Codex Vco
Codex Vco
Codex Vco
REP17/FO
REPORT OF THE 25th SESSION OF THE CODEX COMMITTEE ON FATS AND OILS
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
27 February – 03 March 2017
REP17/FO i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Report of the 25th Session of the Codex Committee for Fats and Oils ....................................................page 1
Paragraphs
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Opening of the Session .............................................................................................................................. 2 - 3
Adoption of the Agenda (Agenda Item 1) .................................................................................................... 4 - 5
Matters Referred by the Codex Alimentarius Commission and other subsidiary bodies
(Agenda Item 2) .......................................................................................................................................... 6 - 13
Activities of International Organizations Relevant to the Work of CCFO (Agenda Item 3) ..................... 14 - 15
Draft Standard for Fish oils (Agenda Item 4) .......................................................................................... 16 - 28
Proposed Draft Revision to the Standard for Olive oils and Olive Pomace oils
(CODEX STAN 33-1981): Revision of the Limit for Campesterol (Agenda Item 5) ................................ 29 - 34
Proposed Draft Revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999):
Addition of Palm oil with high Oleic Acid (OXG) (Agenda Item 6) ........................................................... 35 - 43
Proposed Draft Revision to The Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999):
Revision of Fatty Acid Composition and Other Quality Factors of Peanut Oil (Agenda Item 7) ............ 44 - 48
Proposals for the Transfer of Provisions, from the Appendix into the Main Body of the
Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda Item 8) ................................. 49 - 53
Review of the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes (Appendix II to RCP 36-1987) (Agenda Item 9) .... 54 - 57
Discussion Paper on the Revision of Limits of Oleic and Linoleic Acids in Sunflowerseed Oils
in the Standard for Named Vegetable oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda Item 10) ...................... 58 - 66
Discussion Paper on the Inclusion of Provisions for Walnut Oil, Almond Oil, Hazelnut Oil,
Pistachio Oil, Flaxseed Oil and Avocado Oil in the Standard for Named Vegetable oils
(CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda Item 11) ......................................................................................... 67 - 70
Discussion Paper on the Replacement of Acid Value with Free Fatty Acids for Virgin Palm Oils
in the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda item 12) ...................... 71 – 75
Discussion Paper on the Inclusion of Quality Parameters for Crude Rice Bran Oil in the
Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda Item 13) ............................... 76 - 83
Discussion Paper on the Inclusion of Unrefined Edible Tallow in the Standard for Named Animal Fats
(CODEX STAN 211-1999) (Agenda Item 14) ......................................................................................... 84 - 85
Other Business (Agenda Item 15)
Proposal on Revision of the Standard for Olive Oils and Olive Pomace Oils
(CODEX STAN 33-1981) ............................................................................................................ 86 – 89
Inclusion of Free Fatty Acids as Quality Characteristics Criteria for Refined Rice Bran Oils
in the Standard for Named Vegetable Oil (CODEX STAN 210-1999) ....................................... 90 - 91
Change in the Temperature for the Analysis of Refractive Index and Apparent Density of Palm
Superolein, the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) .................... 92 - 93
Date and Place of Next Session (Agenda Item 16) ........................................................................................ 94
REP17/FO ii
Pages
Appendices
Appendix I – List of Participants ...........................................................................................................page 13
Appendix II – Food Additives .................................................................................................................page 26
Appendix III – Draft Standard for Fish Oils ..............................................................................................page 27
Appendix IV – Proposed Draft Revision to the Standard for Olive oils and Olive Pomace Oils
(CODEX STAN 33-1981): Revision of the Limits of Campesterol ...........................................................page 32
Appendix V – Proposed Draft Revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CODEX STAN 210-1999): Addition of Palm Oil with High Oleic Acid (OXG) ........................................page 33
Appendix VI – Proposed Draft Revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CODEX STAN 210-1999): Peanut Oil ....................................................................................................page 36
Appendix VII – Proposed Draft Revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CODEX STAN 210-1999): Essential Composition of Sunflowerseed Oil ..............................................page 37
Appendix VIII – Proposed New Work to Revise the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CODEX STAN 210-1999): Replacement of Acid Value with Free Fatty Acids for
Virgin Palm Oil and Inclusion of Free Fatty Acids for Crude Palm Kernel Oil .........................................page 42
Appendix IX – Amendment to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) ......page 46
Appendix X – Proposed New Work to Revise the Standard for Olive Oils and Pomace Olive Oils
(CODEX STAN 33-1981): ........................................................................................................................page 47
REP17/FO iii
LIST OF ACRONYMS
INTRODUCTION
1. The twenty-fifth Session of the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils (CCFO) was held in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, from 27 February to 3 March 2017 at the kind invitation of the Government of Malaysia. The Session
was chaired by Ms Noraini Dato’ Mohd Othman, Senior Director for Food Safety and Quality of Ministry of
Health Malaysia. The Session was attended by 41 member countries, one member organisation and seven
observer organisations. A list of participants is given in Appendix I.
1 CRD1
2 CX/FO 17/25/1; CRD7 (Comments of Egypt; EU, India and GOED)
3 CX/FO 17/25/2, Inconsistent Terminology Related to the Term Flavour and Flavourings in Codex Texts (CRD3),
Comments of Egypt, EU, India, GOED (CRD7), Malaysia (CRD21); Report of in-session WG (CRD25).
4 ALINORM99/70 para.34
REP17/FO 2
8. Delegations generally agreed that the Procedural Manual provided CCFO with sufficient guidance on
prioritization and management of its work; however, there was also general agreement with the Chair’s view
that there is still a need for guidance for the management of proposals on amendments to existing Standards.
Delegations further commented that some aspects of the CCFH approach to manage its work could be relevant
to CCFO such as mechanisms to review older Standards and requesting proposals for new work through a
Circular Letter (CL).
Conclusion
9. The Committee agreed that:
(i) there was no need to develop new criteria similar to that of CCFH in view that there is sufficient guidance
for the prioritization and management of its work;
(ii) For the purpose of developing standards for new fats and oils, current guidance in the Procedural Manual
and requirements set out in CCFO16 are adequate and will continue to be applied; and
(iii) CCFO Secretariat (Malaysia) would prepare a discussion paper on the guidance needed for revision of
parameters or inclusion of new parameters and editorial amendments to existing fats and oils standards,
for consideration at its next session. The paper would take into account comments made at the session.
Food Additives
10. China, Chair of the in-session WG, introduced CRD25 which included recommendations in relation to:
CCFA47/48 requests on the technological justification for the use of functional classes of food additives
and individual food additives in products covered by Food Categories (FC) of the General Standard for
Food Additives (GSFA) relevant to CCFO, i.e. FC 02.1.2 “Vegetable fats and oils” and FC 02.1.3 “Lard,
tallow, fish oil, and other animal fats” (Recommendations 1-11);
CCFA48 request on the inconsistent terminology to the use of the terms flavour and flavourings in CCFO
Standards (Recommendation 12).
Discussion
11. The Committee supported all recommendations except Recommendation 8 for which it made the following
comments and agreements.
Recommendation 8
12. The Committee noted that the in-session WG could not get an agreement on the use of emulsifiers in FC
02.1.2 as although their use in vegetable fats and oils was not generally supported, there were cases where
they were used, such as to prevent the crystallization of oils at lower temperatures. Therefore, the Committee
agreed to collect additional information in order to provide a more informed reply to CCFA.
