E

ALINORM 10/33/35

JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME

CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION

Thirty-third Session
Geneva, Switzerland, 5 – 9 July 2010

REPORT OF THE FIFTEENTH SESSION OF THE

CODEX COMMITTEE ON FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES

Mexico City, Mexico

19 – 23 October 2009

NOTE: This report contains Codex Circular Letter CL 2009/31-FFV.

CX 5/95.2 CL 2009/31-FFV
November 2009
TO: - