47) The Delegation of the United States introduced the document, which considered the need for the attributes of Limit of Determination and Limits of Detection, following the decision of the last session of the Committee. The Delegation concluded that there was no need to determine these limits on a routine basis once the method had been selected and proposed to consider a definition of the “Lowest Validated Level” as an alternative to measurement limits. It was also noted that methods of analysis must have ”direct pertinence to the Codex Standard to which they are directed” and that Codex MRLs were not set at the limit of detection.
48) Some delegations indicated that the limit of detection was included in the general criteria for the selection of methods and differences in terminology in this respect should be addressed. The Delegation of Uruguay proposed to take into account ISO Standard 11843:1999 Capability of Detection. It was also noted that the use of “Lowest Validated Level” instead of limit of determination in relation to method validation was consistent with the use of the term “Lowest Calibrated Level” in relation to analytical quality control.
49) Some delegations and the Observer from COMISA expressed the view that there was no need for additional definitions in this area. It was also noted that the issue of measurement limits was more relevant for residues of pesticides and veterinary drugs, which were not the responsibility of CCMAS. 50) The Observer from AOAC indicated that the harmonization of definitions and terminology was included in the future activities of the Inter Agency Meeting (IAM), and that the Committee would be kept informed of further developments in this area.
51) The Committee agreed that there was no need for further consideration of measurement limits at this stage, and that it might consider this issue again at a later date if needed.