Conclusion
13. The Committee agree to:
(i) Forward the replies to CCFA49 (Appendix II, part A) and inform CCFA49 that it needed more time to
clarify the use of emulsifiers in FC 02.1.2
(ii) Establish an Electronic Working Group (EWG) led by the EU, open to all Members and Observers and
working in English only to: (i) review food additive provisions in Standards for fats and oils (except the
standard for fish oils) in order to align with the GSFA or propose modifications to the current entries of
the GSFA if necessary; and (ii) further explore the technological justification for the use of emulsifiers in
products covered by FC 02.1.2 and the existing standards for fats and oils (except the standard for fish
oils) report the findings to CCFO26. It was noted that the report of the EWG should be made available
to the Codex Secretariat at least three months before CCFO26.
(iii) Forward the amendment to the section on flavourings of the Standards to CAC40 for adoption (Appendix
II, part B)
15. The Committee further noted that the matters from FAO/WHO, related to the request for scientific advice for
the evaluation of the 23 substances for acceptable previous cargoes, would be considered under agenda item
9.
6 REP15/FO Appendix III; Report of PWG (CRD2); Comments of Brazil, Canada, Chile, EU, Norway, Peru, the USA,
GOED, IFFO, (CX/FO 17/25/4rev), EU, Japan, Norway, Peru, Republic of Korea, GOED (CX/FO 17/25/4 Add.1), Chile
(CRD4), Egypt, India, Thailand, GOED, ISDI (CRD8), Ecuador (CRD18); Nigeria (CRD20); and draft standard for Fish
Oil – comments included (CRD17).
REP17/FO 4
Contaminants
22. The Committee recalled that CCCF7 had agreed to consider the allocation of MLs for lead and arsenic in fish
oils and whether the MLs should apply to total arsenic or inorganic arsenic as more appropriate for these
products once the standard was finalized.
23. The Committee agreed to inform CCCF that the work on the standard was now completed and that CCCF
should consider to develop maximum levels for arsenic and lead for inclusion into the GSCTF. Attention should
be paid to the presence of inorganic arsenic in fish oils.
Section 8 Methods of Analysis
Determination of phospholipids
24. The Committee noted that conversion factors for the determination of phospholipids from phosphorus are being
used in practice. However, the PWG was unable to recommend a single suitable conversion factor for fish oils
and had instead recommended an NMR-based method for the determination of phospholipids.
25. AOCS informed the Committee that they were considering the validation of the method which might be adopted
in the near future. The observer also proposed to look into the matter of conversion factors or to request
CCMAS to recommend such a factor to allow the methods previously submitted for endorsement7 to be used.
26. The Codex Secretariat recalled that CCMAS had previously indicated that identification of conversion factors
was within the domain of commodity committees, but that a request could still be made if this would facilitate
the endorsement of the previously submitted methods.
Determination of p-anisidine and determination of triglycerides
27. The Committee noted a proposal of an Observer for an additional method for the determination of anisidine,
the European Pharmacopeia 2.5.36; and the proposal of the PWG for methods of analysis for determination
of triglycerides following the addition of a provision for triglycerides in the standard.
Conclusion
28. The Committee agreed to:
(i) Forward the draft standard for Fish Oils (Appendix III) to CAC40 for adoption at Step 8;
(ii) Send the labelling provisions for endorsement by CCFL;
(iii) Send the methods of analysis for endorsement by CCMAS, along with clarification on phospholipids;
and a request for CCMAS to consider a factor for the conversion of phosphorus to phospholipids;
(iv) Inform CCCF of the completion of its work and to reconfirm its request for CCCF to establishing ML for
arsenic, in particular inorganic arsenic, and ML for lead in fish oil;
(v) Inform CCFICS of concerns of the CCFO with regard to authenticity of different oils and that
consideration be given to this in their work on food authenticity/integrity;
(vi) Request the Codex Secretariat to issue a CL to request information to monitor the application of the
standard with respect to the conformity of named fish oils with the requirements (especially the fatty acid
profile) and its effect on trade; and
(vii) Request Chile and Switzerland to compile the information submitted in (vi) above and report to CCFO26.
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR OLIVE OILS AND OLIVE POMACE OILS
(CODEX STAN 33-1981): REVISION OF THE LIMIT FOR CAMPESTEROL (Agenda Item 5)8
29. Argentina, Chair of the EWG, introduced the agenda item and recalled that CCFO had discussed for several
years the need to revise the limit for campesterol to take into account the natural variations in authentic olive
oils due to the climatic, geographical and varietal differences. She briefly outlined the work undertaken by the
EWG, which had considered a statistical analysis of a wide variety of data submitted by Members from
authentic virgin and extra virgin olive oils with a campesterol level above 4%.
7 AOCS Ca 12b-92 (phosphorus by direct graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry); AOCS Ca 12a-02
(colorimetric determination of phosphorous content in fats and oils); and Ca 20-99 (Analysis for phosphorus in oil by
inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy)
8 CX/FO 17/25/5; Comments of Brazil, Canada, Chile, India, Peru, Uruguay, the USA (CX/FO 17/25/5 Add.1), EU,
Egypt, India, Philippines, Turkey (CRD9), Nigeria (CRD20)
REP17/FO 5
30. As a result of this work, the EWG had agreed to introduce a note to the limit for campesterol which allowed for
a higher level of campesterol with stricter levels of stigmasterol, delta-7-stigmastenol and stigmastadienes than
the existing levels in the Standard. Argentina noted that the EWG agreed on most of the parameters of the
note except the levels of campesterol, for which the EWG had proposed two options, i.e. Option 1: level of
4.0% and 4.8%; and Option 2: level of 4.0% and 4.5%.
Discussion
31. Delegations generally supported Option 2 noting that the proposed revision was safeguarding the integrity of
authentic olive oils while allowing the detection of fraudulent practice.
32. Other delegations supporting Option 2, noted that the proposed revision was combining the need to ensure
market access for other authentic olive oils and to avoid the risk of fraud. They underlined the need to continue
working on the revision of other parameters and methods of analysis as proposed under agenda item 15.
33. A number of delegations while supporting Option 1, which more accurately reflected global variability in
campesterol concentrations due to climatic, geographic and varietal differences, were ready to support Option
2 as it was still more inclusive when compared to the current established limit noting that this Option also
contributed to safeguarding the integrity of olive oils. The importance to consider in the future the need for
countries to further revise these limits to ensure that the Standard does not exclude authentic olive oils was
highlighted.
Conclusion
34. In view of the general support for the inclusion of the note as in Option 2, the Committee agreed to forward the
proposed draft revision to the Standard for Olive Oils and Olive Pomace Oils (CODEX STAN 33-1981)
(Appendix IV) to CAC40 for adoption at Step 5/8.
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN
210-1999): ADDITION OF PALM OIL WITH HIGH OLEIC ACID (OXG) (Agenda Item 6)9
35. Colombia, Chair of the EWG, introduced the agenda item, and gave a general outline of the EWG report as
well as the key areas covered by the proposal. He further informed the Committee that Colombia and Ecuador
had refined the proposed draft based on additional information, as presented in CRD 6 and CRD10.
36. The Committee agreed to consider the original proposal (CX/FO 17/25/6 Appendix I) noting that it represented
the position of the EWG members, and also agreed to first consider Section 3 “Essential composition and
quality factors” before discussing Section 2.1 “Product definitions”, since the definition was based on fatty acid
composition of the oil.
