E

REP24/FO

JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME

CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION
Forty-seventh Session

CICG, Geneva, Switzerland

25-30 November 2024

REPORT OF THE 28TH SESSION OF THE CODEX COMMITTEE ON FATS AND OILS
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
19-23 February 2024
REP24/FO i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary and status of work .................................................................................................................... page iii
List of acronyms ........................................................................................................................................ page v
Report of the 28th Session of the Codex Committee for Fats and Oils ....................................................page 1
Paragraphs
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Opening of the session ........................................................................................................................................... 2 – 4
Adoption of the agenda (agenda item 1) ..................................................................................................... 5 – 6
Matters arising from the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its subsidiary bodies (agenda item 2)... ...7 –15
Consideration of the recommendations of the Reports of the 90th and 91st Meetings of the Joint
FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) (agenda item 3) ......................................... 16 – 33
Proposed draft amendment/revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999):
 Inclusion of avocado oil (agenda item 4.1) ................................................................................ 34 – 44
 Inclusion of camellia seed oil (agenda item 4.2) ........................................................................ 45 – 51
 Inclusion of sacha inchi oil (agenda item 4.3) .......................................................................... 52 – 55
 Inclusion of high oleic acid soya bean oil (agenda item 4.4) ..................................................... 56 – 62
Proposed draft revision to the Standard for Olive Oils and Olive Pomace Oils (CXS 33-1981):
Revision of Sections 3, 8 and Appendix (agenda item 5)........................................................................ 63 – 86
Proposed draft amendment/revision of the Standard for Fish Oils (CXS 329-2017):
Inclusion of Calanus oil (agenda item 6) ...............................................................................................87 – 103
Review of the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes in the Code of Practice for the Storage
and Transport of Edible Fats and Oils in Bulk (Appendix 2 to CXC 36-1987) (agenda item 7) ..........104 – 118
Consideration of the proposals for new work and/or amendments to existing Codex standards
(Agenda item 8) .............................................................................................................................................119
 Discussion paper on possible work that CCFO could undertake to reduce TFAs or
eliminate PHOs (agenda item 8.1) .........................................................................................120 – 124
 Proposals for New Work: Proposal for new work on a standard for
microbial omega-3 oils (agenda item 8.2) .............................................................................. 125 - 132
Other business (agenda item 9) .................................................................................................................... 133
Date and place of next session (agenda item 10) ........................................................................................ 134
REP24/FO ii

Pages
Appendices
Appendix I – List of participants ..............................................................................................................page 18
Appendix II – Proposed draft revisions to the Labelling provision for Non-Retail Containers
in the relevant CCFO standards .......................................................................................page 25
Appendix III – Proposed revision to the Code of practice for the storage and transport
of edible fats and oils in bulk (CXC 36-1987) ...................................................................page 26
Appendix IV – Substances for evaluation for acceptance as previous cargoes .....................................page 30
Appendix V – Draft Amendment/Revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999):
Inclusion of Avocado oil … ...............................................................................................page 31
Appendix VI – Draft Amendment/Revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999):
Inclusion of Camellia seed oil ...........................................................................................page 33
Appendix VII – Draft Amendment/Revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CXS 210-1999): Inclusion of Sacha inchi oil ...................................................................page 35
Appendix VIII – Draft amendment/revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CXS 210-1999): Inclusion of high oleic acid soya bean oil .............................................page 37
Appendix IX – Proposed draft revision to the Standard for Olive Oils and Olive Pomace Oils
(CXS 33-1981) ..................................................................................................................page 39
Appendix X – Proposed draft amendment/revision of the Standard for Fish Oils (CXS 329-2017):
Inclusion of Calanus oil .....................................................................................................page 51
Appendix XI – Project document: Proposed revisions to Codex standards on fats and oils to
reduce trans-fatty acid intake ...........................................................................................page 53
Appendix XII – Project document: Proposal for new work on a standard for microbial omega-3 oils .....page 56
 REP24/FO iii

SUMMARY AND STATUS OF WORK

Responsible
Purpose Text/Topic Code Step Para(s)
Party
Draft revision to the Standard for Named 44 and
Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999): Inclusion of N12-2017 8
avocado oil Appendix V

Proposed draft amendment/revision of the 51 and

Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210- Appendix VI
1999): N01-2022 5/8 55 and
- Inclusion of Camellia seed oil
N02-2022 Appendix VII
- Inclusion of Sacha inchi oil
- Inclusion of high oleic acid Soya bean oil N03-2022 62 and
Appendix VIII
Proposed draft revision to the Standard for Olive
85(i) and
Oils and Olive Pomace Oils (CXS 33-1981): N11-2017 5/8
Appendix IX
Revision of Sections 3, 8 and Appendix
Amendment/revision to the Standard for Fish Oils 103(i) and
N04-2022 5/8
(CXS 329-2017) - Inclusion of Calanus oil Appendix X
Amendments to the labelling provisions of non-
retail containers in the six existing fats and oils
15(i) and
standards (CXS 19-1981; CXS 33-1981; CXS - -
Appendix II
210-1999; CXS 211-1999; CXS 256-1999; and
CXS 329-2017)
Amendments/Revisions to the Code of practice for 33(vi), 118(i)
the storage and transport of edible fats and oils in - - and Appendix
bulk (CXC 36-1987) III (Part A & B)
Extension of the project timeline of the Proposed
draft revision to the Standard for Olive oils and
Olive Pomace Oils (CXS 33-1981) to CCFO30 to - - 86
complete further work, including ordinary olive oil,
DAGs and PPP
Approval
New work on the proposed revision to Codex
124(i) and
Standards on Fats and Oils to reduce Trans-Fatty - 1,2
Appendix XI
Acid Intake
New work on a standard for microbial Omega-3 132(i) and
- 1,2
oils Appendix XII
Responses on the technological justifications for the use of chlorophylls
CCFA Action 15(iii)
(INS 140) and paprika extract (INS 160(c)(ii))
The draft amendments to the labelling provisions of non-retail containers
Information 15(i)
in the six existing fats and oils standards
CCFL
Endorsement of the labelling provision related to astaxanthin in calanus
Action 103(iii)
oil in the Standard for fish oils
The revised methods of analysis for olive oils and olive pomace oils 85(ii)
CCMAS Endorsement
The method for determination of wax content in calanus oil 103(ii)
Expert consultation to review available data on DAGs and PPP, defined
FAO Information 85(v)
by CCFO29, based on available data and the outcome of the EWG
Re-evaluation of the acceptability of non-food-grade calcium
JECFA Action 15(vii)
lignosulfonate as a previous cargo
Determination if the method for the determination of gamma oryzanol in
Members Action rice bran oil was still “fit for purpose” and should be included in CXS 234- 15(ii)
1999; and if there was alternative method(s)
 REP24/FO iv

Responsible
Purpose Text/Topic Code Step Para(s)
Party
Collection and assessment for suitability of global scientific data and
information for olive oil on individual samples, and to make
85(iii)
recommendations to CCFO on the need and process for further analysis
of the data
EWG Drafting/ Proposed revisions to codex standards on fats and oils to
Members Comments 2,3 124(ii)
reduce Trans-Fatty Acid (TFA) intake
CCFO29
Proposed draft standard for microbial omega-3 oils 2,3 132(ii)
Consideration of proposals on new substances to be added to
- 118(iv)
the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes
REP24/FO v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ADI Acceptable daily intake

AOCS American Oil Chemists Society
CAC Codex Alimentarius Commission
CAS Chemical Abstracts Service
CCEXEC Executive Committee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission
CCFA Codex Committee on Food Additives
CCFICS Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems
CCFL Codex Committee on Food Labelling
CCFO Codex Committee on Fats and Oils
CCGP Codex Committee on General Principles
CCMAS Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling
CL Circular Letter
CRD Conference room document
CXC Codex code of practice
CXS Codex Standard
DAGs 1,2-diglycerides
DHA Docosahexaenoic acid
EDC Ethylene dichloride
EPA Eicosapentaenoic acid
ETBE Ethyl tertiary butyl ether
EU European Union
EWG Electronic Working Group
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FC Food Category
FEDIOL The EU Vegetable Oil and Protein meal Federation
FIA Food Industry Asia
FOSFA Federation of Oils, Seeds and Fats Association International
GLC Gas-liquid chromatography
GOED Global Organization for EPA and DHA Omega-3s
IDF International Dairy Federation
IMACE The European Margarine Association
INS International Numbering System
IOC International Olive Council
ISO International Organisation for Standardization
iTFAs Industrially produced Trans-Fatty Acids
IWG In-session working group
JECFA Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives
MOAH Mineral oil aromatic hydrocarbons
MTBE Methyl tertiary butyl ether
NCD Non-communicable diseases
ND Not Detected
NRC Non-retail containers
OCS Online Commenting System
PHOs Partially Hydrogenated Oils
PPP Pyropheophytin "a"
TDI Tolerable Daily Intake
TFAs Trans-Fatty Acids
REP24/FO vi

TORs Terms of Reference

TS Technical Specification
UAN Urea ammonium nitrate solution
UV Ultraviolet
WHO World Health Organization
USA United States of America
 REP24/FO 1

INTRODUCTION
1. The Codex Committee on Fats and Oils (CCFO) held its twenty-eighth session in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
from 19 to 23 February 2024, at the kind invitation of the Government of Malaysia. Ms Norrani Eksan, Senior
Director for Food Safety and Quality, Ministry of Health Malaysia, chaired the session, which was attended by
36 Member Countries, one Member Organization (European Union) and 10 Observer organizations and FAO
and WHO. The full list of participants is contained in Appendix I.
OPENING OF THE SESSION
2. Datuk Seri Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, the Honourable Minister of Health, Malaysia, opened the meeting, welcoming
the participants and congratulating the Committee on its great achievements in the 60 years since its
establishment. He underscored the importance of standards in fats and oils to the dual mandate of Codex of
protecting consumer health and facilitating fair practices in the food trade and highlighted the role of the
committee in also addressing important public health issues such efforts to reduce the intake of industrially
produced Trans Fatty Acids (iTFAs) and Partially Hydrogenated Oils (PHOs).
3. Mr Steve Wearne, Chairperson of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), also addressed the Committee
via video message.
Division of Competence1
4. CCFO28 noted the division of competence between the European Union (EU) and its Member States, in
accordance with paragraph 5, Rule II, of the Rules of Procedure of CAC.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA (Agenda item 1) 2
5. CCFO28 adopted the provisional agenda as its agenda for the meeting and agreed to consider,
 under Agenda item 7 (Review of the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes (CXC 36-1987, Appendix 2)),
the related issue raised by FOSFA in CRD16 Rev, and
 under Agenda Item 9 (Other Business), possible future work on inclusion of virgin coconut oil in the
Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999) (India), subject to the availability of time.
6. CCFO28 agreed to establish two In-session Working Groups (IWG) working in English only as follows:
 An IWG on the revision of the Standard for Olive oils and Oil Pomace oils (CXS 33-1981), chaired by
Spain, with the following terms of references (TORs):
a) to consider the comments in document CX/FO 24/28/8 Add.1 and CRDs; and
b) to prepare recommendations for consideration by the plenary.
 An IWG on New Work Proposals chaired by the United Kingdom, with the following TORs:
a) to screen the proposals for new work (Agenda Items 8.1 and 8.2) for completeness against the
criteria in the Codex Procedural Manual regarding proposals for new work and the decision of
CCFO16, taking into account written comments received from Members in relation to the proposals;
b) to assess whether the information provided fulfils the requirements for the new work proposed and
make recommendations to the plenary; and
c) to prepare a report to be presented to the plenary to enable CCFO to make informed decisions on
the work proposals.
MATTERS ARISING FROM THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION AND OTHER SUBSIDIARY
BODIES (Agenda item 2)3
Matters for information
7. CCFO28 noted the information from CAC44, CAC45, CAC46, CCEXEC81, CCEXEC82, CCEXEC83,
CCEXEC84 and CCEXEC85; CCMAS42, CCFL47, CCFICS26 and CCGP33.
8. With regard to the request of CCEXEC83 that committees have due regard to ongoing global efforts to achieve
health and nutrition goals when prioritizing and undertaking new work or reviewing standards, the Chairperson
highlighted that CCFO has indeed been supporting this global effort to provide healthier options to the
population to reduce non-communicable diseases (NCD) risk factors. CCFO has ongoing work to meet this

1 CRD01 (Division of competence between the European Union and its Member States)
2 CX/FO 24/28/1; CRD07 (Burundi, India, United Republic of Tanzania); CRD16 Rev (FOSFA)
3 CX/FO 24/28/2; CRD06 (Codex and CCFO Secretariats); CRD07 (Burundi, Kenya, Thailand, United Republic of

Tanzania); CRD21 (Bangladesh); CRD29 (Uganda); CRD31 (East African Community)

 REP24/FO 2

demand for healthier oils which has resulted from the introduction of new varieties of fats and oils from plants,
animals and marine origin.
9. The WHO Representative acknowledged the contribution that CCFO had made so far in enhancing
healthfulness of fats and oils, which is the case for this committee meeting too, where CCFO will be discussing
trans-fat elimination as proposed new work. In addition to trans fat, there are other nutrients of concern, for
example sodium. In 2013, the World Health Assembly endorsed the Global Action for the prevention and
control of NCD. One of the targets agreed by the Member States was a 30% relative reduction in population
intake of salt/sodium by 2025. However, despite efforts made by countries, the mean sodium intake remains
high. There are different ways in which CCFO could contribute to sodium reduction, for example, promoting
reformulation (reduce the sodium content of fats and oils products) through CCFO standards. Many countries
have set national salt targets for pre-packaged foods including fats and oils products such as salted butter,
butter blends, margarine, other oil-based spreads, emulsion-based dips and dressings. WHO has also
published the global sodium benchmarks for different kinds of pre-packaged foods. Against this background,
the representative of WHO requested that CCFO, when prioritizing and undertaking its work, consider how it
could further contribute to achieving the global goal to reduce the NCD risk factors such as intakes of sodium
intake, as well as sugars and saturated fatty acids.
Matters for action
Labelling provisions for non-retail containers in existing and draft standards
10. In response to the request by CAC44, to the Commodity Committees to review the labelling provisions for non-
retail containers (NRC) in existing standards in light of the new General Standard for the Labelling of Non-
Retail Containers (CXS 346-2021) and the consequential amendment to the Procedural Manual, CCFO28
endorsed the proposed amendments to the labelling provisions for NRC as presented in CRD06.
Methods of analysis
11. CCFO28 considered the matters related to methods of analysis and:
a) agreed to consider the revision to the methods of analysis in Standard for Olive oils and Olive Pomace
oils (CXS 33-1981) under Agenda Item 5; and
b) noted the information presented in CRD06 Part B, that the method for the determination of gamma
oryzanol in rice bran oil in the Standard for Named Vegetable oil (CXS 210-1999) had not been reviewed
by CCMAS since it was never transferred to the standard on Recommended methods of analysis and
sampling (CXS 234-1999). CCFO noted the need to consider whether this method was still fit for purpose
and if so, to request CCMAS to include it in CXS 234-1999; or that an alternative method be proposed
for endorsement by CCMAS and inclusion in CXS 234-1999.
Food additives
12. CCFO28 discussed the requests from CCFA53 on the technological justification for the following food additives
in fats and oils:
a) Chlorophylls (INS 140) in FC 02.1.2: use in vegetable oils to restore natural colour lost in
processing or for the purpose of standardizing colour, including in virgin, cold pressed, and other
oils covered by Standard for Edible Fats and Oils not Covered by Individual Standards (CXS 19-
1981), and especially for that purpose in vegetable oils for deep frying.
13. CCFO28 agreed that there was no technological justification for the use of chlorophylls (INS 140) on products
conforming to CXS 19-1981, as their use could mislead consumers about the quality and authenticity of
vegetable oils especially virgin and cold pressed oils. The standard CXS 19-1981 does not permit the use of
additives in virgin or cold pressed oils. The colour of chlorophyll will be rapidly lost from vegetable oil during
deep frying.
b) Paprika extract (INS 160(c) (ii) in FC 02.2.2: use and use level in products conforming to the
Standard for Dairy Fat Spreads (CXS 253-2006) and Standard for Fat Spreads and Blended Spreads
(CXS 256-1999).
14. CCFO28 also agreed that there was no technological justification for the use of Paprika extract (INS 160(c)
(ii)) in products conforming to CXS 256-1999; and the Standard for Dairy Fat Spreads (CXS 253-2006) was
outside the purview of CCFO.
 REP24/FO 3

Conclusion
15. CCFO28 agreed:
i. to forward for adoption by CAC47, the draft amendments to the labelling provisions of non-retail
containers in the six existing fats and oils standards (Appendix II); and inform the Codex Committee on
Food Labelling (CCFL) accordingly.
ii. to defer discussions on the method for the determination of gamma oryzanol in rice bran oil transcribed
in the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999) to CCFO29; and to request the Codex
Secretariat to issue a Circular Letter (CL) to collect information on whether the method for the
determination of gamma oryzanol in rice bran oil transcribed in CXS 210-1999 was still “fit for purpose”
and should be included in the standard CXS 234-1999; and if there was alternative method(s) that could
be proposed for endorsement by CCMAS and inclusion in CXS 234-1999.
iii. to forward the responses on technological justification for the use of Chlorophylls (INS 140) in FC 02.1.2
and Paprika extract (INS 160c (ii) in FC 02.2.2 as described in paragraph 13 and 14; and
iv. that the request from CCEXEC83 in paragraph 25 of CX/FO 24/28/02 i.e. to give due regard to ongoing
global efforts to achieve health and nutrition related goals through reducing non-communicable diseases
(NCD) risk factors would be taken into account when considering new standards or during the review of
standards relating to composition of foods.
CONSIDERATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORTS OF THE 90TH AND 91ST MEETINGS
OF THE JOINT FAO/WHO EXPERT COMMITTEE ON FOOD ADDITIVES (JECFA) (Agenda item 3) 4
16. The Representative of FAO presented the outcome of the JECFA evaluation noting that the JECFA
recommendations covered two aspects:
 revising criterion no. 2 in the Code of Practice for the Storage and Transport of Edible Fats and Oils in
Bulk (CXC 36-1987) as adopted by CAC 34 (2011); and
 the outcome of the JECFA safety evaluation of 23 substances that may occur as previous cargoes.
Revising criterion no.2
17. The Representative highlighted that based on the data on consumption of fats and oils by infants and young
children, JECFA concluded there were no health concern for the general population from dietary exposure to
previous cargo chemical substances if the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) or Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) was
sufficiently protective, for example, the ADI or TDI was greater than, or equal to 0.3 mg/kg bw per day, and
therefore proposed revising the criterion to reflect this value for the ADI or TDI.
18. The Representative further noted that JECFA indicated that for substances for which there was no numerical
ADI or TDI, the criterion indicates these should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Where there were
additional sources of dietary exposure to the previous cargo chemical substances, they should be considered
in the exposure assessment.
JECFA safety evaluation of 23 substances for acceptability as previous cargoes.
19. The FAO Representative informed CCFO28 that JECFA concluded that 19 out of the 23 substances evaluated
met the criteria for acceptability as previous cargoes (ref. CX/FO 21/27/3 Rev). For the other 4 substances,
JECFA concluded that they do not meet the criteria for acceptability as a previous cargo for edible fats and
oils. Specifically, in the case of montan wax and non-food-grade calcium lignosulfonate there was not sufficient
chemical and toxicological information to allow the evaluation of the substances as shipped, and for acetic
anhydride and cyclohexane, JECFA could not reach a conclusion on the safety of transporting these
substances as a previous cargo for edible fats and oils due to insufficient chemical information regarding the
nature and quantities of impurities that those substances may contain.
Discussion
Inclusion of 19 substances evaluated that met the criteria for acceptability as previous cargoes
20. In considering the acceptance of the 19 substances that met the criteria for acceptability as previous cargoes,
CCFO28 agreed to maintain these in the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes (Appendix II of CXC 36-1987),
but with the following considerations regarding five of these substances.

