The Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling (CCMAS) held its 29th Session from March 10-14, 2008 in Budapest, Hungary. The 29th Session was attended by 160 delegates and observers representing 59 Member Countries, one Member Organization (EC), and 9 international organizations. The United States was represented by the Delegate, Dr. Gregory Diachenko, and Dr. Gregory Noonan, U.S. Food and Drug Administration; Mr. Larry Freese, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA; and Dr. Michael Sussman, Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

The United States fully participated on all agenda items and was successful in achieving many of its objectives and goals during this Session. The U.S. was instrumental in obtaining Committee consensus to stop consideration of efforts to expand the role of CCMAS with respect to methods without specific provisions in Codex standards. Significant U.S. input was also provided on revising the text of the Draft Guidelines for Settling Disputes on Analytical (Test) Results and returning them to Step 6 in order to allow for additional government comments. Additionally, the Committee, recognizing that substantial progress had been made by the U.S. led efforts on the revision of the definitions, agreed to advance the Proposed Draft Guidelines on Analytical Terminology for adoption at Step 5 by the 31st Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. These Codex texts may have significant impact on international trade and the work of CCMAS.

The U.S. was unsuccessful in convincing the Committee to forward the document on Methods for the Detection and Identification of Foods Derived from Biotechnology - General Approach and Criteria (CX/MAS 08/29/8) to FAO as the basis for an expert consultation and guidance for Governments. CCMAS proposed the development of guidelines on criteria for methods for the detection and identification of foods derived from biotechnology to the 31st Session of the Commission, as part of the working document including all proposals for new work. Subject to the decision of the Commission, the Proposed Draft Guidelines as presented in the working document (CX/MAS 08/29/8) would be circulated at Step 3 for comments and consideration by the next session of the Committee. The Delegations of the United States, Australia and New Zealand expressed their opposition to this decision to undertake new work, since there was no clearly defined need in Codex for methods as no provisions existed and development of these guidelines was not in line with Codex strategic objectives.

More detailed summaries on several Agenda items are listed below.

Criteria for the Methods for the Detection and Identification of Foods Derived from Biotechnology
The Delegation of Germany, as co-lead of the electronic working group, introduced the document and informed the committee that the document had been revised taking into consideration comments received and that changes made were not too substantial. The Delegation also reminded the committee that the ad hoc Task Force on Foods Derived from Biotechnology had encouraged the Committee to proceed with work in this regard. The Delegation of the United States, supported by the Delegation of Australia, referring to its comments in CRD 13, expressed the view that there was no clearly defined need in Codex for methods as no provisions existed. It was also stated that development of methods criteria was not in line with Codex strategic objectives, in particular as ISO had active work in this area and such work in the Committee could lead to duplication. The Delegation proposed to forward the paper to FAO who could convene an expert consultation to use the paper as a basis for a guidance document for Governments. The Delegation further stated that only once specific provisions requiring detection and identification of foods derived from biotechnology had been established in Codex should development of guidelines be considered.

The Delegation of the EC expressed support for new work as presented in CRD 21 emphasizing that the development of guidelines was essential for future work of Codex, that it would be useful to have methods to assess the foodstuffs entering the market to ensure fair practices in the food trade, and that this was important work particularly for developing countries. Following some discussion, the Committee agreed to the proposal for new work and to submit the revised project document to the 31st Session of the Commission, as part of the working document including all proposals for new work. Subject to the decision of the Commission, the Proposed Draft Guidelines as presented in the working document (CX/MAS 08/29/8) would be circulated at Step 3 for comments and consideration by the next session of the Committee. The Delegations of the United States, Australia and New Zealand expressed their opposition to this decision to undertake new work (para 87-93 of Alinorm 08/31/23).