Discussion
Section 3 “Essential composition and quality factors”
37. The Committee agreed with the proposed parameters in Tables 1; 2; 3 and 4 with the exception of several
parameters (i.e. C14:0, C16:0, C18:0, C18:1; C18:2, Iodine value and delta-tocopherol) which were amended,
based on additional data and information submitted at the session.
Section 2.1 “Product definitions”
38. The Committee considered the product definition for Palm oil-high oleic acid and noted the divergent views on
whether the use of the term “high oleic acid” was appropriate for the proposed range of oleic acid (48.0 – 58.0)
or could be best described as “mid oleic acid”.
39. Delegations in support of the use of the term “high oleic acid” explained that high oleic acid oil was a relatively
unsaturated oil, derived from hybrid species of palm and it has a high Iodine value. These delegations noted
that there was no definition in Codex for “high oleic” or “mid oleic” and that the use of the term “high oleic acid
palm oil” was intended for palm oil only and that comparison of oleic acid content should be restricted to
vegetable oils derived from palm oil only.
9 CX/FO 17/25/6; Comments of Canada, Ecuador, Peru, the USA (CX/FO 17/25/6 Add.1), Colombia and Ecuador
(CRD6), Brazil, Egypt, EU, India, Philippines (CRD10), Nigeria (CRD20) Malaysia (CDR21); revised proposal from
Colombia (CRD24).
REP17/FO 6
40. Delegations in support of the use of the term “mid oleic acid” observed that the term “high oleic acid” was
generally associated with relatively higher levels of oleic acid for vegetable oils; and that the proposed range
for the “high oleic acid” for palm oil were not comparable to those of “high oleic acid” for safflowerseed oil and
“high oleic acid” for sunflowerseed oils; and therefore, it would be better to categorise as “mid oleic acid palm
oil". These delegations noted the need to examine in broad terms the impact of the use of term “Palm oil-high
oleic acid” would have to other “high oleic acid” containing oils defined in the Standard for Named Vegetable
Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) so as to ensure coherency and avoid confusion.
41. The Codex Secretariat clarified that there was no definition or agreed criteria for establishing whether an oil is
“mid oleic acid” or “high oleic acid”. In view of the implication of labelling provisions for these oils, the Codex
Secretariat recommended to seek CCFL advice on which criteria could be used to establish a claim for mid
and high oleic acid oils.
Conclusion
42. The Committee noted that substantial progress had been made on the proposed draft revision (Section 3) and
that the use of the term “high oleic acid palm oil” under product definition needed further consideration.
43. The Committee agreed to:
(i) Place the product definition in section 2.1 in square brackets;
(ii) Forward the proposed draft revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999):
Addition of Palm Oil with high Oleic Acid (OXG) (Appendix V) to CAC40 for adoption at Step 5.
(iii) Request CCFL advice on what might constitute high and mid oleic acid in vegetable oils.
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN
210-1999): REVISION OF FATTY ACID COMPOSITION AND OTHER QUALITY FACTORS OF PEANUT
OIL (Agenda Item 7)10
44. Argentina, Chair of the EWG, introduced the agenda item and briefly outlined the work undertaken. The
Committee was informed that as a result of discussion during the EWG, only a limited number of parameters
were proposed for revision.
Discussion
45. Delegations generally supported the proposed revision.
46. In response to the concerns regarding the revision of C22:1 due to negative health implications and the
apparent inconsistency in the revision of C18:1 without corresponding adjustments to the values on relative
density and iodine value, Argentina clarified that the proposals were based on the data submitted by members,
and that no concern to these values had been raised in the EWG.
47. The Committee agreed that the values would include the first decimal point for consistency, and amended the
values for C18:1 (from 35.0-80 to 35.0-80.0) and C22:1 (from ND - 0.55 to ND - 0.6) accordingly.
Conclusion
48. The Committee agreed to forward the proposed draft revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Appendix VI) to CAC40 for adoption at Step 5/8.
PROPOSALS FOR THE TRANSFER OF PROVISIONS, OTHER THAN THOSE IN TABLE 3 AND TABLE 4,
FROM THE APPENDIX INTO THE MAIN BODY OF THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS
(CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda Item 8)11
49. The Chair recalled that CCFO24 had agreed to: (i) retain the provisions in Tables 3 and 4 in the Appendix of
the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils and that any further proposals for transferring provisions from the
Appendix into the main body should be considered only after reviewing the parameters; and (ii) issue a CL
asking whether provisions other than those in Tables 3 and 4 should be transferred into the main body for
consideration at the current session.
Discussion
Proposals for the transfer of provisions other than those in Table 3 and Table 4
50. The Committee agreed to retain the provisions other than those in Tables 3 and 4 in the Appendix.
10 CX/FO 17/25/7; Comments of Brazil, Canada, Kiribati, Peru, the USA (CX/FO 17/25/7 Add.1); Egypt, EU, India
(CRD11)
11 Replies from Canada (CX/FO 17/25/8); Comments of EU, India, Philippines (CRD12); Malaysia (CRD21)
REP17/FO 7
REVIEW OF THE LIST OF ACCEPTABLE PREVIOUS CARGOES (APPENDIX II TO RCP 36-1987) (Agenda
Item 9)12
54. The Committee recalled that at its previous session, it was agreed to issue a CL to invite interested members
to propose further amendments to the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes and to establish an EWG to
consider the submitted proposals. The Committee was informed that two members had replied to the CL.
However as no new proposal was submitted, the EWG did not proceed.
55. For the 23 substances forwarded to FAO/WHO for evaluation, the Committee noted that the request had been
included in the “Status of Requests for FAO/WHO Scientific Advice13” which was presented at CAC38 and
CAC39. The Committee further noted that the evaluation will require an expert meeting for which extra-
budgetary resources and information/data submitted by members were needed, and that at the current
workload of FAO and WHO scientific advice programme, the work could start in 2019, provided the necessary
funds are made available.
Conclusion
56. The Committee agreed to:
(i) Request the Codex Secretariat to issue a CL inviting interested members and observers to propose further
amendments to Appendix 2: List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes of CAC/RCP 36-1987;
(ii) Establish an EWG, led by Malaysia and working in English only with the following Terms of Reference:
- Consider proposals on new substances to be added to the list provided that such proposals are
supported by adequate and relevant information.
- Prioritise substances to be submitted to FAO and WHO for evaluation.
- Consider proposals to remove substances from the list in light of new data.
- Prepare a report for consideration by CCFO26. It was noted that the report of the EWG should be
made available to the Codex Secretariat at least three months before CCFO26.
(iii) Convene an in-session Working Group, if needed, chaired by Malaysia, to consider the report of the EWG
and report back to the Committee.
57. The Committee further agreed to inform FAO/WHO that the evaluation of 23 substances was a matter of priority
for CCFO and to encourage FAO/WHO to evaluate the 23 substances as soon as possible.
14 CX/FO 17/25/10; Comments of Brazil, Egypt, EU, India, Russian Federation (CRD13)
REP17/FO 9
DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE INCLUSION OF PROVISIONS FOR WALNUT OIL, ALMOND OIL,
HAZELNUT OIL, PISTACHIO OIL, FLAXSEED OIL AND AVOCADO OIL IN THE STANDARD FOR NAMED
VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda Item 11)15
67. Iran, Chair of the EWG, introduced the agenda item, and explained that the document had been updated based
on the additional information provided by members.
