — List of Unit Operations in a state-of-the-art automated sorting process at a MRF
dealing with separate collected consumer plastic packaging waste
Step # Unit operation Description of operation
1 Sieve The drum sieve (also referred as trommel
sieve) aims to separate waste based on size:
— small items (like caps) that fall through
the smallest holes of the sieve (this material
ends up as fines (residues) and is typically
not used for reprocessing);
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Step # Unit operation Description of operation
— intermediate sized items that fall through
the sieves” larger holes are subjected to
subsequent sorting steps;
— oversized items (like large films) pass the
sieve without falling through any hole.
Alternatively, a vibrating screen may be
used.
2 Windshifter The windshifter creates an upward facing
airflow over a conveyor belt. This airflow
pushes up lightweight items and separates
them from heavier items (the weight to
surface area ratio is a determining factor).
Over-sized materials (which passed the
sieve) are sent to a dedicated windshifter.
a Over-belt magnet The over-belt magnet separates packaging
waste (components) made from (or
containing) ferromagnetic metals, such as
iron and steel.
a Optical sorter (NIR) for liquid The presence of liquid packaging cartons in
packaging cartons the packaging waste is checked (for state-of-
the-art collection schemes like yellow bin
Germany/blue bag Belgium where paper is
collected separately, only liquid packaging
cartons are ejected. The optical sorter
devices sort items classified as a
combination of PE and paperboard/paper.
5 Eddy current The eddy current sorter separates
packaging (components) made from (or
containing high amounts of) metals,
including non-ferrous metals.
6 Ballistic separation The ballistic separator aims to separate rigid
(or three-dimensional) packaging from
flexible (or two-dimensional) packaging.
a Optical sorters: Near infrared Identification of the material of the main
spectroscopy (NIR) based sorting (can packaging component. In case combined
be complemented by visible with VIS, also colour sorting is possible.
spectroscopy (VIS))
7.1 Optical sorter NIR PET The goal of this unit operation is to separate
packaging classified as PET by the NIR
sorter.
7.2 Optical sorter NIR PET-bottles or PET- Materials that were sorted as PET can be
trays further sorted in different fractions: PET
bottles and PET trays.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Step # Unit operation Description of operation
7.3 Optical sorter NIR PE The goal of this unit operation is to separate
packaging classified as PE by the NIR sorter
7.4 Optical sorter NIR PP The goal of this unit operation is to separate
packaging classified as PP by the NIR sorter
7.5 Optical sorter NIR PS The goal of this unit operation is to separate
packaging classified as X(PS) and EPS by the
NIR sorter.
7.6 Optical sorter NIR on mixed plastics The goal of this unit operation is to separate
packaging classified as PP/PE/PET/(X)PS
and EPS by the NIR sorter.
7.7 NIR on flexibles The goal of this unit operation is to separate
packaging classified as PE (or PP) flexibles
by the NIR sorter. In the future, this also
might be widened to separation of PP
flexibles.
To note that different set-ups for the NIR
might be used pending the size of the
flexible packaging material (stream
captured by sieve vs stream in oversized
fraction).
8 Optional: Manual quality inspection Quality inspection before baling the sorted
fractions, which is then provided to a
reprocessor.
NOTE Table note.
a
Unit Operations (with the exception of windshifters) in above table are typically present at any
a
automated state-of-the-art MRF; the ones indicated with an are those unit operations typically also
present at a reprocessor.
To note that a PET reprocessor also typically use delabellers, which is also a Unit Operation that can be
assessed when the plastic packaging test sample is sorted successfully at the MRF/PRF in the desired PET
stream.
4.3 Evaluation of the sortability of plastic packaging waste
The methodology described in Annex A evaluates the sorting behaviour of a plastic packaging test sample,
considering different streams of sorted plastic waste (also called sorting fractions) which are common in
state-of-the-art sorting facilities, including but not limited to:
— PE flexibles;
— PP flexibles;
— PET bottles;
— PET trays;
— PP rigids;
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
— PE rigids;
— PS and XPS rigids;
— EPS rigids;
— mixed polyolefin flexibles;
— mixed polyolefin rigids.
NOTE 1 Monomaterial streams are preferred compared to mixed streams, as the former can lead more to true
circularity.
NOTE 2 Additional streams (such as mixed flexible plastics and mixed rigid plastics) might exist but are not
considered target fractions and are disqualified according the methodology.
The fractions defined above can be potentially further sorted or split (typically at a PRF and/or at a
recycler) according to colour and/or opacity (examples include but are not limited to transparent and
light blue PET bottles, transparent coloured PET bottles, opaque coloured PET bottles, natural and white
coloured PE/PP rigid packaging, and coloured PE/PP rigid packaging, etc.
