Table of Contents Next Page


JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME

REPORT OF THE NINETEENTH SESSION
OF THE
JOINT FAO/WHO CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION

FAO Headquarters, Rome, 1–10 July 1991

INTRODUCTION

1. The Nineteenth Session of the Joint FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission was held at FAO Headquarters, Rome, from 1 to 10 July 1991. The Session was attended by 351 participants, including the representatives and observers from 77 countries and observers from 25 international organizations (See Appendix 1 for the List of Participants).

2. The Commission was presided over by its Chairman, E.R. Méndez, Mexico, and for certain items of the Agenda by two of its Vice-Chairman, N. Tape (Canada), and F.G. Winarno (Indonesia). The Secretary of the Commission was R.J. Dawson, assisted by the Session Joint Secretaries A.W. Randell, and F. Käferstein.

3. The Session was opened by Dr. B.P. Dutia, Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Department, FAO on behalf of the Director-General of FAO, Mr. Edouard Saouma and the Director-General of WHO, Dr. H. Nakajima. The text of the address and the text of the Chairman's reply, are contained in Appendix 2 to this report.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND TIMETABLE (Agenda Item 1)

4. The Commission adopted the Provisional Agenda ALINORM 91/1 as the Agenda for its Session, deleting certain points under Item 24 (See paragraphs 199–225, below).

ELECTION OF OFFICERS OF THE COMMISSION AND MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (Agenda Item 4)

5. During the Session, the Commission elected F.G. Winarno (Indonesia) as Chairman of the Commission to serve from the end of the Nineteenth Session to the end of the Twentieth Session. The Commission also elected L. Crawford (USA), Pakdee Pothisiri (Thailand) and John Race (Norway) as Vice-Chairmen of the Commission for the same period.

6. The following Members of the Commission were elected to represent the geographic locations described in Rule III.1 of the Commission's Rules of Procedure, to hold office from the end of the Nineteenth Session to the end of the Twenty-First Session: Tunisia - Africa; Malaysia - Asia; The Netherlands - Europe; Cuba - Latin America and the Caribbean; Canada - North America; New Zealand - South West Pacific.

Appointment of Regional Coordinators

7. The following persons were appointed as Regional Coordinators for:

AfricaEtienne Enobong Essien (Nigeria)
AsiaAzizan Ghazali (Malaysia)
EuropeBarbro Blomberg (Sweden)
Latin America and the CaribbeanCarlos Alberto Ferreira Guimaraes (Brazil)
North America and the South West PacificDigby Gascoine (Australia)

IN MEMORIAM

8. The Commission observed one minute's silence in memory of its former colleagues who had passed away since its previous Session:

REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMISSION ON THE 37TH AND 38TH SESSIONS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (Agenda Item 2)

9. In introducing the Reports of the 37th and 38th Sessions of the Executive Committee contained in documents ALINORM 91/3 and ALINORM 91/4 respectively, the Chairman indicated that all items dealt with by the Executive Committee should be dealt with by the Commission under the Agenda Items relating to the matters concerned.

10. The Commission noted that the Thirty-Eighth Session of the Executive Committee had also expressed its appreciation of the work of the Chairman of the Commission for his positive contributions to the work of the Commission and his effectiveness as Chairman of both the Commission and the Executive Committee.

MEMBERSHIP OF THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION (Agenda Item 3)

11. The Chairman reported that two new Members had joined the Commission since the 18th Session - Angola and Kiribati. The total membership of the Commission was currently 138 countries and is set out in Appendix 3 to this report. The Commission requested FAO and WHO to continue their efforts to complete the Commission's membership by drawing the attention of those eligible countries which had not yet notified desire to become members to the benefits of participation in the Commission's work.

PROGRESS REPORT ON ACCEPTANCES OF CODEX STANDARDS AND CODEX MAXIMUM LIMITS FOR PESTICIDE RESIDUES, AND ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN FOOD (Agenda Item 5)

12. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 91/5, a summary of acceptances notified by countries since its 18th Session. It was noted that this document was based on replies received from Cuba, Iran, Morocco, New Zealand, and Thailand, in relation to the acceptance of Codex standards, and from Cuba, Egypt, India, Israel, New Zealand, Mozambique, Romania, and Singapore in relation to Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) for Pesticides. This information was supplemented by information provided by several delegations present at the Session.

13. The Commission noted that a new form of acceptance of Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides and Veterinary Drugs had been adopted at its 18th Session and that the first notifications of acceptance of “Free Distribution” had been indicated. It appeared that countries notifying acceptance preferred to use this form of acceptance rather than others. The Commission stressed that all Member countries should give favourable consideration to notifying the Secretariat that products in conformity with Codex Standards and MRLs would be permitted free entry into and distribution within their territorial jurisdictions. It welcomed the efforts made by the Commission of the European Communities to notify acceptance of Codex Standards for products sold within the territory of the Community.

14. The Commission noted that since the publication of ALINORM 91/5, an additional response had been received from the Government of Mexico notifying the acceptance of a number of Codex MRL's, and that these would be published in due course. It also recommended to national and international authorities, that efforts be made to increase the use of Integrated Pest Management procedures and reduce or eliminate the use of persistent pesticides as means of achieving greater acceptance of Codex MRL's by governments.

REPORT ON THE FINANCIAL SITUATION OF THE JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME FOR 1990/91 AND 1992/93 (Agenda Item 6)

15. The Commission received a report on the financial situation of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme for the biennia 1988/89, 1990/91 and 1992/93 (ALINORM 91/6). In introducing the report, the Secretary of the Commission noted that the budget situation of the Programme was very satisfactory in that the tighter control exercised over documentation had resulted in the programme being able to operate within its budget. The Commission noted that the cost sharing arrangements between FAO and WHO were still based on a contribution by FAO of 75 percent and by WHO of 25 percent to the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme, and an additional contribution by FAO as the administering agency providing documentation and other support services, reflected in an actual cost sharing at a level which resulted in FAO paying 83 percent of total Codex costs.

16. The Commission noted the 1990/91 and 1992/93 budgets of the Programme, and the continuing high costs of documentation. It proposed that further efforts be made to reduce the documentation costs by examining the numbers of copies of Codex documents prepared and distributed. It expressed its appreciation to FAO for its continued strong financial support of the Programme and to the Secretariat for its efforts in carrying out the work of the Commission within the available budgetary provisions. However, it noted that the budget continued to be maintained on a “zero growth” basis. Concern was expressed that this was the minimum required for the Programme to meet its current obligations and that further development of the Programme, for example in response to obligations under the proposed GATT Agreement could need greater resources. The Commission also noted that no provisions had been made in response to proposals to finance the attendance of developing Member countries, as these would be met, insofar as would be possible, by other resources (see paras. 64–65 below). The Secretariat noted that the outcome of the FAO/WHO Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade implied additional expenditure for the programme in several areas, and agreed to prepare an analysis of these expected costs for the next session of the Executive Committee.

REPORT ON ACTIVITIES WITHIN FAO AND WHO RELEVANT TO THE WORK OF THE COMMISSION (Agenda Item 7)

A. Report of Joint FAO/WHO Activities

Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)

17. The Commission was informed that three meetings of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) had been held since the last session of the Commission. These were:

18. At the two Meetings devoted to veterinary drug residues (36th and 38th), a total of 18 drug substances were considered. These included 7 anthelmintics, 5 antimicrobial agents, 3 tranquillizing agents, 2 growth promoters and a β-adrenoceptor blocking agent. Of these, 10 were assigned Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) levels and recommended Maximum Residue Levels (MRL) and two other substances were given Limited Acceptance of Residues with one assigned an MRL. At these meetings the expert committee detailed the decision process and parameters used to establish recommended MRLs and discussed the considerations of pharmacological effects in establishing ADIs.

19. At the 37th Meeting concerning food additives, 23 substances were evaluated, including antioxidants, enzyme preparations, flavouring agents, sweetening agents, a food colour and miscellaneous food additives. Two food contaminants (benzo[a]pyrene and ochratoxin A) were also evaluated and specifications for purity and identity for 12 food additives were revised. The Commission was advised that the 37th Meeting on Food Additives was the first JECFA meeting where substances produced by genetic manipulation were evaluated. These were 5 enzymes used in food production and the expert committee was concerned about the approach to be used for their safety evaluation. In this connection, the Committee prepared an addendum to the previously published “General Specifications for enzyme preparations used in food processing” which includes principles to be considered when evaluating enzyme preparations from genetically modified microorganisms.

20. The Commission was advised that FAO had completed work to combine existing JECFA food additive specifications into one compendium (exceeding 1400 pages), and to update and revise the Guide to JECFA Specifications (FAO Food and Nutrition Paper Number 5). These documents are in the final stages of preparation for publication.

21. Finally, the Commission was informed that two JECFA meetings were scheduled for 1992; namely the 39th Meeting on food additives, Rome, February 1992, and the 40th Meeting on veterinary drug residues, Geneva, June 1992.

Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR)

22. The Commission was informed that two Joint FAO/WHO Meetings on Pesticide Residues had been held since the Eighteenth Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. These were held in September 1989 and September 1990. Thirty-nine pesticides were evaluated for acceptable daily intake and/or maximum residue limits in 1989, and 44 pesticides were evaluated in 1990.

23. The Meetings emphasized that, when re-evaluations of existing compounds are undertaken, relevant human data should be included for consideration. The Meetings also considered the feasibility of extrapolating existing residue data to cover commodities of interest to developing countries, but reaffirmed that decisions to extrapolate would be on a case-by-case basis.

The Joint FAO/WHO Food Contamination Monitoring Programme

24. This programme, forming a component of UNEP's Global Environment Monitoring System (GEMS), was established in 1976 with, at present, 39 countries from all regions of the world participating. In the framework of it, priority contaminants are being monitored in selected foods. In addition, data on human exposure to certain contaminants are generated. Both sets of data are of particular interest to the Commission, in particular to its Committees on Food Additives and Contaminants and on Pesticide Residues. The Analytical Quality Assurance component of the programme allows for participating laboratories to see whether or not their analytical capabilities are adequate. However neither FAO nor WHO were in a position to provide accreditation to laboratories.

25. In order to respond better to the specific needs and possibilities of countries in various parts of the world, a certain degree of regionalization of the programme is taking place at the moment.

International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation (ICGFI)

26. The Group, established in 1984, had at present a membership of 32 countries. In addition, several non-governmental organizations (NGO's) participated in the work of the Group, including the International Organization of Consumer Unions (IOCU). The work of the Group was carried out with extra-budgetary resources, pledged by its members. This included training workshops, press briefing seminars and the preparation and publication of technical documents and inventories.