Discussion
68. The Committee generally supported the proposed new work and noted the views expressed by delegations
that the proposed six oils, though not all of them are major oils from the perspective of the current trade volume,
were emerging as high value and nutritionally important oils in international trade; and their trade data were
still limited. It was also noted that these “specialty oils” needed to be regulated in view of their growing
importance in the international trade. The need for setting relevant values in the standard based on robust
data was also noted.
69. The Committee noted that the project document required revision to better reflect the global trend in trade for
these six oils and to include missing information required under Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities
in Procedural Manual and the requirements established by CCFO1616.
Conclusion
70. The Committee agreed:
(i) To start new work on the inclusion of the provision for walnut oil, almond oil, hazelnut oil, pistachio oil,
flaxseed oil and avocado oil in the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999);
(ii) That Iran with interested countries (Chile, India, Spain, Turkey and the United States of America (USA))
to revise and submit a revised project document to CAC40 to approval as new work through the Codex
Secretariat which complies with the Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities in the Procedural
Manual and the requirements established by CCFO16 (by end of April 2017);
(iii) To establish an EWG, chaired by Iran and co-chaired by India, and working in English only, to prepare the
proposed draft provisions for walnut oil, almond oil, hazelnut oil, pistachio oil, flaxseed oil and avocado oil
for inclusion in the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) for circulation for
comments at Step 3 and consideration at CCFO26, subject to CAC40 approval of the new work. It was
noted that the report of the EWG should be made available to the Codex Secretariat at least four months
before CCFO26.
DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE REPLACEMENT OF ACID VALUE WITH FREE FATTY ACIDS FOR VIRGIN
PALM OILS IN THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda Item
12)17
71. Malaysia introduced the discussion paper and explained that the purpose of the proposed new work was to
revise the way acidity of virgin palm oils was expressed in the Appendix of the Standard for Named Vegetable
Oils and to include a similar provision for crude palm kernel oil. The Delegation explained that since the free
fatty acid (FFA) of palm oil is expressed as palmitic acid, being the major fatty acid of palm oils, there would
be a mismatch of the acidity expressed as acid value of 10.0 mg KOH/g oil (in the Standard) with the
specification of FFA 5% (as palmitic acid) currently in practice in the international trade of palm oil in view that
the maximum level of 10 mg KOH/g of oil of acid value is only equivalent to the specification of FFA 5% (as
oleic acid). Since this situation was creating difficulties in the trade of this commodity, Malaysia was proposing
the new work.
72. The Delegation further presented the revised project document (CRD22) and explained that: (i) the title had
been modified to read “replacement of acid value with free fatty acids for virgin palm oil and inclusion of free
fatty acids for crude palm kernel oil”’ to better reflect the scope of the proposed new work; and (ii) the specific
values had been removed as they would be discussed after the new work approval.
Discussion
73. In view of the general support for starting new work, the Committee considered the project document and
agreed with its content.
15 CX/FO 17/25/11; Comments of EU, India and Turkey (CRD14), Ecuador (CRD18), Nigeria (CRD20)
16 ALINOM 99/17
17 CX/FO 17/25/12rev; Comments of India, EU, Philippines, Thailand (CRD15); Revised proposal from Malaysia
(CRD22)
REP17/FO 10
74. On the suggestion to consider extending the replacement of the acid value with free fatty acids to the other
two oils listed under section 1 of the Appendix (i.e. refined oils, cold pressed and virgin oils), the Committee
noted that under the current global trade it was normal practice for the main quality specifications of the virgin
palm oil to be expressed in terms of the content of free fatty acid; however it was not clear whether this was
done for the other oils. Therefore, the Committee agreed not to broaden the scope of the new work noting that
members could always propose the revision of this parameter if necessary.
Conclusion
75. The Committee agreed to:
(i) Start new work on the replacement of acid value with free fatty acids for virgin palm oil and inclusion of
free fatty acids for crude palm kernel oil in Section 1 of Appendix in the Standard for Named Vegetable
Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999);
(ii) Submit the project document to CAC40 for approval as new work (Appendix VIII); and
(iii) Request Malaysia to prepare the proposed draft revision of the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CODEX STAN 210-1999) for circulation for comments at Step 3 and consideration at CCFO26, subject
to CAC40 approval of the new work. It was noted that the proposed draft revision should be made available
to the Codex Secretariat at least four months before CCFO26.
DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE INCLUSION OF QUALITY PARAMETERS FOR CRUDE RICE BRAN OIL
IN THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN 210-1999) (Agenda Item 13)18
76. India in introducing the agenda item clarified that the intent of the proposed new work was to introduce a “Note”
in the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils to indicate that the fatty acid composition for rice bran oil in Table 1
is also applicable to the crude rice bran oil. The Delegation noted that reference to the crude form of the oil
was already included in the Appendix (Tables 2, 3 and 4) and that the intention was not to broaden the scope
of the Standard which applies to “vegetable oils described in Section 2.1 presented in a state for human
consumption”.
Discussion
77. Delegations generally supported the proposed new work but requested clarification on: the use of crude rice
bran oils (i.e. whether it was used for human consumption); the justification for the proposed new work (i.e.
why this new work was proposed); the scientific validity of the proposed “Note” (i.e. whether refining could
affect the fatty acid composition of crude rice bran oil); the implication of introducing such a note to other part
of the Standard. The need to better define the term “crude” as well as the appropriateness to include the
proposed note in the main text were also raised.
78. Referring to CRD26 India further clarified that crude rice bran oil was not an oil ready for human consumption
but rather an “edible grade oil” obtained by solvent extraction methods which required further processing or
refinement to remove unwanted impurities and reduce acid values before being ready to be offered for direct
human consumption; that the some producers of crude rice bran oil were unable to trade this commodity due
to the lack of clarity in the Standard with regard to the applicability of the fatty acid composition for crude rice
bran oil; that it was statistically proven that the fatty acid composition of crude rice bran oil and (refined) rice
bran oil were the same.
79. With regard to the implication of introducing such a “Note” and the applicability of the fatty acid composition
also to crude rice bran oils, the Committee noted that CCFO had already addressed the issue of the crude oils
at several sessions, including at CCFO16 where a discussion on whether the title of Table 1 should apply to
crude or refined oils 19 and CCFO19/20 decision regarding the inclusion of several entries for crude oils,
including crude rice bran oil, in Tables 2, 3 and 4.20 CCFO16 noted that in general, there was no significant
difference between the GLC ranges of crude and refined oils. It was also noted by this Session that there were
enough general scientific knowledge and expert understanding that refining of crude fats and oils does not
affect the fatty acid composition of crude oils and that from a scientific and technical view-point the fatty acid
ranges in Table 1 were also applicable to crude oils intended for further processing to present them in a state
for human consumption.
80. Some delegations questioned the need to make reference to crude rice bran oil in view that the scope of the
standard applies to vegetable oils presented in a state for human consumption. It was clarified that Table 1 in
the main body is for oils intended for human consumption and is within the scope of the standard, whilst
inclusion of other quality and composition factors for crude oils in Appendix of the standard is to cater for
current trade practices in crude oils.
81. Regarding the placement of the “Note”, the Committee noted that it was more appropriate to have this “note”
included in the Appendix where data on crude oils are included.