4 CX/FO 24/28/3; CX/FO 24/28/3 Add.1; CRD08 (Burundi, Saudi Arabia, United Republic of Tanzania); CRD21
(Bangladesh); CRD22 (Nigeria); CRD29 (Uganda); CRD31 (East African Community)
 REP24/FO 4

Mineral oil, medium and low viscosity, class II and class III
21. Some Members noted that in their view these substances should only be included if they contained no
quantifiable levels of mineral oil aromatic hydrocarbons (MOAH), with one proposal to specify in the list that
these were food grade. The FAO Representative clarified that the JECFA evaluation was conducted under the
assumption that mineral oil products shipped as previous cargoes are highly refined-food-grade products free
of MOAH and assumed that the tank and associated pipework had been cleaned according to defined
standards, inspected and considered clean and dry. In addition, negligent or fraudulent practices were not
considered to be part of the criteria identified necessary to determine the acceptability of a previous cargo.
22. The Chairperson further clarified that this was in line with the first criterion in CXC 36-1987 and in line with the
discussion, CCFO28 agreed to include “highly refined-food-grade” in parenthesis after the names of these two
substances and confirmed their inclusion in the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes (Appendix II of CXC 36-
1987)
Tridecyl alcohol, myristyl alcohol and unfractionated fatty alcohol mixture or mixtures of fatty alcohols from
natural oils and fats
23. One Member Organization indicated that they could only support inclusion of these three substances in the list
if it was indicated that their sources were edible types of fats and oils. The FAO Representative clarified that
JECFA did not specify the sources of those substances in its evaluation. Edible sources are included in the
assessment; however, the assessment was not limited to those only. JECFA did not raise safety concerns
associated with the source of the substances. Given the JECFA evaluation that there were no source-specific
safety concerns, another Member noted that indicating that limiting to only food grade versions of these
substances was not appropriate at this time, also as the meeting had no access to data on the potential trade
impact of such a restriction.
24. CCFO28 agreed that these substances be maintained in the list without any specificity as to their source.
25. The European Union expressed their reservation to maintaining tridecyl alcohol, myristyl alcohol and
unfractionated fatty alcohol mixture or mixtures of fatty alcohols from natural oils and fats in the list without
specifying that these substances should be food grade.
Four substances that did not meet the criteria for acceptability as previous cargoes
Montan wax
26. Considering the outcome of the JECFA assessment and information provided to CCFO28 that this substance
was not shipped in large quantities, CCFO agreed to remove this substance from the list.
Non-food-grade calcium lignosulfonate
27. Recalling that JECFA could not complete an assessment of this substance due to insufficient chemical and
toxicological data, one Member indicated that they had a sponsor that could provide a full suite of information
to enable re-evaluation of this substance. The FAO Representative highlighted the need for CCFO to submit
a new request to JECFA for re-evaluation of this substance together with details of the data sponsor, their
contact details, confirmation that the data meet the recommendations of JECFA and date of availability of the
data.
Acetic anhydride
28. Members noted the explanation by JECFA regarding concerns on the safety of this substance and to the
potential genotoxicity of the impurities, with one Member further noting that this was a hazardous substance
banned in some jurisdictions. The FAO Representative clarified that JECFA indicated that there was
uncertainty concerning the purity or “grade” of acetic anhydride that was transported as a previous cargo.
Since acetic anhydride may contain impurities, which are potentially genotoxic, JECFA could not reach a
conclusion on the safety of transporting acetic anhydride as a previous cargo for edible fats and oils until the
nature and quantities of these impurities have been clarified. One Member suggested to retain this on the list,
proposing that an updated footnote be added to this substance to indicate that it was still under review pending
definition and assessment of impurities.
Cyclohexane
29. The FAO Representative explained that there was uncertainty concerning the purity or “grade” of cyclohexane
that would be transported as a previous cargo. Since cyclohexane may contain carcinogenic impurities in
amounts that could significantly increase dietary exposure, JECFA could not reach a conclusion on the safety
of transporting cyclohexane as a previous cargo for edible fats and oils until the nature and the quantities of
these impurities in cyclohexane has been clarified. One Member suggested to retain this on the list, pending
further evaluation by JECFA upon availability of data.
 REP24/FO 5

Prioritization and data availability for re-evaluation

30. The FAO Representative encouraged the Committee to create a priority list of substances to the report of this
meeting including information on the sponsor interested to provide chemical and toxicological information, the
contact details, confirmation that the data meet the recommendations of JECFA and date of availability of the
data.
31. CCFO28 confirmed that non-food-grade calcium lignosulfonate was of the highest priority and that acetic
anhydride and cyclohexane were of a lower priority, that data was available for re-evaluation of calcium
lignosulfonate and encouraged Members to start collecting the data indicated by JECFA as necessary to
complete the assessment of acetic anhydride and cyclohexane and provide an update to future sessions
CCFO to facilitate the revision of the priority list.
Revision of Criterion 2 on whether a substance is acceptable as an immediate previous cargo.
32. CCFO28 agreed with the proposed revision by JECFA to change Criterion 2 to indicate that the ADI or TDI
should be greater than 0.3 rather than 0.1 mg/kg body weight per day and to add a sentence to the end of the
criterion to indicate that “Where there are additional sources of dietary exposure to the previous cargo chemical
substances, they should be considered in the exposure assessment”.
Conclusion
33. CCFO28:
i. agreed to maintain the 18 existing substances and add a new substance i.e. ethyl tertiary butyl ether
(ETBE) assessed by JECFA as acceptable previous cargoes in the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes
in Appendix II, CXC 36-1987; remove the associated footnote to the existing substances indicating that
these were under review by FAO and WHO; and include the words “highly refined-food-grade” after
Mineral oil, medium and low viscosity, class II and class III.
ii. agreed to remove Montan wax from the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes in Appendix II, CXC 36-
1987.
iii. agreed to maintain calcium lignosulfonate with the footnote “pending further evaluation by JECFA”.
iv. agreed to maintain acetic anhydride and cyclohexane in the list with the footnote updated to read “under
review pending submission of data on impurities”.
v. agreed to revise criterion 2 to replace the ADI or TDI of 0.1 mg/kg body weight per day with 0.3 mg/kg
body weight per day and the addition of a sentence at the end of criterion 2 as follows: “Where there are
additional sources of dietary exposure to the previous cargo chemical substances, they should be
considered in the exposure assessment”.
vi. agreed to forward these revisions to the Code of Practice for the Storage and Transport of Edible Fats
and Oils in Bulk (CXC 36-1987) for adoption by CAC 47 (Appendix III Part A).
vii. confirmed non-food-grade calcium lignosulfonate as the highest priority for re-evaluation and requested
JECFA to undertake a re-evaluation of the acceptability of this substance as a previous cargo noting
that the necessary data were already available (Appendix IV); and
viii. encouraged Members to collect data on the impurities associated with acetic anhydride and cyclohexane
in line with the data gaps identified by JECFA and provide an update on data availability to future
sessions of CCFO to facilitate review of the priority list.
PROPOSED DRAFT AMENDMENT/REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS
(CXS 210-1999) (Agenda item 4)
INCLUSION OF AVOCADO OIL (Agenda item 4.1)5
34. Recalling that CAC45 has adopted the proposed draft revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS
210-1999) on the inclusion of avocado oil at Step 5 and agreed to extend the timeline for completion of the
work to CCFO28, the CCFO Chairperson invited CCFO28 to focus on the outstanding issues identified at
CCFO27.
35. Mexico, as Chair of the EWG, and the United States of America as co-Chair expressed appreciation to all who
had contributed to the work and noted that the work of the EWG combined with the comments received in
response to the Circular Letter provided a good basis for completion of the work on Avocado Oil.

5CX/FO 24/28/4; CX/FO 24/28/4 Add.1; CRD09 Rev (Burundi, European Union, Ghana, India, Kenya, New Zealand,
Russian Federation, United Republic of Tanzania, FEDIOL); CRD22 (Nigeria); CRD23 (Uruguay); CRD27 (Senegal);
CRD29 (Uganda); CRD31 (East African Community)
 REP24/FO 6

Discussion
Table 3: Levels of desmethylsterols in crude avocado oil from authentic samples as a percentage of
total sterols.
Beta-sitosterol
36. One Member proposed to reduce the lower value of the range for beta-sitosterol from 79 to 75 as in their view
that would be more representative of the production. However, it was noted that beta-sitosterol was important
in the authentication of avocado oil and the proposed value was based on an extensive data set reviewed by
the EWG. Given the general support to retain the proposed lower value at 79, CCFO28 agreed to a range of
79.0 to 93.4 for beta-sitosterol.
Delta-7-stigmastenol
37. CCFO28 considered a proposal to lower the upper value of the range for delta-7-stigmastenol from 1.5 to 1.0.
The EWG co-Chairs noted that the upper value of 1.5 was agreed by the EWG, following extensive review of
the available data and discussions with stakeholders, and was considered a good compromise which was also
supported by data. CCFO28 agreed to retain the upper level at 1.5.
“Others” and footnote for Clerosterol
38. CCFO28 agreed to:
 increase the upper limit for the range of clerosterol from 2.0% to 2.5%, (included as a footnote to Table
3) noting this better reflected authentic avocado oil from different parts of the world; and
 move the reference to the footnote from the provision “Others” in the table to “Avocado oil” (i.e. name of
the oil) at the top of the table to avoid any confusion between the range for “Others” which was ND –
2.0% and the range for clerosterol (1.0 – 2.5%), since in the case of Avocado oil, unlike other oils in
CXS 210-1999, a separate range was provided for clerosterol, and it was not included under “Others”.
39. It was further noted that it was important to ensure that this footnote appeared under Table 3 when eventually
transferred into CXS 210-1999 and that for clarity it would be useful if existing footnotes also appeared under
all relevant tables and not just Table 1 to facilitate ease of use of the Standard.
Total Sterols
40. With regard to the range for Total sterols it was agreed to extend the range from 3500 – 6500 mg/kg to 3000
– 7500 mg/kg, noting that data from different production regions showed a larger range of total sterols and this
increase better reflected the range of total sterols that could be found in authentic avocado oil.
Table 4: Levels of tocopherols and tocotrienols in crude avocado oils from authentic samples (mg/kg)
41. CCFO28 agreed with the ranges for tocopherols and tocotrienols levels presented in Table 4 with the exception
of delta-tocopherol where the upper range was increased from 50 to 70 to better reflect authentic avocado oil
from different regions.
Other issues
42. Several Members noted that new data were emerging to indicate that further changes may be needed to Table
1 (in particular - C16:0, C18:1 and C18:2) and Table 3 (campesterol) to better reflect the composition of
authentic avocado oil from new growing regions. The Chairperson noted that new data on commodities,
including avocado oil, will become available from time to time. However, noting that CCFO should complete
its work on avocado oil at this session, CCFO28 agreed with the proposal of the Chairperson that, rather than
reopening previously agreed provisions at this stage, Members should continue to collect data; and that
proposals for revision to Table 1 and Table 3 could be considered at future sessions of CCFO.
43. One Member, noting that cis-vaccenic acid (C18:1 n7) was a potential unique parameter that could be used to
authenticate avocado oil, which as a high value product was at risk of adulteration, encouraged Members to
also collect data on this isomer of C18:1 as part on their data collection efforts on the fatty acid profile of
avocado oils, so that the potential incorporation of this parameter could be considered by a future session of
CCFO.
Conclusion
44. CCFO28 agreed to forward the draft amendment/ revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS
210-1999), inclusion of avocado oil to CAC47 for adoption at Step 8 (Appendix V).
 REP24/FO 7

INCLUSION OF CAMELLIA SEED OIL (Agenda item 4.2) 6

45. China, as the Chair of the EWG, introduced the item and outlined the changes made to the proposed draft
standard (CX/FO 24/28/5, Annex I) after considering the comments received in response to CL 2023/58/FO
and those contained in the relevant CRDs as follows:
 Section 2.1: Product definition - deletion of C. oleifera var. meiocarpa as it was a variant of C. oleifera
that has been covered in the definition;
 Section 3: Essential Composition and Quality Factors: Table 1 - revision of the fatty acid ranges of C17:1
and C22:0 from ND to ND – 0.1, Appendix: Table 2: revision of the range for saponification value (lower
limit) from 188-199 to 187-199; and
 Appendix Table 4 - revision of the lower limit for beta-tocopherol and delta-tocopherol from 0 to ND and
the range of total tocopherols and tocotrienols from 70-1000 to 100-1000.
46. The EWG further noted that all proposed provisions were based on data on oils from the species identified in
the product definition and that camellia seed oil, when compared to other oils, had relatively higher values for
delta-7-stigmastenol. The EWG Chair noted that these changes were contained in CRD19 Annex I.
47. CCFO28 agreed to use CRD19 as the basis for its discussions.
Discussion
2. Description
2.1 Product Definitions
48. A Member proposed the addition of C. japonica in the definition as camellia seed oil derived from the seeds of
this species was produced and traded internationally. The Member further expressed their willingness to
provide, in the future, data on essential composition and quality factors for Camellia seed oil derived from C.
japonica should need arise.
49. CCFO28 agreed with the proposal to add C. japonica and endorsed the revised draft product definition in
Section 2.1.
3. Essential composition and quality factors and Appendix – Other quality and composition factors
50. CCFO28 endorsed all the draft provisions in Section 3.1 (essential composition and quality factors) Table 1,
and the Appendix (Other quality factors and composition factors) – Table 2 (Chemical and physical
characteristics of crude camellia seed oil), Table 3 (Levels of desmethylsterols in crude camellia seed oil from
authentic samples) and Table 4 (Levels of tocopherols and tocotrienols in crude camellia seed oil from
authentic samples).
Conclusion
51. CCFO28 agreed to forward the proposed draft amendment/revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CXS 210-1999) - inclusion of camellia seed oil to CAC47 for adoption at Step 5/8 (Appendix VI).
INCLUSION OF SACHA INCHI OIL (Agenda item 4.3)7
52. Peru, as the Chair of the EWG, introduced the item and outlined the changes made to the proposed draft
standard (CX/FO 24/28/6, Annex 1) after considering the comments received in response to CL 2023/59/FO
and those contained in the relevant CRDs as follows:
 Section 2.1 Product definition – the different processing methods were deleted from the definition to
ensure consistency with the approach to definitions in CXS 210-1999.
 Section 3.1 – GLC ranges of fatty acid composition - the statement regarding the levels of linolenic acid
and linoleic acid was deleted to align the section with CXS 210-1999.
 Table 1 – fatty acids C11:0 and C15:0 along with their proposed values of ND were deleted as these
are not included in Table 1 of CXS 210-1999; and the fatty acid ranges for C18:1, C18:2, C18:3 were
adjusted based on comments received;

6 CX/FO 24/28/5; CX/FO 24/28/5 Add.1; CRD10 (Burundi, Ghana, India, Japan, Kenya, Peru, Republic of Korea, Russian
Federation, United Republic of Tanzania); CRD19 (China – EWG Chair); CRD23 (Uruguay); CRD29 (Uganda); CRD31
(East African Community)
7 CX/FO 24/28/6; CX/FO 24/28/6 Add.1; CRD11 (Burundi, Ghana, India, Kenya, Russian Federation, United Arab

Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania); CRD24 (Peru – EWG Chair); CRD29 (Uganda); CRD31 (East African Community)
 REP24/FO 8

 Appendix, Table 2 - The lower value of the range of the saponification value was amended to 185 from
189 (mg KOH/g oil); while in case of the iodine value, the range was changed to 182-205, based on
data and comments received; and
 Editorial and formatting revisions were also made to align the draft standard with CXS 210-1999.
53. The EWG Chair noted that these changes were contained in CRD24, and CCFO28 agreed to use this as the
basis for discussions.
Discussion
54. CCFO28 considered the revised proposed draft provisions for sacha inchi oil section by section (CRD24),
noted the changes and endorsed all the provisions.
Conclusion
55. CCFO28 agreed to forward the Proposed draft amendment/revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CXS 210-1999), inclusion of sacha inchi oil to CAC47 for adoption at Step 5/8 (Appendix VII).
INCLUSION OF HIGH OLEIC ACID SOYA BEAN OIL (Agenda item 4.4) 8
56. The United States of America, as the Chair of the EWG, introduced the item and highlighted that the EWG
report in document CX/FO 24/28/7 Annex 1 had been updated based on the comments received in response
to CL 2023/60/FO together with those contained in the relevant CRDs as follows:
 Section 2.1: Product definition was amended to include the designation “soybean oil – high-oleic acid”;
 Section 3: Essential Composition and Quality Factors: Table 1 - GLC ranges of fatty acid composition;
the range of C18:2 was revised from 1.0 - 12.0 to 1.0 - 16.0;
 Appendix, Table 2, the temperature x=20°C was inserted to the provision for relative density (x °C/water
at 20°C); and
 Various editorial amendments were also made to the different provisions in the proposed draft standard
with view to ensure consistence with similar provisions in CXS 210-1999.
57. The EWG Chair noted that the changes were contained in CRD26, and CCFO28 agreed to use this as the
basis for discussions.
2. Description
2.1 Product Definitions
58. CCFO28 agreed to the proposed product definition and endorsed the provision.
3.1 GLC ranges of fatty acid composition (expressed as percentages)
59. In response to a proposal to delete or move the provision “High-oleic acid soya bean oil must contain not less
than 65 percent oleic acid (as a percentage of total fatty acids)” from Section 3.1 to Section 2.1 (Product
definition), the Codex Secretariat explained that according to CXS 210-1999, Section 3.1 describes the
compositional requirements and that the transfer of the description would be inconsistent with the approach
used to-date in CXS 210-1999 with regard to the fatty acid composition of oils which have been included in the
standard in more than one designation (e.g. normal and high oleic acid varieties).
60. CCFO28 endorsed the statement on compositional requirements for high-oleic acid soya bean oil in Section
3.1.
3. Essential composition and quality factors and Appendix – Other quality and composition factors
61. CCFO28 endorsed all the proposed draft provisions in Section 3.1 (essential composition and quality factors)
in Table 1, and the Appendix (Other quality factors and composition factors) – Table 2 (Chemical and physical
characteristics of crude vegetable oils), Table 3 (Levels of desmethylsterols in crude vegetable oils from
authentic samples as a percentage of total sterols) and Table 4 (Levels of tocopherols and tocotrienols in crude
vegetable oils from authentic samples (mg/kg)).
Conclusion
62. CCFO28 agreed to forward the proposed draft amendment/revision to the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CXS 210-1999) - inclusion of high oleic acid soya bean oil to CAC47 for adoption at Step 5/8 (Appendix VIII).

8CX/FO 24/28/7; CX/FO 24/28/7 Add.1; CRD12 (Burundi, Ghana, India, Kenya, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation,
United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania); CRD21 (Bangladesh); CRD22 (Nigeria); CRD23 (Uruguay); CRD27
(Senegal); CRD29 (Uganda); CRD31 (East African Community)
 REP24/FO 9

PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR OLIVE OILS AND OLIVE POMACE OILS (CXS
33-1981): REVISION OF SECTIONS 3, 8 AND APPENDIX (Agenda item 5) 9
63. Spain, Chair of the EWG and IWG, introduced the item, highlighting the broad outcome of the discussions of
the IWG as contained in CRD03, noting that the discussions focused on only the outstanding issues including
Oleic acid; Uncertainty measurement of the Trans fatty acids; the footnote associated to sterols; organoleptic
characteristics for virgin oils and methods of analysis.
64. The Chairperson proposed that the Committee should focus its discussions on the above highlighted
outstanding issues.
3.2.1 GLC ranges of fatty acid composition
 C18:1 (Oleic acid)
65. Discussions on the GLC ranges for C18:1 focused on the two proposed lower values for Oleic acid i.e. 53 and
55. Some Members, supported lowering the value to 53 noting that this was necessary to reflect authentic
olive oil from different production regions. Other Members supported the value of 55 explaining that this value
was enshrined in their legislation and that this value was important for ensuring authenticity of olive oil. While
supporting the value of 55, others recognised the need to have a standard that was inclusive of all authentic
olive oil due to geographical factors and climatic factors and in the spirit of compromise endorsed the value of
53. CCFO28 agreed to the proposed lower value of 53 for this parameter.
 Uncertainty measurements for Trans fatty acids
66. CCFO28 endorsed the recommendation of the IWG to maintain the two decimal places for uncertainty
measurements for this parameter.
3.2.3 4α-Desmethylsterols composition (% total 4α-desmethylsterols)
 Footnote regarding sterols
67. CCFO28 discussed the footnote indicating that “Virgin olive oil's authenticity is not compromised if one sterol,
or their minimum content, does not fall within the ranges provided for if all other sterols and parameters tested
referred to in this standard fall within the stated range”. Some Members were of the view that this footnote was
essential to ensure that the standard did not exclude authentic olive oils coming from different regions. Others
were opposed to the inclusion of such a footnote noting that it made assumptions that all sterols were equally
relevant with regard to determination of authenticity, which was not the case, and it could allow adulterated
oils to meet the standard and such footnotes should not be included until further studies were available to
better inform their content.
68. Noting that there was no agreement on the new footnote, an alternative proposal was considered in relation
to the provision for campesterol and its associated footnote on sterols for virgin olive oils. The proposal included
increasing the upper limit for campesterol from 4.0% to 4.8% in both the table and in the decision tree (in
footnote b) so as to ensure that this parameter fit all authentic olive oils produced under different geographical
and climatic factors. The aim of the proposal was also to make the application of the related decision tree (in
footnote b) optional.
69. CCFO28 exchanged a range of views on this proposal with some Members supporting, others opposing and
others noting that while it was not their preference, they could accept it in the spirit of compromise. Concerns
were expressed that increasing the value for campesterol in the table to 4.8, without adequate review of the
data, was too large an increase and could not be accepted by some Members. However, they acknowledged
that the upper value in the associated decision tree (in footnote b) could be increased to 4.8% in order to
accommodate all authentic oils that fell outside the set limit of 4.0%. Concerns were also expressed that having
a decision tree no longer made sense as the upper value in the table was 4.8%.
70. One Member noted that the decision tree (in footnote c) related to delta-7-stigmastenol levels should also be
revised to better reflect authentic olive oils from all regions.
71. Following an extensive discussion on whether to maintain the value of 4.0% or adjust it to 4.8%, the
Chairperson noted that there was a lack of consensus to change the values for campesterol in the table and
proposed that the current value (i.e. 4.0%) be maintained. It was further proposed that based on the
discussions, the values for the upper levels for campesterol in the decision tree (in footnote b) be changed
from ≤ 4.5% to ≤ 4.8% in order to accommodate authentic virgin and extra virgin olive oils. Additional edits
were made to the footnote for clarity.

