Get documents about "CODEX STANDARD FOR GRATED DESICCATED COCONUT
Shared by: HC120928222241
-
Stats
- views:
- 3
- posted:
- 9/28/2012
- language:
- Unknown
- pages:
- 19
Document Sample
1
CODEX COMMITTEE ON PROCESSED FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
WORKING GROUP ON GRATED DESICCATED COCONUT
DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS: 06 of January 2010
COMMENTS TO:
Mr Andre Oliveira
E-mail: andre.oliveira@agricultura.gov.br
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION TO THE
CODEX STANDARD FOR GRATED DESICCATED COCONUT
1
2 1. SCOPE
3 This Standard applies to grated desiccated coconut, as defined in Section 2 below, and offered for direct
4 consumption, including for catering purposes or for repacking if required. It does not apply to the product when
5 indicated as being intended for further processing.
6 2. DESCRIPTION
7 2.1 PRODUCT DEFINITION
8 Grated desiccated coconut is the product:
9 (a) prepared from substantially sound white meat obtained from the whole nut of coconut (Cocos nucifera
10 L.), having reached appropriate maturity for processing;
11 (b) processed in an appropriate manner, undergoing operations of de-husking, [de-shelling] [hatcheting] Comment [a1]: Malaysia.
12 peeling, [paring]milling, [comminuting],] drying and sifting; and Comment [W2]: Philippines
Comment [a3]: Malaysia
13 (c) initially produced in a range of particle sizes.
Comment [a4]: Malaysia
14 2.2 STYLES
15 2.2.1 Grated desiccated coconut with respect to oil content may be designated as:
16 (a) [Low fat] Defatted desiccated coconut – products with total oil content between 55-6562%]. Comment [a5]: Fiji, Malaysia
Comment [a6]: Malaysia
17 (b) [High] Whole fat desiccated coconut – products with total oil content above 6562%.
Comment [W7]: Philippines
18 2.2.2 Other Styles Comment [a8]: Fiji
19 Any other presentation of the product should be permitted provided that the product: Comment [W9]: Philippines
20 (a) is sufficiently distinctive from other forms of presentation laid down in the Standard;
21 (b) meets all relevant requirements of the Standard, including requirements relating to limitations on
22 defects, drained weight, and any other requirements which are applicable to that style which most
23 closely resembles the style or styles intended to be provided for under this provision; and
24 (c) is adequately described on the label to avoid confusing or misleading the consumer.
25 2.3 SIZING (optional)
26 Grated desiccated coconut may be [graded] [classified] according to their granulometry as follows: Comment [a10]: Fiji.
27 (a) Extra-fine desiccated coconut - This is grated desiccated coconut of which not less than 90% of the
28 weight shall pass easily through a sieve with square apertures of 0.85 mm, but of which maximum 25% of
29 the weight passes through a sieve of 0.50 mm aperture size.
30 (b) Fine desiccated coconut - This is grated desiccated coconut of which not less than 80% of the weight
31 shall pass easily through a sieve of square aperture size of 1.40 mm, but of which maximum 20% of the
32 weight passes through a sieve of 0.71 mm square aperture size.
2
33 (c) Medium desiccated coconut - This is grated desiccated coconut of which not less than 90% of the weight
34 shall pass easily through a sieve of square aperture size of 2.80 mm, but of which maximum 20% of the
35 weight passes through a sieve of 1.40 mm square aperture size.
36 (d) Unclassified grated desiccated coconut - covers all "fancy cuts" or special cuts (i.e. tender or thin flakes,
37 long and thin chips, extra fancy shreds, long shreds, standard shreds, etc.).
38 3. ESSENTIAL COMPOSITION AND QUALITY FACTORS
39 3.1 COMPOSITION
40 3.1.1 Basic Ingredients
41 Grated desiccated coconut as defined in Section 2.1.
42 3.1.2 Other Permitted Ingredients
43 [.................................................] Comment [a11]: Malaysia
44 3.2 QUALITY CRITERIA
45 3.2.1 Colour and Texture
46 Grated desiccated coconut shall have [normalnatural] white, colour [to light creamy white colour,] and Comment [a12]: Fiji, Philippines
47 shall posses a texture characteristic of the product. Comment [W13]: Philippines
48 3.2.2 Flavour
49 The taste shall be characteristic of the product without off-flavours due to deterioration or absorption of
50 extraneous substances.
51 3.2.3 Odour
52 The odour shall be characteristic of the product and , shall not be mouldy, [cheesy, smoky,] fermented or Comment [W14]: Philippines
53 rancid, [and shall not possess any undesirable odour]. Comment [W15]: Philippines
54 3.2.4 Definition of Defects and Allowances
55
Maximum
Defects Definition
limitsTolerances Comment [a16]: Malaysia,Philippines
Fat acid content in free forms, extracted
0.3% m/m Comment [W17]: Brazil, Malaysia
(a) Total acidity of extracted oil and measured under the operating
measured as lauric acid
conditions specified.