Conclusion
82. In view of the above discussion and clarification provided, and recognising that the inclusion of the “Note” on
the applicability of the fatty acid composition of rice bran oil to the crude form of the oil was not intended to
broaden the scope of the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils but to provide clarity in the trade of crude rice
bran oil, the Committee agreed to:
(i) Include the following text in Section 2 of the Appendix of Standard for Named Vegetable Oils “For the fatty
acid range of crude rice bran oil not intended for direct human consumption the ranges as given for rice
bran oil in Table 1 apply”;
(ii) Forward the proposed amendment (Appendix IX) to CAC40 for adoption.
83. Recalling the conclusion of CCFO16 to consider the question of the applicability of Table 1 fatty acid
composition to crude oils at a later date, the Committee agreed to:
(i) Establish an EWG, chaired by USA with the assistance of AOCS, working in English only, to prepare a
discussion paper on the applicability of the fatty acid composition of other oils listed in Table 1 in relation
to their corresponding crude form; and present the findings for CCFO26 consideration. It was noted that
the report of the EWG should be made available to the Codex Secretariat at least three months before
CCFO26.
DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE INCLUSION OF UNREFINED EDIBLE TALLOW IN THE STANDARD FOR
NAMED ANIMAL FATS (CODEX STAN 211-1999) (Agenda Item 14)21
84. The Committee postponed discussion of this agenda item to CCFO26 and noted that Australia was still actively
collecting data and information on unrefined edible tallow, and that a discussion paper and project document
proposing the addition of new fats in the Standard for Named Animal Fats (CODEX STAN 211-1999) would
be prepared and submitted for consideration at CCFO26.
85. The Chair reminded that the requirements of CCFO16 also applied to the addition of new fats in the Standard
for Named Animal Fats (CODEX STAN 211-1999).
(i) Start new work on the revision of Sections 3, 8 and the Appendix of the Standard for Olive Oils And Olive
Pomace Oils (CODEX STAN 33-1981);
(ii) Submit the project document to CAC40 for approval as new work (Appendix X);
(iii) Establish an EWG, chaired by Spain, co-chaired by Argentina and Canada, and working in English only,
to prepare the proposed draft revisions of the Standard for Olive Oils and Olive Pomace Oils (CODEX
STAN 33-1981) for circulation for comments at Step 3 and consideration at CCFO26, subject to CAC40
approval of the new work. It was noted that the report of the EWG should be made available to the Codex
Secretariat at least four months before CCFO26;
(iv) Convene a PWG, chaired by Spain, and co-chaired by Argentina and Canada open to all members and
observers and working in English only, and meeting immediately prior to CCFO26 to consider the report
of the EWG and comments submitted.
Inclusion of Free Fatty Acids as Quality Characteristics Criteria for Refined Rice Bran Oils in the
Standard for Named Vegetable Oil (CODEX STAN 210-1999)23
90. Thailand presented CRD19 and explained that in refined rice bran oil the most critical quality parameter was
free fatty acids and or acid value and that these two parameters were currently being used in trade. However
in the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) only acid value was listed as the
parameter for determination of the acidity of refined rice bran oil. To reflect the current industry and trade
practice of rice bran oil, Thailand proposed to amend Appendix 1 to include: free fatty acid for refined rice bran
oil (under quality characteristics) and a method for determination of acidity (under methods of analysis).
Conclusion
91. In view of general support, the Committee requested Thailand to prepare a discussion paper including a project
document based on the guideline on the application of the Criteria for the establishment of work priorities in
the Procedural Manual, for consideration at CCFO26.
Change in the Temperature for the Analysis of Refractive Index and Apparent Density of Palm
Superolein, the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999)24
92. Malaysia introduced CRD23 and explained that when the refractive index (RI) and apparent density for Palm
superolein are determined at an experimental temperature of 40°C as stated in the Standard for Named
Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-1999) the oil did not comply with the stated ranges for these parameters.
However at an experimental temperature of 30°C it was possible to obtain results that fell within the stated
ranges of the standard. The Delegation proposed that CCFO consider amending the Standard to enable the
parameters to be determined at 30°C.
Conclusion
93. There was support for this proposal. However, in view of its late availability and the need of some countries
for more time to examine the proposal, the Committee agreed to request the Codex Secretariat to issue a CL
inviting comment on the proposals presented in CRD23 for consideration at CCFO26.
APPENDIX I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS
LISTA DE PARTICIPANTES
OBSERVERS
OBSERVATEURS
OBSERVADORES
Appendix II
FOOD ADDITIVES
Appendix III
1. Scope
This Standard applies to the fish oils described in section 2 that are presented in a state for human consumption.
For the purpose of this Standard, the term fish oils refers to oils derived from fish and shellfish as defined in
section 2 of the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003)1. This standard only
applies to fish oils used in food and in food supplements where those are regulated as foods.
2. Description
Fish oils means oils intended for human consumption derived from the raw material as defined in Section 2 of
the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003). Processes to obtain fish oil for human
consumption may involve, but are not limited to, extraction of crude oil from raw material and refining of that
crude oil. Fish oils and concentrated fish oils are primarily composed of glycerides of fatty acids whereas
concentrated fish oils ethyl esters are primarily composed of fatty acids ethyl esters. Fish oils may contain
other lipids and unsaponifiable constituents naturally present.
Crude fish oils and crude fish liver oils are oils intended for human consumption after they have undergone
further processing, e.g. refining and purification and have to comply with section 3.1, as applicable, as well as
with sections 4, 6.1 and 7. Fish oils intended for direct human consumption shall comply with all sections of
this standard.
The refined fish oil production process typically includes several steps such as repeated heating at high
temperatures as well as alkali/ acid treatments and repeated removal of the water phase. Fish oils may also
be subjected to processing steps (e.g. solvent extraction, saponification, re-esterification, trans-esterification).
2.1 Named fish oils are derived from specific raw materials which are characteristic of the major fish or
shellfish taxon from which the oil is extracted.
2.1.1 Anchovy oil is derived from Engraulis ringens and other species of the genus Engraulis (Engraulidae).
2.1.2 Tuna oil is derived from the species of the genus Thunnus and from the species Katsuwonus pelamis
(Scombridae).
2.1.3 Krill oil is derived from Euphausia superba. The major components are triglycerides and phospholipids.
2.1.4 Menhaden oil is derived from the genera Brevootia and Ethmidium (Clupeidae).
2.1.5 Salmon oil is derived from the family Salmonidae.
2.2 Fish oils (unnamed) are derived from one or more species of fish or shellfish. This includes also
mixtures with fish liver oils.
2.3 Named fish liver oils are derived from the livers of fish and are composed of fatty acids, vitamins or
other components that are representative of the livers from the species from which the oil is extracted.
2.3.1 Cod liver oil is derived from the liver of wild cod, Gadus morhua L and other species of Gadidae.
2.4 Fish liver oil (unnamed) are derived from the livers of one or more species of fish.
2.5 Concentrated fish oils are derived from fish oils described in Sections 2.1 to 2.4 which have been
subjected to processes that may involve, but are not limited to, hydrolysis, fractionation, winterization
and/or re-esterification to increase the concentration of specific fatty acids.
2.5.1 Concentrated fish oil contains 35 to 50 w/w % fatty acids as sum of C20:5 (n-3) eicosapentaenoic acid
(EPA) and C22:6 (n-3) docosahexaenoic acid (DHA).
2.5.2 Highly concentrated fish oil contains more than 50 w/w % fatty acids as sum of EPA and DHA.
2.6 Concentrated fish oils ethyl esters are derived from fish oils described in Section 2.1 to 2.4 and are
primarily composed of fatty acids ethyl esters.