International Conference on Nutrition

27. The Commission was informed of the decision taken by the Directors-General of FAO and WHO to convene an “International Conference on Nutrition”, in December 1992, in Rome. This Conference will present a unique opportunity for the international community to address the broad range of issues affecting nutritional status. It will be open to all Member Nations of FAO and WHO and to interested international, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations. In addressing the broad range of nutrition problems, it is envisaged that the Conference will give necessary emphasis to specific regional and sub-regional consensus. The Commission was further informed of the various organizational arrangements made for the Conference preparations to ensure the participation of member countries in all phases of these preparations, in the Conference itself and in its follow-up.

28. Preparatory activities will include the convening of national, sub-regional and regional workshops in food and nutrition - related matters and carrying out selected case studies. Food quality and safety aspects will receive the necessary attention in these preparatory activities and during the Conference itself.

29. The Commission expressed its appreciation and support to FAO and WHO for this important initiative.

Joint FAO/WHO/IAEA Expert Consultation on Trace Elements in Human Nutrition, Geneva, 18–22 June 1990

30. The Commission was informed of the results of this Consultation which discussed recent progress made in research on the analysis, interaction and bioavailability of such trace elements as zinc, selenium, copper, iodine and molybdenum. The Consultation's report would be published in late 1991 in the WHO Technical Report Series.

Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Protein Quality Evaluation, Bethesda, Md., USA, 4–8 December 1989

31. The Commission was informed of the main conclusions and recommendations of this Consultation which was held at the request of the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins (Fifth Session, Ottawa, 6–10 February 1989). The purpose of the Consultation was to:

  1. review present knowledge in protein quality evaluation,

  2. discuss various techniques used, and

  3. specifically evaluate the protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score method.

32. The Consultation recognized that significant advancements have been made in standardizing amino acid methodology, human amino acid requirements and determination of digestibility of protein and amino acids in a variety of foods. It noted that methods for the determination of all amino acids in foods have been standardized resulting in acceptable interlaboratory variation (coefficients of variation of about 10%). It also recognized that the amino acid scoring pattern proposed in 1985 by FAO/WHO/UNU for children of preschool age is at present the most suitable pattern for use in the evaluation of dietary protein quality for all age groups, except infants. The Consultation further noted the similarity in the ability of humans and rats to digest foods, and concluded that the true digestibility of crude protein is a reasonable approximation of the true digestibility of most amino acids (as determined by the rat balance method) in diets based on animal protein sources, cereals, oilseed, legumes or mixture of protein sources. The Consultation agreed that the rat balance method is the most suitable practical method for predicting protein digestibility by humans.

33. Based on the above conclusions, the Consultation agreed that the protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score method was the most suitable approach for routine evaluation of protein quality for humans, and recommended the adoption of this method as an official method at the international level. The Commission endorsed these conclusions and recommendations1.

B. Report of Selected FAO Activities in Food Control and Consumer Protection

34. The Commission was informed of specific activities carried out by FAO's Food Quality and Consumer Protection Group, Food Quality and Standards Service, in cooperation with member governments in promoting the quality and safety of foods throughout the food chain. These activities were briefly described in Part B of ALINORM 91/7. The Commission noted with appreciation the technical assistance provided by FAO to developing member countries in the development and strengthening of integrated national food control systems, the establishment of food contaminants monitoring and control programmes and the setting up of national food import/export quality control and certification systems.

35. The Commission also noted the priority given in these activities to the development of human resources as indicated by the sixteen regional training courses and workshops carried out in various parts of the world and the local training activities organized in over thirty countries. These training courses embraced a wide range of technical subjects directly related to food quality control and safety. The Commission especially noted the training activities conducted by FAO under the Asian regional food control training network project.

36. The Commission further noted the extensive activities carried out in the field of mycotoxin prevention and control as a follow-up to the 2nd International Conference on Mycotoxins (Bangkok, 1987) and in collaboration with UNEP and UNEPCOM. It welcomed FAO's continued effort in supplying mycotoxin laboratories in developing countries with reference standards and materials and in organizing regional analytical quality assurance programmes for selected food contaminants including mycotoxins.

37. Concerning street foods, the Commission noted with interest the latest studies and workshops carried out on the subject in different countries, the progress made in the drafting of a Code of Hygienic Practice for the preparation and sale of street foods and the video programme prepared recently on street foods in Asia. It expressed its full support to these activities.

38. The Commission was apprised of FAO's action plan to assist the governments of the Latin American and the Caribbean countries affected by the cholera outbreak in their effort to control the spreading of this epidemic. It was informed that this assistance would be devoted essentially to improving handling practices at all levels of the food chain with particular emphasis on street foods and to improving import/export inspection and quality control programmes to protect national food supplies and promote trade opportunities. Several delegations expressed their concern about the possible use of this tragic event as a non-tariff barrier and drew the attention of the Commission to the negative repercussions that this may have on the food export trade from the region as well as on tourism all of which would have an effect on the economies of the countries concerned.

1 The Delegation of France expressed its reservation as to the endorsement of the conclusions and recommendations of the Consultation.

C. Report of WHO Activities

39. The Commission noted the activities outlined in ALINORM 91/7, and in particular the following matters.

WHO Commission on Health and the Environment

40. The Commission was informed that the Director-General of WHO had established a Commission on Health and Environment which was charged with assessing the impact of environmental change to human health. The Commission's chairperson was Mme. Simone Veil, former Minister of Health of France and former President of the European Parliament. Four technical panels had been established to assist the Commission. Energy; Industry; Urbanisation; and Food and Agriculture. The Food and Agriculture Panel, which was chaired by Professor Kampelmacher of the Netherlands and in which one of the Codex Vice-Chairmen, Dr. Tape of Canada, participated, had made a comprehensive review of the environmental changes to be expected as a consequence of expanding and intensifying agricultural and fisheries production to meet the needs of the ever increasing world population. The report of the WHO Commission on Health and Environment would be one of WHO's inputs into the UN Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 1992.

Cholera

41. Since the beginning of the cholera epidemic in Latin America in early 1991, some 230 000 people had fallen ill. Besides the tremendous health problems with which the affected countries were faced, they were also facing serious economic problems since their export in certain agricultural and fishery commodities as well as tourism has declined. To respond effectively to this challenge, the Director-General of WHO had established a Global Task Force on Cholera Control to coordinate the work of all technical programmes of WHO. Since Cholera was a food and water borne disease, the Food Safety Programme was a member of this Task Force. In order to alleviate the economic problems related to the fact that several countries had reduced or even stopped their food and feed (fish meal) imports from the affected countries, the Task Force has published a press release and an article in its Weekly Epidemiological Record on Small Risk of Cholera Transmission by Food Imports.

42. The 44th World Health Assembly (May 1991), after an extensive discussion on the Cholera epidemic, adopted a resolution (WHA 44.6) which called inter alia upon the international community to intensify its solidarity with the countries affected by the epidemic and not to apply to those countries restrictions that cannot be justified on public health grounds, in particular as regards the importation of products from the countries concerned. The delegations to the 44th World Health Assembly were also provided with a statement prepared by the Task Force concerning the Risk of Cholera Transmission in Relation to the International Food Trade which emphasised that Cholera transmission by international food trade was more a theoretical than a real risk and one that could normally be dealt with by means other than an embargo on importation.

43. In order to provide travellers with practical advice on how to eat safely -and thus to prevent foodborne diarrhoea including cholera - and what to do if one gets diarrhoea, the WHO Programmes on Food Safety and Diarrhoeal Disease Control had published a Guide on Safe Food for Travellers which was available in Arabic, English, French, German and Spanish. Also, a Guide to identify Hazards and Assessing Risks Associated with Food Production and Storage, which was applicable to food handling at the domestic/street vending/cottage-industry level, was in an advanced stage of preparation.

REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS WORKING ON STANDARDIZATION OF FOOD AND RELATED MATTERS (Agenda Item 8)

44. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 91/8 when discussing this Agenda Item, which summarized activities of interest arising from the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE).

45. The Observer from the UNECE highlighted activities arising from its Working Party on Standardization of Perishable Produce and Quality Developments, and noted with pleasure the progress which had been made by the Codex Committee on Tropical Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in harmonizing the text of the proposed draft Codex standard for mangoes with that of the UNECE mango standard and format. It was also stated that the UNECE Working Party was undertaking a review concerning Class II quality requirements and Codex minimum quality requirements for raisins, dates, dried apricots and unshelled pistachio nuts, as established in an earlier working agreement between the CAC and the UNECE which required alignment of these requirements where possible. In addition, it was indicated that the Working Party was continuing its activities concerning the harmonization of existing commercial standards to facilitate international trade between and to European countries for a wide range of perishable products. The Observer noted that working procedures had been established between the Codex and UNECE secretariats with the aim of avoiding duplication of work and an overlap of standardization activities.

46. Concern was expressed that the elaboration of a UNECE standard for cashew kernels should be carried out by an international standardization body such as Codex or the International Organization for Standardization instead of the UNECE, as UNECE membership was made up of consuming, as opposed to producing, countries. The Commission noted the importance of UNECE/ISO collaborative efforts in the continued elaboration of the cashew kernel standard, with a view towards producing a standard applicable to both exporting and importing countries.

REPORT ON THE GATT/URUGUAY ROUND OF MULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS IN RELATION TO SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES AND BARRIERS (Agenda Item 9)

47. The Secretariat introduced document ALINORM 91/9 which gave a brief historical background to the development of the work on sanitary and phytosanitary barriers and the implications of this work on Codex and related FAO and WHO activities. The report was presented basically as an informative document, requiring no specific action by the Commission.

48. The Representative of GATT highlighted the major provisions of the draft agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures. Attention was drawn to: the encouragement to countries to use international standards, guidelines and recommendations, including Codex standards; recognition of the right of countries to use more stringent standards when scientifically justified; requirements that sanitary measures be based on risk assessment; recognition of the equivalency of alternative measures; provisions regarding the information and justification which countries must provide; and use of the GATT dispute settlement procedures. Several areas of disagreement remained, however, in particular concerning the coverage of animal welfare, consumer concerns, and environmental protection measures; national procedures for establishing limits on residues in foodstuffs; and application of the GATT agreement to local and regional governmental bodies.