9CX/FO 24/28/8; CX/FO 24/28/8 Add.1; CRD03 (Report of the in-session working group on olive oils); CRD04 (Spain –
EWG Chair); CRD13 (Burundi, Ghana, India, Russian Federation, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania,
MoniQA Association); CRD14 (Canada); CRD20 (Syrian Arab Republic); CRD21 (Bangladesh); CRD22 (Nigeria); CRD23
(Uruguay); CRD25 (Peru); CRD29 (Uganda); CRD30 (Morocco); CRD31 (East African Community)
 REP24/FO 10

72. CCFO28 agreed to the amended decision tree in footnote b as follows:

“(b) When a virgin or extra virgin olive oil naturally has a campesterol level > 4.0% and ≤ 4.8%, it may
be considered authentic if the stigmasterol level is ≤ 1.4% and the delta-7-stigmastenol level is ≤ 0.3%.
The other parameters shall meet the limits set out in the standard.”
73. Reflecting on the discussion and the importance of additional data to facilitate any future evidence-based
decisions on sterol levels and the associated decision trees (in footnotes b and c), the Chairperson encouraged
all Members and Observers to undertake further studies on these aspects which could then be considered at
a future session of the CCFO. It was proposed that an EWG could be established to examine the results of
these studies.
74. Syria expressed their reservation to this decision as it did not recognize that some authentic olive oils fell
outside of the table and its associated decision trees in relation to delta-7-stigmastenol.
3.3.1 Organoleptic characteristics of virgin olive oils
 Virgin olive oil
75. CCFO28 considered two values for the median of most perceived defect for virgin olive oil; less than or equal
to 2.5 which is the value in the current standard and less than or equal to 3.5 which was the proposed revised
value to include the uncertainty of the measure calculated by the IOC method. There were divergent views on
this, with some Members highlighting the importance of maintaining the value of 2.5 in the interest of consumer
protection, while others considered that 3.5 was more appropriate as it accounted for uncertainty associated
with the method. In the spirit of compromise CCFO28 agreed to retain the original value of 2.5 but with the
addition of a footnote (i) to indicate that this did not include the uncertainty of the measure calculated by the
IOC method.
76. One Member highlighted that for consistency with this decision, the lower value for ordinary virgin olive oil
should also be maintained at 2.5. In this regard, CCFO noted that the value of 2.5 for ordinary virgin olive oil
was the value in the current standard. The Chairperson highlighted that any discussion with regard to the
ordinary virgin olive oil had been deferred to CCFO30 as agreed during CCFO27.
Appendix 1 - 1.5 1,2-diglycerides (% total diglycerides) and 1.6 Pyropheophytin "a" (% total chlorophyll
pigments)
77. The inclusion of new provisions for 1,2-diglycerides (DAGs) and Pyropheophytin "a" (PPPs) was an area of
extensive debate in the revision of the standard with some Members highlighting the value of these additional
provisions in terms of consumer protection while others were of the view that these provisions were not an
accurate reflection of the quality of extra virgin and virgin olive oils. Some Members proposed that more data
were needed in order to assess the appropriateness of these parameters and it was noted that although data
needs were also highlighted in earlier sessions of CCFO, these had not led to concerted efforts to collect such
data.
78. Noting that there was a clear divergence of views on these quality parameters, CCFO recognised that more
time and effort would be needed to give adequate consideration to their potential inclusion. While some
Members proposed retaining reference to the use of these parameters in the Appendix, pending data review,
others were of the strong view that it was premature to include any reference to these parameters in the
standard, although they acknowledged that, if possible, the relevant methods should be included in the section
on methods of analysis to promote harmonized approaches to data collection.
79. In order to move forward on this issue, CCFO28 agreed on the need for a concerted effort to formally collect
data on the use of DAGs and PPPs as quality parameters, and undertake an expert assessment of that data.
The Representative of FAO indicated their willingness to consider any request from the committee for support
to undertake an expert review, reiterating the importance of data collection from a broad range of Members
and stakeholders.
80. CCFO28 thus agreed on the following way forward:
 Issue a Circular Letter to all Codex Members and Observers requesting the data necessary to enable a
full consideration of the potential inclusion of DAGs and PPPs as quality parameters;
 Establish an EWG to assess completeness of the data and report on progress to CCFO29;
 Determine the need to establish an independent expert group to review the data at CCFO29, and
acknowledged the willingness of FAO to consider a request in this regard; and
 Consider whether or not to include such parameters, in the standard, at CCFO30, according to the
outcome of the EWG and expert review of the data.
 REP24/FO 11

81. CCFO further encouraged Members and relevant international organizations and Observers to undertake
studies in order to ensure submission of adequate data in response to the Circular letter and that it would
facilitate a full consideration of these potential quality parameters.
82. The Observer for the International Olive Council (IOC) informed CCFO of its long-term collaboration with
Codex over the past 60 years to facilitate fair international trade for olive oil and olive pomace oil through
providing scientific support in carrying out necessary scientific studies and technical support on discussions,
including on aspects related to DAGs and PPP, and in these studies both IOC members and non-members
were included. It was also stressed that the organisation remained available to carry out any additional
scientific studies and to collaborate closely with CCFO to solve this or any other technical issue.
8. Methods of Analysis and Sampling
 1,2-diglycerides (% total diglycerides) and Pyropheophytin "a" (% total chlorophyll pigments)
83. CCFO28 discussed whether to retain the methods of analysis for DAGs and PPP in section 8 and in the
Appendix noting the absence of the provisions for these two parameters in the standard. CCFO confirmed the
need to generate data for olive oil and olive pomace oil produced in different geographical and climatic regions
that would support the further consideration of these parameters by CCFO30. While CCFO acknowledged that
methods should only be forwarded to CCMAS when there was an associated provision, Members strongly
recommended that these methods be included in the standard to promote the use of these specific methods
in generating comparative data. Some Members also noted that they were already using these parameters at
national level, and including these methods would promote harmonization. It was agreed to insert a footnote
indicating “This method is retained pending review in CCFO29 and CCFO30” should be associated to the
methods for DAGs and PPP.
84. CCFO28 endorsed all the updated methods of analysis in section 8 and in the Appendix (Section 3), including
the ISO and IOC methods for DAGs, and the ISO method for PPP as in CRD03, and agreed to forward the list
of methods to CCMAS along with the explanation in paragraph 83 for the exceptional circumstances related
to the inclusion of methods of analysis for DAGs and PPP in the standard.
Conclusion
85. CCFO28 agreed to:
i. forward the draft revised Standard for Olive oils and Olive Pomace oils (CXS 33-1981) (Appendix IX) to
CAC47 for adoption at Step 5/8;
ii. forward the revised Methods of Analysis for olive oils and olive pomace oils (Section 8 and Section 3 of
the appendix) to CCMAS for endorsement, noting that a review of the parameters DAGs and PPP is
ongoing;
iii. establish an Electronic Working Group (EWG), chaired by Italy and co-chaired by USA, Saudi Arabia,
Australia, and Canada, working in English only, with the following Terms of Reference:
a) To collect global scientific data and information for olive oil on: free fatty acids, fatty acid ethyl esters,
acidity, peroxides and sensory defects, taking also into account the influence of time, temperature,
light exposure, UV exposure and oxygen exposure on the values of PPP and 1,2-DAG on individual
samples;
b) To assess the collected data and information for suitability and make recommendations to CCFO
on the need and process for further analysis; and
c) To submit the report of the EWG on the collected data at least three (3) months before CCFO29.
iv. request the Codex Secretariat to issue a Circular Letter (CL) requesting for data and information on the
parameters identified in paragraph 85(iii) above; and
v. inform FAO that a request for expert consultation to review available data on DAGs and PPP would be
defined by CCFO29 based on available data and the outcome of the EWG.
86. In light of the need to elaborate a standard that embraces olive oils and olive pomace oils produced in the
different geographical areas and taking into account the impact of climate change on composition of the olive
oil produced in different geographical regions, CCFO28 agreed to inform CCEXEC that during the review of
the Standard for Olive oils and Olive Pomace oils (CXS 33-1981), the need for collection and analysis of data
that allows for assessment of the suitability of some of the parameters in CXS 33-1981 was identified. To
undertake the data collection and analysis, while also noting that the revision of many aspects of the standard
had been completed and forwarded to CAC for adoption, CCFO agreed to request CCEXEC for an extension
of the project timeline to CCFO30 for the completion of further work on CXS 33-1981, including ordinary olive
oil as agreed by CCFO27, and DAGs and PPP as agreed by CCFO28.
 REP24/FO 12

PROPOSED DRAFT AMENDMENT/REVISION OF THE STANDARD FOR FISH OILS (CXS 329-2017):
INCLUSION OF CALANUS OIL (Agenda item 6)10
87. Norway, as the Chair of the EWG, introduced the item and outlined the process of the EWG which included
two rounds of consultations. During the consultations, there was general agreement on the description; the
GLC ranges for fatty acid composition; other essential compositional criteria; and the methods of analysis as
presented in document CX/FO 24/28/9 (Appendix I).
88. The EWG Chair emphasized that CXS 329-2017 applies to fish oils that are used in food and food supplements
where those are regulated as foods, and it does not apply to foods or food supplements themselves. The
standard was also intended for the verification of specific fish oils and for the performance of quality control
and authentication of fish oils for trade purposes.
89. The EWG Chair noted that changes had been made to the proposed draft standard (CX/FO 24/28/9 Appendix
I) after considering the comments received in response to CL 2023/62/FO and those contained in relevant
CRDs. These changes were contained in CRD05 which CCFO28 agreed to use as the basis for its discussions.
Discussion
90. A Member Organization requested the inclusion of safety-related specifications (e.g. astaxanthin esters levels)
in the proposed draft standard, as well as guidance on the conditions under which calanus oil may be used,
noting that calanus oil contains astaxanthin, a substance with an established acceptable daily intake (ADI) in
their region. The Member Organization recalled that among its members, calanus oil was only authorised in
food supplements (excluding food supplements for infants and young children), up to different maximum levels
established for different age groups and subject to additional labelling requirements.
91. The EWG Chair, while noting the Member Organization’s concerns, reiterated its view that provisions linked to
food supplements as regulated by specific Members were outside the scope of CXS 329-2017. Norway, as
Chair of the EWG, in reply to the comments from a Member Organisation regarding the values of wax esters
and peroxide value noted that the plenary discussions were not preliminary discussions, and that these had
already taken place in an active EWG.
92. Noting that food safety provisions are included within the scope of CXS 329-2017 and that the scope of the
standard includes fish oils used in food and in food supplements where those are regulated as foods, CCFO28
agreed to consider safety-related specifications by introducing additional provisions to the proposed draft
standard after discussing the provisions in Sections 2, 3 and 8.
93. CCFO28 considered the provisions in the proposed draft standard section by section.
2. Description
94. CCFO28 endorsed the description - 2.1.6 Calanus oil is derived from the species Calanus finmarchicus.
Calanus oil consists mainly of wax esters.
3. Essential composition and quality factors
Section 3.1: GLC ranges of fatty acid composition
Table 1
95. CCFO28 agreed on the provisions for calanus oil in the table, with editorial amendments to C20:5 (n-3)
Eicosapentaenoic acid and C22:1 (n-11) Cetoleic acid.
Section 3.2: Other essential compositional criteria
Provision on the minimum content of wax esters in calanus oil
96. In response to a Member Organization’s proposal to increase the minimum content of wax esters in calanus
oil from 80 w/w% to 85 w/w% to align with its specifications, the EWG Chair explained that the value of 80
w/w% was agreed by the EWG based on the available data.
97. CCFO28 endorsed the provision – “For calanus oil (2.1.6) the content of wax esters shall be at least 80 w/w
%.” – in Section 3.2 (Other essential compositional criteria).

10CX/FO 24/28/9; CX/FO 24/28/9 Add.1; CRD05 (Norway); CRD15 Rev (Burundi, European Union, Ghana, Peru, Russian
Federation, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania); CRD21 (Bangladesh); CRD22 (Nigeria); CRD29
(Uganda); CRD31 (East African Community)
 REP24/FO 13

Section 3.3 Quality Parameters

Section 3.3.2: Proposal to include a statement of oils with high wax ester content
98. CCFO28 endorsed the addition of the provision “and fish oils with a high wax ester concentration of 80% or
more such as calanus oil (Section 2.1.6)” – in Section 3.3.2.
Section 3.3.2: Provisions for peroxide value
99. A Member Organization proposed to revise the peroxide value for calanus oil from ≤ 5 milliequivalent of active
oxygen/kg oil to ≤ 3 milliequivalent of active oxygen/kg oil to align with its specifications. Recalling that the
provision ≤ 5 milliequivalent of active oxygen/kg oil already existed in CXS 329-2017, it was noted that this
proposed revision would need to be placed under a new section to ensure that it only applied to calanus oil
and not other fish oils with high phospholipid concentrations.
100. Based on consideration of additional data which indicated that the original value was reflective of the range of
calanus oil, CCFO agreed to retain the original peroxide value for fish oils of ≤ 5 milliequivalent of active
oxygen/kg oil.
8. Methods of Analysis and Sampling
101. The EWG Chair confirmed that the only method which had been validated for calanus oil was the AOCS
method. Some Observers encouraged the EWG Chair to further investigate the use of method ISO/TS
23647:2010 for wax esters in fish oils. The value of sharing statistical data which would facilitate the review of
the method by CCMAS was highlighted. CCFO28 agreed to forward the AOCS Ch 8-02 method for
endorsement by CCMAS.
 Safety-related provisions on astaxanthin
102. To address the concerns from a Member Organization on the safe levels of intake of astaxanthin, the EWG
Chair proposed to add two provisions to the proposed draft standard. The committee exchanged views on the
additional provisions and endorsed the following, noting that Section 3.5 will be a proposed new section in
CXS 329-2017:
 Section 3.5: Other compounds – Maximum levels of astaxanthin in calanus oil (Section 2.1.6) shall
comply with regulations of the country of retail sale; and
 Section 7.3: Other labelling requirements – For calanus oil (Section 2.1.6), the maximum intake level
of astaxanthin shall be declared if required by the country of retail sale in accordance with the acceptable
daily intake established for different age groups by competent authorities.
Conclusion
103. CCFO28 agreed to:
i. advance the proposed draft amendment/revision to the Standard for fish oils (CXS 329-2017): Inclusion
of Calanus oil (Appendix X) to CAC47 for adoption at Step 5/8;
ii. forward the method for the determination of wax content for endorsement by CCMAS; and
iii. forward the labelling provision related to astaxanthin for endorsement by CCFL.
REVIEW OF THE LIST OF ACCEPTABLE PREVIOUS CARGOES (APPENDIX II TO CXC 36-1987) (Agenda
Item 7)11
104. Malaysia, as Chair of the EWG, introduced the agenda item and informed the Committee that a Circular Letter
(CL 2021/95/OCS-FO) had been issued inviting interested Members and Observers to propose further
amendments to Appendix 2: List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes of CXC 36-1987. Ten (10) Members and
one (1) Observer responded to the CL. According to responses received, there was general support for the
existing List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes, along with the following relevant technical proposals submitted
for consideration by the EWG: i) proposed addition of new substances such as drinks – alcoholic and non-
alcoholic, dairy products, glucose and lecithin, all of which are regarded as foodstuffs; ii) addition of five new
substances namely ammonium sulfate solution, cyclohexanol, cyclohexanone, wine iodines and urea; and iii)
assignment of CAS numbers to three substances, i.e. fructose, hydrogen peroxide and urea ammonium nitrate
solution. The EWG conducted two rounds of consultations and made recommendations for consideration by
CCFO28.

11 CX/FO 24/28/10; CX/FO 24/28/10 Add.1; CRD16 Rev (Burundi, Ghana, Peru, Russian Federation, United Arab
Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, FOSFA); CRD21 (Bangladesh); CRD22 (Nigeria); CRD29 (Uganda); CRD31 (East
African Community)
 REP24/FO 14

Inclusion of drinks – alcoholic and non-alcoholic, dairy products, glucose and lecithin
105. CCFO28 endorsed the recommendation that drinks – alcoholic and non-alcoholic, dairy products, glucose and
lecithin were regarded as foodstuffs and thus, do not need to be included in the List of Acceptable Previous
Cargoes in relation to Section 2.1.3, Notes (1) and Criterion 3 of Appendix 2: List of Acceptable Previous
Cargoes of CXC 36-1987.
Recommendation on inclusion of five (5) new substances
106. CCFO28 noted that, five (5) new substances namely ammonium sulfate solution, cyclohexanol,
cyclohexanone, wine iodines and urea had been submitted for inclusion in CXC 36-1987 (Appendix 2: List of
Acceptable Previous Cargoes). However, adequate and relevant information had not been provided to enable
the EWG to assess their acceptability for inclusion into Appendix 2: List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes of
CXC 36-1987. CCFO28 agreed:
a) that cyclohexanol and cyclohexanone should not be included in Appendix 2: List of Acceptable Previous
Cargoes of CXC 36-1987 due to their genotoxic and carcinogenic potential as pointed out by a Member
Organisation;
b) that the other three substances, i.e. ammonium sulfate solution, wine iodines and urea would only be
considered after adequate and relevant information is provided by Members; and
c) to consider the above mentioned three substances when adequate data and information becomes
available.
Recommendation on assignment of CAS numbers to substances already listed in Appendix 2
107. CCFO28 endorsed the recommendation to assign the respective CAS numbers to the following substances:
a) Fructose: 57-48-7; b) Hydrogen peroxide: 7722-84-1; and c) Urea ammonium nitrate solution (UAN): 15978-
77-5.
Consideration of issues in CRD16 Rev
108. The Chairperson of CCFO recalled that during the adoption of the agenda, it was agreed that the issues raised
in CRD16 Rev would be considered under Agenda 7.
109. The Observer (FOSFA) highlighted the following three proposals, contained in CRD16 Rev, for consideration
by the Committee:
a) Leaded products are extremely toxic and persistent; thus their restrictions extend beyond the immediate
previous cargo to the second and third previous cargoes and these are indicated in the Banned List of
Immediate Previous Cargoes in Appendix 3 of CXC 36-1987. However, on the List of Acceptable
Previous Cargoes (Appendix 2), it was not clear that these extremely toxic substances are restricted
beyond the immediate previous cargo to the second and third previous cargoes. There was a need to
clarify these extended restrictions by inserting a note in Appendix 2 indicating that leaded products are
not permitted as second and third previous cargoes on the Acceptable List. This note would enable
users to effectively comply with the requirements.
b) Ethylene dichloride and styrene monomer are also extremely toxic and persistent, and they are readily
absorbed into organic coated tanks, and according to studies these can be found in up to three previous
cargoes. Based on scientific studies, these substances should not be carried as three previous cargoes
in organic coated tanks on the List of Banned Immediate Previous Cargoes (Appendix 3). Currently the
restrictions are only for up to the second previous cargo. It was proposed that a note be included in the
Immediate Banned List to extend the ethylene dichloride and styrene monomer restrictions to the third
previous cargo for organically coated tanks.
c) Editorial corrections and updates to Appendix 4: Bibliography with respect to the hyperlinks related to
FOSFA.
110. CCFO briefly exchanged views on the proposals, noting the support for the proposals from Members that the
proposed amendments to clarify Appendices 2 and 3 would enhance understanding and use of these two
appendices.
111. Malaysia, as Chair of the EWG, highlighted that while Appendices 2 and 3 were separate, either one cannot
be taken in isolation as they are part of CXC 36-1987 and should be read together when considering previous
cargoes.
112. A view was also expressed that inclusion of a note clarifying the restriction on leaded products under Appendix
2, could lead to other banned substances being included into this Appendix.
 REP24/FO 15