Depending on the choice of the sample, the method described in this document can either provide a
sortability determination for a given packaging design or item, or it can be employed to selectively study
the impact of individual design constituents in plastic packaging on sortability. The latter approach may
be employed to generate data for the updating of design-for-recycling guidelines.
4.4 Principles
It is essential for certain types of plastic packaging to be tested for sortability, as their design can affect
their ability to be effectively detected, classified and sorted into the desired target fraction (including but
not limited to a detection and/or classification challenge), potentially leading to partial or total loss of the
packaging to reprocessing operations and/or contaminating other sorting streams.
Decision tree (when to run a sorting test / what to test when):
In general, prEN 18120-1 as well as the design guideline parts of this series of standard (covering PET
bottles, PET rigids, PE and PP rigids, PE and PP flexibles, PS and XPS rigids and EPS rigids) shall be
consulted first to determine whether a sorting test is required.
Plastic packaging test samples that are similar to packages already placed onto the market and known to
have similar sorting behaviour (all packages containing only constituents in the green and yellow
columns of the corresponding design guidelines (in this series of standards) do not need to be tested
according to this protocol.
Plastic packaging test samples that are similar to packages already placed onto the market and known to
have similar sorting behaviour (all packages containing only constituents in the red columns of the
corresponding design guidelines (in this series of standards) can be tested according to this protocol.
Packaging designs containing components and/or constituents according to Table 1 (not exhaustive list)
are recommended to test on sortability (or results may be extrapolated from previous testing), unless the
relevant design guideline part of the series of standards already provides guidance on these components
and/or constituents.
The below decision tree (not exhaustive) helps in making an assessment for items not listed in green or
yellow columns in design guidance parts of this series of standard (PET bottles, PET rigids, PE and PP
rigids, PE and PP flexibles, PS and XPS rigids and EPS rigids) or references in prEN 18120-1.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Table 2 — Recommendation for unit operation testing (not exhaustive)
Unit operation Constituents or components of plastic packaging (currently not in
green or yellow) to be tested for indicated unit operation
Optical sorting — Large labels (as defined in the design guidance parts of this series of
(NIR/VIS) standards) made from a different material than the main component
of the packaging.
— Full body sleeves, covering a large surface as defined in the design
guidance parts of this series of standards (perforated and non-
perforated) where sleeve material is different than main component
of the packaging.
— Structures that require sorting testing according to a design
guidance part of this series of standards (e.g. certain multi-material
structures).
— Component(s) made from paper fibres (such as paper labels).
— Colours (both mass colouration and prints) that may prevent the
correct classification of the packaging body material, such as dark
colours containing a significant portion of carbon black, excluding
fine print features / patterns such as 1D barcodes, QR codes, 2D
Datamatrix, text (including (but not limited to) regulatory
information), line graphics, …). NIR detectable dark colours do not
require to be tested according the NIR test protocol.
— Packages that are prone to rolling on a fast-moving conveyer belt
and therefore cannot be ejected correctly. Examples include (but not
limited to) cylindrical, conical or spherical shapes that are very rigid
and hard to compact or flatten. Note that also the package design
(diameter to length ratio, amongst others) might impact this rolling
behaviour.
— Metallized film OR metallisation visible from the outside of the
packaging (including sandwiched packaging, e.g. where the
metallized layer is not on the outside surface).
Eddy current — Contains component(s)/constituents made from aluminium
(including heavy metallized labels on Rigid Packaging).
— All packaging structures with aluminium foil as a layer in the main
component.
Magnet contain component(s)/constituents that contain ferromagnetic metals or
magnetic components regardless of the weight share (apart from valve balls
and springs in pump closures)
Windshifting — Different rigidity of components:
— a lightweight rigid packaging ((such as packaging material or
structure designed to reduce weight while maintaining strength,
Ballistic separator
durability, and protective qualities; risk of being sent to a flexible
stream), or
— flexible packaging combined with rigid integrated components: a
heavy flexible packaging (such as packaging material or structure
designed with additional functionalities such as a spout; risk of
being sent to a rigid stream).
Induction-based metal contains metallized films
detectors, integrated
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Unit operation Constituents or components of plastic packaging (currently not in
green or yellow) to be tested for indicated unit operation
into a NIR (future
implementation)
Household packaging waste enters the sorting process crushed and folded due to transportation and
logistics. To be representative of industrial reality, the test method described in this document simulates
the compression and the friction as typically experienced by packaging waste in waste collection trucks
and transport operations.