49. The GATT representative reported that negotiations were continuing and many participants desired to conclude the Uruguay Round around the end of 1991. However, it was not likely that a further meeting on the sanitary agreement would occur until considerable further progress had been made in other aspects of the agriculture negotiations. The representative further noted the value of the Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade and the recommendations which had emanated from that meeting, in terms of the GATT proposed use of Codex standards.

50. At the request of some countries, the Secretariat clarified that the use by GATT contracting parties of Codex standards was envisaged by the GATT long term objective of furthering the use of harmonized sanitary measures on the basis of international standards, guidelines or recommendations. The GATT rules, however, were binding on contracting parties and governed the dispute procedures to determine whether or not particular measures applied by member governments were justified and legitimate.

51. The Commission agreed to express its continued support for the objectives of the GATT Negotiations in relation to sanitary and phytosanitary barriers and noted the importance of these discussions. The Commission also considered that even if the Uruguay Round negotiations were to fail, the work of the Commission would remain strengthened, and the new direction of the Commission's work would be valid.

MATTERS ARISING FROM THE REPORT OF THE FAO/WHO CONFERENCE ON FOOD STANDARDS, CHEMICALS IN FOOD AND FOOD TRADE (Agenda Item 10)

52. The Commission had before it documents LIM 2, ALINORM 91/4 and ALINORM 91/10 which summarized the recommendations and consensus statements made by the Conference, indicated the implications of these recommendations for the Codex Alimentarius Commission, and proposed possible courses of action.

53. A report on the Conference was given by E.F. Kimbrell, the Conference Chairman, who emphasized that recommendations were provided not only for the CAC, but also for FAO and WHO in relation to food control activities and the work of FAO/WHO expert committees, groups and panels. The implications of the GATT Uruguay Round discussions on the work of the Commission and changes that might be necessary were analyzed. Also, attention was drawn to the need to do more to make known the important work of the Commission.

54. The important contributions that JECFA and JMPR had made and the need for increased output was pointed out. There was a need to make known the evaluation criteria, to standardize them and to increase the transparency of the processes. More and higher quality data on Good Agricultural Practice and Good Manufacturing Practice were essential.

55. It was pointed out that the Conference Recommendations had budgetary implications. The Commission expressed concern that essential areas of work had been identified which would require additional funding or other forms of external support in order to be implemented.

56. The Commission considered the recommendations on a point-by-point basis as outlined in ALINORM 91/101:

Relations with Consumers

57. The Commission strongly endorsed the Conference's recommendations and the proposals for action contained in ALINORM 91/10. It noted that national governments had the primary responsibility in achieving greater participation of consumers. Extensive discussions occurred regarding publicizing the work of the Commission and the Secretariat was requested to develop simplified summaries and reports that would be more easily understood.

58. The Commission accepted with pleasure the offer of the observer of IOCU to prepare a discussion document regarding consumer participation and training. The Commission encouraged mutual efforts in informing consumers and gaining input from outside groups during early stages of the harmonization process.

59. The Commission agreed that its next session would include an agenda item during which governments could report on progress toward increasing consumer and industry input into the decision making process.

Harmonizing national regulations and the effect on exports

60. The Commission endorsed the Conference statements calling for the urgent harmonization of national food regulations. It noted the importance of such harmonization as a means of increasing exports from developing countries.

“Horizontal” approach to food standardization

61. The Commission noted with satisfaction that work along horizontal lines was already underway and welcomed the recommendation to strengthen this approach. Several delegations stressed the need for more and improved dietary information if the horizontal approach is to be fully successful. The Commission also noted that this approach did not always apply across the board, but also may be used for specific classes, groups or even individual products.

62. The Commission indicated that the General Subject Committees should examine their terms of reference in this regard, but did not want this to delay the development of standards based on the horizontal approach.

Restructuring of standards to remove excessive detail

63. The Commission endorsed the general recommendations and noted that further discussion would occur under Agenda Item 13.

1 The conclusions and recommendations of the Conference, as contained in ALINORM 91/10, are reproduced in Appendix 4 of this report.

Improved participation in Codex work

64. The Commission reaffirmed the effectiveness of detailed written comments as a means of participation and strongly endorsed the Conference recommendation calling for greater efforts to improve participation by developing countries in Codex activities. The importance was stressed of committees keeping workshops and working groups held separately from committee sessions to the absolute minimum necessary, since such meetings posed extreme hardships on many countries, especially developing countries, which did not have the resources to participate. The Commission noted with satisfaction that several developed countries had assisted developing countries in participating in Codex and hoped that such efforts would continue or increase.

65. The recommendation that consideration be given to amending Rule XI. 4 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission was discussed in detail. Some delegations suggested that amendment to permit financing through FAO or WHO would not be desirable because of accountability and dispersal problems. A suggestion, supported by a number of countries, was made that the rule might be amended to allow only for use of extrabudgetary funds, including from sources outside FAO and WHO, to enhance participation by developing countries.

66. The Commission decided to refer the question of amending Rule XI. 4 to the Codex Committee for General Principles for its consideration with the request that such consideration take into account the discussion at the Commission and the Executive Committee.

Importance of the GATT/Uruguay Round of Multilateral trade negotiations

67. The Commission expressed its full support for the Conference Statement on this matter. Several delegations pointed out the impetus that the negotiations had provided for the Commission's activities.

68. The Commission noted with satisfaction that it would be looked to for scientific guidance in food control matters and indicated its willingness to provide assistance.

Modification of the acceptance procedure

69. The Commission noted that “free distribution” had already been used in the notification process and strongly supported the Conference recommendation in principle. However several delegations indicated the need to carefully consider “free distribution” and its definition since it could have legal and other implications not readily discernible. The Commission indicated therefore that the Secretariat should prepare a detailed proposal on revisions of the acceptance procedure for consideration by the Codex Committee on General Principles with a view to revise the Procedural Manual.

Expediting the elaboration and review of Codex Standards

70. The Commission fully supported the Conference recommendation and noted that the matter would be addressed more fully in later agenda items.

Review of Codex Standards

71. The Commission fully agreed with the Conference recommendation calling for a review of standards. It noted with satisfaction that the Secretariat had already taken action to determine which standards should be subject to priority review. Based on a suggestion, the Commission agreed that “host” countries could be asked for support in this effort. It also agreed that efforts to involve developing countries in the process should be undertaken.

Review of Codex Procedures

72. The Commission fully supported the proposals for action to implement the Conference proposals outlined in Point 11 of Appendix 1 to ALINORM 91/10. The Commission accepted the Executive Committee decision that actions to implement the adoption of a two-thirds majority rule in the elaboration process at Step 5 should be instituted immediately pending amendments to the Procedural Manual to be recommended by the Codex Committee on General Principles for adoption. Several delegates indicated that more meetings of the Codex Committee on General Principles were needed. Also, several delegations indicated that a review of the complete elaboration process should be undertaken, and that the possibility and modalities of instituting an elaboration process based on voting by correspondence could be considered.

73. The Commission decided that the complete elaboration procedure should be reviewed by the Codex Committee on General Principles and that written decisions should be considered as well as Executive Committee action as a means to speed up the process.

Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants

74. The Commission noted that no action was required on the recommendation made at the March Conference not to split the Committee into two.

Structure of the Executive Committee and functions of the Regional Representatives

75. The Commission agreed with the Executive Committee that this matter was not of high priority. It agreed that the matter should be considered in more detail by the Executive Committee at its next session as well as by the Codex Committee on General Principles.

Good Agricultural Practice and Codex MRLs for pesticides

76. The Commission endorsed the Conference recommendation noting that they were aimed principally at the FAO/WHO Meetings on Pesticide Residues and to member countries. It agreed with the Executive Committee that the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues does not evaluate pesticide residues.

Resources for JECFA, JMPR and other expert groups

77. The Commission endorsed the Conference statement that FAO and WHO should work to assure proper resources for JECFA, JMPR and other scientific support. It was pleased to note that the FAO Summary Programme of Work and Budget submitted to FAO Council in June 1991 had included a proposal for a third meeting of JECFA in the biennium 1991–1993. It also noted that extrabudgetary resources were used to meet additional requests for scientific evaluations in 1990/91 and it might be the only means to meet such requests for the current biennium.

Risk Assessment

78. The Commission endorsed the views of the Conference, noting and agreeing with the views expressed at the Executive Committee as regards the expansion of the need for transparency. Several delegations expressed the urgent need for criteria to be developed regarding evaluations especially for contaminants such as aflatoxins. The Commission noted that there was a need for uniformity of assessment, that the process should be open and available to national governments and interested organizations, and that steps be taken to increase understanding of the process by the press.

New Food Products derived from Biotechnology

79. The Commission endorsed the recommendations of the Conference, and noted that detailed discussion of this subject would occur under Agenda Item 11.

Migrants from packaging material

80. The Commission agreed with the Executive Committee that this issue did not warrant a high priority by JECFA. However, this did not mean that all work should stop on such migrant substances. Several delegations indicated that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants should continue to allocate priorities for individual substances. They also indicated that there were perceptions of problems in this area among consumers and the Commission should be prepared to address these concerns. The observer from the IOCU asked that attention be given to such substances, as consumers were concerned.

81. The Commission agreed that it was the appropriate body to respond to concerns and noted that a limited number of substances warranting action were being addressed. It asked that the Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants keep it informed of additional concerns.

Establishment of a Committee to deal with import/export control

82. The Commission considered in detail the recommendations of the Conference, the proposed terms of reference prepared by the Secretariat, along with the recommendations of the Executive Committee. Most delegations expressed the view that a committee to address issues relating to import/export would be of great benefit to all countries but especially for developing countries. The Delegation of Mexico strongly supported the establishment of a committee and asked that the proposed terms of reference be rewritten to include the proposal of the Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean regarding establishment of a certification system, as this had been a recommendation of the March Conference.

83. Some delegations expressed the view that the terms of reference were too broad, that they failed to address the specific problems, and that they in some cases duplicated the responsibilities already assigned to other Codex Committees. These delegations also thought that the problem areas should be sent to the Committee on General Principles so that it could determine the appropriate committee to which the problem should be referred.

84. The Commission decided that a committee to consider matters of import/export inspection and certification should be established under Rule IX. 1(b) (i). It further decided that it would be essential to review the need for the committee's continuing activity after two sessions. The delegations of Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands and Switzerland opposed the establishment of the Committee.