[ 3% m/m] Comment [a18]: Malaysia
Loss in mass measured under the [ 4% m/m] Comment [a19]: Malaysia
(b) Moisture
operating conditions specified.
[ 4,5% m/m] Comment [W20]: Philippines
[ 55% m/m] Comment [a21]: Malaysia
for defatted low fat
product
Total oil content in product under the
(c) Oil content
operating conditions specified. [> 55 65% m/m]
65% m/m Comment [a22]: Malaysia
for whole high fat product
Total mineral content in product under Comment [a23]: Malaysia
(d) Ash 2.5% m/m
the operating conditions specified.
Harmless vegetable matter associated [ 15]
(e) Extraneous vegetable material
with the product. fragments per 100g
Any visible and/or apparent matter or
(f) Foreign matter material not usually associated with the Absence in 100g
product.
3
56 3.3 CLASSIFICATION OF “DEFECTIVES”
57 A container that fails to meet one or more of the applicable quality requirements, as set out in Section 3.2
58 (except those based on sample averages), should be considered as a “defective”. Comment [a24]: Rationale – Contrasting with
Codex Stan 61:1985, there is no provision in
59 3.4 LOT ACCEPTANCE this document based on sample average.
60 A lot should be considered as meeting the applicable quality requirements referred to in Section 3.2 when
61 for those requirements which are not based on averages, the number of “defectives”, as defined in Section 3.3,
62 does not exceed the acceptance number (c) of the appropriate sampling plan with an AQL of 6.5, as described in
63 section 10.; and Comment [a25]: Brazil
64 (b)the requirements of Section 3.2, which are based on sample averages, are complied with. Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
65 complied with.
66 4. FOOD ADDITIVES
67 [ Only those food additive classes listed below are technologically justified and may be used in grated
68 desiccated coconut. Within each additive class only those food additives listed below, or referred to, may be used
69 and only for the functions, and within limits, specified.
70 4.1 [Functional class(es)] used in accordance with Table 3 of the Codex General Standard for Food Additives
71 (CODEX STAN 192-1995) for Food Category 0.4.1.2.2 – Dried Fruits are acceptable for use in grated desiccated
72 coconut conforming to this Standard.]
73 4.21 PRESERVATIVE
INS No. Name of the Food Additive Maximum Level
[50] [150] [200] [1000] Comment [a26]: Malaysia
mg/kg Comment [W27]: Philippines
220-225, 227, 228, 539 Sulfites
as residual SO2 Comment [W28]: Brazil, Malaysia,
in the end product Philippines
74 4.2 OTHER FUNCTIONAL CLASS(ES) Comment [a29]: Malaysia
INS No. Name of the Food Additive Maximum Level
75 5. CONTAMINANTS
76 5.1 The product covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum levels of the Codex General
77 Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995).
78 5.2 The product covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum residue limits for pesticides
79 established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
80 6. HYGIENE
81 6.1 It is recommended that the products covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and handled in
82 accordance with the appropriate sections of the Recommended International Code of Practice – General Principles
83 of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), the Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Desiccated
84 Coconut (CAC/RCP 4-1971) and other relevant Codex texts such as codes of hygienic practice and codes of
85 practice.
86 6.2 The products should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the Principles
87 for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods (CAC/GL 21-1997).
88 7. WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
89 [Containers shall be as full as practicable without impairment of quality and shall be consistent with a
90 proper declaration of contents for the product...................................................] Comment [a30]: Malaysia
91 87. PACKAGING, TRANSPORT AND STORAGE
4
92 87.1 Grated desiccated coconut shall be packaged, transported and stored in containers which will safeguard the
93 hygienic, nutritional, technological and organoleptic qualities of the product.
94 87.2 The packaging material shall be such as to protect the product against bacteriological and other contamination;
95 it shall protect the product as far as possible against any infiltration absorption of moisture , re-hydration and against Comment [a31]: Brazil
96 leakingspillage. The packaging material shall not impart any odour, taste or colour or any other extraneous property Comment [a32]: Malaysia
97 to the product and shall not result in contamination of the product with the packaging material.
Comment [a33]: Malaysia
98 98. LABELLING Comment [a34]: Malaysia
99 In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Pre-packaged Foods
100 (CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:
101 98.1 NAME OF THE PRODUCT
102 98.1.1 The name of the product should be "Grated Desiccated Coconut" preceded or followed by the common or
103 ordinary name legally accepted in the country of retail sale.
104 98.1.2 The name may indicate the grade of the product in accordance with the descriptions contained in Section 2.3.
105 98.1.3 The name should indicate the oil content of the product in accordance with the description contained in Formatted: Not Highlight
106 Section 2.2
107 98.1.34 Other styles - If the product is produced in accordance with the other styles provision (Section 2.2.2),
108 the label should contain in close proximity to the name of the product such additional words or phrases that will avoid
109 misleading or confusing the consumer.