113. With the view to ensure correct interpretation of Appendices 2 and 3, CCFO28 agreed to amend CXC 36-1987
as follows:
Section 2.1.3 Contamination
114. Inserted a new paragraph after the second paragraph as follows:
Therefore, when considering previous cargoes for the storage and transport of edible fats and oils in
bulk, Appendices 2 and 3 should be read together as part of this code.
Appendix 2 – List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes
115. Inserted the following new note after Note 2:
Restrictions for substances beyond the immediate previous cargoes must be followed:
 Leaded products shall not be carried as the 2nd or 3rd previous cargoes.
 Ethylene dichloride and styrene monomer shall not be carried as the 2 nd or 3rd previous cargoes in
organically coated tanks.
Appendix 3 – List of Banned Immediate Previous Cargoes
116. Amended the footnote associated with Ethylene dichloride (EDC); 1,2-dichloroethane; ethylene chloride)* and
Styrene monomer (vinyl benzene; phenyl ethylene; cinnamene) *:
* Banned as the 2nd or 3rd previous cargoes in organically coated tanks and as the immediate previous
cargo in stainless steel and inorganically coated tanks.
117. CCFO28 also endorsed the recommendation to update the relevant hyperlinks and information in Appendix 4
related to FOSFA as contained in CRD16 Rev.
Conclusion
118. CCFO28 agreed to:
i. forward for adoption, the proposed draft amendments to the Code of Practice for the Storage and
Transport of Edible Fats and Oils in Bulk (CXC 36-1987) to CAC47 (Appendix III Part B).
ii. request the Codex Secretariat to issue a Circular Letter inviting interested Members and Observers to
propose further amendments to Appendix 2: List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes of CXC 36-1987.
iii. encourage Members and Observers to submit data on ammonium sulfate solution, wine iodines and
urea for future consideration as previous cargoes; and
iv. establish an EWG, led by Malaysia and working in English only, with the following Terms of Reference:
a) To consider proposals on new substances to be added to the list, provided that such proposals are
supported by adequate and relevant information.
b) To prioritise substances to be submitted to FAO and WHO for evaluation.
c) To consider proposals to remove substances from the list in light of new data; and
d) To prepare a report for consideration by CCFO29 to be submitted to the Codex Secretariat at least
3 months before CCFO29, only in cases where proposals for evaluation of new substances or
deletions to the lists of acceptable previous cargoes have been received in response to the CL.
CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSALS FOR NEW WORK AND/OR AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING
CODEX STANDARDS (Agenda item 8)12
119. The Chairperson recalled the work management mechanism established by CCFO and that CCFO28 had
established an in-session working group (IWG) to review proposals for new work. The United Kingdom, as
chair of the in IWG presented the report of its deliberations, noting that the IWG concluded that both proposals
were complete and suitable for further consideration by the plenary. The United Kingdom further noted that
the issue of a safety assessment of the microbial omega-3 oils had been raised but it was referred to the
plenary as it was not within the terms of reference of the IWG.

12 CRD02 (Report of the in-session working group on new work proposals)

 REP24/FO 16

DISCUSSION PAPER ON POSSIBLE WORK THAT CCFO COULD UNDERTAKEN TO REDUCE TFAs OR
ELIMINATE PHOs (Agenda item 8.1)13
120. Canada presented the proposal, recalling the history of discussion of trans fatty acids (TFAs) in several Codex
subsidiary bodies, the recommendations of WHO with regard to TFAs reduction and noted that countries were
taking different approaches to reach the WHO global target of elimination of industrially produced TFAs (iTFAs)
from the global food supply. Canada highlighted that the proposal for new work focussed on three standards
that had been developed by CCFO, namely, the Standard for Edible Fats and Oils Not Covered by Individual
Standards (CXS 19-1981), the Standard for Fat Spreads and Blended Spreads (CXS 256-1999), and the
Standard for Named Animal Fats (CXS 211-1999) as fats and oils covered by these standards were more
commonly partially hydrogenated and contained TFAs.
121. There was general support for the new work proposal. Discussion of the proposal highlighted the need to
consistently refer to iTFAs, which, Members considered to be the main objective of the work. It was also noted
that countries may take different approaches to reduce iTFAs and the revision of the standard should be
sufficiently flexible to reflect that, thus referring to either prohibition of PHOs or limits on TFAs. A Member
Organization noted that the prohibition on PHOs alone, if relying on the definition of PHOs based on iodine
value, could result in too high levels of TFAs, therefore the ban of PHOs should be in addition to legislated
limits of TFAs. One Observer proposed that the focus should be on ingredients rather than end products as
these would be easier to monitor; and that appropriate methods should also be considered.
122. It was also clarified that the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999) was not included in the scope
of the work, as this standard focuses on pure oils where partial hydrogenation was not an issue noting that if
it occurs during refining, the levels remain very low.
123. The project document was revised to reflect these comments and is attached as Appendix XI.
Conclusion
124. CCFO28 agreed:
i. to submit for approval by CAC47 the proposal for new work on the proposed revisions to Codex
standards on fats and oils to reduce Trans-Fatty Acid intake (Appendix XI);
ii. to establish an EWG chaired by Canada and co-chaired by Saudi Arabia, working in English, subject to
the approval of new work by CAC47, to prepare the proposed draft revisions for circulation for comments
at Step 3 and consideration by CCFO29; and
iii. that the report of the EWG should be made available at least three months before CCFO29.

PROPOSALS FOR NEW WORK: PROPOSAL FOR NEW WORK ON A STANDARD FOR MICROBIAL
OMEGA-3 OILS (Agenda Item 8.2)14
125. The Global Organisation for EPA and DHA omega 3s (GOED) presented the proposal noting that omega-3
oils from single celled microalgae for human consumption were a high value commodity with both production
and global trade of these oils increasing. With a high content of EPA and/or DHA these oils were an important
ingredient in an increasing variety of foods and food supplements. However, the lack of an international
standard for these oils, meant that the product was traded with differences in information which presented
challenges for regulators. Thus, development of a Codex standard with quality and compositional factors will
ensure fair practices in trade of these oils and also protect consumers health. It is proposed that the standard
focuses on three distinct microbial omega-3 oils from three different species which are increasingly used in
food applications.
126. There was general support for this proposal. However, a few Members indicated that as the proposal did not
take into account the safety aspects of this new commodity, they could not support the proposal. It was noted
that different countries have different authorization processes for such products so that should not prevent the
development of a standard. Some Members also noted the need for Codex to put in place a mechanism to
deal with requests for new work related to novel foods and production systems that address food safety aspects
and include the necessary risk assessment.
127. With regard to the safety concerns raised, GOED noted that this product was already traded internationally
and that a number of jurisdictions had evaluated safety and that there was already sufficient information with

13 CX/FO 24/28/11; CRD17 (Burundi, Ghana, India, Japan, New Zealand, Russian Federation, Thailand, United Republic
of Tanzania, FEDIOL, FIA, IDF, IMACE); CRD21 (Bangladesh); CRD22 (Nigeria); CRD23 (Uruguay); CRD28 (Malaysia),
CRD31 (East African Community)
14 CX/FO 24/28/12; CRD18 (Burundi, Ghana, India, New Zealand, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, United Republic of

Tanzania, GOED); CRD21 (Bangladesh); CRD22 (Nigeria); CRD29 (Uganda); CRD31 (East African Community)
 REP24/FO 17

regard to product safety without the need to undertake an international risk assessment.
128. The Codex Secretariat clarified that the review of the project document was an opportunity for Members to add
aspects they considered should be included in the proposal including the option of indicating that scientific
advice was needed to support the work. It could also be identified in the course of elaboration of the standard.
129. The Codex Secretariat, reflecting on the recommendations of CAC46 regarding new work proposals, recalled
that CAC46 had encouraged Members and Observers to submit new work proposals as only by addressing
such proposals could Codex identify the optimum ways of working on these commodities. If new mechanisms
to address aspects such as a safety assessment were needed, it could be conducted in parallel.
130. It was also discussed whether referring in the title to microbial oils as opposed to microalgae oils was
appropriate. However, it was clarified that these micro-algae were unicellular eukaryotes also grown in
fermentation processes, thus fitting within the understanding of microbial classification, and that there were
other products under development from other micro-organisms which would fit under the proposed standard,
thus facilitating future updates as new oils of microbial origin came on the market.
131. In light of the discussion, the purpose and scope of the project document was revised to also cover any
potential food safety issues. Section 7 was amended to include the potential need for expert advice which may
be identified in the course of the work. The timeline was simplified to indicate that the aim was to complete the
work within two sessions of CCFO.
132. CCFO28 agreed:
i. to submit for approval by CAC47 the proposal for new work on a standard for microbial omega-3 oils
(Appendix XII);
ii. to establish an EWG chaired by the United States of America and co-chaired by China working in
English, subject to the approval of the new work by CAC47, to prepare the proposed draft standard for
circulation for comments at Step 3 and consideration by CCFO29; and
iii. that the report of the EWG should be made available at least three months before CCFO29.

OTHER BUSINESS (Agenda item 9)

 Potential future work on inclusion of virgin coconut oil in the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils
(CXS 210-1999) (India):
133. The Chairperson requested India to submit a new work proposal on the inclusion of virgin coconut oils in the
Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999) by responding to the Circular Letter, which the Codex
Secretariat will issue in advance of CCFO29, noting that CXS 210-1999 already contained provisions for
coconut oil, as well as the processing of virgin oils, and hence may already cover virgin coconut oils.
DATE AND PLACE OF THE NEXT SESSION (Agenda item 10)
134. The Committee was informed that the 29th Session of CCFO is scheduled to be held in Malaysia tentatively
from 9 to 13 February 2026, subject to confirmation by the host government in consultation with the Codex
Secretariat.
REP24/FO – Appendix I 18

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS
LISTA DE PARTICIPANTES

CHAIRPERSON - PRÉSIDENTE – PRESIDENTA

Ms Norrani Eksan
Senior Director for Food Safety and Quality
Ministry of Health Malaysia
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya

CHAIR'S ASSISTANTS - ASSISTANTS DE LA PRÉSIDENTE - ASISTENTES DE LA PRÉSIDENTE

Ms Zailina Abdul Majid

Director for Policy, Strategic Planning and Codex Standard
Ministry of Health Malaysia
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya

Dr Tee E Siong
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya

MEMBERS NATIONS AND MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS

ÉTATS MEMBRES ET ORGANISATIONS MEMBRES
ESTADOS MIEMBROS Y ORGANIZACIONES MIEMBROS

AUSTRALIA - AUSTRALIE BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA –

BOSNIE-HERZÉGOVINE –
Ms Amber Wood BOSNIA Y HERZEGOVINA
Director of Food and Organics
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Dr Dzemil Hajric
Canberra, ACT Director
Food Safety Agency
Dr Glen Edmunds Mostar
Director- China Market Access
Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry BRAZIL - BRÉSIL - BRASIL
Canberra
Mrs Ana Paula De Rezende Peretti Giometti
Dr Claudia Guillaume Health Regulation Expert
Laboratory Manager Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency – Anvisa
Modern Olives Brasilia
Mr Paul Miller Ms Alinne Barcellos Bernd
Director Federal Agricultural Inspector
Australian Olives Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock
BELGIUM - BELGIQUE - BÉLGICA CANADA - CANADÁ
Mr Henk De Pauw Mrs Grace Ramos
Attaché Senior Program Officer
FPS economy Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Brussels Ottawa
Mr Marc Leguen De Lacroix Mrs Mariola Rabski
Political Administrator Supervisor Science Laboratory Services
Council of the European Union Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Bruxelles Ottawa
Mr César Timmerman CHILE - CHILI
Attaché
FPS economy Ms Patricia Ewert
Brussels Coordinadora de Gestión Departamento
Salud Ambiental
Ministerio de Salud
Santiago
REP24/FO – Appendix I 19

CHINA - CHINE ECUADOR - ÉQUATEUR

Dr Changpo Sun Ms Natalia Piedad Quintana Garzón
Professor/General Gngineer Secretaría del Comité Coordinador FAO/OMS para
Standards and Quality Center of National Food and América Latina y El Caribe CCLAC
Strategic Reserves Administration Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería, Acuacultura y
Beijing Pesca – MAGAP
Quito
Ms Bei Chen
Staff EGYPT - ÉGYPTE - EGIPTO
Standard and Quality Center of National Food and
Strategic Reserves Administration Prof Hanafy Abdelaziz Hanafy Hashem
Beijing President of Egyptian Delegation
Professor of Food Science and Technology
Dr Zhangqun Duan Cairo
Associate Professor
Academy of National Food and Strategic Reserves Eng Mariam Reyad
Administration Food Standards Specialist
Beijing Food standards specialist
Cairo
Mr Yi Han
First degree consultant Eng Mohamed Shamekh
General Administration of Customs of the People‘s Deputy lead,Technical Affairs
Republic of China Chamber of Food Industies
Beijing Cairo
EUROPEAN UNION - UNION EUROPÉENNE - UNIÓN
Mrs Shiyuan Liang
EUROPEA
Research assistant
China National Center For Food Safety Risk Mr Gaspar Avendano Perez
Assessment Policy Officer
Beijing European Commission
Mrs Xueli Lyu Brussels
Research Assistant Ms Laura Alexandrescu
China National Center for Food Safety Risk Policy Officer
Assessment European Commission
Beijing Brussels
Eng Shanshan Ni Mr Koen Dillen
Division Director Head of Unit
Hubei Cereals Oils & Foodstuffs Quality Supervision European Commission
and Inspection Center Brussels
Wuhan
FRANCE - FRANCIA
Mrs Jiyue Zhang
Associate Researcher Ms Rachida Sofrani
China National Center for Food Safety Risk Rédactrice - Bureau des produits d’origine végétale et
Assessment boissons alcoolisées
Beijing Ministère de l’économie et des finances
Paris
Dr Yan Zhang
Associate professor / Division Director Mr Laurent Queirolo
Standards and Quality Center of National Food and Responsable Domaine Scientifique des Corps Gras
Strategic Reserves Administration Service Commun des Laboratoires (SCL)
Beijing Marseille

Dr Jiangge Zheng GERMANY - ALLEMAGNE - ALEMANIA

Associate Researcher Dr Katrin Stolle
China National Center for Food Safety Risk Deputy Head of Unit
Assessment Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture Berlin
Beijing
GREECE - GRÈCE - GRECIA
Dr Li Zhou
Lecturer Mr Kostas Dikaros
Wuhan Polytechnic University Honorary Secretary Assistant of the Honorary
Wuhan Consulate of Greece
Consulate General of Greece in Malaysia
CROATIA - CROATIE - CROACIA
Ms Ljiljana Vinkovic
Counsellor
Embassy of the Republic of Croatia in Malaysia
REP24/FO – Appendix I 20

INDIA - INDE Mr Muthomi Ernest

Chief Executive Officer
Dr Ravinder Singh Avocado Society of Kenya
Director Nairobi
Food Safety and Standards Authority of India
Mr Hardik Malde
Dr Prabodh Halde General Manager
Head Keitt Exporters Limited
Marico Limited Nairobi
Mumbai
Mr Sunil Savla
Mr Ratish Ramanan K Managing Director
Technical Officer Avoil Industries
Food Safety and Standards Authority of India Nairobi
Delhi
MALAYSIA - MALAISIE - MALASIA
INDONESIA - INDONÉSIE
Dr Ahmad Parveez Hj. Ghulam Kadir
Prof Sugeng Heri Suseno Director-General
Director of Directorate of Research and Innovation Malaysian Palm Oil Board
IPB University Selangor
Bogor
Ms Siti Munirah Wan Jusoh@kamal
IRAQ
Senior Assistant Director
Hayder Fadhil Ministry of Health Malaysia
senior chief agriculture engineer Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
Ministry of agriculture Dr Kok Meng Chan
Baghdad Specialist (Toxicology)
ITALY - ITALIE - ITALIA PETRONAS
Wilayah Persekutuan
Dr Francesca Ponti Kuala Lumpur
Official
Ministry of Agriculture, Food Sovereignty and Forests Dr Kanga Rani Selvaduray
Rome Head of Nutrition Unit
Malaysian Palm Oil Board
Dr Angelo Faberi Selangor
Head of unit
Ministry of Agriculture, Food Sovereignty and Forests – Dr Azmil Haizam Ahmad Tarmizi
ICQRF Head of Analytical and Quality Development Unit
Roma Malaysian Palm Oil Board
Selangor
JAPAN - JAPON - JAPÓN
Dr Soon Sen Leow
Mr Shigefumi Ishiko Group Leader, Food Technology Group
Section Chief Malaysian Palm Oil Board
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan Kajang, Selangor
Tokyo
MEXICO - MEXIQUE - MÉXICO
Ms Reiko Murayama
Science Officer Mr Mtro. Salvador Argüelles López
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan Titular de la Unidad de Normatividad, Competitividad y
Tokyo Competencia
Secretaría de Economía
Mr Tomotaro Yoshida Ciudad de México
Associate Director
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan Mr Regino Javier Avila Pérez
Tokyo Director Calidad Total Área Técnica
Aniame Guadalajara, Jalisco
JORDAN - JORDANIE - JORDANIA
Mr Edgar Barrón Murillo
Eng Sharif Al-Mhirat Investigador estatal de producción de aguacate y
standardization Officer derivados Estado de Michoacán
Jordan Standards and Metrology organization Aniame
Amman Ciudad de México
KENYA Ms Mtra. María Teresa Indira Zambrano Callejas
Mr James Nduati Quality Infrastructure Coordinator
Standards Officer Ministry of Economy
Kenya Bureau of Standards Ciudad de México
Nairobi
REP24/FO – Appendix I 21

MOROCCO - MAROC - MARRUECOS REPUBLIC OF KOREA –

RÉPUBLIQUE DE CORÉE –
Mrs Khadija Arif REPÚBLICA DE COREA
Chef de la Division du contrôle des produits végétaux et
d’origine végétale Dr Sang Hee Cheon
Office National de Sécurité Sanitaire des Produits Scientific Officer
Alimentaires Ministry of Food and Drug Safety
Rabat
Ms Ye Yeon Lee
Dr Abderraouf Elantari Codex Researcher
Directeur de Recherche au Centre Régional de la Ministry of Food and Drug Safety
Recherche Agronomique de Marrakech
SAUDI ARABIA - ARABIE SAOUDITE –
National Institute of Agronomic Research
ARABIA SAUDITA
Marrakech
Mr Hassan Mouho Prof Fatmah Alasmary
Cadre Responsable Au Laboratoire Standards and Regulations Chief Expert
Morocco Foodex Saudi Food and Drug Authority
Marrakech Riyadh

Mr Mohamed Stitou Najla Alharbi

Chef de Service des Affaires juridiques Senior Risk Assessment Expert
Direction des Affaires Administratives et Juridiques Saudi Food and Drug Authority
Salé Riyadh

NETHERLANDS - PAYS-BAS - PAÍSES BAJOS Ms Rania Bogis

Senior Standards and Regulations Specialist
Mr Frederik Heijink Saudi Food and Drug Authority
Coordinating Policy Officer Riyadh
Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality
SENEGAL - SÉNÉGAL
The Hague
NORWAY - NORVÈGE - NORUEGA Mrs Ndeye Ngone Diaw
Chef de Division
Mrs Anne Mæland Direction Redéploiement Industriel
Senior Adviser
SPAIN - ESPAGNE - ESPAÑA
Norwegian Food Safety Authority
Bergen Mr Juan Manuel Jiménez Delgado
Mrs Mia Eirin Brastad Jefe de servicio de Control de la Calidad
Quality manager Ministry of Agriculture
Zooca Calanus AS Madrid
Tromsø Mr Luis Molina Almela
Mr Lars Haneborg Jefe de Servicio
Chief Advisor Dirección General de la Industria Alimentaria-Ministerio
Norwegian Seafood Federation de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación (MAPA)
Oslo Madrid

