The 29th Session of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products (CCFFP) was held on February 18-23, 2008 in Trondheim, Norway. Participants were from 50 member states, one member organization and one international organization. Some highlights that reflect the U.S. effort and interest are included below.

Meeting Summary

(1) Draft Standard for Live and Raw Bivalve Molluscs
The CCFFP had previously listed examples of testing regimes for E. coli and fecal coliform in this standard so as to recognize various country interests and practices and to prevent Committee deadlock. However, the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (CCFH) recommended that only one microbiological criterion be set as an indicator for fecal coliforms. Recognizing that the examples currently listed are not significantly different from one another and are not likely to produce substantially different public health outcomes, the U.S., along with other countries that use fecal coliform as the indicator organism, agreed to refer only to the limit for E. coli, irrespective of the type of indicator bacteria used in growing area monitoring programs. In addition, the CCFFP agreed to include a new section in the Standard that considers actions to be taken by the competent authority when the microbiological criteria were not met.

In response to concerns raised by the CCFH on the use of a 3-class sampling plan, the CCFFP indicated that this was consistent with the General Guidelines on Sampling and with the recommendations by the International Commission on Microbiological Specifications for Foods in Microorganisms in Foods 2: Sampling for Microbiological Analysis: Principles and Specific Applications. The CCFFP agreed to delay consideration of a criterion for Vibrio parahaemolyticus pending completion of the work undertaken by the CCFH on a Code of Hygienic Practices for Vibrio spp. in seafood. The United States supported this proposal, recognizing that further scientific research is needed on Vibrio parahaemolyticus.

The CCFFP agreed on all the levels proposed for biotoxins and transferred the language to a new section on Contaminants as recommended by the CCFH. Only the method for the saxitoxin group has been endorsed by the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling (CCMAS) currently so, the CCFFP decided to include the table listing other methods in an Annex that would be circulated for further comment and consideration at Step 6. Similarly, the CCFFP agreed to retain language indicating five 25g samples be used in determining presence of Salmonella, but requested consultation from FAO and WHO to consider the risk mitigation for Salmonella in bivalve molluscs when different sampling plans and microbiological criteria are applied.

Discussions regarding labeling resulted in some minor modifications and an agreement that labeling of non-retail containers should include the identification of the product by its common and/or scientific name, as determined by the competent authority, leaving the possibility to the country where the product is sold to require the scientific name.

(2) Draft Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products; section on Processing of Live and Raw Bivalve Molluscs
The United States, along with other Delegations, pointed out that there were different possibilities for monitoring waters and that the use of fecal coliforms and total coliforms as indicators should be retained in addition to E. coli because the different monitoring systems could all be effective in ensuring the safety of bivalves. The concerns of CCFH in advocating a single indicator were addressed in the Standard. The CCFFP agreed that a more flexible approach could be taken in the Code of Practice for the purposes of monitoring and therefore, the CCFFP agreed to retain the language allowing the use of all three indicators.

The Delegation of the European Community (EC) proposed documentation requirements that should accompany the consignments sent to distribution centers. The CCFFP agreed to make several revisions to the EC proposal, including allowing the use of a common and/or scientific name to identify the bivalve molluscs, where appropriate. The United States and other delegations made refinements to the EC proposal, such as distinguishing documentation requirements for consignments arriving in the distribution center and those arriving in the depuration center. The CCFFP made other minor modifications and clarifications of terms in the standard and consequently reached consensus to advance the Draft Code of Practice section on Processing of Live and Raw Bivalve Molluscs to Step 8.

(3) Draft Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products; section on Processing of Lobsters
Revisions made to this section of the Code of Practice were primarily for clarification and were done without much discussion by the CCFFP. One item that was discussed was the use of water chlorination. The Delegation of the European Community opposed the use of chlorinated water and proposed to revise text which would allow for the establishment to use chlorine for water treatment, provided that the residual chlorine did not exceed levels for potable water. The United States did not disagree with this language given its flexibility. Brazil, along with other Delegations, disagreed with the EC position, noting that further scientific advice from the FAO/WHO on chlorination would be forthcoming and a previous discussion paper submitted to the Committee by the WHO had shown that residual levels of chlorine of up to 10mg/l did not pose a risk to human health. The Committee decided to accept the proposed amendments to the text by the Delegation of the European Union and noted the reservation of the Delegation of Brazil to this decision.

(4) Draft Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products; section on Processing of Crabs
During the last session, the CCFFP decided to split the sections on processing of crabs and lobsters. Although the CCFFP decided to advance the section on processing of lobsters to Step 8, the section on processing of crabs needed further discussion by the CCFFP at this session. The CCFFP agreed to several clarifying modifications. Among the revisions agreed upon include noting that biotoxins in addition to parasites for certain species of crabs could be a potential hazard. In addition, the Committee also agreed to delete the phrasing "survival of pathogens microorganisms" as a potential hazard in section xx3.1.4, to highlight that the cooking process is not intended to reduce or eliminate pathogens but to aid the removal of the crab flesh. The United States proposed other modifications such as the inclusion of language to note that products that undergo pasteurization are not shelf stable; that products should be exposed to procedures that would specifically address non-proteolytic Clostridium botulinum risk; and that appropriate time and temperatures would inactivate microorganisms that could grow during storage.

Due to time constraints, the Committee did not consider the section on chilled and frozen cooked crab and agreed to return the draft Code to Step 6 for further comments and discussion at the next session. The Committee agreed to establish a working group to consider comments received at Step 6.

