Proposed Draft Standard for Canned Bamboo Shoots (Agenda Item 6(a))
Proposed Draft Standard for Dried Anchovies (Agenda Item 6(b))
Proposed Draft Standard for Fish Crackers (Agenda Item 6(c))
Proposed Draft Standards for Pickles and Chutney (Agenda Item 6(d-e))
11. The Delegation of Indonesia introduced the proposed draft standard stating that after the 9th Session of the Committee, the proposed draft standard had been revised taking into consideration comments made at the session.
Scope
12. The Committee moved the academic names of edible bamboo shoots from the body of the standard to an annex. The Committee corrected errors in a number of academic names.
Packing Media (2.2.2)
13. The Committee amended the provision to read “..., except that little precipitation is allowed if thermal processing method is used” as precipitation might occur depending on the processing method but not on the size or shape of the can.
Acid-base Condition
14. The Delegations of Japan and Thailand stated that without the addition of acid, pH of the final product would be higher than 4.6. In order to include canned bamboo shoots in water and to prevent Clostridium contamination, the Committee amended the provision to read “... shall not be lower than 4.0 and, if acid is added, not more than 4.6”. Consequently, the term “or without” was inserted in section 2.1.2 after the word “with”.
Table 1
15. Several delegations requested clarification of the meaning of the table. However, the information was not available at the session. The Committee decided to switch the words “Defect” and “Limitations” and to change the maximum permissible limitations for defect from 20% to 10% of drained weight. It was further decided that the maximum permissible limitations for blemishes for whole, half, top and topless be clarified and the terms “blemish” and “defect” be defined in the next draft.
Other provisions
16. Other comments for further consideration include those on Whole, Types of Pack, Colour, Minimum Drained Weight, Name of the Food and Annex containing microbiological test.
17. The Committee agreed to advance the proposed draft standard as amended[9] to Step 5 for adoption by the Executive Committee with the understanding that it should be further revised taking into consideration comments made at the session and that after its adoption, it would be further elaborated by the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables.
18. The Delegation of Malaysia introduced the proposed draft standard explaining that after the last session, Malaysia had redrafted the standard, circulated it to the drafting countries[10] for comments, and further revised it. The Delegation also explained that “niboshi” had been excluded as it had been felt to be a different product.
Title
19. The Committee amended the title to read “dried salted anchovies” in order to distinguish the products covered by the standard from those processed without salt or brine, such as those produced in Indonesia and Japan.
Scope
20. While the Delegation of Japan proposed to specify species of anchovies or to exclude species used in Far East from the standard, the Committee decided to keep the term “family Engraulidae” in order to accommodate other species of anchovies, if any, than those used in this Region taking into consideration this standard being elaborated as a world-wide standard.
Size Classification
21. The Committee changed the boundary between small and medium from 2.5 cm to 3.5 cm.
22. The Committee agreed to advance the proposed draft standard as amended[11] to Step 5 for adoption by the Executive Committee with the understanding that after its adoption, it would be further elaborated by the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products.
23. The Delegation of Malaysia introduced the proposed draft standard which had been revised since the last session with the assistance provided by Indonesia and the Philippines.
Product Definition
24. The Committee deleted the last sentence concerning the preparation as at present deep frying was not the only method of preparation.
Other Ingredients
25. As starches other than tapioca and sago starches were currently used for the production of fish crackers, the Committee amended the provision to read “... tapioca (Manihot sp.), sago (Metroxylon) starch and/or other suitable starches”.
Table 1
26. The Committee noted that under current commercial practice there were three grades, although it was recognized that only top two grades were traded in bulk internationally. The Committee agreed to include in the table, provisions of grades as contained in Appendix IV of this report. It also agreed to change the range of moisture content from 8.0-12.0 to 8.0-14.0% to reflect the actual results of the analyses of the product.
27. Consequently, the Committee added a new provision 7.3 for grades which stipulates “The package shall declare the grades as prescribed in Table 1” and renumbered the section 7.3 as 7.4.
Food Additives
28. The Committee changed the maximum level of polyphosphate from 0.5% to “limited by GMP” as there were no methods of analysis for this substance.
29. The Committee agreed to advance the proposed draft standard as amended[12] to Step 5 for adoption by the Executive Committee with the understanding that after its adoption, it would be further elaborated by the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products.
30. The Delegation of India introduced the proposed draft standards stating that these standards had not been revised since it had been felt unnecessary although the Committee at its 9th Session had agreed that the standards be revised. The Delegation of Sri Lanka explained that it had been found necessary to maintain the maximum levels of heavy metals as originally drafted, while the Committee at its 9th Session had felt the levels too high, as these products were usually manufactured at cottage level where heavy metals might be present in raw materials as environmental contaminants. She further explained that it would not result in high level of daily intake as these products were eaten as condiments with small amount of consumption.
31. The Committee noted that “pickles” covered in the standard contain more preservatives than those in Japan and the maximum levels of preservatives might vary depending on the medium of pickles.
32. The Committee had a vigorous discussion on the title of the standard for pickles. Several delegations stated that the word “pickle” was too general which could refer a wide variety of traditional pickles in various countries and therefore, should be either replaced by local names, e.g., achar, or specified with a qualifier(s), such as “Indian type” in order to avoid confusion while the Delegations of India and Sri Lanka believed that “pickles (vegetarian)” was sufficient to avoid confusion.
33. It was also pointed out that the provisions for labelling and methods of analysis and sampling of both standards were not complete and the hygiene provision had been placed by the Codex Secretariat, which should be examined by the drafting countries. The Committee decided to return the proposed draft standards to Step 3 for further revision by the drafting groups for circulation for government comments well before the next session of the Committee.