110 98.2 Labelling of Non-Retail Containers
111 Information for non-retail containers shall be given either on the container or in accompanying documents,
112 except that the name of the product, lot identification, and the name and address of the manufacturer, packer,
113 distributor or importer, as well as storage instructions, shall appear on the container. However, lot identification,
114 and the name and address of the manufacturer, packer, distributor or importer may be replaced by an identification
115 mark, provided that such a mark is clearly identifiable with the accompanying documents.
116 109. METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING
Provision Method Principle Type
Acidity total
Described in the Standard Titration of extracted oil I
(in extracted oil) Comment [W35]: Brazil, Malaysia
Ash AOAC 950.49 Gravimetry I
Extraneous Counting extraneous material
Described in the Standard IV
vegetable material with the naked eye
ISO 2591-1:1988
Test sieving according to I
Granularity Sieving
British Standard Mesh (TE)*
Nominal Test Sieves: BS 410-1986
Gravimetry
Moisture AOAC 925.40 I
(loss on drying)
Oil content AOAC 948.22 Gravimetry I
Described in the StandardISO 2170-1980 Comment [a36]: Brazil
(Cereals and Pulses) or
[Sampling ]
ICC Method of Sampling No. 101-1960
(Sampling of Milled Products)
117 * Temporarily Endorsed (TE) - The 21st Session of the Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling extended its
118 temporarily endorsed status (ALINORM 97/23A, Appendix IV).
5
119 DETERMINATION OF TOTAL ACIDITY OF EXTRACTED OIL
120 Principle
121 The sample is extracted by ethyl ether at room temperature. The acidity of the extracted oil is determined by titrations
122 with alkali and the results expressed as percent of lauric acid.
123 Reagents
124 Anhydrous ethyl ether, peroxide free
125 Ethyl ether and ethyl alcohol 95% (1:2) mixture neutralized with sodium hydroxide 0.1N using phenol-phthalein
126 as indicator
127 Sodium hydroxide 0.1N
128 1% ethanolic solution of phenol-phthalein
129 Procedure
130 50 g of the sample is extracted at room temperature in 500 ml erlenmeyer flask with 300 mL of ethyl ether (Reagent
131 1) for one hour with mechanical agitation. The extract is filtered through Whatman No. 542 filter paper and further
132 undergoes dry evaporation in rotary evaporator with nitrogen flow at a maximum temperature of 40 C.
133 20 g of the extracted oil is weighed and dissolved with addition of 100 mL of ethyl alcohol mixture (Reagent 2) and
134 further titrated with 0.1N sodium hydroxide (Reagent 3) using 5 drops of indicator (Reagent 4).
135 Expression of results
136 Acidity is calculated as below:
137 Acidity = VxNx20
138 m
139 V = Volume (ml) of NaOH
140 N = Normality of NaOH solution
141 m = Mass of the sample in grammes
142 The results as obtained above, are expressed in percent lauric acid m/m.
143 EXTRANEOUS VEGETABLE MATTER
144 The determination is carried out by spreading 100 g of the sample in a thin layer against a white background and
145 counting the extraneous material with the naked eye.
146 SAMPLING
147 1.Instructions for drawing primary samples according to ISO 2170-1980 (Cereals and Pulses) or ICC Method of Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
148 Sampling No. 101-1960 (Sampling of Milled Products).
149 2.The size of the sample to be undertaken from a homogeneous lot should be in accordance with Table 3 of the
150 Instructions on Codex Sampling Procedures (CX/MAS 1-1987, Appendix V).
151 3.For all determinations the laboratory sample should be prepared according to the variables plan for proportion
152 defective (CX/MAS 1-1987, Appendix IV).
153 4.For all determinations, except granularity (Section 2.3), analysis should be performed on the “blended bulk
154 sample”.
155 5.For verification of granulation, i.e. size grade (Sections 2.3 and 7.1) as declared on the label, the determination in
156 consignments of repacked product should be on individual packages.