Mrs Marianne Maehlum Mr Wenceslao Moreda

Chief Marketing and Innovation Officer Científico Titular del Consejo Superior de
Zooca Calanus AS Investigaciones CientÍficas (CSIC)
Tromsø Instituto de la Grasa-Consejo Superior de
Investigaciones CientÍficas (CSIC)
PERU - PÉROU - PERÚ Sevilla
Ms Gloria Atala Castillo Vargas SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC –
Coordinadora Titular de la Comisión Técnica de Grasas RÉPUBLIQUE ARABE SYRIENNE–
y Aceites REPÚBLICA ARABE SIRIA
Instituto Nacional de Calidad – INACAL
Lima Eng Abeer Shaban Jawhar
Manager of Syrian olive Beraue
PORTUGAL Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform
Hamah
Dr Sarogini Monteiro
Senior Officer Eng Maisaa Abo Alshamat
Autoridade de Segurança Alimentar e Económica Head of Plants standard Department
Lisbon Syrian Arab organization for standardization And
Metrology
Damascus
REP24/FO – Appendix I 22

THAILAND - THAÏLANDE - TAILANDIA

OBSERVERS - OBSERVATEURS –
Ms Yupa Laojindapun OBSERVADORES
Director of the Office of Standard Development
National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL
Standards ORGANIZATIONS -
Bangkok
ORGANISATIONS GOUVERNEMENTALES
Ms Jiraporn Banchuen INTERNATIONALES -
Standards Officer, Professional Level
National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food ORGANIZACIONES GUBERNAMENTALES
Standards INTERNACIONALES
Bangkok INTERNATIONAL OLIVE OIL COUNCIL (IOC)
Mr Adul Premprasert Mrs Yousra Antit
Committee of the Federation of Thai Industries
Head of Olive Oil Chemistry Department
The Federation of Thai Industries
Bangkok International Olive Council
Madrid
Mr Suttipong Saisarai
Assistance committee of The Federation of Thai Mrs Mercedes Fernández
Industries Head of the Standardization and Research Unit
The Federation of Thai Industries International Olive Council
Bangkok Madrid
TUNISIA - TUNISIE - TÚNEZ NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS -
ORGANISATIONS NON GOUVERNEMENTALES -
Eng Narjes Maslah Hammar
Directrice Générale ORGANIZACIONES NO GUBERNAMENTALES
Centre Technique de l’agro-alimentaire AMERICAN OIL CHEMISTS' SOCIETY (AOCS)
Tunis
Dr Scott Bloomer
Mr Kamel Ben Ammar
Chief Science Officer
Directeur
American Oil Chemists' Society
Office National De L'huile
Tunis Champaign, IL

UNITED KINGDOM - ROYAUME-UNI – EUROPEAN FOOD EMULSIFIER

REINO UNIDO MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION (EFEMA)

Dr Michelle Mcquillan Ms Lee Yein Lam

Team Leader Regulatory Lead
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs Kerry
London Johor
Ms Laurel Gilbert FOOD INDUSTRY ASIA (FIA)
Senior Policy Advisor
Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs Ms Jelene Teo
Senior Executive, Regulatory Affairs
Ms Elizabeth Tossell Food Industry Asia
Head of Codex Team
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs FEDERATION OF OILS, SEEDS AND FATS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA – ASSOCIATIONS INTERNATIONAL (FOSFA
ÉTATS-UNIS D'AMÉRIQUE – INTERNATIONAL)
ESTADOS UNIDOS DE AMÉRICA Dr Gretel Bescoby
Ms Doreen Chen-Moulec Technical Manager
International Issues Analyst FOSFA International
U.S. Department of Agriculture London
Washington, DC
GLOBAL ORGANIZATION FOR EPA AND DHA
Mr Abraham Inouye OMEGA-3S (GOED)
International Trade Specialist
Foreign Agriculture Service, U.S. Department of Dr Harry Rice
Agriculture VP, Regulatory & Scientific Affairs
Washington, D.C. Global Organization for EPA and DHA Omega-3s
(GOED)
Dr Jill Moser
Salt Lake City
Lead Scientist
ARS, NCAUR Functional Foods Research Unit
Peoria, IL
Dr Girdhari M. Sharma
Consumer Safety Officer
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
College Park, MD
REP24/FO – Appendix I 23

Dr Gerard Bannenberg FAO PERSONNEL

Director, Technical Compliance and Outreach PERSONNEL DE LA FAO
Global Organization for EPA and DHA Omega-3s PERSONAL DE LA FAO
(GOED)
Ms Angeliki Vlachou
Salt Lake City
Food Safety Officer
Mr David Pineda Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Consultant Nations
Global Organization for EPA and DHA Omega-3s Rome
(GOED)
WHO PERSONNEL
Salt Lake City
PERSONNEL DE L’OMS
Ms Michelle Shelton PERSONAL DE LA OMS
Member
Dr Rain Yamamoto
Global Organization for EPA and DHA Omega-3s
Scientist
(GOED)
World Health Organization
Salt Lake City
Geneva
INTERNATIONAL DAIRY FEDERATION (IDF/FIL)
HOST GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT –
Mr Andy Goodwin SECRÉTARIAT DU GOUVERNEMENT HÔTE -
General Manager, Global Regulatory, Response & SECRETARÍA DEL PAÍS ANFITRIÓN
Services
Ms Faridah Malik Shari
Fonterra
Deputy Director
INTERNATIONAL LIFE SCIENCES INSTITUTE (ILSI) Food Safety and Quality Division, Ministry of Health
Malaysia
Mrs Pauline Chan
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
Director, Scientific Programs
ILSI SEA Region Ms Ruhana Abdul Latif
Singapore Principal Assistant Director
Ministry of Health Malaysia
Dr Shyarmala Kanesin
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
ASEAN Regulatory Science Attache
Ajinomoto Ms Nuraini Ghaifullah
Principal Assistant Director
Ms Shamila Syuhada Bt Ahamed Kamal
Ministry of Health Malaysia
Technical Info Specialist
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
IFF
Penang Ms Shazlina Mohd Zaini
Principal Assistant Director
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF FOOD SCIENCE AND
Ministry of Health Malaysia
TECHNOLOGY (IUFOST)
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
Prof Samuel Godefroy
Ms Nuurul Hidayah Sharipan
Chief Operating Officer GFoRSS / President Elect
Senior Assistant Director
IUFoST
Ministry of Health Malaysia
IUFoST
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
Quebec
Ms Nurul Syuhada Mohamad Basri
UNITED STATES PHARMACOPEIAL CONVENTION
Senior Assistant Director
(USP)
Ministry of Health Malaysia
Dr Richard Cantrill Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
Expert Volunteer
Ms Nabila Ab Rahman
USP (United States Pharmacopeial Convention)
Senior Assistant Director
Rockville MD
Ministry of Health Malaysia
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
Ms Norshafawati Rosli
senior Assistant Director
Ministry of Health Malaysia
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
Ms Seri Rukiah Mohamad Farid
Senior Assistant Director
Ministry of Health Malaysia
Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya
REP24/FO – Appendix I 24

CODEX SECRETARIAT
SECRÉTARIAT DU CODEX
SECRETARÍA DEL CODEX
Mr Patrick Sekitoleko
Food Standards Officer
Codex Alimentarius Commission
Rome
Dr Sarah Cahill
Senior Food Standards Officer
Codex Alimentarius Commission
Rome
Mr Chun Yin Johnny Yeung
Food Standards Officer
Codex Alimentarius Commission
Rome
REP24/FO – Appendix II 25

Appendix II
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISIONS TO THE LABELLING PROVISION FOR NON-RETAIL
CONTAINERS IN THE RELEVANT CCFO STANDARDS
(For Adoption)
Title Reference Section Current text Draft Amendment
number
1 Standard for CXS 19-1981 6.2
Edible Fats
and Oils not Labelling of non-retail
Covered by containers
Individual
Standards Information on the above
labelling requirements shall
2 Standard for CXS 33-1981 7.2 be given either on the
Olive Oils and container or in
Olive Pomace accompanying documents, “The labelling of
Oils except that the name of the non-retail
food, lot identification and containers should
3 Standard for CXS 210-1999 7.2
the name and address of be in accordance
Named
the manufacturer or packer with the General
Vegetable
shall appear on the Standard for the
Oils
container. Labelling of Non-
4 Standard for CXS 211-1999 7.2 Retail Containers
However, lot identification
Named Animal of Foods (CXS
and the name and address
Fats 346-2021).”
of the manufacturer or
5 Standard for CXS 256-1999 7.2 packer may be replaced by
Fat Spreads an identification mark,
and Blended provided that such a mark
Spreads is clearly identifiable with
the accompanying
6 7.2 documents.
Paragraphs 1
&2
7.2 For crude fish oils and crude Note: Paragraph
Standard for
CXS 329-2017 fish liver oils the label shall 3 of 7.2 is to be
Fish Oils Paragraph 3
indicate that these oils are retained without
intended for human any changes.
consumption only after
they have undergone further
processing.
REP24/FO – Appendix III 26

Appendix III
PROPOSED REVISION TO THE CODE OF PRACTICE FOR THE STORAGE AND TRANSPORT OF
EDIBLE FATS AND OILS IN BULK (CXC 36-1987)
(Adoption)
Proposed changes to relevant provisions are indicated in bold and underline, and deletions in strikethrough.
PART A - Related to Agenda Item 3 on JECFA Recommendations
APPENDIX 2 - Codex Alimentarius List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes
List of acceptable previous cargoes
No. Substance CAS No.
1 Acetic anhydride (ethanoic anhydride) 13 108-24-7
2 1,4-Butanediol (1,4-butylene glycol)1 110-63-4
3 Butyl acetate, sec-1 105-46-4
4 Butyl acetate, tert-1 540-88-5
5 Cyclohexane (hexamethylene; hexanaphthene; hexahydrobenzene) 110-82-7
13

6 Iso decyl alcohol (isodecanol)1 25339-17-7

7 Myristyl alcohol (1-tetradecanol; tetradecanol)1 112-72-1
8 Iso nonyl alcohol (isononanol)1 27458-94-2
9 Tridecyl alcohol (I-tridecanol)1 27458-92-0
10 Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE)1 1634-04-4
11 Montan wax 8002-53-7
12 Iso-Octyl alcohol (isooctanol)1 26952-21-6
13 Pentane1 109-66-0
14 1,3-Propylene glycol1 504-63-2
15 Propylene tetramer (tetrapropylene; dodecane)1 6842-15-5
16 Soybean oil epoxidized1 8013-07-8
17 Mineral oil, medium and low viscosity, class II 1 (highly refined
food-grade)
18 Mineral oil, medium and low viscosity, class III 1 (highly refined
food-grade)
19 Calcium ammonium nitrate solution1 6484-52-2
20 Calcium nitrate (CN-9) solution1 35054-52-5
21 Unfractionated fatty alcohol mixture or mixtures of fatty alcohols
from natural oils and fats1
22 Calcium lignosulphonate liquid (lignin liquor; sulphite lye) 1 8061-52-7
23 Ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE) 637-92-3
1 under review by FAO and WHO pending further evaluation by JECFA
3 under review pending submission of data on impurities.
REP24/FO – Appendix III 27

Section 2.1.3 Contamination

1 The substance is transported/stored in an appropriately designed system with adequate cleaning
routines, including the verification of the efficacy of cleaning between cargoes, followed by effective
inspection and recording procedures.
2 Residues of the substance in the subsequent cargo of fat or oil should not result in adverse human health
effects. The acceptable daily intake (ADI) (or tolerable daily intake (TDI)) of the substance should be
greater than or equal to 0.1 0.3 mg/kg bw/day. Substances for which there is no numerical ADI (or TDI)
should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Where there are additional sources of dietary exposure to the previous cargo chemical
substances, they should be considered in the exposure assessment.
3 The substance should not be or contain a known food allergen unless the identified food allergen can be
adequately removed by subsequent processing of the fat or oil for its intended use.
4 Most substances do not react with edible fats and oils under normal shipping and storage conditions.
However, if the substance does react with edible fats and oils, any known reaction products must
comply with criteria 2 and 3.
REP24/FO – Appendix III 28

PART B - Related to Agenda Item 7 on Review of the List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes
Assignment of CAS Number to substances in Appendix 2 - Codex Alimentarius List of Acceptable
Previous Cargoes

Substance (synonyms in bracket) CAS Number

Fructose 57-48-7

Hydrogen peroxide 7722-84-1

Urea ammonium nitrate solution (UAN) 15978-77-5

SECTION 2.1.3 Contamination

Undesirable contamination may be from residues of a previous material handled in the equipment, dirt, rain,
seawater or through the accidental addition of a different product. In storage installations and ships, particular
difficulty may be experienced ensuring cleanliness of valves and pipelines, particularly where they are common
for different tanks. Contamination is avoided by good design of the systems, adequate cleaning routines and
an effective inspection service, and on ships by the carriage of oils in segregated tank systems in which the
previous cargoes are included in the Codex list of acceptable previous cargoes in Appendix 2 of this code.
Contamination is also avoided by the rejection of tanks which have carried, as a last cargo, products which are
included on the Codex list of banned immediate previous cargoes in Appendix 3 of this code.
Therefore, when considering previous cargoes for the storage and transport of edible fats and oils in
bulk, Appendices 2 and 3 should be read together as part of this code.
Previous cargoes not on the Codex lists of acceptable or banned cargoes are only to be used if agreed upon
by competent authorities of the importing countries.
Until both lists are completed, practitioners may find the lists and data referred to in the bibliography in
Appendix 4 provide relevant guidance.
When determining whether a substance is acceptable as an immediate previous cargo, competent authorities
should consider the following criteria:

APPENDIX 2: Codex Alimentarius List of Acceptable Previous Cargoes

Notes
(1) Where it is not possible to transport edible fats and oils in bulk in tankers reserved for foodstuffs only,
the possibility of contamination incidents is reduced by carriage in tankers in which the previous cargo
is included in the list below. Application of this list must be combined with: good design of the system;
adequate cleaning routines; and, effective inspection procedures (see Section 2.1.3 of the code).
(2) Previous cargoes not on the list are only acceptable if they are agreed upon by the competent authorities
of the importing country (see Section 2.1.3 of the code).
(3) Restrictions for substances beyond the immediate previous cargoes must be followed;

 leaded products shall not be carried as 2nd or 3rd previous cargoes.

 ethylene dichloride and styrene monomer shall not be carried as the 2 nd or 3rd previous
cargoes in organically coated tanks.
(4) The list below is not necessarily a final list but is subject to review and possible amendment to take
account of scientific or technical developments. Additional substances are being considered for inclusion
in the list and may be included as acceptable following an appropriate risk assessment. This should
include consideration of:

 Toxicological properties, including genotoxic and carcinogenic potential (account may be taken
of the opinions of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) or other
recognised bodies).
 Efficacy of cleaning procedures between cargoes.
 Dilution factor in relation to the potential amount of residue of the previous cargo and any
impurity which the previous cargo might have contained, and the volume of oil or fat transported.
 Solubility of possible contaminating residues.
REP24/FO – Appendix III 29

 Subsequent refining/processing of the oil or fat.

 Availability of analytical methods for the detection of trace amounts of residues or for verifying
the absence of contamination.
 Reactivity of oils/fats with contaminating residues.

APPENDIX 3: Codex Alimentarius List of Banned Immediate Previous Cargoes

Footnote
*Banned as any one of the last two the 2nd or 3rd previous cargoes in organically coated tanks and as the
last immediate previous cargo in stainless steel and inorganically coated tanks.
Editorial changes

Substance (synonyms in bracket) CAS Number

Ethylene oxide (E0) (EO) 75-21-8

APPENDIX 4: BIBLIOGRAPHY
Federation of Oils, Seeds and Fats Associations (FOSFA International). 2021. In: FOSFA. London.
FOSFA International List of Banned Immediate Previous Cargoes. NOVEMBER 1999 (fosfa.org) and
FOSFA International List of Acceptable Immediate Previous Cargoes. Available at Carriage of Oils
and Fats | FOSFA International
REP24/FO – Appendix IV 30

Appendix IV

SUBSTANCES FOR EVALUATION FOR ACCEPTANCE AS PREVIOUS CARGOES

(For action by JECFA)

Name of Priority Data Sponsor contact Availability Data meet the

substance assigned by sponsor details of data recommendations
CCFO of JECFA1
Non-food High Norway [email protected] Immediately Yes
grade calcium
lignosulfonate
Acetic Low/medium TBD TBD TBD TBD
anhydride
Cyclohexane Low/medium TBD TBD TBD TBD
TBD: to be defined

1 For non-food grade calcium lignosulfonate JECFA recommended that at a minimum the information for re-evaluation
should address the following: molecular weight range(s), chemical component identification and relative composition;
toxicological data on representative products.
For acetic anhydride and cyclohexane JECFA recommended that at a minimum the information for re-evaluation should
address the following: product grade(s) and composition including characterization and levels of impurities arising from all
methods of manufacture.
REP24/FO – Appendix V 31

APPENDIX V
DRAFT AMENDMENT/REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS (CXS 210-
1999): INCLUSION OF AVOCADO OIL
(Adoption at Step 8)

2. DESCRIPTION
2.1 Product definitions
Avocado oil may be derived from either the mesocarp of avocado fruit (Persea americana) or obtained by
processing the whole avocado fruit.
3. ESSENTIAL COMPOSITION AND QUALITY FACTORS
3.1 Gas-liquid chromatography (GLC) ranges of fatty acid composition (expressed as percentages)
Samples falling within the appropriate ranges specified in Table 1 are in compliance with this Standard.
Supplementary criteria, for example national geographical and/or climatic variations, may be considered, as
necessary, to confirm that a sample is in compliance with the Standard.
Table 1: Fatty acid composition of avocado oil as determined by gas liquid chromatography from
authentic samples (expressed as percentage of total fatty acids)
Fatty acid Avocado Oil

C6:0 ND

C8:0 ND

C10:0 ND

C12:0 ND

C14:0 ND - 0.3

C16:0 11.0 - 26.0

C16:1 4.0 – 17.1

C17:0 ND – 0.3

C17:1 ND - 0.1

C18:0 0.1 - 1.3

C18:1 42.0 - 75.0

C18:2 7.8 - 19.0

C18:3 0.5 - 2.1

C20:0 ND - 0.7

C20:1 ND - 0.3

C20:2 ND

C22:0 ND - 0.5

C22:1 ND

C22:2 ND

C24:0 ND - 0.2

C24:1 ND – 0.2

ND – Non-detectable, defined as ≤ 0.05%

REP24/FO – Appendix V 32

APPENDIX TO CXS 210-1999: OTHER QUALITY AND COMPOSITION FACTORS

3. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Chemical and Physical Characteristics are given in Table 2.
Table 2: Chemical and physical characteristics of crude avocado oil
Parameter Avocado Oil
Relative density (x°C/water at 20°C) 0.910 – 0.920 (x=20°C)
Refractive Index (nD 40°C) 1.458 – 1.470
Saponification Value (mg KOH/g oil) 170 – 202
Iodine Value 78 – 95
Unsaponifiable matter (g/Kg) ≤ 19.0

4. IDENTITY CHARACTERISTICS
Levels of desmethylsterols in vegetable oils as a percentage of total sterols are given in Table 3.
Table 3. Levels of desmethylsterols in crude avocado oil from authentic samples as a
percentage of total sterols.
Avocado Oild
Cholesterol ND - 0.5
Brassicasterol ND - 0.5
Campesterol 4.0 - 8.3
Stigmasterol 0.3 - 2.0
Beta-sitosterol 79.0 - 93.4
Delta-5-avenasterol 2.0 - 8.0
Delta-7-stigmastenol ND – 1.5
Delta-7-avenasterol ND – 1.5
Others ND - 2.0
Total sterols (mg/kg) 3000 - 7500
dAvocado oil also contains 1.0 - 2.5% clerosterol
ND – Non-detectable, defined as ≤ 0.05%
Table 4: Levels of tocopherols and tocotrienols in crude vegetable oils from authentic samples
(mg/kg) (see Appendix of the Standard)
Avocado oil
Alpha-tocopherol 45 – 270
Beta-tocopherol ND – 36
Gamma-tocopherol ND – 62
Delta-tocopherol ND – 70
Alpha-tocotrienol ND – 20
Gamma-tocotrienol ND – 20
Delta-tocotrienol ND – 20
Total (mg/kg) 45 – 478
ND – Non-detectable
REP24/FO − Appendix VI 33