The shape or integrity of the packaging can be impacted by:
— the consumer sorting gesture:
Consumer behaviour differs widely between individuals and countries and there is no single
representative way a packaging is disposed of and collected. For example, the same packaging can be
discarded by consumers as it is or in flattened form. Based on brand or local authorities’
recommendations, it can be emptied and cleaned or contain partial residues; and/or
— the logistical steps, between the collection point to the facility:
Household packaging waste enters the sorting process crushed and folded due to transportation and
logistics.
Annex C provides a method to determine packaging component removal, either by the consumer and/or
during the collection/sorting process.
4.5 Samplings
Samples to be tested shall not be limited to one component of the packaging but comprise the whole
packaging, as it enters the sorting plant (with labels, adhesives, closure system, liners, seals, valves, and
any other component).
Exception is when components are proven to be separable as per test procedure in Annex C. In this case,
the separate component(s) shall be individually assessed according the relevant design guideline part of
this series of standards and the original test sample shall be tested without the separate component.
In case of a high product residue (typically for highly viscous products), the typical residual content
(representing how consumers would put the used package in their recycling bin) shall be added to the
packaging (refer to 1.4 in Annex A).
The amount of required plastic packaging test samples is dependent on the test facility, e.g. lab scale
testing, pilot scale testing or industrial scale testing:
— lab scale testing (preliminary assessment only): at least 10 samples per measurement (at least three
measurements (with at least two different operational programs for the rougher step for NIR
testing)). The results cannot be used for 4.6;
— pilot scale testing: at least 100 samples per measurement. The results can be used for 4.6;
— industrial scale testing: at least 100 samples per measurement. The results can be used for 4.6.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
When several unit operations have to be tested, it is recommended to prepare multiple sample sets to
ensure at least 100 samples are available for the relevant testing. To note samples can be re-used in case
they are still functional after the testing.
Only those measurements are evaluated in which at least 95 out of 100 samples are found in the sorting
streams/and or residues.
4.6 Test method
Testing shall be conducted according to the method described in Annex A.
4.7 Test report
The test report shall contain the following:
1) a reference to this document (including its year of publication);
2) the date of the testing;
3) name and location where sort testing is performed;
4) all information necessary for the complete identification of the plastic packaging test sample;
5) detailed description (including pictures) of the preparation step as described in A.1.5;
6) all information necessary for the complete identification of the Unit Operation device settings (see
A.1.1). All machine setting parameters shall be documented. Deviations from standard machine
settings (if given in this document) shall be explained. In case packaging are tested in a MRF, specify
the order of the machines;
7) in case a control sample is used, the results of the control sample also may be added to the report;
8) determination of split factors and final analysis (see Clause 1.12 of Annex A);
9) results of testing in format as specified in A.1.8;
10) overall final results as per 4.6;
11) details of any deviation from the test method, as well as any incident which may have influenced the
results.
4.8 Evaluation
Tables 3 and 4 help in the interpretation of the results. A distinction is made between:
— component/constituents that are already listed in any of the design guidelines of this series of
standards (please refer to Table 3). The test results (3 levels of outcome) might be used as input to
update the design guideline parts of this series of standard;
— new innovate packaging for which components/constituents are not listed in the design guidelines
of this series of standards (please refer to Table 4). The test results are used to allocate a
compatibility level to the packaging (constituent or component).

oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Table 3 — Sorting yield results for plastic packaging samples with components/constituents
already listed in the design guidelines
Sorting yield Sorted in non- Test results (recommendation only)
(target target stream or
stream) not sorted
≥ 80 % ANY
No negative impact on sorting
(70 to 80) % ≤ 10 %
(70 to 80) % > 10 %
Limited negative impact on sorting
(50 to 70) % ≤ 20 %
(50 to 70) % > 20 %
< 50 % ANY Strong negative impact on sorting

NOTE Table note.
Table 4 — Sorting yield results for new innovative packaging
Sorting yield Sorted in non- Test results and respective allocation in design guidelines
(target target stream or (recommendation only)
stream) not sorted
≥ 80 % ANY
green (fully compatible), yellow (limited compatible)
(70 to 80) % ≤ 10 %
or red (not compatible)
(70 to 80) % > 10 % yellow (limited compatible) or red (not compatible)
(50 to 70) % ≤ 20 %
(50 to 70) % > 20 %
< 50 % ANY red (not compatible)

NOTE Table note.
oSIST prEN 18120-3:2024
prEN 18120-3:2024 (E)
Annex A
(normative)
Experimental determination of the sortability of plastic packaging samples
A.1 Principle
The steps below describe how to test plastic package test samples to assess their sortability. Note that
the proposed order of unit operations in A.1.6 represent the sequence of a standard automated state-of-
the-art sorting centre
...