6
157 SAMPLING PLANS FOR PRE-PACKAGED FOODS WITH AN AQL = 6.5
158 USUALLY APPLYING TO STANDARDS FOR PROCESSED FRUITS AND VEGETABLES FOR
159 QUALITY CRITERIA AND WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (e.g. minimum fill)
Sampling Plans
The appropriate inspection level is selected as follows:
Inspection level I - Normal Sampling
Inspection level II - Disputes, (Codex referee purposes sample size),
enforcement or need for better lot estimate
160 SAMPLING PLAN 1
161 (Inspection Level I, AQL = 6.5)
NET WEIGHT IS EQUAL TO OR LESS THAN 1 KG (2.2 LB)
Lot Size (N) Sample Size (n) Acceptance Number (c)
4,800 or less 6 1
4,801 - 24,000 13 2
24,001 - 48,000 21 3
48,001 - 84,000 29 4
84,001 - 144,000 38 5
144,001 - 240,000 48 6
more than 240,000 60 7
NET WEIGHT IS GREATER THAN 1 KG (2.2 LB) BUT NOT MORE THAN 4.5 KG (10 LB)
Lot Size (N) Sample Size (n) Acceptance Number (c)
2,400 or less 6 1
2,401 - 15,000 13 2
15,001 - 24,000 21 3
24,001 - 42,000 29 4
42,001 - 72,000 38 5
72,001 - 120,000 48 6
more than 120,000 60 7
NET WEIGHT GREATER THAN 4.5 KG (10 LB)
Lot Size (N) Sample Size (n) Acceptance Number (c)
600 or less 6 1
601 - 2,000 13 2
2,001 - 7,200 21 3
7,201 - 15,000 29 4
15,001 - 24,000 38 5
24,001 - 42,000 48 6
more than 42,000 60 7
162
7
163 SAMPLING PLAN 2
164 (Inspection Level II, AQL = 6.5)
NET WEIGHT IS EQUAL TO OR LESS THAN 1 KG (2.2 LB)
Lot Size (N) Sample Size (n) Acceptance Number (c)
4,800 or less 13 2
4,801 - 24,000 21 3
24,001 - 48,000 29 4
48,001 - 84,000 38 5
84,001 - 144,000 48 6
144,001 - 240,000 60 7
more than 240,000 72 8
NET WEIGHT IS GREATER THAN 1 KG (2.2 LB) BUT NOT MORE THAN 4.5 KG (10 LB)
Lot Size (N) Sample Size (n) Acceptance Number (c)
2,400 or less 13 2
2,401 - 15,000 21 3
15,001 - 24,000 29 4
24,001 - 42,000 38 5
42,001 - 72,000 48 6
72,001 - 120,000 60 7
more than 120,000 72 8
NET WEIGHT GREATER THAN 4.5 KG (10 LB)
Lot Size (N) Sample Size (n) Acceptance Number (c)
600 or less 13 2
601 - 2,000 21 3
2,001 - 7,200 29 4
7,201 - 15,000 38 5
15,001 - 24,000 48 6
24,001 - 42,000 60 7
more than 42,000 72 8
8
EXPLANATORY NOTES ON THE ANNEX1
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The revised Standard as currently proposed is based on the Comments provided by Brazil, Fiji, Malaysia and the
Philippines.
Comments readily accepted were inserted in the document highlighting the Member Country that proposed the
change and previous wording/provision.
Comments that proposed changes in provisions or consecrated wording were inserted into brackets for further
discussion/clarification on the second phase of the WG.
Comments considered turn points were not inserted in the current version of the Annex, but discussed below and
in APPENDIX – 1 (Referring to: WGGrDesCoconut-Mess01-09) with all the comments listed for further request
of the Member Country if still needed.
SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS
Food Additives
The WG should decide whether the section should permit only Sulphites as food additives for the product [first
square brackets] or if the section will be revised in light of the provisions for additives available in the General
Standard for Food Additives relevant to Food Category 0.4.1.2.2 Dried Fruits currently containing more additives
than those specified in the Standard for Grated Desiccated Coconut [second square brackets].
Additionally the WG should decide if for sulphur dioxide, as a preservative, the maximum level set up for grated
desiccated coconut should be justified against the corresponding level applicable to dried fruits in the GSFA. In this
regard, four levels are proposed: 50 mg/kg (Standard in force and Malaysia), 150 mg/kg (1st version of the proposed
annex), 200 mg/kg (Philippines) and 1000 mg/kg (Food Category 0.4.1.2.2 – Dried Fruits, GSFA).
If the WG would like to refer to Tables 1/2 of the GSFA identification of the functional classes is needed, at least
those currently available for use in dried fruit.
Weights and Measures
The WG should decide whether this provision needs to be evaluated/controlled for lot acceptance.
In that case the WG needs to decide if the current sampling plan for pre-packaged foods is applicable. As a reference
there are no provisions for lot acceptance in the standards for dates and resins as regards to weights and measures.
Packaging, Transport and Storage
Although technical comments to revise the section were inserted, the WG is invited to decide whether these
provisions should be retained in the Standard, as may have been better addressed in the RECOMMENDED
INTERNATIONAL CODE OF HYGIENIC PRACTICE FOR DESICCATED COCONUT (CAC/RCP 4-1971), if
so the WG should confirm if just a reference to CAC/RCP 4-1971 is necessary before getting into the actual revision
of the provisions.
Methods of Analysis and Sampling
Provisions for methods of analysis were introduced in accordance with CODEX STAN 234-1999 listing methods of
analysis and sampling for various commodity standards.
Sampling Plans
Provisions for sampling were introduced in accordance with CODEX STAN 234-1999 listing methods of analysis
and sampling for various commodity standards.
Brazil stroke out references to ISO 13690:1999 (Cereals, Pulses and milled products – sampling of static batches), or
ICC Method of Sampling No. 101-1960 (Sampling of Milled Products) and CX/MAS 1-1987, taking in mind that
CX/MAS 1-1987 was a working document discussed in CCMAS but never adopted as official Codex texts and no
longer being further discussed in CCMAS, and because it is not customary to reference such documents.