85. The Commission, using as a precedent the terms of reference for the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods, decided to forward the terms of reference as amended by the Secretariat (point “a” was deleted) to governments for comments along with copies of the discussion occurring at the meeting. These draft terms of reference, comments and the proposal of the Codex Regional Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean regarding the establishment of a certification system would be reviewed by the Committee at its first session, and recommendations then made to the Commission for its consideration.

86. The Commission further decided unanimously to accept the kind offer of the Australian Government to serve as host country for the newly established committee.

Hygienic production of foods

87. The Commission strongly agreed with the Executive Committee's endorsement of the statement of the Conference in regard to the problems associated with the hygienic production of foods. It also agreed that microbiological contamination of foods requires priority attention and referred both issues to the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene for priority attention.

IMPLICATIONS OF BIOTECHNOLOGY ON INTERNATIONAL FOOD STANDARDS AND CODES OF PRACTICE (Agenda Item 11)

88. In considering document ALINORM 91/11, the Commission recalled that the issue of biotechnology was first discussed in 1989 during its 18th Session. At that time, the Commission had been informed of an initiative of WHO to convene, jointly with FAO, a Consultation on the Assessment of Biotechnology in Food Production and Processing as Related to Food Safety. This Consultation had taken place in Geneva in November 1990 and the Report of it would be available, as a formal WHO publication, at the end of 1991. The Consultation had recognized biotechnology as a continuum, embracing traditional breeding techniques and modern techniques based on recombinant DNA - technologies. “Modern” biotechnologies had the potential of revolutionizing the food supply, both in quantity and quality. While the Consultation was of the opinion that foods derived from “modern” biotechnologies were inherently not less safe than those derived from traditional biotechnologies, the issue of safety had to be considered. In addition, nutritional concerns may have to be addressed.

89. Based on scientific and technical advice by Joint FAO/WHO expert committees and consultations, the Codex Committees on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses, on Food Labelling, on Food Additives and Contaminants and on Food Hygiene were expected to be the main committees with responsibilities for matters on biotechnologies. In addition, several commodity committees (e.g. Vegetable Protein, Cereals, Pulses and Legumes, Fish and Fishery Products, Fats and Oils) might need to play a role in reaching international consensus on particular novel foods.

90. The Commission endorsed the conclusions and recommendations of the Joint FAO/WHO Consultation. It noted that while consumers would benefit from “modern” food biotechnology, some consumers felt that this technology would pose certain problems. For example, individual consumers might, on ethical or other grounds, not wish to buy foods derived from “modern” biotechnology. The Commission requested the Codex Committee on Food Labelling to provide guidance on how the fact that a food was derived from “modern” biotechnologies could be made known to the consumers.

91. The need to provide consumers with sound, scientifically based information which explained the application of biotechnology in food production and processing and clarified the safety issues was stressed. In this context, the Commission was informed that WHO was exploring possibilities to prepare a book on food biotechnology for the non-technical reader which would be based on the report of the Joint FAO/WHO Consultation.

92. The Commission endorsed the views expressed by its Executive Committee and agreed that the Commission should monitor developments in the field of food biotechnology and that the General Subject Committees identified above should discuss issues related to biotechnology within the context of their Terms of Reference (see ALINORM 91/4, para. 34). The Commission requested WHO to make copies of the Consultation report available to all Codex Contact Points. A progress report is to be presented to the 20th Session of the Commission.

CONVERSION OF CODEX REGIONAL STANDARDS TO WORLD-WIDE STANDARDS -PROGRESS REPORT (Agenda Item 12)

93. The Commission had before it ALINORM 91/2, a paper prepared by the Secretariat. The Commission noted that the regional standards prepared by the Committees for Europe and Africa covered commodities which by and large were traded beyond the region in which the standards was originated. In response to a request from the Executive Committee (37th Session, July 1990) governments were invited to comment on proposals leading to the conversion of the Commission's regional standards to world-wide ones. Although few responses were received, those countries which did respond favoured this approach.

94. The Commission decided not to adopt existing regional standards as worldwide standards until such time as they had been reviewed by all countries through the step procedure. This was seen as necessary to ensure adequate input from those countries which did not participate in the original elaboration of the standards concerned. It therefore recommended that current regional standards and the regional standards adopted at its present session should be resubmitted to governments for comments at Step 3 with a view to their elaboration as world-wide standards. It agreed to entrust the development of the world-wide standards to the following committees:

Natural Mineral WaterCodex Committee on Natural Mineral Waters1
Fresh Fungus “Chanterelle”Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables
VinegarCodex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables
MayonnaiseCodex Committee on Fats and Oils
GariCodex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes
Pearl Millet GrainsCodex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes
Pearl Millet FlourCodex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes

1 The Commission agreed that the Codex Committee on Natural Mineral Waters, previously operating as a European Committee, would subsequently act on a worldwide basis.

REVIEW OF THE FORMAT OF CODEX STANDARDS (Agenda Item 13)

95. The Secretariat introduced document 91/30 which had been prepared in response to debates within Codex over a number of years as to whether the considerable detail in some Codex standards might influence negatively their acceptance by governments. The FAO/WHO Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade considered that this was the case to some degree and had recommended that all Codex standards should be reviewed in the light of their acceptance and their importance in international trade. The present paper had been prepared in the light of the Conference recommendation. A list of Codex standards ordered for priority review developed by the Secretariat in response to the Conference recommendation was appended to ALINORM 91/30.

96. The Commission saw no objection in principle to revising the Codex standards as proposed in the paper and as endorsed by the Executive Committee (ALINORM 91/4 paras. 35–37). However, the Commission agreed that emphasis in the review should be broader than that recommended in the paper and extended to cover health, safety and consumer protection concerns as well as essential elements needed to assure fair trade practices and to protect against fraud. It agreed in principle that the detailed information contained in Codex standards should be transferred from the standards themselves to other advisory documents and that as far as was possible standards should not contain any provisions of an optional nature.

97. The Commission stressed that the need to review Codex standards was urgent and requested the Secretariat to contact host government secretariats to initiate this work as soon as possible. It applauded the work already being undertaken by the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products in this regard. It also agreed that the Abridged Codex Alimentarius could serve as a useful model for simplifying the information contained in Codex standards.

STATUS OF CODEX ADVISORY TEXTS AND PROCEDURES FOR THEIR ELABORATION (Agenda Item 14)

98. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 91/33 prepared as a follow-up to questions raised at the 18th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the 37th session of the Executive Committee ALINORM 91/3 para. 43.

99. The Commission endorsed the Executive Committee conclusions that in principle all Codex texts should be subject to full and transparent elaboration procedures, with full and equal participation by all member governments and other interested parties. It requested all committees to ensure that texts which were not defined as standards or maximum residue limits would be clear and unambiguous in their interpretation and their intended application. It noted the opinion of FAO Legal Counsel that the Commission had full authority to elaborate advisory texts and texts in support of standards or other recommendations intended for mandatory application by governments. However noting that internationally developed standards, guidelines and other recommendations would be the basis for the future work of GATT as a consequence of the Uruguay Round, the Commission agreed that all such texts should be developed openly and with the same scientific rigour.

100. The Commission requested those committees which had prepared advisory texts to examine the implication of these recommendations especially in relation to international trade. Guideline levels for contaminants were mentioned as needing clarification in this regard. The Commission also agreed that the present paper be examined by the Codex Committee on General Principles to determine if changes to the Procedural Manual would be needed to ensure the principles outlined above were met.

CONSIDERATION OF “ORGANICALLY/BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCED FOODS” (Agenda Item 15)

101. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 91/37 which was introduced by the Delegation of Canada. The introduction of the document provided a background to the previous activities undertaken by Codex Committees on this issue, and a proposed draft guideline, attached to the document as Appendix I, had been prepared by Canada on the basis of the discussions held during the FAO/WHO Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade. The Commission was informed that this proposed draft guideline represented the initial approach for the harmonization and elaboration of international guidelines on this subject. Several sections of the guideline had been placed in square brackets or parentheses when an agreement had not been reached.

102. Several delegations requested clarification on different points of the proposed draft guidelines, with particular reference to the problems related to inspection and control of biologically/organically produced foods. The Commission was informed that these proposed draft guidelines would be translated and circulated among member countries for comments. The Commission noted that particular emphasis should be given in consumer information that these products which did not differ in composition, nutritional value or safety from traditionally produced foods, and further noted that labelling was a focal point in the regulation of production, processing and marketing of these products.

103. The Commission also noted the decision of the Executive Committee at its 38th Session and decided to endorse its recommendation which referred to a review of the proposed draft guidelines by the Codex Regional Committees. The comments received from governments and Regional Committees should be referred to the Codex Committee on Food Labelling, which would be responsible for the future development of the guidelines.

CODEX COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR AFRICA (Agenda Item 16)

104. The Commission had before it the report of the 9th Session of the Codex Coordinating Committee for Africa (ALINORM 91/28) which had been held in Cairo, Egypt from 3–7 December 1990. The report was introduced by the Codex Secretariat which informed the Commission of the most important points and activities, including the discussions held by this Committee on regional non-tariff technical barriers to trade in food, control of pesticide residues in food, strengthening of the Codex Contact Points and revision of the Code of Hygienic Practice for the Preparation and Sale of Street Vended Foods and on the elaboration of regional standards.

Consideration at Step 8 of the Draft African Regional Standard for Edible Cassava Flour (Appendix II, ALINORM 91/28)

105. The Commission noted that the Section on Hygiene was according to the general text proposed by the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene and the other sections on Labelling and Methods of Analysis and Sampling had been endorsed by the related Committees. Some delegations requested clarification concerning the decision taken by the Commission regarding the conversion of Codex Regional Standards to worldwide standards and the proposed endorsement for Edible Cassava Flour at Step 8 and the draft African Regional Standard for Processed Couscous at Step 3. The Commission was informed that the draft regional standards proposed for endorsement should be submitted to the normal Codex procedure, in view of their future conversion to a worldwide standard starting at Step 3.

Status of the Standard

106. The Commission adopted the Regional African Standard for Edible Cassava Flour at Step 8 of the Codex Procedure.

Other matters arising from the Report of the 9th Session of the Committee

Proposed Draft African Regional Standard for Processed Couscous

107. The Secretariat informed the Commission that a proposed draft standard for processed couscous had been elaborated by Algeria and reviewed at the 9th Session of the Codex Coordinating Committee for Africa. The revised version was attached to the report as Appendix III. The Commission was requested to consider further elaboration of this standard and to decide which Codex Committee should be responsible for developing such a standard. The first analysis of the proposed draft standard by several delegations indicated that the Coordinating Committee for Africa was competent in the elaboration of this standard and the Commission agreed to its adoption at Step 3, considering that at the final Step of the Codex Procedure, the draft standard would be revised by the Codex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes.