APPENDIX VI
DRAFT AMENDMENT/REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS
(CXS 210-1999): INCLUSION OF CAMELLIA SEED OIL
(For Adoption at Step 5/8)

2. DESCRIPTION
2.1 Product definition
Camellia seed oil (youcha oil) is derived from the seeds of cultivated Camellia species (C.oleifera,
C.chekiangoleosa, C. japonica and C.vietnamensis).
3. ESSENTIAL COMPOSITION AND QUALITY FACTORS
3.1 Gas-liquid chromatography (GLC) ranges of fatty acid composition (expressed as percentages)
Samples falling within the appropriate ranges specified in Table 1 are in compliance with this Standard.
Supplementary criteria, for example national geographical and/or climatic variations, may be considered, as
necessary, to confirm that a sample is in compliance with the Standard.
Table 1: Fatty acid composition of camellia seed oil as determined by gas liquid chromatography from
authentic samples (expressed as percentage of total fatty acids)
Fatty acid Camellia seed oil
C6:0 ND

C8:0 ND

C10:0 ND

C12:0 ND

C14:0 ND-0.8

C16:0 3.9-14.5

C16:1 ND-0.2

C17:0 ND-0.1

C17:1 ND-0.1

C18:0 0.3-4.8

C18:1 68.0-87.0

C18:2 3.8-14.0

C18:3 ND-1.4

C20:0 ND-0.5

C20:1 ND-0.7

C20:2 ND

C22:0 ND-0.1

C22:1 ND-0.5

C22:2 ND

C24:0 ND

C24:1 ND-0.5
ND - Non-detectable, defined as ≤ 0.05%
REP24/FO − Appendix VI 34

APPENDIX TO CXS 210-1999 - OTHER QUALITY AND COMPOSITION FACTORS

3. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Chemical and Physical Characteristics are given in Table 2.
Samples falling within the appropriate ranges specified in Table 2 are in compliance with this Standard.
Table 2: Chemical and physical characteristics of crude camellia seed oil
Camellia seed oil
Relative density (x℃/water at 20℃) 0.912-0.922 (x=20℃)
Refractive index (nD 40℃) 1.460-1.464
Saponification value (mg KOH/g oil) 187-199
Iodine value 83-89
Unsaponifiable matter (g/kg) ≤15

4. IDENTITY CHARACTERISTICS
Table 3: Levels of desmethylsterols in crude camellia seed oil from authentic samples as
a percentage of total sterols
Camellia seed oil
Cholesterol ND
Brassicasterol ND
Campesterol 0.5-2.1
Stigmasterol 0.3-4.6
Beta-sitosterol 16.0-60.0
Delta-5-avenasterol 0.4-4.3
Delta-7-stigmastenol 37.2-69.0
Delta-7-avenasterol 0.9-8.5
Others 0.5-5.1
Total sterols(mg/kg) 100-4000
ND - Non-detectable, defined as ≤ 0.05%

Table 4: Levels of tocopherols and tocotrienols in crude camellia seed oil from authentic
samples (mg/kg)
Camellia seed oil
Alpha-tocopherol 30-950
Beta-tocopherol ND-11
Gamma-tocopherol 2-56
Delta-tocopherol ND-28
Alpha-tocotrienol 13-35
Gamma-tocotrienol 5-39
Delta-tocotrienol ND
Total (mg/kg) 100-1000
ND - Non-detectable.
REP24/FO − Appendix VII 35

APPENDIX VII
DRAFT AMENDMENT/REVISION OF THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS
(CXS 210-1999): INCLUSION OF SACHA INCHI OIL
(For Adoption at Step 5/8)

2 DESCRIPTION
2.1 Product definitions
Sacha inchi oil is derived from the seeds of sacha inchi (Plukenetia volubilis L.).
3. ESSENTIAL COMPOSITION AND QUALITY FACTORS
3.1 Gas-liquid chromatography (GLC) ranges of fatty acid composition (expressed as percentages)
TABLE 1: Fatty acid composition of sacha inchi oil as determined by gas liquid
chromatography from authentic samples (expressed as percentage of total fatty acids)
(see Section 3.1 of the Standard)
Fatty acid Sacha Inchi oil
C6:0 ND

C8:0 ND
C10:0 ND
C12:0 ND
C14:0 ND
C16:0 3.6 – 4.8
C16:1 ND – 0.1
C17:0 ND – 0.1
C17:1 ND
C18:0 2.6 – 4.0
C18:1 6.0 – 11.7
C18:2 32.0 – 43.4
C18:3 36.2 – 50.0
C20:0 ND – 0.1
C20:1 ND – 0.4
C20:2 ND – 0.1
C22:0 ND – 0.1
C22:1 ND – 0.1
C22:2 ND
C24:0 ND
C24:1 ND
ND - Non detectable, defined as ≤ 0.05 %
REP24/FO − Appendix VII 36

APPENDIX TO CXS 210-1999: OTHER QUALITY AND COMPOSITION FACTORS

3. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Chemical and Physical Characteristics are given in Table 2.
TABLE 2: Chemical and physical characteristics of crude sacha inchi oils
Parameter Sacha inchi oil
Relative density (x℃/water at 20 ºC) 0.920 – 0.930 (x=20℃)
Refractive index (nD 40 ºC) 1.478 – 1.482
Saponification value (mg KOH/g oil) 185 – 196
Iodine value 182 – 205
Unsaponifiable matter (g/kg) ≤5

4 IDENTITY CHARACTERISTICS
Levels of desmethylsterols in vegetable oils as a percentage of total sterols are given in Table 3.
TABLE 3: Levels of desmethylsterols in crude sacha inchi oils from authentic samples as a percentage
of total sterols
Sacha Inchi oil
Cholesterol ND – 1.0
Brassicasterol ND – 0.1
Campesterol 6.6 – 7.8
Stigmasterol 23.4 – 27.0
Beta-sitosterol 51.6 – 56.9
Delta-5avenasterol 4.3 – 8.7
Delta-7stigmastenol ND – 0.3
Delta-7avenasterol ND – 0.7
Others ND
Total sterols (mg/kg) 2080 – 2480

ND - Non-detectable, defined as ≤ 0.05 %

TABLE 4: Levels of tocopherols and tocotrienols in crude sacha inchi oils from authentic samples
(mg/kg)
Sacha inchi oil
Alpha-tocopherol 3.0 – 7.0
Beta-tocopherol ND – 3.0
Gamma-tocopherol 1040 – 1370
Delta-tocopherol 640 – 860
Alpha-tocotrienol ND
Gamma-tocotrienol ND
Delta-tocotrienol ND
Total (mg/kg) 1683 – 2240
ND - Non-detectable.
REP24/FO − Appendix VIII 37

APPENDIX VIII
DRAFT AMENDMENT/REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR NAMED VEGETABLE OILS
(CXS 210-1999): INCLUSION OF HIGH OLEIC ACID SOYA BEAN OIL
(For Adoption at Step 5/8)
2. DESCRIPTION
2.1 Product definitions
Soya bean oil – high-oleic acid (soybean oil – high-oleic acid; high-oleic acid soya bean oil; high-oleic acid
soybean oil) is produced from high-oleic acid oil-bearing seeds of varieties derived from soya beans (seeds of
Glycine max (L.) Merr.).
3. ESSENTIAL COMPOSITION AND QUALITY FACTORS
3.1 Gas-liquid chromatography (GLC) ranges of fatty acid composition (expressed as percentages)
High-oleic acid soya bean oil must contain not less than 65 percent oleic acid (as a percentage of total fatty
acids).
Table 1: Fatty acid composition of high oleic acid soya bean oils as determined by gas
liquid chromatography from authentic samples (expressed as percentage of total fatty
acids)
Fatty acid Soya bean oil (high-oleic acid)
C6:0 ND
C8:0 ND-0.1
C10:0 ND-0.1
C12:0 ND-0.1
C14:0 ND-0.5
C16:0 2.5-8.0
C16:1 ND-0.1
C17:0 ND-0.8
C17:1 ND-1.5
C18:0 3.2-5.0
C18:1 65.0-87.0
C18:2 1.0-16.0
C18:3 1.0-6.0
C20:0 ND-1.0
C20:1 ND-1.0
C20:2 ND-0.1
C22:0 ND-0.7
C22:1 ND-0.4
C22:2 ND
C24:0 ND-0.5
C24:1 ND
ND – not detectable, defined as ≤ 0.05%
REP24/FO − Appendix VIII 38

APPENDIX TO CXS 210-1999 - OTHER QUALITY AND COMPOSITION FACTORS

3. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Table 2: Chemical and physical characteristics of crude high oleic acid soya bean oils
Soya bean oil (high-oleic acid)
Relative density (x℃/water at 20°C) 0.909-0.923 (x=20°C)
Refractive index (nD 40°C) 1.462-1.468
Saponification value (mg KOH/g oil) 188-192
Iodine value 75-95
Unsaponifiable matter (g/kg) ≤15

4. IDENTITY CHARACTERISTICS
Table 3: Levels of desmethylsterols in crude high oleic acid soya bean oils from authentic
samples as a percentage of total sterols
Soya bean oil (high-oleic acid)
Cholesterol 0.2-0.5
Brassicasterol 0.2-0.3
Campesterol 19.9-25.2
Stigmasterol 17.3-23.0
Beta-sitosterol 42.3-51.9
Delta-5-avenasterol 1.9-3.0
Delta-7-stigmastenol 0.6-2.5
Delta-7-avenasterol 0.5-1.5
Others 4.5-7.1
Total sterols (mg/kg) 2300-3850
ND – Non-detectable, defined as ≤ 0.05%
Table 4: Levels of tocopherols and tocotrienols in crude high oleic acid soya bean oils from
authentic samples (mg/kg)
Soya bean oil (high-oleic acid)
Alpha-tocopherol 17-138
Beta-tocopherol 9-106
Gamma-tocopherol 89-1756
Delta-tocopherol 44-570
Alpha-tocotrienol ND-39
Gamma-tocotrienol ND
Delta-tocotrienol ND
Total (mg/kg) 900-2000
ND – Non-detectable.
REP24/FO Appendix IX 39

APPENDIX IX
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION TO THE STANDARD FOR OLIVE OILS AND OLIVE POMACE OILS
(CXS 33-1981)
(Adoption at Step 5/8)
1. SCOPE
This standard applies to olive oils and olive-pomace oils described in Section 2 presented in a state for human
consumption.
2. DESCRIPTION
Olive oil is the oil obtained solely from the fruit of the olive tree (Olea europaea L.) to the exclusion of oils
obtained using solvents or re-esterification processes and of any mixture with oils of other kinds.
Virgin olive oils are the oils obtained from the fruit of the olive tree solely by mechanical or other physical
means under conditions, particularly thermal conditions, that do not lead to alterations in the oil, and which
have not undergone any treatment other than washing, decanting, centrifuging, and filtration.
Olive-pomace oil is the oil obtained by treating olive pomace with solvents other than halogenated solvents
or by other physical treatments, to the exclusion of oils obtained by re-esterification processes and of any
mixture with oils of other kinds.
3. ESSENTIAL COMPOSITION AND QUALITY FACTORS
3.1 Designations and definitions
Extra virgin olive oil: virgin olive oil with a free acidity, expressed as oleic acid, of not more than 0.8 grams
per 100 grams and whose other physicochemical and organoleptic characteristics correspond to those laid
down for this category.
Virgin olive oil: virgin olive oil with a free acidity, expressed as oleic acid, of not more than 2.0 grams per 100
grams and whose other physicochemical and organoleptic characteristics correspond to those laid down for
this category.
Ordinary virgin olive oil: virgin olive oil with a free acidity, expressed as oleic acid, of not more than 3.3 grams
per 100 grams and whose other characteristics correspond to those laid down for this category 1.
Refined olive oil: olive oil obtained from virgin olive oils by refining methods (including methods aiming to the
complete or partial removal of chemical compounds responsible for organoleptic descriptors) that do not lead
to alterations in the initial glyceridic structure. It has a free acidity, expressed as oleic acid, of not more than
0.3 grams per 100 grams and its other physicochemical characteristics correspond to those laid down for this
category1.
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils: olive oil consisting of a blend of refined olive oil and
extra virgin olive oil and/or virgin olive oil. It has a free acidity, expressed as oleic acid, of not more than 1 gram
per 100 grams and its other physicochemical characteristics correspond to those laid down for this category.
Refined olive-pomace oil: Olive-pomace oil obtained from crude olive-pomace oil by refining methods that
do not lead to alterations in the initial glyceridic structure. It has a free acidity, expressed as oleic acid, of not
more than 0.3 grams per 100 grams and its other physicochemical characteristics correspond to those laid
down for this category1.
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils: olive-pomace oil consisting
of a blend of refined olive-pomace oil and extra virgin olive oil and/or virgin olive oil. It has a free acidity,
expressed as oleic acid, of not more than 1 gram per 100 grams and its other physicochemical characteristics
correspond to those laid down for this category. In no case shall this blend be called olive oil.
Note: Genuine virgin olive oil that does not meet one or more of the virgin olive oil's quality criteria of this
standard is referred to as LAMPANTE OLIVE OIL. It is considered unfit for human consumption either as it
stands or blended with other oils.

1This product may only be sold direct to the consumer if permitted in the country of retail sale (RETAINED UNTIL CCFO30
FOR ORDINARY OLIVE OIL).
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 40

3.2 COMPOSITION FACTORS

3.2.1 GLC ranges of fatty acid composition (expressed as percentages of total fatty acids)
The fatty acid values in this table apply to the oils described in Section 3.1 presented in a state for human
consumption. However, to provide clarity in the trade of lampante olive oil and crude olive-pomace oil, the
values of the table, trans isomers excluded, may also be applied.

Extra virgin olive oil Olive-pomace oil composed of

Olive oil composed of refined
refined olive-pomace oil and
Fatty acid Virgin olive oils olive oil and virgin olive oils
virgin olive oils
Refined olive oil
Refined olive-pomace oil

C14:0 ≤ 0.03 ≤ 0.03 ≤ 0.03

C16:0 7.0 – 20.0 7.0 – 20.0 7.0 – 20.0
C16:1 0.3 – 3.5 0.3 – 3.5 0.3 – 3.5
C17:0 ≤ 0.4 ≤ 0.4 ≤ 0.4

C17:1 ≤ 0.6 ≤ 0.6 ≤ 0.6

C18:0 0.5 -5.0 0.5 - 5.0 0.5 – 5.0
C18:1 53.0 – 85.0 53.0 – 85.0 53.0 – 85.0
C18:2 2.5– 21.0 2.5 – 21.0 2.5 – 21.0

C18:3 ≤ 1.0a ≤ 1.0a ≤ 1.0a

C20:0 ≤ 0.6 ≤ 0.6 ≤ 0.6

C20:1 ≤ 0.5 ≤ 0.5 ≤ 0.5

C22:0 ≤ 0.2 ≤ 0.2 ≤ 0.3

C24:0 ≤ 0.2 ≤ 0.2 ≤ 0.2

Trans fatty acids

Σ(t-C18:1) ≤ 0.05 ≤ 0.20 ≤ 0.40

Σ(t-C18:2) +
≤ 0.05 ≤ 0.30 ≤ 0.35
Σ(t-C18:3)
(a) In cases where an edible virgin olive oil exhibits 1.0 < linolenic acid % ≤ 1.4, then this oil is authentic provided that apparent β-sitosterol/campesterol
≥ 24 and all other composition factors lie within the official limits.

3.2.2 ECN42 (Difference between the actual and theoretical ECN 42 triglyceride content)
Extra virgin olive oil
≤ |0.20|
Virgin olive oils

Refined olive oil

≤ |0.30|
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils

Refined olive-pomace oil

≤ |0.50|
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 41

3.2.3 4α-Desmethylsterols composition (% total 4α-desmethylsterols)

Cholesterol ≤ 0.5
≤ 0.1 for olive oils
Brassicasterol
≤ 0.2 for olive-pomace oils
Campesterol ≤ 4.0b
Stigmasterol < campesterol
7-stigmastenol ≤ 0.5c
Apparent β-sitosterold ≥ 93.0
(b) When a virgin or extra virgin olive oil naturally has a campesterol level > 4.0% and ≤ 4.8%, it may be considered authentic if the
stigmasterol level is ≤ 1.4% and the delta-7-stigmastenol level is ≤ 0.3%. The other parameters shall meet the limits set out in the
standard.
(c) For virgin olive oils, if the value is > 0.5 and ≤ 0.8%, campesterol must be ≤ 3.3, apparent β-sitosterol/(campesterol+Δ7-stigmastenol)
≥ 25, stigmasterol ≤ 1.4 and ΔECN42 ≤ |0.1|. For refined olive pomace oils values > 0.5 and ≤ 0.7% then stigmasterol ≤ 1.4% and
ΔECN42 ≤ |0.4|.
(d) Chromatographic peak composed by Δ5,23-stigmastadienol+clerosterol+β-sitosterol+sitostanol+Δ5-avenasterol+Δ5,24-
stigmastadienol peaks.

3.2.4 Total 4α-desmethylsterols content (mg/kg)

Virgin olive oils
Refined olive oil ≥ 1,000
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive-pomace oil ≥ 1,800
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils ≥ 1,600

3.2.5 Erythrodiol and uvaol (% total 4α-desmethylsterols + erythrodiol and uvaol)

Extra virgin olive oil
Virgin olive oils
≤ 4.5
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive oil

Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
> 4.5
Refined olive-pomace oil

3.2.6 Waxes content (mg/kg)

Extra virgin olive oil

≤ 150e
Virgin olive oils
Refined olive oil
≤ 350f
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive-pomace oil
> 350f
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils
(e) Sum of C42 esters+C44 esters+C46 ester
(f) Sum of C40 esters+C42 esters+C44 esters+C46 ester
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 42

3.2.7 Stigmastadienes content (mg/kg)

Extra virgin olive oil
≤ 0.05
Virgin olive oils

3.2.8 Percentage of 2-glyceryl monopalmitate (2P) (% total monoacylglycerol)

Extra virgin olive oil
If C16:0 ≤ 14.0 %; 2P ≤ 0.9 %
Virgin olive oil
If C16:0 > 14.0 %, 2P ≤ 1.0 %
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
If C16:0 ≤ 14.0 %; 2P ≤ 0.9 %
Refined olive oil
If C16:0 > 14.0 %, 2P ≤ 1.1 %
Refined olive-pomace oil 2P ≤ 1.4 %

Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive pomace oil and virgin olive oils 2P ≤ 1.2 %

3.2.9 K (g, h)
Extra virgin olive oil
Virgin olive oil ≤ 0.01
Ordinary virgin olive oilj

(g) Defined as:

𝐾266 + 𝐾274
∆𝐾270 = 𝐾270 −
2
𝐾264 + 𝐾272
∆𝐾268 = 𝐾268 −
2
(h): 270 nm when using cyclohexane; 268 nm when using iso-octane.

3.3 QUALITY FACTORS

3.3.1 Organoleptic characteristics of virgin olive oils

Median of the most Median of the fruity
perceived defect attribute
Extra virgin olive oil 0.0 > 0.0
Virgin olive oil ≤ 2.5i > 0.0

Ordinary virgin olive oilj 2.5 < Me ≤ 6.0k

(i) Does not include the uncertainty of the measure calculated by IOC method.
(j) Retained until CCFO30
(k) or when the median of the defect is less than or equal to 2.5 and the median of the fruity attribute is equal to 0.

3.3.2 Free fatty acids (g/100 g, expressed as oleic acid)

Extra virgin olive oil ≤ 0.8
Virgin olive oils ≤ 2.0
Refined olive oil ≤ 0.3
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 1.0
Refined olive-pomace oil ≤ 0.3
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 1.0
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 43

3.3.3 Peroxide value (milliequivalents of active oxygen/kg oil)

Extra virgin olive oil ≤ 20
Virgin olive oils ≤ 20
Refined olive oil ≤5
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 15
Refined olive-pomace oil ≤5
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 15

3.3.4 Absorbancy in the ultraviolet region (K270) at 270/or 268 nm(l) (expressed as K270/or K268)

Extra virgin olive oil ≤ 0.22

Virgin olive oil ≤ 0.25
Ordinary virgin olive oilj ≤ 0.30 (*)
Refined olive oil ≤ 1.25
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 1.15
Refined olive-pomace oil ≤ 2.00
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 1.70
(l): 270 nm when using cyclohexane; 268 nm when using iso-octane.
* After passage of the sample through activated alumina, absorbency at 270 nm shall be equal to or less than 0.11.
(j) Retained until CCFO30

3.3.5 K (g, h)
Refined olive oil ≤ 0.16
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 0.15
Refined olive-pomace oil ≤ 0.20
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 0.18
(g) Defined as

𝐾266 + 𝐾274
∆𝐾270 = 𝐾270 −
2
𝐾264 + 𝐾272
∆𝐾268 = 𝐾268 −
2
(h): 270 nm when using cyclohexane; 268 nm when using iso-octane.