1Fish: Any of the cold-blooded (ecothermic) aquatic vertebrates. Amphibians and aquatic reptiles are not included. Shellfish:
Those species of aquatic molluscs and crustaceans that are commonly used for food.
REP17/FO Appendix III 28
2.6.1 Concentrated fish oil ethyl esters contain fatty acids as esters of ethanol of which 40 to 60 w/w % are
as sum of EPA and DHA.
2.6.2 Highly concentrated fish oil ethyl esters contain fatty acids as esters of ethanol of which more than
60 w/w % are as sum of EPA and DHA.
4. Food Additives
Antioxidants, sequestrants, antifoaming agents, and emulsifiers used in accordance with Tables 1 and 2 of the
General Standard for Food Additives (CODEX STAN 192-1995), in food category 02.1.3 Lard, tallow, fish oil,
and other animal fats are acceptable for use in foods conforming to this standard.
The following additives may be used in addition:
INS Additive name Maximum level
Antioxidant
300 Ascorbic acid, L- GMP
304, 305 Ascorbyl esters 2500 mg/kg, as ascorbyl stearate
307a, b, c Tocopherols 6000 mg/kg, singly or in combination
Emulsifier
322 (i) Lecithin GMP
471 Mono- and di-glycerides of fatty acids GMP
The flavourings used in products covered by this standard should comply with the Guidelines for the Use of
Flavourings (CAC/GL 66-2008).
5. Contaminants
The products covered by this Standard shall comply with the Maximum Levels of the General Standard for
Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995).
The products covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum residue limits for pesticides and/or
veterinary drugs established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
6. Hygiene
6.1 General hygiene
It is recommended that the products covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and handled in
accordance with the appropriate sections of the General Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), the
Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003), and Code of Hygienic Practice for the
Storage and Transport of Edible Oils and Fats in Bulk (CAC/RCP 36-1987).
6.2 Microbiological criteria
The products should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the Principles and
Guidelines for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria Related to Foods (CAC/GL 21-
1997).
7. Labelling
The requirements of the General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods (CODEX STAN 1-1985)
and of the Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling (CAC/GL 2-1985) apply to this standard.
7.1 Name of the food
The name of the fish oil shall conform to the descriptions given in Section 2 of this Standard. For salmon oil
the label shall specify the source of the raw material (wild or farmed).
7.2 Labelling on non-retail containers
Information on the above labelling requirements shall be given either on the container or in accompanying
documents, except that the name of the food, lot identification and the name and address of the manufacturer
or packer shall appear on the container.
However, lot identification and the name and address of the manufacturer or packer may be replaced by an
identification mark, provided that such a mark is clearly identifiable with the accompanying documents.
For crude fish oils and crude fish liver oils the label shall indicate that these oils are intended for human
consumption only after they have undergone further processing.
7.3 Other labelling requirements
For fish liver oils (Sections 2.3 and 2.4) the content in vitamin A and vitamin D, naturally present or restored,
shall be given if required by country of retail sale.
REP17/FO Appendix III 30
For all fish oils covered by this standard the content of EPA and DHA shall be given if required by country of
retail sale.
Table 1: Fatty acid (FA) composition of named fish oil and fish liver oil categories as determined by
gas liquid chromatography from authentic samples (expressed as percentage of total fatty acids) (see
Section 3.1 of the Standard)
Salmon Cod
Anchovy Tuna Krill Menhaden
(Section 2.1.5) Liver
Fatty acids (Section (Section (Section (Section
(Section
2.1.1) 2.1.2) 2.1.3) 2.1.4) Wild Farmed 2.3.1)
C14:0 myristic acid 2.7-11.5 ND-5.0 5.0-13.0 8.0-11.0 2.0-5.0 1.5-5.5 2.0-6.0
C15:0 pentadecanoic
ND-1.5 ND-2.0 NA ND-1.0 ND-1.0 ND-0.5 ND-0.5
acid
C16:0 palmitic acid 13.0-22.0 14.0-24.0 17.0-24.6 18.0-20.0 10.0-16.0 6.5-12.0 7.0-14.0
C16:1 (n-7) palmitoleic
4.0-12.6 ND-12.5 2.5-9.0 9.0-13.0 4.0-6.0 2.0-5.0 4.5-11.5
acid
C17:0 heptadecanoic
ND-2.0 ND-3.0 NA ND-1.0 ND-1.0 ND-0.5 NA
acid
C18:0 stearic acid 1.0-7.0 ND-7.5 NA 2.5-4.0 2.0-5.0 2.0-5.0 1.0-4.0
C18:1 (n-7) vaccenic
1.7-3.7 ND– 7.0 4.7-8.1 2.5-3.5 1.5-2.5 NA 2.0–7.0
acid
12.0-
C18:1 (n-9) oleic acid 3.6-17.0 10.0-25.0 6.0-14.5 5.5-8.5 8.0-16.0 30.0-47.0
21.0
C18:2 (n-6) linoleic
ND-3.5 ND-3.0 ND-3.0 2.0-3.5 1.5-2.5 8.0-15.0 0.5-3.0
acid
C18:3 (n-3) linolenic
ND-7.0 ND-2.0 0.1-4.7 ND-2.0 ND-2.0 3.0-6.0 ND-2.0
acid
C18:3 (n-6) γ-linolenic
ND-5.0 ND-4.0 NA ND-2.5 ND-2.0 ND-0.5 NA
acid
C18:4 (n-3) stearidonic
ND-5.0 ND-2.0 1.0-8.1 1.5-3.0 1.0-4.0 0.5-1.5 0.5-4.5
acid
C20:0 arachidic acid ND-1.8 ND-2.5 NA 0.1-0.5 ND-0.5 0.1-0.5 NA
C20:1 (n-9) eicosenoic
ND-4.0 ND-2.5 NA ND-0.5 2.0-10.0 1.5-7.0 5.0-17.0
acid
C20:1 (n-11)
ND-4.0 ND-3.0 NA 0.5-2.0 NA NA 1.0-5.5
eicosenoic acid
C20:4 (n-6)
ND-2.5 ND-3.0 NA ND-2.0 0.5-2.5 ND-1.2 ND-1.5
arachidonic acid
C20:4 (n-3)
ND-2.0 ND-1.0 NA NA 1.0-3.0 0.5-1.0 ND-2.0
eicosatetraenoic acid
C20:5 (n-3)
5.0-26.0 2.5-9.0 14.3-28.0 12.5-19.0 6.5-11.5 2.0-6.0 7.0-16.0
eicosapentaenoic acid
C21:5 (n-3)
heneicosapentaenoic ND-4.0 ND-1.0 NA 0.5-1.0 ND-4.0 NA ND-1.5
acid
C22:1 (n-9) erucic acid ND-2.3 ND-2.0 ND-1.5 0.1-0.5 ND-1.5 3.0-7.0 ND-1.5
C22:1 (n-11) cetoleic
ND-5.6 ND-1.0 NA ND-0.1 1.0-1.5 NA 5.0-12.0
acid
REP17/FO Appendix III 31
C22:5 (n-3)
ND-4.0 ND-3.0 ND-0.7 2.0-3.0 1.5-3.0 1.0-2.5 0.5-3.0
docosapentaenoic acid
C22:6 (n-3)
4.0-26.5 21.0-42.5 7.1-15.7 5.0-11.5 6.0-14.0 3.0-10.0 6.0-18.0
docosahexaenoic acid
ND = non-detect, defined as ≤0.05%
NA = not applicable or available
P-Anisidine
European Pharmacopeia 2.5.36
value
Appendix IV
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR OLIVE OILS AND OLIVE POMACE OILS
(CODEX STAN 33-1981): REVISION OF THE LIMIT FOR CAMPESTEROL
(N12-2015)
(at Step 5/8)
Appendix V
PROPOSED REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN 210-1999):
ADDITION OF PALM OIL WITH HIGH OLEIC ACID (OXG)
(N10-2015)
(at Step 5)
2. DESCRIPTION
2.1 Product Definitions
[Palm oil – high oleic acid (high oleic acid palm oil) is derived from the fleshy mesocarp of hybrid palm
fruit OxG (Elaeis oleifera x Elaeis guineensis).]