Regional and National Programmes on Control of Mycotoxins in Food

108. The Commission was informed of a specific request of the Coordinating Committee for an international regulation regarding acceptance of aflatoxin detoxified groundnut extraction which represented an important commodity for exportation for several African countries. The Commission noted that a Code of Practice for groundnuts had been elaborated to prevent aflatoxin contamination and that full information was not available on the toxicological aspects of the detoxification process. It considered that such matter should be referred to the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants which should consider this issue in the light of priorities established for JECFA evaluation.

Appointment of Coordinator for Africa

109. The Delegation of Egypt reported that the Government of Egypt was willing to support the hosting of the next session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa but in view of the fact that the last two sessions had been held in Cairo, it was considered opportune to move the Coordinating Committee for Africa to another African country.

110. The Commission was informed that Prof. Etienne Enobong Essien, Director of the Food and Drug Administration and Control (Nigeria) had been proposed by the delegations from the Region present at the Session as the new Coordinator for the Region of Africa. The Delegation of Nigeria indicated that it would be willing to host the 10th Session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa. In accordance with Rule II.4 (b) the Commission appointed Prof. Etienne Enobong Essien of Nigeria as Coordinator for Africa to serve from the end of the 19th until the end of the 20th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

CODEX COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR ASIA (Agenda Item 17)

111. The Report of the 7th Session of the Coordinating Committee was presented by the Coordinator for Asia, Dr. Pakdee Pothisiri, Thailand. Dr. Pakdee reported that the Coordinating Committee at its 7th Session had discussed in detail technical support programmes and projects related to food control and consumer protection and had expressed strong support for continued activities in this area, especially in relation to regional work for mycotoxin control and training of food control officials. The Coordinator also reported that the Coordinating Committee had studied a number of issues related to import/export certification and inspection programmes which it believed were highly important. The Coordinator raised the following specific matters for the attention of the Commission:

Radionuclide Contamination of Food in International Trade

112. The Commission noted the opinion of the Coordinating Committee that the Guideline levels for radionuclides were too high and that they should be revised to take into account more acceptable risk assessment procedures. The Commission noted that the matters raised by the Coordinating Committee had been discussed at the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants (see paras. 217–221 below).

Code of Practice for Street Foods

113. The Commission endorsed the development of a Code of Practice for the Preparation and Sale of Street Foods for the region and noted that similar activities were underway in other Coordinating Committees. It was agreed that the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene would continue to coordinate the basic elements of the different regional codes.

Proposed Draft Codex Standard for Milled Rice

114. The Commission noted the opinion of the Coordinating Committee that Codex should not embark on the elaboration of a world-wide standard for rice, but recalled its decision taken at its 18th Session to develop a Codex Standard for Milled Rice through the Codex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes.

Appointment of Coordinator for Asia

115. The Commission appointed Dr. Azizan Ghazali, Malaysia, as Coordinator for Asia in accordance with Rule II.4(a). Dr. Azizan informed the Commission that the 8th Session of the Coordinating Committee would be held in Kuala Lumpur in January 1992.

CODEX COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR EUROPE (Agenda Item 18)

116. The Commission had before it ALINORM 91/19, the report of the 17th Session of the Codex Coordinating Committee for Europe. The report was introduced by Prof. H. Woidich, the Coordinator for Europe and the Chairman of the Committee. Prof. Woidich informed the Commission of the most important points and activities developed by the Coordinating Committee at its last session, which included a more active participation of Codex Contact Points in a programme of coordination and implementation of food legislation. The Coordinator also informed the Commission on a thorough review of the Codex Standard for Natural Mineral Waters which had been carried out by this Committee and discussions held on biotechnology and organically/biologically produced foods.

Matters arising from the Report of the 17th Session of the Committee

Draft Amendments to the Codex European Standard for Natural Mineral Waters

117. The Coordinator informed the Commission of proposed amendments to the Codex European Standard on Natural Mineral Waters as referred to in ALINORM 91/21.

  1. Proposed amendment of the Maximum Levels for Radionuclides in Natural Mineral Waters

  2. Proposed amendment to Section 3.1 on Treatment and Handling for Natural Mineral Waters

  3. Proposed amendment to the Limit for Nitrites for Natural Mineral Waters

118. Several delegations pointed out that these amendments should be considered in light of the programme of conversion adopted by the Commission of regional standards to international standards. The Commission noted that the above standard should be completed according to the normal procedure before being submitted to the new procedure of conversion to a worldwide standard starting at Step 3 of the Codex Procedure.

Status of the Draft Amendments to the Standard

119. The Commission adopted the draft amendment on the provision for Radionuclide Levels in the Codex European Standard for Natural Mineral Waters at Step 8. It agreed that the other proposed draft amendments would be studied in conjunction with the conversion of the European Standard to a World-wide Standard.

Methods of Bacteriological Analysis for Natural Mineral Waters and Methods of Chemical Analysis for Natural Mineral Waters

120. The Commission was informed that the methods of bacteriological analysis were validated methods selected by ISO and that the Committee had recommended the omission of Steps 6 and 7 for endorsement as Codex methods. The methods of chemical analysis proposed by the Coordinating Committee for Europe were endorsed by the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling with minor exceptions.

Status of the Draft Methods of Analysis

121. The Commission agreed with the proposal of the omission of Steps 6 and 7 for bacteriological and chemical methods of analysis, and adopted these provisions at Step 8.

Appointment of Coordinator for Europe

122. The Commission was informed that the Coordinating Committee for Europe had unanimously nominated Mrs. Barbro Blomberg of Sweden as the new Coordinator for Europe for appointment by the Commission from the end of 19th Session until the end of the 20th Session of the Commission. The Commission was informed by the Delegation of Sweden that the Government of Sweden had officially agreed to host the 18th Session of the Coordinating Committee for Europe in Stockholm in May 1992. The Commission appointed Mrs. Barbro Blomberg as Coordinator for the Region of Europe.

123. The Commission expressed its thanks to the Government of Austria for hosting the last session of the Coordinating Committee and thanked the Coordinator, Prof. H. Woidich for his valuable contribution to promote the work of Codex in the region of Europe.

CODEX COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN (Agenda Item 19)

124. The Secretariat presented the document for this agenda item (ALINORM 91/36), the report of the 7th Session of the Committee. The 7th Session took place in San José, Costa Rica from 25 February to 1 March 1991 with the participation of over 70 delegates from Argentina, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela and observers from Spain, ICAITI, CARICOM and the Organization of American States. A number of items were brought to the attention of the Commission.

Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Street-vended Foods at Step 5 of the Procedure

125. The Coordinating Committee had initiated the elaboration of this Code at its 5th Session. A totally revised version was approved at the 6th Session in February 1989 and circulated for comments at Step 3 (ALINORM 89/36, Appendix III). The Commission noted that the 7th Session of the Committee had revised this draft and had advanced it to Step 5 of the procedure (ALINORM 91/36, paras. 159–174, Appendix IV).

126. The Commission adopted the draft Code of Hygienic Practice at Step 5 and also took note of the strong support for the further elaboration of the Code expressed by the Committee.

Food Export/Import Certification Programmes

127. The Coordinating Committee had considered food export/import issues under several agenda items and recognized that certification programmes were of extreme importance for the countries of the Region and should be given high priority in the Region and in the future work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The need for a world-wide information system concerning import/export matters was also raised by the Committee. The Coordinating Committee also supported a Mexican proposal for the involvement of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in certification activities (ALINORM 91/36 paras. 21, 96, 142).

128. The Commission noted that this proposal had been discussed in depth during the Joint FAO/WHO Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade, and during the review of the Conference recommendations under Agenda Item 10 of the present session (see paras. 82–86). Recalling that the Commission had endorsed the creation of a new Codex committee addressing itself to the problems of import/export inspection and certification the Commission agreed to request the new committee to consider these proposals (ALINORM 91/36, para. 143) when it considers its terms of reference and future work.

Strengthening of Codex Contact Points and National Codex Committees

129. The Coordinating Committee considered a number of activities aimed at improving exchange of information and strengthening the work of the Codex Contact Points in the Region. A Directory of the Contact Points and Guidelines for setting up national Codex Committees were approved. The Committee supported the recommendations of a meeting of the Codex Contact Points in Latin America that took place in Chile in December 1990. This meeting reviewed the status and activities of the Contact Points, elaborated an action plan for their strengthening and proposed the elaboration of a manual of procedures for the Contact Points (ALINORM 91/36, paras. 175-180, 187 Appendix V).

130. The Commission took note of these initiatives and recommended and encouraged similar activities in other regions. The Commission also stressed the importance of further strengthening the network of Codex Contact Points and National Codex Committees in view of the future plans of work of the Codex Commission.

Harmonization of Regional and Codex Standards

131. The Coordinating Committee had reviewed the wide activities in the harmonization of regional standards with those of Codex and urged the countries of the Region and institutions involved in standardization to apply Codex standards (ALINORM 91/36, paras. 188–201). The Commission noted that the Committee had agreed to circulate a number of food products (apples in syrup, fruit marmalades from strawberry, raspberry, blackberry, plum, pear, apricot, peach, grapefruit, guava, quince, cookies and pastas) for government comments concerning the need for the elaboration of regional or worldwide standards, and endorsed this procedure.

Appointment of Coordinator

132. Under Rule 4.II (b) of the Rules of Procedure of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the Commission appointed Carlos Alberto Ferreira Guimaraes of Brazil as the new Regional Coordinator. The Delegation of Brazil confirmed the readiness of their Government to act as host of the Codex Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean.

CODEX COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR NORTH AMERICA AND THE SOUTH-WEST PACIFIC (Agenda Item 20)

133. The Commission had before it the report of the First Session of the Coordinating Committee for North America and the South-West Pacific (ALINORM 91/32) which was held in Honolulu, Hawaii from 30 April to 4 May 1990. The report was introduced by Dr. Lester Crawford, Coordinator for North America and the South-West Pacific who drew the Commission's attention to those matters of interest summarized in ALINORM 91/21, and as highlighted below.

Acceptance of Codex Standards

134. The Coordinating Committee had noted that very detailed Codex standards could hamper their acceptance by individual member countries and indicated that more concise or general standards might be easier to accept by governments (see paras. 28–34, ALINORM 91/32). The Commission, noting that the Review of the Format of Codex standards had been previously discussed under Agenda Item 13, decided that no further action was required concerning this subject.