1
Prepared by Brazil with the aid of the Secretariat.
9
On the other hand ISO 13690:1999 specifies on the scope that is restricted to the general conditions relating to
sampling for the assessment of the quality i.e. good sampling practices.
The WG is invited to decide if these deletions are adequate and to comment on the proposed reference to a Sampling
Plan of AQL 6.5 as currently used in other CCPFV standards, taking in light the guidance provided by the Guidelines
for Sampling Plans (CAC/GL 50-2004) developed by the Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling for the
selection of appropriate sampling plans by Codex committees and task forces
10
APPENDIX – 1 (REF. WGGrDesCoconut-Mess01-09)
CODEX COMMITTEE ON PROCESSED FRUITS AND VEGETABLES (CCPFV)
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION TO THE
CODEX STANDARD FOR GRATED DESICCATED COCONUT
(DOCUMENT TO GUIDE CCPFV WORK)
STATUS OF COMMENTS FROM FIJI, MALAYSIA AND THE PHILIPPINES
1. FIJI
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
Section 2.1 Product insertion of the word 'fresh' Not Addressed.
Definition- Line 9 - Only fresh coconuts are to be used for making
dessicated coconut. Section 2.1
-prepared from substantially sound white meat
obtained from the fresh whole nut of coconut
(Cocos nucifera …
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
Some highly flavored products are made of coconuts that are harvested and stored as long as a
month before processing.
section 2.2.1-lines 16 - insertion of the words 'low fat' and 'high fat' Addressed.
and 17 -I think when we use the words high and low fat - it
will make 'naming of the product' section 8.1 Section 2.2.1
subsection 8.1.3 easily understandable rather than
putting defatted dessicated or whole fat dessicated Lines 16, 17
coconut
- (a) Defatted dessicated coconut (low fat) , (b)
Whole fat dessicated coconut (high fat)
section 2.3 Sizing- word graded to be used instead of classified Addressed.
line 26 - Word graded is to be used so that there is
consistency when we go to naming of the product Section 2.3
under 8.1.3- it reads the name may indicate the
grade of the product.... Line 26
-Grated dessicated coconut may be graded
according to their granulometry as follows..
section 3.2.1 Colour word normal to be replaced by natural Addressed.
and texture - Use of the word natural in this context seems
line 46 more appropriate- (how can a person define Section 3.2.1
normal white colour)
- Grated dessicated coconut shall have natural Line 44
white colour and shall ...
section 5 Contaminants section 5 contaminants (add line 81 and 81 as 5.3) Not Addressed.
section 6 Hygiene - section 6.2 should come under contaminants as
lines 70 - 82 section 5.3
- Section 6.2 is setting out microbiological
compliance and as such is a reflection of the
11
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
hygiene operation but is going to give the level of
contamination.
According to the Procedural Manual (Format for Codex Commodity Standards), for the
presentation of standards, a Format that describes a uniform presentation separating Hygiene
provisions from Contaminants.
Section 7. Packaging, Suggestion that the Packaging, transport and Addressed.
transport and storage storage should be better addressed under Code of
lines 85 - 91 practice
2. MALAYSIA
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
•Title of standard deleting the term ‘grated’ preceding the name of Not Addressed.
•Section 1-Scope, line 3 the product appearing in the title and throughout
•Section 2.1-Product the standard.
Definition, line 8 Desiccated coconut is characteristically a grated
•Section 2.2-Styles, line product and is internationally accepted and traded
15 as such without explicitly indicating the term
•Section 2.3-Sizing, ‘grated’ to its name.
lines 26, 27, 30 and 36
•Section 3.1.1-Basic
Ingredients, line 41
•Section 3.2.2-Colour
and Texture, line 46
•Section 4-Food
Additives, line 66
•Section 7-Packaging,
Transport and Storage,
line 86
•Section 8.1-Name of
the Product, line 96
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
Current document adopted the term “grated” and the terminology “grated desiccated coconut” is
easily translated and understandable in Spanish and French versions of the documents.
Section 2.1-Product We propose the following:- Addressed.
Definition, para (b), line i. To replace the terms ‘peeling’ and ‘milling’
11 with ‘de-shelling’ and ‘paring’ respectively. Section 2.1
ii. To add in the term ‘comminuting’ before
‘drying’. Lines 11, 12
The proposed terms are more commonly used in
describing the processes involved in the
production of desiccated coconut
Section 2.2.1 Styles, We propose the following:- Addressed.
para (a) and (b), lines i. To replace the term ‘Defatted’ with ‘Low
12
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
16 and 17 fat’. Section 2.2.1
ii. To delete the term ‘Whole fat’.
Lines 16, 17
i. ’Low fat desiccated coconut’ would be a
more appropriate name for this product as the
extraction of oil from desiccated coconut will form
a product with a lower fat content.
ii. Unless otherwise stated, the non-defatted
desiccated coconut will contain its inherent fat
content and need not be specified as being ‘Whole
fat’.
