77) The Committee noted that in accordance with the Codex Alimentarius Procedural Manual, all provisions in respect of food contaminants should be submitted for endorsement, and that the document did not include previously endorsed contaminant provisions.
78) The Committee was of the opinion that the proposed levels for Arsenic, Lead and Tin were high and that these levels were still under discussion by this Committee. It decided to inform the relevant Commodity Committees of its decision to withdraw Maximum Levels for Arsenic and return the standards for further consideration pending further developments concerning Maximum Levels for Lead and Tin in the General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Foods (GSCT).
Draft Revised Standard for Butter
79) The Committee endorsed the Maximum Level for Lead as proposed.
Draft Revised Standard for Sugars
80) The Delegation of the United States, supported by Denmark, expressed its concern that 1 mg/kg of Arsenic in sugar would be quite high regardless of other processing factors. The Committee decided not to endorse the Maximum Level for Arsenic in the Draft Revised Standard for Sugars taking into account the fact that Maximum Levels for Arsenic were still under discussion (see Agenda Item 15e).
Draft Revised Standard for Canned Applesauce
81) Several delegations expressed their opinions that the levels for both Lead and Tin were excessive for Canned Applesauce and suggested to lower the levels of Lead and Tin to 0.1mg/kg and 100 or 200 mg/kg respectively. The Delegation of Australia noted that the level of Tin proposed, 250 mg/kg, corresponded to the level considered at Step 3 for canned solid foods at the 30th Session.
82) The Committee decided to refer back the Draft Revised Standard for Canned Applesauce to the Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables for further consideration pending current development on Maximum Levels for Lead and Tin in the GSCT.
Draft Standard for Pickles
83) The Committee decided not to endorse the ML for Arsenic and to return the Draft Standard for Pickles to the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables for further consideration pending further developments on Maximum Levels for Lead and Tin in the GSCT.
Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Cocoa Butters, Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Cocoa (Cacao) Mass (Cocoa/Chocolate Liquor) and Cocoa Cake, for use in the Manufacture of Cocoa and Chocolate Products and Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Cocoa Powders (Cocoas)
84) Several delegations felt that the proposed levels for lead in Cocoa Butter and Cocoa Powder were exceedingly high and no information was given to the Committee to justify currently proposed maximum levels for Lead.
85) The Committee recalled that the 17th Session of the Codex Committee on Cocoa Products and Chocolate (CCCPC) had discussed this matter recently and there was no need to refer it back to the CCCPC. The Committee also noted that the levels of lead proposed by the CCCPC reflected the levels which could be achieved by the industry.
86) The Delegation of Denmark stressed the need to go through all the Commodity Standards to consider the levels of Lead prior to the completion of the Draft Maximum Levels for Lead.
87) Several delegations also expressed the opinion that more information should be provided to the Committee to justify the levels of lead proposed in those commodities for endorsement; in addition the data should be based on sound science and reflect what was technologically feasible.
88) The Committee decided to send back to the CCCPC for further consideration the Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Cocoa Butters, Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Cocoa (Cacao) Mass (Cocoa/Chocolate Liquor) and Cocoa Cake, for use in the Manufacture of Cocoa and Chocolate Products and Proposed Draft Revised Standard for Cocoa Powders (Cocoas).