Acceptance of Codex Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides

135. The Coordinating Committee had proposed a thorough review of pesticide safety, risk assessment and the establishment of acceptable daily intakes and in this regard, agreed to explore ways to promote increased acceptance of Codex Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides by countries of the region with a view towards providing recommendations to the 20th Session of the Commission, (see paras. 35-38 and 94, ALINORM 91/32). The Commission supported the further study of this subject by the Coordinating Committee, however as this issue was discussed by the FAO/WHO Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade and was under active consideration by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, it was recommended that the Coordinating Committee should take the results of these discussions into account.

Codex Code of Ethics for International Trade in Foods

136. The Coordinating Committee had agreed to forward discussions concerning this issue (see paras. 63–68, ALINORM 91/32) to the Executive Committee and the Commission with a view towards stimulating ideas for specific initiatives in implementing acceptance of the Code by Codex Member Governments. The Commission supported the general conclusions of the Committee.

Labelling and Other Issues in Relation to Organically Produced Foods

137. The Coordinating Committee had agreed on the importance of establishing guidelines for organic foods under the guidance of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling (see paras. 71–73, ALINORM 91/32). The Commission, while noting its positive conclusions concerning this issue under Agenda Item 15 above, decided that no additional action was required.

Use of the Term “Natural” in Food Product Labelling

138. The Coordinating Committee had agreed on the need to establish labelling guidelines for products labelled as “natural” (see paras. 74–76, ALINORM 91/32) through the Codex Committee on Food Labelling, and had decided to forward this proposal to the 37th Session of the Executive Committee for advice. The Commission recalled the positive decision taken by the 37th Session of the Executive Committee (see Agenda Items 2 and 23) concerning this issue, and noted that the matter had been taken up by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling.

Health and Nutrition Claims in Food Labelling

139. The elaboration of Codex general guidelines on nutrition and health claims for labelling by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling had been recommended by the Coordinating Committee (see paras. 77–79, ALINORM 91/32). The Commission recalled the positive decision taken by the 37th Session of the Executive Committee (see Agenda Items 2 and 23) concerning this issue, and therefore, decided no further action was required.

Codex promotion activities

140. The Coordinating Committee had recommended further promotion of Codex directed to FAO, WHO and Codex member governments with a view towards enhancing the visibility of Codex and the effectiveness of document distribution in Codex member countries (see para. 93, ALINORM 91/32). The Commission supported these recommendations.

Appointment of Coordinator

141. In accordance with Rule II.4. (a) the Commission appointed Mr. Digby Gascoine of Australia as the Coordinator for North America and the South-West Pacific to serve from the end of the 19th to the end of the 20th Session of the Commission. The Delegation of Australia indicated that Australia would be willing to host the 2nd Session of the Coordinating Committee for North America and the South-West Pacific.

CODEX COMMITTEE ON PESTICIDE RESIDUES (Agenda Item 21)

142. The Commission had before it documents ALINORM 91/24, ALINORM 91/24A and ALINORM 91/24A-Add.1. The reports were introduced by the Chairman of the Committee, Dr. J. Van der Kolk who highlighted the main activities of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues during the last two sessions. The Chairman informed the Commission that the FAO/WHO Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade, held in March 1991 in Rome had coincided with specific initiatives undertaken by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues during the Workshop held in April 1990 and with the organization of an Ad Hoc Working Group on Acceptances, related to increasing the transparency of the work of Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues and Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues in the elaboration of international standards on Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides in foods, in order to increase acceptances at member country level. Dr. Van der Kolk noted that the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues had commenced a programme of review of old MRLs three years ago and a mechanism had been created for a periodical review of old standards. Other important points referred to the revision of the terms of reference for the working groups of developing countries, discussion on grain protectants and fumigants and the elaboration of FAO guidelines for submission of information on Good Agricultural Practice and residue data for estimation of Maximum Residue Limits.

143. The Chairman of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, in view of the increased activities of the Codex Committee and Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues concerning the scheduled programme of revision of old standards and old compounds, requested information on the financial resources available to support such a programme.

144. The Commission was informed by the Representative of WHO that the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) planned on expanding and consolidating its various activities related to pesticides, but that the highest priority would continue to be given to the assessment of pesticide residues in foods. Thus, with the resources that were presently available, one Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues meeting per year, would continue to be held.

Draft Maximum Residue Limits at Steps 5, 5/8 and 8 of the Codex Procedure

145. The Commission had before it the draft Maximum Residue Limits at Steps 5 and 8 of the Codex Procedure, including uncontroversial Maximum Residue Limits at Step 5/8 where the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues had recommended the omission of Steps 6 and 7 (ALINORM 91/24A-Add.1).

146. Several Delegations informed the Commission that the draft Maximum Residue Limits had been received too late and there had not been adequate time to prepare written comments. The Delegations of Sweden, the Netherlands, the United States of America, Spain, Denmark, France, Finland and Austria expressed reservations on some high levels proposed for adoption by the Commission, confirming their same positions held during the discussions at the last two Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues sessions and reflected in the corresponding reports. This was particularly the case for those pesticides which had been scheduled for reevaluation by the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues over the next few years.

147. The Chairman of the Committee confirmed that the discussions reflected the position of these countries at the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues meeting however, the Maximum Residue Limits submitted for adoption would be entered in a process of review by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues and re-evaluation by the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues. The Commission agreed to adopt the draft Maximum Residue Limits at Steps 5 and 8 and the proposed draft amendments to existing Codex Maximum Residue Limits as indicated in document ALINORM 91/24A-Add.1.

Other matters arising from the Reports of the 22nd and 23rd Sessions of the Committee

Draft Method of Sampling for the Determination of Pesticide Residues in Meat and Poultry Products for Control Purposes

148. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues had considered the proposal for the above recommended method of sampling as indicated in Appendix II, ALINORM 89/24A and that minor changes had been included in Appendix VIII of ALINORM 91/24A. This draft method of sampling was advanced by the Committee to Step 8 for adoption by the Commission.

149. The Commission adopted the draft method of sampling which would replace the existing sampling plan (CAC/PR 5-1984) in the part which dealt with meat and poultry.

Confirmation of Chairmanship of the Committee

150. The Commission expressed its appreciation to Dr. J. Van der Kolk who had chaired the last three sessions of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues for his contribution to the work of Codex.

151. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the Netherlands.

CODEX COMMITTEE ON RESIDUES OF VETERINARY DRUGS IN FOODS (Agenda Item 22)

152. The Commission had before it working papers ALINORM 91/31 and 91/31A, which were the reports of the 4th and 5th Sessions of the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods, respectively. These reports were introduced by the Committee's Chairman, Dr. Gerald B. Guest (USA).

Consideration of Draft Maximum Residue Limits for Veterinary Drugs at Step 8

153. To facilitate its discussions, the Commission agreed to discuss the Draft Maximum Residue Limits for hormones and for Chloramphenicol as separate issues.

Maximum Residue Limits for Estradiol-17β, Progesterone, Testosterone and Zeranol

154. The Commission was informed that the 4th Session of the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods agreed to advance the above hormones, as evaluated by the 32nd Session of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), to the Commission for adoption at Step 8.

155. The Delegation of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the EEC Member States present at the Session, and the Observer of the European Economic Community, while not objecting to the evaluation of JECFA, expressed their opposition to the proposal forwarded by the Committee, as the use of these substances for growth-promoting purposes was banned in the EEC Member States and therefore, the establishment of maximum residue limits for these substances was objected to in principle. The Observer noted that the following views were expressed on repeated occasions in the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods when elaborating these limits. This position was taken for a number of reasons, namely:

156. This position was supported by the Observer of the International Organization of Consumer Unions.

157. Other delegations, namely those of Finland, Norway and Sweden, while not opposing the adoption of the Maximum Residue Limits for these substances at Step 8, noted that the use of hormones as growth-promotants in their countries was not allowed. This position was taken because their use did not comply with principles of Good Agricultural Practice, there was no demonstrated need and because of consumer concerns. These countries emphasized that they accepted JECFA's evaluation and pointed out that these compounds were also used for therapeutic purposes.

158. Other delegations noted that the work of Codex was consistently based on sound scientific principles and that the JECFA evaluation confirmed that health issues in relation to residues of these substances in food were not a cause for concern. It was stated that consumers were often unaware of the scientific validity and logic supporting the use of these compounds, and that regulatory control procedures for their use were similar to those for the application of any chemical substance. These delegations stated that the use of the compounds in accordance with Good Agricultural Practice did not pose health risks, and that consumer concerns could be addressed through other means. It was noted that the method or purpose of application was the only issue, and that individual countries could prohibit hormone applications as growth promotants regardless of the Commission's decision concerning international trade. More importantly, the worldwide use of these compounds for therapeutic purposes strongly supported the need for an MRL to facilitate international trade, as it was difficult to determine the purposes for which the compounds were introduced. It was also noted that the technical need for hormones had been amply demonstrated. These comments were felt to be especially relevant to the current negotiations concerning sanitary and other technical barriers to trade in the GATT Uruguay Round, as this body has already recognized Codex as the primary international technical organization which works strictly within scientific principles and procedures. Deviating from these basic and founding principles of the Commission was felt to have serious implications for Codex.

159. This position was supported by the Observer of the Consultation Mondiale de l'Industrie de la Santé Animale (COMISA).

160. The Delegation of the Netherlands requested that the matter be decided by vote, unless there was agreement to postpone the matter. The Delegation of Mexico requested that the views of WHO and GATT be sought before the Commission should proceed to take a decision. The Commission agreed to decide the issue by role call vote. The Members of the Commission were called in alphabetical order starting with the Delegation of Spain, as determined by random selection. The result of the vote was as follows:

In favour of adoption: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Finland, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, United States.

Against adoption: Algeria, Austria, Bahrain, Belgium, Cape Verde, China, Cuba, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Iran, Italy, Morocco, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Tanzania, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom.

Abstaining: Costa Rica, Lesotho, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Thailand.

161. The numerical result of the voting was as follows: in favour of adoption: 12; against adoption: 27; abstentions: 9.

Status of the Draft Maximum Residue Limits for Estradiol 17 - β, Progesterone, Testosterone and Zeranol

162. The Commission decided not to adopt the Draft Maximum Residue Limits for these hormones, as contained in Appendix IV of ALINORM 91/31. It was agreed that the results of these discussions would be forwarded to the next session of the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods for information.