Table 3: Levels of desmethylsterols in crude vegetable oils from authentic samples 1 as a percentage of total
sterols
Table 4: Levels of tocopherols and tocotrienols in crude vegetable oils from authentic samples (mg/kg)
34
REP17/FO Appendix V 35
Delta-tocopherol ND – 31
Alpha-tocotrienol 165 - 179
Gamma-tocotrienol 475 - 586
Delta-tocotrienol 35 - 61
Total (mg/kg) 678 - 956
ND - Non-detectable
1
Data taken from species listed in Section 2.
35
REP17/FO Appendix VI 36
APPENDIX VI
Arachis Oil
Relative density 0.909 - 0.920 x=20ºC
Iodine value 77-107
REP17/FO Appendix VII 37
Appendix VII
PROJECT DOCUMENT
PROPOSED NEW WORK TO REVISE THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN
210-1999): ESSENTIAL COMPOSITION OF SUNFLOWERSEED OIL
1
FAOSTAT, 2012.
2Protabase Records - Helianthus annuus L.(at. http://database.prota.org/PROTAhtml/Helianthus%20annuus_En.htm)
3Grunvald AK et al. Influence of Temperature on the Fatty Acid Composition of the Oil From Sunflower Genotypes Grown
in Tropical Regions. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society, 90(4):545-553, 2013.
4 Lajara JR, Diaz U, Quidiello RD. Definite influence of location and climatic conditions on the fatty acid composition of
sunflower seed oil. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society 67(10):618-623, 1990.
5Salera E, Baldini M. Performance of high and low oleic acid hybrids of sunflower under different environmental conditions.
seeds. International Journal of Chemical, Environmental & Biological Sciences 1(2):4087, 2013.
REP17/FO Appendix VII 38
b) Volume of production and consumption in individual countries and volume and pattern of trade between
countries.
Sunflower oil is the fourth most important oil in the world. Due to its price as compared to other edible oils, its
consumption has increased significantly in the last few years.
According to the most current data published by the FAOSTAT (www.faostat.fao.org), an average of
13,713,410.5 tons of sunflower oil was produced in the 2012 and 2013 crops. The top five producers are
Russian Federation, Ukraine, Argentina, Turkey and France, which represented in this period 67% of world
sunflower oil production (graph 1).
Graph 1.Sunflower oil production of top 5 producers (average 2012/2013).
In 2012/2013, the main exporters were Ukraine, the Russian Federation, Argentina, Netherlands and Hungary.
Practically, all production of sunflowerseed oil in Ukraine was destined to exportation, while 41% of the oil
produced in the Russian Federation and 46% in Argentina were exported. Ukraine, Russian Federation and
Argentina were responsible for 25, 10 and 4%, respectively, by exports considering the global production in
this period.
As regards to imports, India, European Union (except intra trade), Turkey, Egypt and Netherlands were the
top five importers of sunflowerseed oil in 2012 and 2013 (graph 2). They imported together in this period a
total of 3,753,634 tons of sunflower oil.
REP17/FO Appendix VII 39
c) Diversification of national legislations and apparent resultant or potential impediments to International trade.
This Codex Standard may be used by Member States as a reference for the establishment of their own national
legislation.
The WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade states that, whenever a Member adopts a technical
regulation in accordance with relevant international standards, it shall be presumed not to create unnecessary
obstacle to international trade (Article 2.5.) There is sound scientific evidence of the world variation in the
oleic/linoleic acid levels and related indexes as a consequence of high temperatures in production areas.In
2006 in Argentina, the Instituto Argentino de Normalización y Certificación (IRAM), the Argentine
standardization body which represents Argentina before ISO, revised the sunflower standard based on the
results of the ASAGA study attached.7
Finally, Argentina modified its regulation to adapt it to the production reality, since the Codex Standard no
longer allows reflecting the fatty acid profile of sunflower oils from Argentina traditional seeds.
The proposed amendment to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210) will help to provide
a harmonized international approach to the said quality and composition factors and will facilitate sunflower oil
world trade for all the producers.
The resolution of the various inconsistencies found for sunflower oils defined in Codex Stan 210, will avoid
difficulties in and barriers to trade.
d) International or regional market potential.
The consumption of edible vegetable oils has risen significantly in the last few years, and this trend is expected
to continue and increase in the future.
Sunflower oil production is forecast to reach an all-time high of 16.6 million tons 1.4 million on the year. Exports
are projected to surge, with Ukraine and Russia accounting for the bulk of the increase. Global consumption
is forecast to grow 4 percent, driven mainly by strong demand in the EU, India, the Middle East and North
Africa.
d) Amenability of the commodity to standardization.
This commodity is already regulated by CODEX STAN 210 in force since 1999. However, due to the
appearance of new sunflower hybrids and production under new agro climatic conditions, differences in
composition parameters mainly based on production areas with wider temperature variation and high
temperatures are becoming increasingly evident, which requires modification to reduce the gaps in oleic and
linoleic acid between sunflowerseed oil and sunflowerseed mid-oleic oil.
7 - http://www.alimentosargentinos.gob.ar/HomeAlimentos/Aceites%20y%20Oleaginosas/documentos/011.pdf
REP17/FO Appendix VII 40
The proposed changes should be introduced in the standard as there are scientific studies and analytical data
supporting the rationale for amendment of Codex Stan 210.
e) Coverage of the main consumer protection and trade issues by existing or proposed general standards.
The Codex Standard in force does not address the natural variation in the fatty acid composition of sunflower
oil according to agro climatic conditions of production areas worldwide.
Therefore, the amendment to the Codex Standard will contribute to ensure fair practices in the trade in these
oils.
f) Number of commodities which would need separate standards indicating whether raw, semi processed or
processed.
Not applicable.
g) Work already undertaken by other international organizations in this field and/or suggested by the relevant
international intergovernmental bodies.
None known.
5. Relevance to the Codex strategic objectives:
The proposed new work would contribute to guaranteeing the proper identification of sunflower oil in
international trade, taking into account the special needs and concerns of all countries, as it will meet the
following strategic goals of the Strategic Plan2014-2019 of the Codex Alimentarius.
Goal 1: Establish international food standards that address current and emerging food issues.
The elaboration of Codex standards that are more representative of the world conditions will help to ensure
their wider adoption by Member States and reduce to a minimum their possibility of causing negative effects
on international trade as it is guaranteed that they do not represent any technical barriers to trade. This activity
is very important considering the efforts being made by the international community to increase the production
of food in order to guarantee food security, for which new regions that used to be unproductive have been
incorporated into the productive system over the years.