Section 2.2.1 Styles, iii. To reduce the range of total oil content for Not Addressed
para (a) and (b), lines ‘Low fat desiccated coconut’ to 35-45%.
16 and 17 iv. To reduce the minimum total oil content for
‘Desiccated coconut’ to 55%
iii. The proposed range of 35-45% is typically
the total oil content for Low fat desiccated coconut.
iv. The proposed 55% m/m min total oil content for
Desiccated coconut is based on data from local
manufacturing companies.
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
Grated Desiccated Coconut with fat content below 50% is unacceptable as regards to
characteristic flavor of the product.
Section 3.1.2-Other We propose that this section be deleted. Addressed.
Permitted Ingredients, Based on data from local manufacturing
lines 42 and 43 companies, we are of the view that there is no Section 3.1.2
justified need for other ingredients to be used in
this product.
Section 3.2.4-Definition We propose replacing the term ‘Maximum limits’ Addressed.
of Defects and with ‘Tolerances’ and to individually indicate
Allowances, line 53 whether the values specified are ‘max’ or ‘min’. Section 3.2.4
So as to accommodate the ‘max’ and ‘min’ values
specified in the following rows. Table
Section 3.2.4-Definition We propose replacing ‘Total acidity of extracted Not addressed
of Defects and oil’ with ‘Free fatty acid measured as lauric acid’.
Allowances, line 53, For a more clear description of the parameter
item (a) being measured.
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
The provision Total Acidity is related to a consecrated approved method listed at Codex
Alimentarius Volume 13 (Codex Stan 177-1991, Section 9).
Section 3.2.4-Definition We propose to remove the square brackets from Not Addressed
of Defects and [3% m/m], to add the term ‘max’ after the specified
Allowances, line 53, limit and to delete [4% m/m].
item (b) Based on data from local manufacturing
companies, we are of the view that a moisture
content of not more than 3% m/m is typically the
13
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
characteristic of this product.
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
The provision as proposed (4%) is more adequate with what is stated in the scope of the
document i.e. for direct consumption, including for catering purposes or for repacking if required.
Therefore, considering the necessary shelf life for products designed to retail market, higher
moisture values consider the natural absorption of moisture (UR%) from the environment,
considering the different types of packing material.
Section 3.2.4-Definition We propose the following:- Not Addressed
of Defects and i. To replace ‘defatted product’ with ‘low fat
Allowances, line 53, desiccated coconut’, to change the limit to 45%
item (c) m/m and to add in the term ’max’ after the
specified limit.
ii. To replace ‘whole fat product’ with
‘desiccated coconut’, to change the limit to 55%
m/m and to add in the term ‘min’ after the
specified limit.
For clarity and consistency with our proposal at
Section 2.2.1 Styles, para (a) and (b), lines 16
and 17 (above)
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
Grated Desiccated Coconut with fat content below 50% is unacceptable as regards to
characteristic flavor of the product.
Section 3.2.4 Definition We propose to add in the term ‘max’ after the Addressed.
of Defects and specified limit.
Allowances, line 53, Section 3.2.4
item (d) For clarity and consistency.
Table
Section 3.2.4-Definition We propose changing the limit to ≤10 fragments per Addressed.
of Defects and 100g.
Allowances, line 53, Section 3.2.4
item (e). We are of the view that this is a more appropriate
limit of tolerance. Table
Section 4-Food We propose deleting this paragraph at lines 62, 63 Not Addressed
Additives, lines 62, 63 and 64.
and 64.
This statement is only being mentioned in a few
Codex standards such as the Std for Fat Spreads
and Blended Spreads (Codex Stand 256-2007)
and Std for Infant Formula and Formulas for
Special Medical Purposes Intended for Infants
(Codex Stan 72-1981, Rev. 2007). Since the use
of such statement is not indicated in the
Procedural Manual and is not being used in most
of the Codex standards, it may not be necessary
to include this in the standard.
Proposed adoption of tables 1 & 2 may not fit with the proposed restriction to Sulfites (table
1000ppm; Malaysia’s proposal 50ppm). Besides functional classes need to be identified
14
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
previously.
Section 4-Food We propose replacing this sentence with the Partially
Additives, lines 65, 66 complete general reference statement as quoted in Addressed
and 67. the Procedural Manual. (under square
For consistency with the general reference brackets).
statement in the Procedural Manual.
Section 4
Lines 61-69
Section 4-Food To amend the numbering to 4.2 Addressed.
Additives, 4.1-
Preservative, line 68 Section 4
Editorial
Line 72
Section 4-Food We propose removing the square brackets from Addressed.
Additives, 4.1- [50] and to delete [150] and [1000].
Preservative, line 68 Section 4.1
We are of the view that the existing maximum
level of 50 mg/kg residual SO2 specified in the Table
GSFA is appropriate.