Consideration of the Draft Maximum Residue Limit for Chloramphenicol at Step 8

163. The Commission was informed that Chloramphenicol was scheduled for reevaluation at the 1993 JECFA Session devoted to the examination of veterinary drugs. In view of this, several delegations indicated that the elaboration of a Maximum Residue Limit for Chloramphenicol should be postponed in view of current studies and data which will be available in the near future. Other delegations felt that the Maximum Residue Limit for Chloramphenicol should be advanced to Step 8 as current data and toxicity concerns indicated that the compound should not be used.

Status of the Draft Maximum Residue Limit for Chloramphenicol

164. The Commission decided to withhold the adoption of the Draft Maximum Residue Limit for Chloramphenicol at Step 8, pending the re-evaluation of this compound at the 1993 JECFA Session. This decision was taken with a view towards adopting the Maximum Residue Limit for Chloramphenicol at Step 8 at the 20th Session of the Commission, based on the JECFA re-evaluation.

Consideration of Proposed Draft Maximum Residue Limits for Albendazole, Sulfadimidine and Trenbolone Acetate at Step 5

165. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods agreed to advance proposed Draft Maximum Residue Limits for these compounds to the Commission for adoption at Step 5.

166. The Observer of the European Economic Community reiterated the Community's comments concerning hormones in regard to the adoption of the Maximum Residue Limit for Trenbolone Acetate.

Status of the Proposed Draft Maximum Residue Limits for Albendazole, Sulfadimidine and Trenbolone Acetate

167. The Commission adopted the Proposed Draft Maximum Residue Limits for Albendazole, Sulfadimidine and Trenbolone Acetate, as contained in Appendix III of ALINORM 91/31A, at Step 5.

Consideration of the Proposed Draft Code of Practice for the Control of the Use of Veterinary Drugs at Step 5

168. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods had agreed to advance the Draft Code to the Commission for adoption at Step 5.

Status of the Proposed Draft Code of Practice for the Control of the Use of Veterinary Drugs

169. The Commission adopted the Proposed Draft Code of Practice for Control of the Use of Veterinary Drugs, as contained in Appendix V of ALINORM 91/31A, at Step 5.

Consideration of the Proposed Draft Guidelines for the Establishment of a Regulatory Programme for Control of Veterinary Drug Residues in Foods at Step 5

170. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods had agreed to forward the general introductory section of the Guidelines to the Commission for adoption at Step 5, with the understanding that several annexes under development by its Working Group on Methods of Analysis and Sampling would be incorporated into the Guidelines in the near future.

Status of the Proposed Draft Guidelines for the Establishment of a Regulatory Programme for Control of Veterinary Drug Residues in Foods

171. The Commission adopted the above Guidelines, as contained in Appendix VI of ALINORM 91/31A, at Step 5.

Consideration of the Proposed Draft Glossary of Definitions and Terms at Step 5

172. The Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods, while agreeing to the importance of the Proposed Draft Glossary for the Committee's internal use, agreed to forward it to the Commission for adoption at Step 5. The Committee also agreed that other Codex publications used to define similar terms would be consulted in the future when revising the Glossary in order to prevent duplication of efforts or confusion.

Status of the Proposed Draft Glossary of Definitions and Terms

173. The Commission adopted the Proposed Draft Glossary of Definitions and Terms, as contained in Appendix IV of ALINORM 91/31A, at Step 5.

Confirmation of Chairmanship of the Committee

174. The Commission confirmed, under Rule IX. 10, that the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the United States of America.

CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD LABELLING (Agenda Item 23)

175. The Chairman designate of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling, Mrs. Katherine Gourlie (Canada), introduced the report of the 21st Session of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling (ALINORM 91/22) which was held in Ottawa, Canada from 11 to 15 March 1991. The Commission was also informed of other matters of interest as outlined in document ALINORM 91/21.

Consideration of the Draft Revised General Guidelines on Claims at Step 8

176. The Commission recalled that the 18th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, when adopting the guidelines at Step 5, reiterated that although the Codex Committee on Food Labelling could discuss issues related to advertising there was no need to initiate work on a Code of Practice on Advertising (see paras. 256 – 257, ALINORM 89/40), as determined by the FAO Legal Counsel. The Commission noted that other international agreements covered advertising, including the UN General Assembly Guidelines for Consumer Protection (39/248) as well as codes of practice promulgated under the International Chamber of Commerce.

Status of the Draft Revised Guidelines

177. The Commission adopted the Draft Revised Guidelines, as contained in Appendix II of ALINORM 91/22, at Step 8.

Consideration of Draft Amendments to the General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods at Step 8

178. The Commission noted that the 18th session of the Commission, when adopting the above amendments at Step 5, requested the Codex Committee on Food Labelling to review the need for amending section 4.2.1.3 of the General Labelling Standard. The Committee concluded that such a revision was unnecessary and therefore agreed to maintain the current wording of this section.

179. The Committee also agreed to forward the draft amendment of section 5.2.1 (irradiated foods) to the Commission for adoption at Step 8. It was indicated that the remaining sections (i.e. Sections 5.2.2 and 5.2.3) would remain as currently elaborated.

Status of the Draft Amendment

180. The Commission adopted the Draft Amendment to Section 5.2.1 of the General Labelling Standard at Step 8, as contained in Appendix III of ALINORM 91/22.

Consideration of the Revised Proposed Draft List of Class Titles for Food Additives at Step 5

181. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Labelling, while noting that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants was also forwarding identical class titles as part of the International Numbering System for adoption by the Commission at Step 8, agreed that the Draft List of Class Titles should be forwarded for adoption at Steps 5 and 8 (i.e. with a recommendation to omit Steps 6 and 7).

Status of the Revised Proposed Draft List of Class Titles for Food Additives

182. The Commission adopted the Revised Proposed Draft List of Class Titles for Food Additives at Step 8, as contained in Appendix IV of ALINORM 91/22.

Consideration of Proposed Draft Guidelines for Use of the Term “Natural” in Food Product Labelling

183. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Labelling had agreed that updated guidelines would be prepared based on written comments and discussions at its 21st meeting, with a view towards circulating the guidelines for government comments at Step 3 prior to its next session. Although reservations were expressed concerning the complexity of separate guidelines established solely for the purposes of defining “natural”, the Commission supported this procedure. The Codex Committee on Food Labelling was encouraged to take other governmental and international organization initiatives concerning “natural” into account.

Consideration of Proposed Draft Guidelines for the Use of Health and Nutrition Claims in Food Product Labelling

184. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Labelling had agreed that updated guidelines would be prepared based on written comments and discussions at its 21st meeting, with a view towards circulating the guidelines for government comments at Step 3 prior to its next session. The Committee had also agreed that input was required from the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses as to the values to be used for quantitative comparisons contained in the draft guidelines.

185. The Commission supported this procedure.

Other matters arising from the Report of the 21st Session of the Committee

Standardization of Date Marking Systems

186. The Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Food Labelling forwarded a request to the 38th Session of the Executive Committee to consider the appropriateness of aligning Codex and the International Organization for Standardization recommendation on the presentation of date marking and, if necessary, to suggest a plan of action.

187. The Executive Committee, while noting that the International Organization for Standardization recommendation was not intended for use in public information but was principally established for the electronic exchange of information, decided to recommend to the Commission that the matter not be pursued further at the present time. This decision was taken in view of provisions in the Codex General Standard for Labelling, which provided for clear, unambiguous information to the consumer in a manner which was not deceptive or misleading.

188. The Commission agreed with the conclusions of the Executive Committee and decided not to initiate work in this area.

Consideration of the Implementation of Food Labelling in Asian countries

189. The Commission was informed that the Codex Coordinating Committee for Asia had requested the opinion of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling as to the elaboration of labelling guidelines specific to the Asian region.

190. The Committee noted that the elaboration of these guidelines specific to the Asian region could create a variety of problems, especially in relation to the establishment of trade barriers. The Commission agreed and concluded that such guidelines, prepared in addition to the Codex General Standard for Labelling might be acceptable as long as the Codex Committee on Food Labelling was entrusted with the review and endorsement of any such initiatives. It also noted the opinion of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses in this matter (see ALINORM 91/26, paras. 129–131). The Commission agreed that more detailed proposals should be prepared by the Coordinating Committee for Asia and that developments in this area should be coordinated by the Executive Committee.

Consideration of Proposed Draft Nutrient Reference Values for Food Labelling Purposes

191. The Commission was informed that the Draft Amendment of Section 3.3.4 of the Codex Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling was strongly supported by the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses and the European Community.

Status of the Proposed Draft Nutrient Reference Values for Food Labelling Purposes

192. The Commission adopted the Proposed Draft Nutrient Reference Values for Food Labelling Purposes at Step 5, as contained in Appendix V of ALINORM 91/22, and as revised by the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses.

Analytical Methodology for Use in the Codex Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling

193. The Commission noted that the most recent session of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling questioned the relationship between its ad hoc working group on Methodology for Use in Codex Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling and the terms of reference of the Committee. The Codex Committee on Food Labelling felt that the identification of nutrients and corresponding methods of analysis were more appropriately within the responsibilities of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses and the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling and decided to forward this discussion to the Executive Committee for advice.

194. The 16th Session of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling suggested that the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses should be responsible for defining those nutrients for which methodology was required and proposing suitable methods, while the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling should retain its responsibilities in endorsing those methods proposed. The Executive Committee had concluded that further examination by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling of methods of analysis in relation to nutrient declaration was not warranted (ALINORM 91/4, paras. 47–48). The Commission agreed with this point of view.

Labelling of Potential Allergens in Food

195. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Labelling had agreed to examine Section 4.2.1.3 of the General Labelling Standard, which states in part that “where a compound ingredient ....... constitutes less than 25% of the food, the ingredients ........ need not be declared.” The Codex Committee on Food Labelling agreed that a working paper would be prepared for discussion at its next session on the labelling of potential allergens which were present as components of composite ingredients in foods but which were not sub-listed in the product ingredient list as a result of the application of this section of the standard. The Delegation of Austria requested that particular consideration be given to the use of gluten-containing preparations, since such products used as compound ingredients, were becoming more widely used in foods which traditionally and according to consumer expectations were produced without gluten.