3.3.6 Fatty acid ethyl esters (mg/kg)

Extra virgin olive oil ≤ 35

4. FOOD ADDITIVES
Antioxidants used in accordance with Tables 1 and 2 of the General Standard for Food Additives (CXS 192-
1995) in food category 02.1.2 (Vegetable oils and fats) are acceptable for use in foods conforming to this
Standard.
No additives are permitted in virgin olive oils covered by this Standard.
5. CONTAMINANTS
5.1 The products covered by this Standard shall comply with the Maximum Levels of the General Standard for
Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995).
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 44

5.2 Pesticide residues

The products covered by the provisions of this standard shall comply with those maximum residue limits
established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission for these commodities.
5.3 Halogenated solvents
Maximum content of each halogenated solvent: 0.1 mg/kg
Maximum content of the sum of all halogenated solvents: 0.2 mg/kg
6. 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 (CXC 1-1969), and other
relevant Codex texts such as Codes of Hygienic Practice and Codes of Practice.
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 (CXG 21-1997).
7. LABELLING
The products shall be labelled in accordance with the General Standard for the Labelling of Pre-packaged
Foods (CXS 1–1985).
7.1 Name of the food
The name of the product shall be consistent with the descriptions as shown in Section 3 of this standard. In no
case shall the designation ‘olive oil’ be used to refer to olive-pomace oils.
7.2 Labelling of Non-Retail Containers
The labelling of non-retail containers should be in accordance with the General Standard for the Labelling of
Non-Retail Containers of Foods (CXS 346-2021).
8. METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING2

Fats and oils and

Provision Method(s) Principle Type
related products

Olive oils and olive Absorbency in COI/T.20/Doc. No. 19 / Absorption in ultra-violet I

pomace oils ultra-violet ISO 3656 / AOCS Ch 5-
91

Olive oils and olive Acidity, free (acid ISO 660 / AOCS Cd 3d- Titrimetry I
pomace oils value) 63 / COI/T.20/Doc. No 34

Olive oils and olive ISO 9936 II

HPLC (UV or
pomace oils Alpha-tocopherol
AOCS Ce 8-89 fluorescence) III

Difference I
between the Analysis of triglycerides
Olive oils and olive actual and COI/T.20/Doc. no. 20 by HPLC and fatty acids
pomace oils theoretical ECN and COI/T.20/Doc. No 33 by GC followed by
42 triglyceride calculation
content

Olive oils and olive 1,2 Diglycerides COI/T.20/Doc. No 323 Gas chromatography II
pomace oils (FID)
ISO 298223 III

2 The methods of analysis will be included in CXS 234-1999 after endorsement by CCMAS and the following text shall
replace the table.
For checking the compliance with this standard, the methods of analysis and sampling contained in the
Recommended Methods of Analysis and Sampling (CXS 234-1999) relevant to the provisions in this standard, shall
be used.
3 This method is retained pending review in CCFO29 and CCFO30.
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 45

Fats and oils and

Provision Method(s) Principle Type
related products

Olive oils and olive Erythrodiol + COI/T.20/Doc. No 26 Separation and gas II

pomace oils uvaol chromatography (FID)

COI/T.20/Doc. No 33 II

AOCS Ce 2-66 and III

Olive oils and olive Fatty acid AOCS Ch 2-91 / Ce 1h- Gas chromatography
pomace oils composition 05 (FID) of methyl esters

ISO 12966-2 and ISO III

12966-4

Olive oils and olive 2-glyceryl COI/T.20/Doc. No 23 Gas chromatography II

pomace oils monopalmitate (FID)
percentage

Olive oils and olive Fatty acid ethyl COI/T.20/Doc. No 28 Gas chromatography II
pomace oils ester content (FID)

Olive oils and olive Halogenated ISO 16035 Gas chromatography II

pomace oils solvents, traces (FID)

Olive oils and olive Insoluble ISO 663 Gravimetry I

pomace oils impurities in light
petroleum

Olive oils and olive Iodine value ISO 3961 / AOAC Wijs-Titrimetry I
pomace oils 9930.20 / AOCS Cd 1d-
92 / NMKL 39

Olive oils and olive Iron and copper ISO 8294 / AOAC 990.05 AAS II
pomace oils

Olive oils and olive Lead Use performance criteria*

pomace oils

Olive oils and olive Moisture and ISO 662 Gravimetry I

pomace oils volatile matter

Olive oils and olive Organoleptic COI/T.20/Doc. no. 15 Panel test I

pomace oils characteristics

ISO 3960 / AOCS Cd 8b- I

Olive oils and olive 90
Peroxide value Titrimetry
pomace oils
COI/T.20/Doc. No 35 IV

Olive oils and olive Pyropheophytin “a” ISO 298413 HPLC with UV/VIS or II
pomace oils fluorescence detection

Olive oils and olive Relative density ISO 6883 / AOCS Cc Pycnometry I
pomace oils 10c-95

Olive oils and olive Refractive index ISO 6320 / AOCS Cc 7- Refractometry II
pomace oils 25

Olive oils and olive Saponification ISO 3657 / AOCS Cd 3- Titrimetry I

pomace oils value 25

*
ISO 12193; AOAC 994.02; and AOCS Ca 18c-91
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 46

Fats and oils and

Provision Method(s) Principle Type
related products

Olive oils and olive 4-desmethylsterol COI/T.20/Doc. No 26 Gas chromatography II

pomace oils and total sterol (FID)
content

COI/T.20/Doc. no. 11 II

Gas chromatography
ISO 15788-1 III
Olive oils and olive (FID)
Stigmastadienes
pomace oils
AOCS Cd 26-96 III

ISO 15788-2 HPLC III

COI/T.20/Doc no. 33 II

Olive oils and olive trans Fatty acids ISO 12966-2 and ISO Gas chromatography III
pomace oils content 12966-4 (FID) of methyl esters
AOCS Ce 2-66 and III
AOCS Ce 1h-05

Olive oils and olive Unsaponifiable ISO 3596 / AOCS Ca 6b- Gravimetry I
pomace oils matter 53

Olive oils and olive COI/T.20/Doc. no. 28 II

Gas chromatography
pomace oils Wax content
AOCS Ch 8-02 (FID) III

Olive oils and olive Sampling ISO 5555 and ISO 661
pomace oils
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 47

Appendix I
OTHER QUALITY AND COMPOSITION FACTORS
These quality and composition factors are supplementary information to the essential composition and quality
factors of the standard. A product which meets the essential quality and composition factors but does not meet
these supplementary factors, may still conform to the standard.
1. QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS

1.1 Organoleptic characteristics

Extra virgin and virgin olive oils: See Section 3.3.1

Perceptions
Type of oil

Odour Taste Colour

Refined olive oil Acceptable light yellow

Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils Good light yellow to green

light yellow to
Refined olive-pomace oil Acceptable
brownish-yellow

Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and

Good light yellow to green
virgin olive oils

1.2 Moisture and volatile matter (g/100 g)

Extra virgin olive oil
≤ 0.2
Virgin olive oils

Refined olive oil ≤ 0.1

Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 0.1

Refined olive-pomace oil ≤ 0.1

Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils ≤ 0.1

1.3 Insoluble impurities in light petroleum (g/100 g)

Extra virgin olive oil
≤ 0.1
Virgin olive oils
Refined olive oil
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive-pomace oil ≤ 0.05

Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil

and virgin olive oils

1.4 Absorbance in the ultraviolet region at 232 nm (expressed as K232)

Extra virgin olive oil ≤ 2.50*
Virgin olive oils ≤ 2.604

4
The country of retail sale may require compliance with these limits when the oil is made available to the end consumer.
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 48

1.5 Trace metals (mg/kg)

All olive oils and olive-pomace oils

Iron (Fe) ≤ 3.0
Copper (Cu) ≤ 0.1

2. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

2.1 Relative density (𝒅𝟐𝟎

𝒓 ) (20 ºC/water at 20 ºC)

Extra virgin olive oil

Virgin olive oils
Refined olive oil
0.910-0.916
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive-pomace oil
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils

2.2 Refractive index (n𝟐𝟎

𝑫
)
Extra virgin olive oil
Virgin olive oils
1.4677-1.4705
Refined olive oil
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive-pomace oil
1.4680-1.4707
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils

2.3 Saponification value (mg KOH/g)

Extra virgin olive oil
Virgin olive oils
184-196
Refined olive oil
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive-pomace oil
182-193
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils

2.4 Iodine value (Wijs method)

Extra virgin olive oil
Virgin olive oils
75-94
Refined olive oil
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive-pomace oil
75-92
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils

2.5 Unsaponifiable matter (g/kg)

Extra virgin olive oil
Virgin olive oils
≤ 15
Refined olive oil
Olive oil composed of refined olive oil and virgin olive oils
Refined olive-pomace oil
≤ 30
Olive-pomace oil composed of refined olive-pomace oil and virgin olive oils
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 49

3. METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING2

Fats and oils and

Provision Method(s) Principle Type
related products

Olive oils and olive Absorbency in COI/T.20/Doc. No. 19 / Absorption in ultra-violet I

pomace oils ultra-violet ISO 3656 / AOCS Ch 5-
91

Olive oils and olive Acidity, free (acid ISO 660 / AOCS Cd 3d- Titrimetry I
pomace oils value) 63 / COI/T.20/Doc. No 34

Olive oils and olive ISO 9936 II

HPLC (UV or
pomace oils Alpha-tocopherol
AOCS Ce 8-89 fluorescence) III

Olive oils and olive Difference COI/T.20/Doc. no. 20 Analysis of triglycerides I

pomace oils between the actual and COI/T.20/Doc. No 33 by HPLC and fatty acids
and theoretical by GC followed by
ECN 42 calculation
triglyceride content

Olive oils and olive 1,2 Diglycerides COI /T.20/Doc.No 323 Gas chromatography II
pomace oils (FID)
ISO 298223 III

Olive oils and olive Erythrodiol + uvaol COI/T.20/Doc. No 26 Separation and gas II
pomace oils chromatography (FID)

COI/T.20/Doc. No 33 II

AOCS Ce 2-66 and III

Olive oils and olive Fatty acid AOCS Ch 2-91 / Ce 1h- Gas chromatography
pomace oils composition 05 (FID) of methyl esters

ISO 12966-2 and ISO III

12966-4

Olive oils and olive 2-glyceryl COI/T.20/Doc. No 23 Gas chromatography II

pomace oils monopalmitate (FID)
percentage

Olive oils and olive Fatty acid ethyl COI/T.20/Doc. No 28 Gas chromatography II
pomace oils ester content (FID)

Olive oils and olive Halogenated ISO 16035 Gas chromatography II

pomace oils solvents, traces (FID)

Olive oils and olive Insoluble impurities ISO 663 Gravimetry I

pomace oils in light petroleum

Olive oils and olive Iodine value ISO 3961 / AOAC Wijs-Titrimetry I
pomace oils 9930.20 / AOCS Cd 1d-
92 / NMKL 39

Olive oils and olive Iron and copper ISO 8294 / AOAC 990.05 AAS II
pomace oils

2 The methods of analysis will be included in CXS 234-1999 after endorsement by CCMAS and the following text shall
replace the table.
For checking the compliance with this standard, the methods of analysis and sampling contained in the Recommended
Methods of Analysis and Sampling (CXS 234-1999) relevant to the provisions in this standard, shall be used.
3 This method is retained pending review in CCFO29 and CCFO30.
REP24/FO − Appendix IX 50

Fats and oils and

Provision Method(s) Principle Type
related products

Olive oils and olive Lead Use performance criteria*

pomace oils

Olive oils and olive Moisture and ISO 662 Gravimetry I

pomace oils volatile matter

Olive oils and olive Organoleptic COI/T.20/Doc. no. 15 Panel test I

pomace oils characteristics

Olive oils and olive ISO 3960 / AOCS Cd 8b- I

pomace oils 90
Peroxide value Titrimetry
COI/T.20/Doc. No 35 IV

Olive oils and olive Pyropheophytin “a” ISO 298413 HPLC with UV/VIS or II
pomace oils fluorescence detection

Olive oils and olive Relative density ISO 6883 / AOCS Cc Pycnometry I
pomace oils 10c-95

Olive oils and olive Refractive index ISO 6320 / AOCS Cc 7- Refractometry II
pomace oils 25

Olive oils and olive Saponification ISO 3657 / AOCS Cd 3- Titrimetry I

pomace oils value 25

Olive oils and olive 4-desmethylsterol COI/T.20/Doc. No 26 Gas chromatography II

pomace oils and total sterol (FID)
content

COI/T.20/Doc. no. 11 II

Gas chromatography
ISO 15788-1 III
Olive oils and olive (FID)
Stigmastadienes
pomace oils
AOCS Cd 26-96 III

ISO 15788-2 HPLC III

COI/T.20/Doc no. 33 II

Olive oils and olive trans Fatty acids ISO 12966-2 and ISO Gas chromatography III
pomace oils content 12966-4 (FID) of methyl esters
AOCS Ce 2-66 and III
AOCS Ce 1h-05

Olive oils and olive Unsaponifiable ISO 3596 / AOCS Ca 6b- Gravimetry I
pomace oils matter 53

Olive oils and olive COI/T.20/Doc. no. 28 II

Gas chromatography
pomace oils Wax content
AOCS Ch 8-02 (FID) III
Olive oils and olive Sampling ISO 5555 and ISO 661
pomace oils

*
ISO 12193; AOAC 994.02; and AOCS Ca 18c-91
3 This method is retained pending review in CCFO29 and CCFO30.
REP24/FO − Appendix X 51

APPENDIX X
PROPOSED DRAFT AMENDMENT/REVISION OF THE STANDARD FOR FISH OILS (CXS 329-2017):
INCLUSION OF CALANUS OIL
(For Adoption at Step 5/8)
2. DESCRIPTION
2.1.6 Calanus oil is derived from the species Calanus finmarchicus. Calanus oil consists mainly of wax
esters.
3. ESSENTIAL COMPOSITION AND QUALITY FACTORS
3.1 Gas-liquid chromatography (GLC) ranges of fatty acid composition (expressed as percentages)
Table 1: Fatty acid (FA) composition of named fish oil and fish liver categories as determined by gas liquid
chromatography from authentic samples (expressed as percentage of total fatty acids) (see Section 3.1 of
the standard)
Fatty acids Calanus oil (Section 2.1.6)
C14:0 Myristic acid 12.7-17.1
C15:0 Pentadecanoic acid 0.1-0.9
C16:0 Palmitic acid 7.9-12.9
C16:1 (n-7) Palmitoleic acid 3.2-8.1
C17:0 Heptadecanoic acid 0.3-1.2
C18:0 Stearic acid 0.4-1.5
C18:1 (n-7) Vaccenic acid 0.3-0.8
C18:1 (n-9) Oleic acid 2.3-4.2
C18:2 (n-6) Linoleic acid 0.7-1.5
C18:3 (n-3) Linolenic acid 1.1-3.5
C18:3 (n-6) γ-Linolenic acid ND-0.9
C18:4 (n-3) Stearidonic acid 8.7-19.9
C20:0 Arachidic acid 0.1-1.2
C20:1 (n-9) Eicosenoic acid 2.1-5.6
C20:1 (n:11) Eicosenoic acid 0.2-0.8
C20:4 (n-6) Arachidonic acid ND-0.7
C20:4 (n-3) Eicosatetraenoic acid 0.9-2.0
C20:5 (n-3) Eicosapentaenoic acid 10.8-16.8
C21:5 (n-3) Heneicosapentaenoic acid 0.5-0.7
C22:1 (n-9) Erucic acid ND-0.8
C22:1(n-11) Cetoleic acid 3.1-8.3
C22:5 (n-3) Docosapentaenoic acid 0.5-0.8
C22:6 (n-3) Docosahexaenoic acid 7.2-12.3
ND = non-detected, defined as ≤0.05%
NA = not applicable or available
REP24/FO − Appendix X 52

3.2 Other essential compositional criteria

For calanus oil (Section 2.1.6) the content of wax esters shall be at least 80 w/w %.
3.3.2 Fish oils with a high phospholipid concentration of 30% or more such as krill oil (Section 2.1.3) and fish
oils with a high wax ester concentration of 80% or more such as calanus oil (Section 2.1.6) shall comply
with the following:
Acid value ≤ 45 mg KOH/g
Peroxide value ≤ 5 milliequivalent of active oxygen/kg oil
3.5 Other compounds
Maximum levels of astaxanthin in calanus oil (Section 2.1.6) shall comply with regulations of the
country of retail sale.
7.3 Other labelling requirements
For calanus oil (Section 2.1.6), the maximum intake level of astaxanthin shall be declared if required
by the country of retail sale in accordance with the acceptable daily intake established for different age
groups by competent authorities.
8. METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING
Commodity Provision Method Principle Type
Fish oil Wax content AOCS Ch 8-02 Gas Chromatography IV
REP24/FO − Appendix XI 53

APPENDIX XI
PROJECT DOCUMENT
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO CODEX STANDARDS ON FATS AND OILS TO REDUCE TRANS-FATTY
ACID INTAKE
(For Approval)
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE NEW WORK
The objective of this proposal is to revise the following Codex Standards on fats and oils to include a prohibition
on partially hydrogenated oils (PHO) and/or limits on industrially produced trans-fatty acid (iTFA):
 Standard for Edible Fats and Oils Not Covered by Individual Standards (CXS 19-1981)
 Standard for Fat Spreads and Blended Spreads (CXS 256-1999)
 Standard for Named Animal Fats (CXS 211-1999)
2. ITS RELEVANCE AND TIMELINESS
Virtual elimination of industrially produced trans-fatty acids (iTFA) from the food supply was one of the priority
targets identified in the 13th General Programme of Work of the World Health Organization (WHO) for 2019-
2023. Increased intake of TFA (>1% of total energy intake) is associated with increased risk of coronary heart
disease events and mortality. Globally, more than 500,000 deaths in 2010 were attributed to increased intake
of TFA.
Codex has committed to revising Codex standards and related texts, as necessary, to ensure that they are
consistent with and reflect current scientific knowledge and other relevant information.
Of the six Codex standards for fats and oils, two have limits on TFA levels: Standard for olive oils and olive
pomace oils (CXS 33-1981) and Standard for fish oils (CXS 329-2017). The four other standards – Standard
for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999), Standard for Named Animal Fats (CXS 211-1999), Standard for
Edible Fats and Oils Not Covered by Individual Standards (CXS 19-1981), and Standard for Fat Spreads and
Blended Spreads (CXS 256-1999) – do not identify specific fatty acid isomers in their compositional
requirements nor do they identify limits for TFA levels.
3. MAIN ASPECTS TO BE COVERED
Revise the following standards to:
a) include a prohibition on PHO and/or limits on industrially produced TFA:
 Standard for Fat Spreads and Blended Spreads (CXS 256-1999)
 Standard for Edible Fats and Oils Not Covered by Individual Standards (CXS 19-1981)
 Standard for Named Animal Fats (CXS 211-1999)
b) ensure that the scope of the above prohibition and/or limits, apply to fats and oil products used as
ingredients in other food products, and consideration of enforcement option to focus on ingredient
permission rather than in the consumer products given analytical challenges in differentiating between iTFA
and ruminant TFA
c) introduce as necessary any definitions in the standards, such as a definition for Partially Hydrogenated Oils
(PHOs)
d) provide flexibility to facilitate different approaches to implementation of the standards
The proposed list of standards does not include the Standard for Named Vegetable Oils (CXS 210-1999)
where pure oils are described. Partial hydrogenation of such oils would move them outside the scope of the
standard.
4. ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE CRITERIA FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW WORK PRIORITIES
General criteria:
Clear composition requirements for oils and fats related to TFA can provide:
 industry with a clear and consistent direction for product formulation; and
 consumers with healthier products to reduce their risk of coronary heart disease.
REP24/FO − Appendix XI 54

Criteria applicable to general subjects:

(a) Diversification of national legislation and apparent resulting or potential impediments to international trade
Greater global harmonization related to the TFA content of fat products would help reduce barriers to trade
and minimize potential negative health impacts.
(b) Scope and establishment of priorities between the various sections of the work
Not applicable.
(c) Work that has already been undertaken by other international organizations in this field and/or suggested
by the relevant international intergovernmental body(ies).
In May 2018, WHO called for the global elimination of industrially produced TFA by 2023, highlighting as a
priority target of the WHO’s 13th General Programme of Work. The WHO REPLACE action framework was
launched in 2018 and includes technical guidance and practical steps to help governments take relevant
actions to eliminate industrially produced TFA from their national food supply. WHO also monitors countries'
progress in implementing legislative and other measures to reduce and eliminate industrially produced TFA
and has developed the TFA Country Score Card to track countries’ performance on a continuous basis.
(d) Amenability of the subject of the proposal to standardization
Greater harmonization related to the TFA content of products would minimize potential negative health impacts
and help reduce barriers to trade.
(e) Consideration of the global magnitude of the problem
Despite substantial progress, however, this leaves 5 billion people worldwide at risk from TFA’s harmful health
impacts. The report showed that the overwhelming majority of people living in low-income countries are not
protected by such policies.
5. RELEVANCE TO THE CODEX STRATEGIC PLAN’S1 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The proposed work is consistent with the Commission’s mandate to develop standards, guidelines and other
international recommendations to protect consumer health and to ensure fair food trade practices. Amending
the named fats and oils standards to comprehensively address TFA will contribute to the achievement of
Strategic Goals 1, 2, 3, and 4.
 Goal 1: Address current, emerging and critical issues in a timely manner.
Virtual elimination of industrially produced TFA from the food supply is one of the priority targets identified in
the 13th General Programme of Work of the WHO in 2019-2023.
 Goal 2: Develop standards based on science and Codex risk-analysis principles.
o Objective 2.1. Use scientific advice consistently, in line with Codex risk-analysis principles.
Implementing legislative or regulatory actions to limit or prohibit industrially produced TFA has been recognized
as the most effective action to reduce TFA in the food supply.
 Goal 3: Increase impact through the recognition and use of Codex standards.
o Objective 3.2: Support initiatives to enable the understanding and implementation/application
of Codex standards.
This work would enable better application of globally-aligned and scientifically-based TFA compositional
requirements globally.
 Goal 4: Facilitate the participation of all Codex Members through the standard setting process.
o Objective 4.3: Reduce barriers to active participation by developing Countries.
 Trans fat is a globally relevant issue, impacting both developed and developing countries.
 Amending the CCFO standards to address the issue of TFA would enable all Codex
Members and Observers to participate in the discussion.