Section 4-Food We propose deleting this section. Addressed.
Additives, 4.2-Other
Functional Class(es), Based on data from local manufacturing Section 4
line 69 companies, we are of the view that there is no
justified need for other functional classes to be
used in this product.
Section 7-Weights and We can agree with Brazil’s views as mentioned in Addressed.
Measures, lines 83 and the explanatory notes, that the provision for this
84 section be in a similar manner as set out in other Section 7
standards for dried fruits (e.g. Std for Raisins, Std
for Dates) which is as follows:- Lines 88, 89
‘Containers shall be as full as practicable
without impairment of quality and shall be
consistent with a proper declaration of contents for
the product.’
For clarity and consistency with other standards for
dried fruits.
Section 7-Packaging, We propose the following: Addressed.
Transport and Storage, i. deleting ‘re-hydration’
para 7.2, line 89 ii. replacing ‘leaking’ with ‘spillage’ Section 7.2
i. To delete ‘re-hydration’ as ‘infiltration of
moisture’ or absorption of moisture by Line 94-95
the product will result in the product
being re-hydrated, thus ‘re-hydration’ is
15
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
redundant.
ii. We feel that ‘spillage’ is a more
appropriate term in describing the out
flowing of desiccated coconut.
Section 7-Packaging, We propose the following: Not Addressed.
Transport and Storage, iii. inserting ‘light’ after ‘moisture’
para 7.2, line 89 Section 7.2
iii. Since ‘light’ promotes rancidity, the
packaging material should also protect
desiccated coconut from infiltration of
‘light’.
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
Current wording without the term “light” considers the different types of packing material used for
direct consumption, besides being aligned with the scope of the document i.e. for direct
consumption, including for catering purposes or for repacking if required.
Brazilian Grounded Desiccated Coconut adopts transparent windows in packing material to
facilitate acceptance at retail market.
Section 8-Labelling, To amend the numbering to 8.1.4 Addressed.
8.1.3-Other styles, line
101 Editorial Section 9.1.4
Section 9-Methods of We propose to replace ‘Acidity total (in extracted Not Addressed
Analysis and Sampling, oil)’ with ‘Free fatty acid measured as lauric acid’.
line 110
For consistency with our proposal at Section 3.2.4-
Definition of Defects and Allowances, line 53, item
(a).
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
The provision Total Acidity is related to a consecrated approved method listed at Codex
Alimentarius Volume 13 (Codex Stan 177-1991, Section 9).
Section 9-Methods of We wish to seek clarification on the source of the
Analysis and Sampling, methods as ‘Described in the Standard’ specified
line 110 for ‘Acidity total (in extracted oil) and for ‘Extraneous
vegetable material’.
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
The methods of analysis for Total Acidity and Extraneous Vegetable Method are consecrated
approved methods listed at Codex Alimentarius Volume 13 (see. Codex Stan 177-1991, Section
9).
16
3. PHILIPPINES
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
Title In the Title, the Philippines propose the deletion of Not Addressed.
Line 1 the word “grated” from the title and all those
appearing in the document text to provide for
flexibility and consistency with the industrial
practice of grinding the desiccated coconut instead
of grating.
Rationale for not addressing the comment:
Current document adopted the term “grated” and the terminology “grated desiccated coconut” is
easily translated and understandable in Spanish and French versions of the documents.
In Section 2.1 of inclusion of the words “hatcheting, paring” after the Addressed.
Product Definition word de-husking and to delete the word peeling
under Line No. 11 and thus the sentence would read as: Section 2.1
Processed, in an appropriate manner,
undergoing operations of de-husking, hatcheting, Line, 11, 12
paring, milling, drying, and sifting; and
These are necessary process step involved in the
manufacture of desiccated coconut in an industry
set-up or level.
Furthermore, to be consistent with the CAC/RCP
4-1971, the word “Hatcheting” was used and is
referred, as the removal of the shell while “Paring”
is the removal of the brown skin around the kernel.
The Philippines would like to stress that, in an
aqueous process where the meat is subject to
pressing to obtain coconut cream before drying,
the resulting product (whether pure or blended)
shall not be classified as desiccated coconut.
Section 2.2 of Styles Under Line No. 16 on Defatted desiccated Addressed.
under Lines No. 16- coconut, 55 – 65% should be changed to “55 –
17 *62%” and under Line No. 17, above 65% should Section 2.2
also be changed to “above *62%” to allow for a
marginal allowance during the lean season being Lines 16, 17
experienced by the coconut industry and also
varieties and hybrids of coconut affect oil content
such that, there are occurrence of coconut that are
naturally low in fat content. Moreover, this is in
coherent with the Philippine National Standard for
Desiccated Coconut (PNS/BAFPS 25:2007) thus
showing:
2.2.1 Grated desiccated coconut with respect to oil
content may be designated as:
(a) Defatted desiccated coconut – products
with oil content between 55 – *62%.
(b) Whole fat desiccated coconut – products
with oil content above *62%.