196. The 38th Session of the Executive Committee expressed concern as to the practicality of the proposal, as almost all foods contain potential allergens. With this in mind the Executive Committee recommended that the Codex Committee on Food Labelling should proceed cautiously when examining this subject. The Executive Committee also noted that the proposed working document was in the preliminary stages of preparation and therefore agreed that a progress report concerning this issue should be provided to the Executive Committee at the earliest opportunity. The Commission agreed with this proposal.

Endorsement of Labelling Provisions in Codex Standards

197. The Commission noted, with approval, the endorsement of labelling provisions of various standards examined by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling as summarized in paragraphs 59–86 of ALINORM 91/22.

Confirmation of Chairmanship of the Committee

198. The Commission confirmed the Government of Canada as Chairman of the Committee under Rule IX. 10 of the Codex Rules of Procedure.

CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD ADDITIVES AND CONTAMINANTS (Agenda Item 24)

199. The Commission had before it the reports of the 22nd and 23rd Sessions of the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants (ALINORM 91/12 and ALINORM 91/12A). In addition, other matters of interest were highlighted in document ALINORM 91/21. The reports were introduced by Mr. R. Top (Netherlands) in the absence of Mrs. C.G.M. Klitsie, Chairman of the Committee.

Consideration of Draft Guideline Levels for Methylmercury in Fish

200. The Commission was informed that the 23rd Session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants agreed to maintain those levels proposed for methylmercury in fish as elaborated at its 22nd Session, with the understanding that governments would be requested to identify additional predatory fish species causing problems in international trade for examination at the next session of the Committee. It was noted that although the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products opposed the establishment of guideline levels in general, it indicated that if levels needed to be established, they should be based on total mercury as opposed to methylmercury. However, the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants reached a decision contrary to these conclusions.

201. Several countries agreed with the opinion of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products that there were perhaps more appropriate ways of managing health risks associated with methylmercury (for example, control of intake over time) than the setting of Guideline Levels, and that the proposal should be returned to Step 6 for consideration. It was felt that this point of view was especially relevant as the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants had not yet elaborated a philosophy concerning the establishment of contaminant levels.

Status of the Guideline Levels for Methylmercury in Fish

202. The Commission adopted the two Guideline Levels for Methylmercury in Fish at Step 8, as contained in Appendix VIII of ALINORM 91/12. This decision was taken with the understanding that the Guidelines would be kept under review by the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants as well as the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products, especially as to the identification of predatory species of fish to which the higher guideline level applied. Several delegations expressed their reservations on the action taken by the Commission.

Consideration of Draft Guideline Levels for Acrylonitrile in Food and Vinyl Chloride Monomer in Food and Food Packaging Materials

203. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants had advanced the draft guideline levels for these contaminants for adoption by the Commission at Step 8, with the understanding that the ISO and AOAC would be requested to elaborate appropriate sampling plans and methods of analysis.

Status of the Draft Guideline Levels for Acrylonitrile and Vinyl Chloride Monomer

204. The Commission adopted the guideline levels at Step 8 (see Appendix VIII, ALINORM 91/12) under the above procedure.

Draft Amendments to the International Numbering System for Food Additives

205. The Commission was reminded that the International Numbering System (INS) was adopted at its last session at Step 8 as a Codex advisory text for inclusion in Volume I of the Codex Alimentarius. Subsequent to the Commission's adoption, the 22nd Session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants agreed to advance a proposed Foreword, Table of Functional Class Titles and Definitions to the INS system for adoption by the Commission. In addition, the 23rd Session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants also agreed to forward other revisions to the INS list for adoption by the Commission at Step 8.

Status of the Draft Amendments to the International Numbering System for Food Additives

206. The Commission adopted the amendments contained in Appendix III of ALINORM 91/12 and Appendix IV of ALINORM 91/12A, at Step 8. This decision was taken with the understanding that revisions and amendments to the list would remain as a standing agenda item for the Committee.

Consideration of Proposed Draft Guideline Levels for Cadmium and Lead in Food

207. The Commission was informed that the 21st Session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants had elaborated guideline levels for cadmium and lead in certain food groups as contained in Appendix IX of ALINORM 89/12A, for circulation and government comment at Step 3. After reviewing comments submitted, the Committee had decided to solicit additional government comments on existing guideline levels for cadmium and lead in current Codex standards along with a request for information on national regulations, methods of compliance and enforcement. In addition, the Committee recommended that the Commission should consider preventive measures for the control of cadmium and lead contamination, including the elimination of lead capsules for wine, lead soldered cans, lead shot used in hunting and clay pigeon shooting, lead uses in food contact materials and lead in gasoline, as well as cadmium containing fertilizers as a means to lower contaminant levels.

208. The Observer from the Office International du Vin et de Vignes noted that at its General Assembly in September, 1990, a recommendation was finalized to recommend against the use of lead capsules for wine. The Commission welcomed this statement and supported the recommendation. In regard to recommendations concerning other preventive measures, it was indicated that such measures could be incorporated into Codex Codes of Practice or similar advisory Codex texts. In addition, the Commission was informed that FAO and WHO had recommended preventive measures and had published recommendations on the control of lead and tin contamination in canned foods (FAO Food and Nutrition Paper No. 36).

Consideration of Draft Guideline Levels for Aflatoxins in Food and Feed

209. The Commission noted that the 23rd Session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants decided to discontinue the consideration of those levels for aflatoxins in food and feed as elaborated at its 22nd Session (Appendix VI, ALINORM 91/12) for a variety of reasons, particularly in view of the difficulty in establishing general levels acceptable to all foods, as opposed to specific commodities. The Commission was also informed of the need to establish practical limits based on variances in levels due to climatic conditions, regional variations and other factors, with a view towards the avoidance of an unnecessary disruption in trade. The Committee, while agreeing to establish a new level for aflatoxin M1 in milk and a revised level of aflatoxin B1 in supplementary feedingstuffs for milk-producing animals for circulation and government comment at Step 3, also decided to solicit additional government comments on other issues related to aflatoxin contamination in certain foods. The Commission agreed with this procedure.

Consideration of Draft Specifications for the Identity and Purity of Food Additives at Step 3

210. The Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants agreed to forward Categories I and II of specifications arising from the 31st and 33rd JECFA (Appendix V, ALINORM 91/12) as well as those arising from the 35th JECFA (Appendix III, ALINORM 91/12A) to the Commission for adoption as Codex Advisory Specifications at Step 3.

211. The Observer of the International Organization for Consumer Unions, while noting the importance of JECFA specifications for use in the food industry, supported the reevaluation of gum arabic in view of the different varieties of this compound within the species. The Observer indicated that caution should be exercised in avoiding the establishment of specifications which were too broad or general in nature.

Status of the Draft Specifications for the Identity and Purity of Food Additives

212. The Commission adopted the specifications listed above as Codex Advisory specifications. The Commission noted that specifications were not subject to government acceptance.

Consideration of the Proposed Draft Codex General Standard for Food Additives

213. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants agreed to the importance of continuing this activity and in view of the significant workload involved, decided to establish a working group under the direction of the United States to prepare a revised general standard for circulation and government comment at Step 3, prior to the next session of the Committee. The Committee also agreed that the “Denner” paper (CX/FAC 89/16) would form the basis of its deliberations, and that the standard would be developed under specific terms of reference for the Working Group (see para. 36, ALINORM 91/12A). The Commission agreed with this procedure.

Methods of Analysis for Aflatoxins

214. The Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants had agreed to forward a list of methods of analysis for aflatoxins to the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling for endorsement and consequently to the Commission for adoption. The 17th Session of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling decided against endorsing these methods because in some cases, the limits were at or below the reliable limit of determination of the methods proposed. The Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling concluded that a list of general criteria for evaluating acceptable methods for determining aflatoxins should be prepared by the United Kingdom, while the AOAC representative would prepare and updated list of available methods for consideration by the next session of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling.

215. The Commission agreed with this procedure, and noted that this would result in the establishment of methods of analysis for aflatoxins under the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling.

Sampling Plans for Aflatoxins

216. The Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants agreed with a request of the Codex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes to consider holding an expert consultation to examine issues regarding sampling plans in aflatoxins in view of the complexity of this subject, (see paras. 352–354).

Guideline Levels for Radionuclides in Foods (Dilution Factors and Minor Dietary Components)

217. The Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants agreed to recommend to the Commission that the guideline levels should apply to the reconstituted product (i.e., ready for consumption) and that the current text concerning the treatment of minor dietary components should remain as elaborated.

218. The Commission supported these recommendations, and agreed to amend CAC/VOL. XVIII-Add.1, Supplement 1 by removing the current footnote included on page 2 of CAC/GL 5-1989.

Establishment of Guideline Levels for Radionuclide Levels in Foods Subsequent to the Accident Year

219. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants had agreed to recommend that the current Codex levels for radionuclide contamination in foods be extended for an indefinite period, with the understanding that the need for such a permanent level would be regularly reviewed.

220. Several delegations from the Region of Asia expressed concern that the levels proposed for application on a permanent basis were too high, especially when the natural decrease of these levels over time was taken into account. In response to these concerns, the Secretariat indicated that the IAEA, through inter-agency consultations, was in the process of revising its volume Safety Series No. 72 on protection of the public in the event of a nuclear accident which would include the most recent evaluation of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). It was indicated that these recommendations, once finalized, could be discussed by the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants with a view to a revision of the Codex Guidelines if necessary.

221. The Commission agreed to extend the current levels for radionuclide contamination of foods on a permanent basis (i.e., subsequent to the accident year). In taking this decision, the Commission also agreed that these levels would be kept under review, and that the Executive Committee would keep the Commission informed of activities concerning this subject.

Procedure for the Establishment of Guideline Levels for Contaminants

222. The Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants agreed to the need for a general philosophy and procedure to facilitate its deliberations in the establishment of guideline levels for contaminants. The Commission supported the elaboration of a general procedure for the internal use of the Committee and agreed that the Commission should be informed of the Committee's future efforts in this area.

Lead Levels in Sugars

223. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants recommended that all lead levels in sugars should be lowered to 0.5 mg/kg, when reviewing those levels forwarded for endorsement. See also discussion under Agenda Item 36, paras 376–377 below.

Sampling Plan for Mercury, Cadmium and Lead

224. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants supported a simple sampling plan for mercury, cadmium and lead and decided to await the decision of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling concerning this sampling plan prior to advancing the plan to the Commission for adoption at Step 8. The 17th Session of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling temporarily endorsed the sampling plan, pending the outcome of its review of general sampling plans for contaminants.


Top of Page Next Page