Historically, sunflower seed is being produced in temperate countries. The identity and quality factors of Codex
Standard were defined based on data from these countries. The increasing of sunflower seed production in
new regions, with higher temperature, has resulted in oil with different fatty acid profiles, which does not fill the
parameters established, making outdated the current in Codex Standard.
According to objective 1.2 of the strategic goal 1, it is expected that international standards could be developed
and revised in order to reach the needs of its Members in response to factors that affect food safety, nutrition
and fair practices in the food trade. Unfortunately, this issue has been discussing in Committee since 2009
without a decision about the matter.
Goal 2: Ensure the application of risk analysis principles in the development of Codex standards
The proposed work will promote the elaboration of Codex commodity standards based on the rigorous scientific
analysis of collected data.
The proposed amendment to this Codex Standard (CODEX STAN 210) will promote fair trade of sunflower oil,
as the production conditions in other geographic areas with parameters different from those regulated by
Codex are considered thus reflecting the existing world variations. Also, this will prevent genuine oils from
being classified under undefined areas.
This proposal of new work is aligned with the objective 2.3 of the strategic goal 2 that recommend increasing
scientific input from developing countries. Argentina and Brazil present their analytical results from genuine oil
of traditional sunflower seeds showing that the fatty acid profile, mainly oleic and linoleic acid, are out of current
codex standard. There are scientific evidences that explain the influence of temperature in the fatty acid profile.
6 . Information on the relation between the proposal and other existing Codex documents as well as
other ongoing work:
There are no other ongoing work about sunflower oil. However, similar new works were recently approved by
CCFO regarding revision on standards of olive oil standard and peanut oil due to climatic influence or new
varieties not covered by current standards.
7. Identification of any requirement for and availability of expert scientific advice:
None identified.
REP17/FO Appendix VII 41
8 . Identification of any need for technical input to the standard from external bodies so that this can
be planned for:
None identified.
9. Proposed time-line for completion of the new work:
Appendix VIII
PROJECT DOCUMENT
PROPOSED NEW WORK TO REVISE THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN
210-1999):
REPLACEMENT OF ACID VALUE WITH FREE FATTY ACIDS FOR VIRGIN PALM OIL AND INCLUSION
OF FREE FATTY ACIDS FOR CRUDE PALM KERNEL OIL
42
REP17/FO Appendix VIII 43
a) Volume of production and consumption in individual countries, and volume and pattern of trade
between countries
According to data published by the Oil World Annual, the total world production of 17 major oils and fats in
2015 amounted to 206.38 million tonnes1. Palm oil is the largest produced vegetable oil in the world. The
global production of palm oil reached 62.56 million tonnes, representing 30% of the total world production of
major oils and fats. This is followed by soybean oil (24%), rapeseed oil (13%) and sunflower oil (7%). Palm
kernel oil is the fifth largest produced vegetable oil at 6.85 million tonnes, contributing to about 3% of total
world production of oils and fats (Figure 1).
___________________________________________________________________________
1 Oil World Annual 2016
2 Oil World Annual 2016
3 Oil World Annual 2016
43
REP17/FO Appendix VIII 44
The major exporters of palm oil and palm kernel oil are Indonesia and Malaysia. In 2015, Indonesia and
Malaysia exported a combined total of 44 million tonnes and 2.96 million tonnes of palm oil and palm kernel
oil, respectively. Both oils are imported by more than 150 countries of which the major importers are India,
EU, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, U.S.A and Brazil. Figure 2 illustrates the major palm oil importers in
2015 while Figure 3 shows the major importers of palm kernel oil in the same year.
___________________________________________________________________________
4 Oil World Annual 2016
44
REP17/FO Appendix VIII 45
6. Information on the relation between the proposal and other existing Codex documents as well as
other ongoing work
This proposal is a revision to the existing Codex Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CODEX STAN 210-
1999).
8. Identification of any need for technical input to the standard from external bodies so that this
can be planned for:
No technical input to the standard from external bodies is necessary.
9. The proposed timeline for completion of the new work, including the start date, the proposed
date for adoption at step 5, and the proposed date for adoption by the Commission
Approval as new work by the 40th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in 2017;
Proposed draft revisions considered at Step 4 at the 26th Session of CCFO, 2019.
Final adoption at Step 5/8 in the 42nd Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in 2019.
45
REP17/FO Appendix IX 46
Appendix IX
AMENDMENT TO THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CODEX STAN 210-1999)
(for adoption)
Appendix X
PROJECT DOCUMENT
NEW WORK TO REVISE THE STANDARD FOR OLIVE OILS AND OLIVE POMACE OILS (CODEX STAN
33-1981)
___________________________________________________________________________
1 www.internationaloliveoil.org
47
REP17/FO Appendix X 48
International trade in olive oil has sharply developed. Over the last twenty years it increased by 88% in volume
and by 420% in value 2 to reach a total volume of imports of 822.5 kilotonnes in 2015/16 marketing year
(October to September), for an overall value of EUR 3 209 millions in 2015 2. The leading five importers were
the USA (314 kt, approximately 38% of global imports), the EU (119 kt, 14.5%), Brazil (50 kt, 6.1%), Japan
(53.5 kt, 6.5%) and Canada (41 kt, 5%). During the same period, the main five consumers were the EU (1
618.5 kt, approximately 55%), the USA (310 kt, 10.5%), Turkey (124 kt, 4.2%), Syria (105 kt, 3.6%) and
Morocco (120 kt, 4%).
(b) Diversification of national legislation and apparent resultant or potential impediments to international trade.
The Codex standard may be used as a benchmark for standards by member countries in setting their domestic
regulations.
The alignment of national standard to Codex standard is essential to facilitate international trade, promote and
ensure fair trade practices and consumer protection.
Currently producing countries and consuming countries often apply national and international standards which
differ on substantial aspects related to quality and authenticity parameters and analytical methods. Most of the
producing countries use the standard of the International Olive Council.
(c) International or regional market potential
While the EU, Tunisia, Turkey and Morocco are likely to remain the world's leading olive oil exporters in the
near future, production is expected to expand considerably in a number of other countries.
(d) Amenability of the commodity to standardization
The experience with the current Codex standard, in place since 1981, has shown the amenability of olive oil
to standardization.
(e) Coverage of the main consumer protection and trade issues by existing or proposed general standards
The aim of the new work is to revise the existing Codex standard on olive oil.
(f) Number of commodities which would need separate standards indicating whether raw, semi-processed
or processed
The scope of the current standard (CODEX STAN 33-1981) will remain unchanged.
(g) Work already undertaken by other international organizations in this field and/or suggested by the relevant
international intergovernmental body(ies)
International Olive Council (IOC) has developed the following standard: COI/T.15/NC No 3/Rev. 11 TRADE
STANDARD APPLYING TO OLIVE OILS AND OLIVE-POMACE OILS, and COI/T.20/Doc. No 15/Rev. 8
SENSORY ANALYSIS OF OLIVE OIL METHOD FOR THE ORGANOLEPTIC ASSESSMENT OF VIRGIN
OLIVE OIL
___________________________________________________________________________
2 GTA (Global Trade Atlas) import value; annual series 1996-2015
48
REP17/FO Appendix X 49
6. Information on the relation between the proposal and other existing CODEX documents
n.a.
7. Identification of any need of any requirement for and availability of expert scientific advice
No specific need for any scientific advice has been identified.
8. Identification of any need for technical input to the standard from external bodies
A contribution from relevant organisations including the IOC and AOCS in the revision of the Codex standard
would be expected.
49