(5) Draft Standard for Sturgeon Caviar
After much discussion, the Committee made several revisions to the draft standard, including amending the definition of fish eggs to refer to use of non-ovulated eggs and to indicate that for aquaculture sturgeon, ovulated eggs could be used. Other modifications were agreed upon, including noting in the text that salt content was for the end product, amending the process definition to differentiate among product temperatures required during packaging, storage and retail and wholesale, and specifying the allowance for freezing and frozen storage of caviar provided that deterioration of quality is avoided. The Committee recognized the finding by the Committee on Food Additives that the use of boric acid in sturgeon caviar is not allowed, but agreed to further discuss the food additives section for the next Session in order to explore the use of other food additives.

Due to time constraints, the Committee did not complete review of the draft standard and agreed to return the standards as amended to Step 6 for further comments and consideration by the next Session of the Committee.

(6) Quick Frozen Scallop Adductor Muscle Meat; Proposed Draft Standard and section on Processing of Scallop Adductor Muscle Meat in the Proposed Draft Code of Practice
The Committee discussed the scope of the Standard at length and concluded that quick frozen scallops with added water or those with significant uptake of water should not be included in the present standard. The Delegation of the United States considered a proposal for new work for the next session on the development of a specific standard for quick frozen scallops with added water for the next session. The Committee discussed food additives and agreed that phosphates could be used, but did not decide upon levels of use. An electronic working group led by Canada will prepare a revised version that would include a proposed list of phosphates among other items for consideration at the next session. The section of the Proposed Draft Code of Practice on Processing of Scallop Meat was only briefly discussed due to time constraints, but the CCFFP recognized that the discussion should correspond with the products included in the Standard. The electronic working group established for the Standard would also revise the section of the Proposed Draft Code of Practice.

(7) Smoked Fish; Proposed Draft Standard and section on Processing of Smoked Fish in the Proposed Draft Code of Practice
Prior to this session, the Netherlands established an electronic working group to revise the draft standard. The resulting draft included smoked fish, smoke-flavored fish, and smoked-dried fish. The CCFFP had considerable discussion over the inclusion and definition of the three smoked fish products at this session. An in-session working group was convened to discuss the product and process definitions. Some technical amendments were made as a result of the working group's discussion and the CCFFP agreed to include all three smoked fish products in the Standard at the working group's recommendation. The Committee also agreed that carbon monoxide treated fish was not considered smoked fish and should not be included in the Standard. Consideration was given to listing information specific to histamine forming fish in the Standard, but the CCFFP agreed to elaborate that information in the code of practice instead. The CCFFP made some modifications to the labeling requirements in the standard so that the name of the food would be smoked 'fish,' smoked-flavoured 'fish,' or smoked-dried 'fish' where 'fish' would be the common or commercial name of the species of fish used in accordance with the law and customs of the country where the product is sold. Due to time constraints, the Committee did not consider all sections of the Standard and did not discuss the section on Processing of Smoked Fish in the Proposed Draft Code of Practice, but agreed to return these drafts to Step 3 for comments and further consideration by the next session. The Committee agreed to establish a physical working group to be led by the Netherlands to discuss the Standard and comments received as well as the section in the Proposed Draft Code of Practice.

(8) Proposed Draft Revision of the Procedure for the Inclusion of Additional Species in Standards for Fish and Fishery Products
The Committee did not enter into a detailed discussion on this agenda item, but agreed to establish a physical working group led by France to review the inclusion procedure of additional species in the standards with a view to its inclusion in the Procedural Manual. The Committee agreed to circulate the Proposed Draft Procedure for the Inclusion of Additional Species in Standards for Fish and Fishery Products at Step 3 for comments and further revision by the physical working group for consideration by the next Session of the Committee.

(9) Proposed Draft Standard for Fish Sauce
The Committee discussed the proposal for fish sauce undertaken by Thailand and other countries. The Committee discussed at length the scope of the draft standard and ultimately reached the conclusion to limit the scope to products prepared with only fish but to include fish sauce prepared with technologies other than traditional fermentation. The Delegations of United States, Cambodia, Japan and Germany volunteered to assist the Delegation of Thailand in further development of the draft standard.

(10) Proposed Draft Amendment to the Standard for Quick Frozen Fish Sticks
Discussion of this agenda item was deferred until the next Session of the Committee, in light of the need for further research on nitrogen factors. The Delegation of Thailand, with assistance of other interested countries, agreed to prepare a proposed draft standard for circulation at Step 3.

(11) Proposed Draft Standard for Fresh/Live and Frozen Abalone
The Committee reviewed the scope of this draft standard to include other gastropods and agreed to include in the Proposed Draft Standard fresh/live, frozen and raw chilled abalone of the species Haliotis and other relevant species. The Committee agreed to both return the proposed draft Standard to Step 2/3 for redrafting by South Africa and circulate for comments and consideration by the next session of the Committee.

(12) Other items considered by CCFFP
The Delegation of Canada described the global increase of standards on contaminants, in particular maximum limits for cadmium in shrimp, but noted the finding of the 55th JECFA meeting (2000) that crustaceans were not among the main contributors to cadmium exposure. The Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants agreed to discontinue work on establishing maximum levels for cadmium given the JECFA findings and therefore, the CCFFP determined that it was not necessary to develop a maximum level for cadmium in shrimp at this time.

The Commission decided to disallow consequential changes to the commodity standards when adopting food additive provisions until the General Standard for Food Additives (GSFA) was finalized. In light of this decision, the CCFFP decided to work on aligning food additive provisions in the different standards to ensure consistency with the GSFA. In order to accomplish this, the Secretariat agreed to prepare a circular letter listing current additive levels in the standards and relevant provisions in the GSFA and solicit comments on the need for amendments to the additive sections.