17
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
Section 2.3 of Sizing we support the classification of grated desiccated
under Line No. 25 coconut according to their granulometry as stated.
Section 3.2 of Quality we propose to change the word normal to natural Addressed.
Criteria under 3.2.1 before the word white
of Colour and Section 3.2.1
Texture (under Line
No. 45) Line 44
Section 3.2 of Quality inclusion of words “to light creamy white” after the Addressed.
Criteria under 3.2.1 word white and the sentence would read as:
of Colour and Section 3.2.1
Texture (under Line Grated desiccated coconut shall have
No. 45) natural white to light creamy white colour and shall Line 44
possess a texture characteristic of the product.
As light creamy white color is also an innate color
attribute of a sound or good quality mature
coconut.
Section 3.2.3 of Odor we propose the inclusion of the words “cheesy and Addressed.
under Line 52 smoky” after the word moldy, to delete the word
“or” before the word rancid and to include the Section 3.2.3
phrase “or possess any undesirable odor” after the
word rancid and thus the sentence would read as: Lines 50, 51
The odor shall be characteristic of the
product and shall not be moldy, cheesy, smoky,
fermented, rancid or possess any undesirable
odor.
The use of the words “cheesy and smoky” were
also considered as quality criteria for the rejection
of the product.
The inclusion of the phrase “or possess any
undesirable odor” was considered namely to
provide for flexibility.
Section 3.2.4 of the heading (maximum limit) is not consistent to Addressed.
Definition of Defects the values stated for oil content that are regarded
and Allowances as minimum limits Section 3.2.4
under Line 53
Table
Section 3.2.4 of The Philippines proposes that allowances for Partially
Definition of Defects moisture content should be given based on the Addressed
and Allowances classification (sizing) or particle size of grated considering
under Line 53 desiccated coconut as follows: (1) For extra fine Sizing is
(b) Moisture and fine, shall not exceed 3% moisture content; (2) optional.
medium, shall not exceed 3.8% moisture content;
and (3) unclassified grated desiccated coconut, Section 3.2.4
shall not exceed 4.5% moisture content. It is
deemed necessary that for bigger cuts or particle Table
18
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
size, high moisture content should be considered
or allowed.
Section 4.1 of the Philippines proposes a change in the Addressed
Preservative under maximum levels proposed for Sulfites for the
Line 70 following reasons: (1) as this level of use is Section 4.2
considered safe for human consumption; (2) found
technologically necessary for shelf life stability of Table
the product during transport wherein it is exposed
to high temperature (the product can be stored for
11-12 months at ambient temperature); (3) to
apply for Philippine climate in general; and (4)
achievable by the industry sector.
Thus the matrix for Section 4.1 Preservatives
should contain the change to 200mg/Kg
I. Justification in Support of Safety Issue as stated above
The use of 1000 mg sulphite/kg level in desiccated coconut, or in fruit and vegetable in general would
not exceed the WHO-ADI of 0.7 mg sulphite/kg body weight. Only about 95% of WHO-ADI is achieved
if we assume that a person eat a 30 grams of desiccated coconut with 1000 mg sulphite/kg
everyday. It is safe to assume that 30 grams of desiccated coconut consumption is an overestimated
value already.
E.g. Assuming that our daily consumption of desiccated coconut is 30 grams (to calculate the
national theoretical maximum daily intake, NTMDI).
To Calculate for 1000 mg/kg:
1000 mg/kg x 30 g
60 kg = 0.5 mg/kg body weight
To Calculate for 200mg/kg:
200 mg/kg x 30 g
60 kg = 0.1 mg/kg body weight
Hence, we do not exceed the World Health Organization-Adequate Daily Intake (WHO-ADI) for 60
kilograms body weight (estimated average weight of Filipino).
II. Justification in Support to Shelf life stability and to Apply for Philippine Climate in general as stated
above
A maximum level of 200 mg/kg as residual Sulfur Dioxide in the end product is beneficial both to the
manufacturer and customer since the product can be stored for a period of 11 to 12 months and
longer for temperate countries.
Sulfites are in some ways unique additives, in such that the level of use typically does not reflect the
level remaining in a food at the time of ingestion owing to the losses during processing or further
processing such as cooking and storage (especially when exposed to high temperature environment)
19
Reference in the Member’s Comment Updated status
draft document, Sept. and reference
2009 in the revised
draft document
of treated foods.
Considering that, most of the producers of desiccated coconut are located from tropical countries
that have an environment temperature ranging from 28C to 32C. And in addition to that, during
shipping, the product is again exposed to high temperature inside the container van.
Therefore, this conditions results to a much lower concentrations of sulfites when it reaches the
country destination and in treated foods at the time of consumption. It is estimated that the rate of
sulfite loss is 1 mg/kg per day.
In Section 8.1.3 of Name of the Product under Line 101, the Philippines support the provision as stated
herein to provide for consistency with labeling requirements and for the information of consumers.