1 For more information, please see the Codex Strategic Plan 2021-2025
REP24/FO − Appendix XI 55

6. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIS PROPOSAL AND OTHER EXISTING CODEX DOCUMENTS

The proposal relates to the Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling (CXG 2-1985) which includes information on TFA
declaration and the General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods (CXS 1-1985) which refers to
the term “hydrogenated” and “partially-hydrogenated” in item 4.2.3.1.
7. IDENTIFICATION OF ANY REQUIREMENT FOR AND AVAILABILITY OF EXPERT SCIENTIFIC
ADVICE
No need for the expert scientific advice has been identified at this stage.
8. IDENTIFICATION OF ANY NEED FOR TECHNICAL INPUT TO THE GUIDELINE FROM EXTERNAL
BODIES THAT CAN BE PLANNED
No need identified at this stage as the committee could consider using the values already established by the
WHO.
9. PROPOSED TIMELINE FOR COMPLETION OF THE NEW WORK
Subject to approval of the new work by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, it is expected that the CCFO will
require 2 sessions to complete its work.
REP24/FO − Appendix XII 56

APPENDIX XII
PROJECT DOCUMENT
PROPOSAL FOR NEW WORK ON A STANDARD FOR MICROBIAL OMEGA-3 OILS
(Approval)
1. The purposes and the scope of the standard
The purpose and scope of this new work is to establish an overarching Standard providing a harmonised
description containing quality and compositional factors for microbial omega-3 oils, potential food safety issues
of the product and its production system for use as an ingredient in foods and food supplements where these
are regulated as food.
2. Its relevance and timeliness
Microbial omega-3 oils have specific compositions, rich in eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic
acid (DHA), which makes them an important ingredient in an increasing variety of foods and food supplements.
The consumption of oils produced by microbial omega-3 organisms, known for their specific compositions rich
in EPA and DHA, is a more recent phenomenon observed in many countries. Microbial omega-3 oils are added
to foodstuffs, and consumer awareness, as well as trade, is increasing.
Today, microbial omega-3 oils are presented to the consumer in fortified foods, foods for plant-based diets,
several types of foods for special dietary uses — such as foods for special medical purposes, infant formula
or follow-up formula products — and food supplements.
However, there is a lack of knowledge among consumers and national authorities on appropriate quality and
compositional factors for microbial omega-3 oils in general, or between different types of microbial omega-3
oils. As trade in microbial omega-3 oils has increased rapidly, with volume at over 5,029 metric tons (according
to data for the year 2021), an international standard is required to enable fair practices in trade.
Examples of internationally traded microbial omega-3 oils currently on the market include those from the
genera Schizochytrium, Nannochloropsis and Crypthecodinium, among others:
 Oil from Schizochytrium is composed of triglycerides rich in DHA, or rich in DHA and EPA, as the major
polyunsaturated fatty acid components.1 It has a light yellow to orange appearance. It is obtained from
fermentation of Schizochytrium sp., followed by solvent extraction, aqueous extraction methods or
enzymatic hydrolysis methods, and further refining using traditional technologies applied for vegetable
or animal based fats and oils.
 Oil from Nannochloropsis has a dark green appearance and is obtained from the fermentation of
Nannochloropsis 56culate, followed by extraction methods and is composed of a mixture of glycolipids,
phospholipids and triglycerides, with >24% of fatty acids being EPA. 2
 Oil from Crypthecodinium cohnii is composed of triglycerides with a high level of DHA by weight, with
DHA constituting almost all the polyunsaturated fatty acid fraction. The color of the oil is light yellow to
orange. The oil is obtained by fermentation of C. cohnii, and may be refined using winterization,
bleaching, and deodorization.
Microbial omega-3 oils from other single-cell microalgae species have been developed in the past or are under
current development or are currently traded. Examples are oils from Euglena and Cryptecodinium cohnii, which
is used for infant nutrition. Some microbial omega-3 oils that have been traded in the past are oils from Ulkenia.
Currently, due to the lack of an international standard, microbial omega-3 oils are traded with differing levels
of information. This makes it difficult for authorities to judge whether a particular type of oil is acceptable, and
consumers are unable to make an informed choice.
In this regard, it is therefore proposed to develop an inclusive Codex Standard that can be easily updated to
include other microbial omega-3 oils as newer types of oils increase in importance in international trade.
Establishing a Codex Standard for microbial omega-3 oils containing quality and compositional factors will
ensure fair practices in trade in these commodities as well as ensure consumers’ health protection, in line with
Codex Alimentarius purpose and goals.

1
US Pharmacopeia - Food Chemical Codex (FCC). USP-FCC Schizochytrium Oil.
https://online.foodchemicalscodex.org/uspfcc/document/6_GUID-DE13986B-B98E-413F-B133- 8516D1F776E7_50101_en-
US?source=TOC.
2
Australian Government. Department of Health and Aged Care. Therapeutic Goods Administration. EPA-rich Nannochloropsis oculata oil.
https://www.tga.gov.au/resources/resource/compositional-guidelines/epa-rich- nannochloropsis-oculata-oil.
REP24/FO − Appendix XII 57

The Codex Alimentarius Commission has developed Standards for almost all fats and oils commonly used in
food. However, microbial omega-3 oils are increasingly important foodstuffs, for which up to now no specific
Codex Standard has been developed, which means that no quality standards for these types of oils are
applicable globally. Neither the Codex Standard for Edible Fats and Oils not Covered by Individual Standards
(CXS 19-1981) nor the Standard for Named Animal Fats (CXS 211-1999) nor the Standard for Fish Oils (CXS
329-2017) adequately cover the specific nature of microbial omega-3 oils.
3. The main aspects to be covered.
The proposed new work to establish a Standard for microbial omega-3 oils includes the following sections,
following the format for Codex Commodity Standards provided by the Codex Procedural Manual (Twenty-
eighth edition, 2023) and the structures of existing Codex Standards for fats and oils:
- Scope
- Description
- Essential composition and quality factors
- Food additives
- Contaminants
- Hygiene
- Labelling
- Methods of analysis and sampling
- Tables with characteristic lipids/fatty acid composition of the described oils.
Further detail on the main aspects to be covered and addressed by the proposed new work are indicated in
the Annex to this project document.
4. An assessment against the criteria for the establishment of work priorities General criterion
The Codex Alimentarius Commission has a mandate of protecting consumers’ health and ensuring fair
practices in food trade. The proposed new Standard for microbial omega-3 oils, containing quality and
compositional factors, will meet this criterion by promoting consumer protection from the point of view of health,
food safety and ensuring fair practices in the food trade, assuring product authenticity and traceability, taking
into account the identified needs of developing countries.
Criteria applicable to commodities
a) Volume of production and consumption in individual countries and volume and pattern of trade
between countries
Microbial omega-3 oils for human consumption are a high value commodity. The international trade in
processed microbial omega-3 oils suitable for human consumption reached over 5,029 metric tons and 264.6
million USD in 2021. Both the production and global trade of microbial omega-3 oil is increasing, as growth in
the demand as well as trade of this commodity is projected to continue. 3
Microbial omega-3 strain selection and growth condition are optimized to produce a certain type of omega-3
(high EPA, high DHA, etc.), and can be grown by fermentation in tanks, or grown in open ponds (raceway
ponds) or photobioreactors.
Microbial omega-3 oils are used mainly for segments where the ingredient characteristics justify it: fortified
infant formula and foods, usually for a high content of DHA, and specialized food supplements, in particular
for consumers wishing to consume omega-3 oils of a non-fish origin.
The figure below shows that the largest microbial omega-3 oil volume is used by two applications, infant
formula and food and beverage:4

3 Market survey data, Global Organization for EPA and DHA Omega-3s (GOED).
4 Market survey data, GOED
REP24/FO − Appendix XII 58

Traditionally, microbial omega-3 oils have been used in food supplements tailored to specific groups of users
(like vegetarian/vegan consumers, or people concerned about fish allergies) and have been high in DHA. As
shown above, infant formula is now the largest application followed by food and beverage. In recent years, the
production volume of high-EPA microbial omega-3 oils has increased, and it is likely that the resulting
innovation will attract new consumer segments. In this regard, advances in production methods and declining
prices are starting to make these oils attractive to a larger audience.
All geographic markets grew in volume, but the fastest increases (as a percentage of the demand) were
observed in the developing markets, driven by increased penetration into infant formula.
Microbial omega-3 oils trade growth
Microbial omega-3 oils trade volumes, and projected continued growth in global production, demand and trade
of microbial omega-3 oils, are described as follows:
In 2021, by Application:
Infant formula, the largest application, uses 51.0% of microbial omega-3 oil volume, growing at an annual rate
of 2.8%, particularly in Asian countries.
The next application, food and beverage, commands 27.0% of the volume of microbial omega-3 oils, and grew
at a healthy 9.6%, driven by rapid growth in the large European market. An increased focus on prevention has
resulted in the demand for healthy (including fortified) foods. The US market and the demand in the Asia-
Pacific region also grew at a rapid pace.
Microbial omega-3 oils have traditionally represented a small fraction of the oil volumes used in food
supplements, but they are gaining momentum. In 2021, these oils comprised less than 1.6% of the volume
(and 9.4% of the value) of omega-3 ingredients used in this sector. The major obstacle to larger representation
has been their higher cost, but advances in production methods — and therefore more manufacturers coming
onstream with algal/protist capacity — and economies of scale have resulted in more competitive pricing.
Additionally, consumer interest in plant-based ingredients and a growing variety of strains and compositions
have helped microalgae achieve a global growth rate of 10.3%.
The following figures provide further detail of microbial omega-3 growth in trade volumes by application:5

5 Market survey data, GOED

REP24/FO − Appendix XII 59

In 2021, by region.
The following figures provide further detail of microbial omega-3 growth in trade volumes by region.6

6 Market survey data, GOED

REP24/FO − Appendix XII 60

2021, by Region and Application

The following tables provide further detail of microbial omega-3 growth in trade volumes, in metric tons, mT,
and value in millions of US dollars, by region and application: 7
Volumes in mT
Food and Dietary
Infant Formula Clinical Nutrition
Beverages Supplements
2020 2021 Change 2020 2021 Change 2020 2021 Change 2020 2021 Change

Australasia 10 10 1.0% 12 13 3.2% 1 1 2.2% - - -

Canada 8 8 -1.3% 16 17 5.7% 8 9 6.2% - - -

1,05
China 1,025 9 3.3% 162 168 4.1% 25 26 4.0% - - -
Europe 114 115 1.1% 255 301 17.9% 115 137 19.9% - - -

Japan - - - 13 13 0.8% 2 2 2.0% - - -

Mexico 4 4 4.9% 63 69 8.7% - - - - - -

Rest of the
World
- - - 3 4 3.2% <1 <1 2.9% - - -
Asia-Pacific 394 414 5.3% 201 218 8.9% 89 97 8.8% - - -

Rest of Asia 20 20 4.1% 43 47 8.1% 2 2 2.2% - - -

South
America
41 42 2.2% 80 88 9.4% 2 2 3.1% - - -
USA 878 890 1.4% 392 423 8.0% 90 98 9.6% 2 2 5.9%

Volumes in metric tons (mT)

Volumes of trade in millions of US dollars
Infant Formula Food and Beverages Dietary Supplements Clinical Nutrition
2020 2021 Change 2020 2021 Change 2020 2021 Change 2020 2021 Change

Australasia $0.4 $0.4 -2.0% $0.7 $0.7 0.2% $0.1 < 0.1 -0.8% - - -

Canada $0.3 $0.3 -4.2% $0.9 $1.0 2.6% $0.6 $0.6 3.1% - - -

China $44.8 $45.0 0.3% $9.6 $9.7 1.1% $1.8 $1.8 0.9% - - -

Europe $5.0 $4.9 -1.8% $15.2 $17.3 14.4% $8.3 $9.6 16.4% - - -

Japan - - - $0.7 $0.7 -2.1% $0.1 $0.1 -1.0% - - -

Mexico $0.2 $0.2 1.8% $3.8 $4.0 5.5% - - - - - -

Rest of the World - - - $0.2 $0.2 0.2% < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1% - - -

Asia-Pacific $17.2 $17.6 2.2% $11.9 $12.6 5.7% $6.4 $6.8 5.7% - - -

Rest of Asia $0.9 $0.9 1.1% $2.6 $2.7 5.0% $0.2 $0.2 -0.8% - - -

South America $1.8 $1.8 -0.8% $4.8 $5.1 6.3% $0.1 $0.1 0.1% - - -

USA $38.4 $37.8 -1.5% $23.3 $24.4 4.9% $6.5 $6.9 6.4% $0.1 $0.1 2.8%

Volumes in millions of US dollars (MM US$)

7 Market survey data, GOED

REP24/FO − Appendix XII 61

Forecast
These are the volumes by region and by application for 2021, followed by the growth rate from 2020-2021 and
then the average annual growth rate expected to be seen to 2024.8
Forecast by region:
2021 volume 2020-21 To 2024 (average)
(Tons) (Percentage change)

Australasia 29 2.1% 2.1%

Canada 34 4.0% 4.3%
China 1,255 3.4% 3.4%
Europe 738 12.5% 9.6%
Japan 15 <0.1% 0.7%
Mexico 73 8.5% 8.5%
Rest of the World 4 2.6% 2.6%
Asia-Pacific 772 6.9% 7.0%
Rest of Asia 69 6.8% 6.8%
South America 132 7.0% 7.2%
USA 1,909 5.4% 5.6%

Forecast by application:
2021 volume 2020-21
(Tons) (Percentage change) To 2024 (average)

Infant Formula 2,563 2.8% 2.9%

Food and Beverage 1,360 9.6% 8.0%
Dietary Supplements 1104 10.3% 10.1%
Clinical nutrition 2 5.9% 5.9%

b) Diversification of national legislations and apparent resultant or potential impediments to international

trade
As no internationally harmonised standard for microbial omega-3 oils exists, difficulties in and impediments to
trade occur. Microbial omega-3 oils are currently traded with various levels of detail concerning their source,
composition and quality. As there are variations possible in the degree of processing, chemical forms of the
oil, fatty acid profile requirements, quality requirements and addition of additives, it is difficult for national
authorities to judge whether individual shipments are acceptable.
Currently, pharmacopeial monographs, guidelines, standards and regulations exist for microbial omega-3 oils
in Australia, China, the European Union, the USA, Brazil and Chile, providing orientation or authorising the
use of microbial omega-3 oils with different levels of information in a variety of food applications.
This new work will assist in providing an internationally harmonized approach for quality and compositional
factors as well as the labelling and trade in microbial omega-3 oils, embracing future innovation.
c) International or regional market potential
Today, both the production of microbial omega-3 oils, as well as the consumption of finished omega-3 rich
food products containing such oils already occurs globally.
d) Amenability of the commodity to standardisation
Microbial omega-3 oils are approved for sale in different parts of the world, so therefore are a commodity
amenable to standardization by the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils, CCFO.

8 Market survey data, GOED

REP24/FO − Appendix XII 62

e) Coverage of the main consumer protection and trade issues by existing or proposed general standards
The Codex Alimentarius Commission has developed Standards for almost all fats and oils commonly used in
food. However, microbial omega-3 oils are increasingly important foodstuffs, for which up to now no specific
Standard has been developed. Neither the Codex Standard for Edible Fats and Oils not Covered by Individual
Standards (CXS 19-1981) nor the Standard for Named Animal Fats (CXS 211-1999) nor the Standard for Fish
Oils (CXS 329-2017) adequately cover the specific nature of microbial omega-3 oils.
f) Number of commodities which would need separate standards indicating whether raw, semi-
processed or processed.
There are several types of microbial omega-3 oils. The proposal is to develop an inclusive Codex Standard
that can be easily updated to include other microbial omega-3 oils as newer types of oils increase in importance
in international trade. Therefore, the work will cover a commodity that encompasses the various relevant
microbial omega-3 oils.
g) Work already undertaken by other international organizations in this field and/or suggested by the
relevant international intergovernmental body(ies)
There is no existing work already undertaken on an international standard for the food use of microbial omega-
3 oils. In addition, so far no similar work by other international organizations has been discovered. A Codex
Standard covering all necessary quality and compositional factors is therefore required.
5. Relevance to the Codex strategic objectives
The proposed new work to establish a Standard for microbial omega-3 oils containing quality and
compositional factors will ensure fair practices in trade in these commodities as well as ensure consumers’
health protection, in line with Codex Alimentarius purpose and goals.
The objective, as described above, is in line with the Codex Strategic Plan 2020-2025, adopted by the 42nd
Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. In this regard, the new work proposal will contribute
particularly to Goals 1, 2 and 3:
Goal 1: “Address current, emerging and critical issues in a timely manner.”
Goal 2: “Develop standards based on science and Codex risk-analysis principles.”
Goal 3: “Increase impact through the recognition and use of Codex Standards.”
6. Information on the relation between the proposal and other existing Codex documents as well as
other ongoing work
The Codex Alimentarius Commission has developed Standards for almost all fats and oils commonly used in
food. However, microbial omega-3 oils are increasingly important foodstuffs, for which up to now no specific
Standard has been developed. Neither the Codex Standard for Edible Fats and Oils not Covered by Individual
Standards (CXS 19-1981) nor the Standard for Named Animal Fats (CXS 211-1999) nor the Standard for Fish
Oils (CXS 329-2017) adequately cover the specific nature of microbial omega-3 oils.
The proposed new work to establish a Standard for microbial omega-3 oils will take into account the provisions
of relevant general subject standards, such as: the General Principles of Food Hygiene (CXC 1-1969), the
General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods (CXS 1-1985), the General Standard for
Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995) and the General Standard for Food Additives
(CXS 192-1995).
7. Identification of any requirement for and availability of expert scientific advice
The need for expert advice may be identified during the course of the work.
8. Identification of any need for technical input to the standard from external bodies so that this can
be planned for
No technical input other than that which is to be found in the CCFO is required at this time.
9. The proposed timeline for completion of the new work
The work will be completed in 2 sessions of the Committee.