Proposed Draft Guidelines for Settling Disputes over Analytical (Test) Results
An in-session working group was formed and made major revisions in the Draft Guidelines developed at the last CCMAS session and circulated as part of CL 2007/10-MAS at Step 6 of the Codex process. The Committee considered the document and made a number of revisions in each section. It was agreed to include as a pre-requisite the need for both countries to agree on using the guideline in order to clarify that these guidelines would only apply if both countries agreed to their use. The U.S. and other delegations highlighted the need to stipulate a timeline for settling of disputes since some consignments could lose their integrity and value upon storage. The Committee agreed to re-insert a section from the original document recognizing that disputes could be settled without further analysis, through the sharing of results and procedures between the laboratories of the importing and exporting countries. A major focus of the new document was on the analyzing of reserve samples. The Committee agreed to language indicating that agreement should be between competent authorities on analysis of reserve samples and to insert a footnote regarding the timeline to indicate that disputes should be resolved within the shortest possible time so as to avoid adversely affecting the quality of the commodity during storage.

The U.S. and several other delegations noted that the document had been considerably changed from the previous version and that in view of the short time to thoroughly consider the revised version it could not be sent for final adoption, but should be re-circulated for comments at Step 6. The Delegation of Germany speaking on behalf of the EC member states present at the meeting was of the view that the document was a much simpler, clearer and understandable document and should be considered and finalized at the Session. The Committee agreed to return the Draft Guidelines, as amended at the present session, to Step 6 for further comments and consideration at the next session (para 20-34 and Appendix IV of Alinorm 08/31/23) with a view to its finalization by that session.

Review of Analytical Terminology for Codex Use
The U.S. Delegation presented a document that had been revised by an electronic working group based on comments received on CL 2007/10-MAS at Step 3 of the Codex process. What was originally developed as updated analytical terminology for inclusion in the Codex Procedural Manual will be removed from the Procedural Manual and placed in a guideline for governments in order to facilitate future changes and reduce expansion of the Procedural Manual. The Committee was informed that all definitions from international standard development organizations that had been under revision were now harmonizable since they had reached the final publication stage. CCMAS considered the list of definitions and accepted most of them without changes. The Committee, recognizing that substantial progress had been made by the U.S. led efforts on the revision of the definitions, agreed to advance the Proposed Draft Guidelines on Analytical Terminology for adoption at Step 5 by the 31st Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (para 35-51 and Appendix V of Alinorm 08/31/23).

Endorsement of Methods of Analysis for Provisions in Codex Standards
A report of the ad hoc Working Group on endorsement of methods was presented by the Chair, Dr. Roger Wood (United Kingdom). The Committee endorsed several methods of analysis in Codex Standards at different steps of the Procedure as proposed by the ad hoc Working Group, but with a few minor amendments and comments (para 52-61 and Appendix III of Alinorm 08/31/23).

Proposed Amendment to the Working Instructions for the Implementation of the Criteria Approach in Codex The criteria approach allows analysts flexibility in selecting validated methods of analysis that meet Codex requirements. It was proposed to amend the section in the Procedural Manual on the working instructions for the implementation of the criteria approach, including a table of numerical values for the minimum applicable range, LOD, LOQ, precision, recovery and trueness, according to the value of the maximum level. These instructions will be useful to CCMAS and other Committees when considering the methods submitted or to be submitted for endorsement. The Committee agreed to send the amendment to the General Principles Committee for its endorsement. The Committee also agreed to future work on developing more detailed guidelines for establishing methods criteria for the identification of relevant analytical methods, which would include a step by step procedure to decide on the applicability of the method (para 64-86 and Appendix II of Alinorm 08/31/23).

Role of CCMAS With Respect to Methods Without Specific Provisions in Codex Standards
The Delegation of Netherlands presented a discussion paper indicating that the Committee faced difficulties in developing or endorsing methods of analysis for which there were no provisions in Codex Standards (e.g., methods for foods derived from biotechnology). The paper informed the Committee that there were three existing phrases in the Procedural Manual that put limitations on the work of the Committee (e.g., in the CCMAS terms of reference) and proposed language changes to eliminate these restrictions. The U.S. and some other delegations did not support the proposed amendments and were of the opinion that the terms of reference should not be too open-ended and that the current terms of reference were sufficient to allow the Committee to conduct its work. In view of the discussion the Committee agreed not to make any amendments as proposed (para 121-125 of Alinorm 08/31/23).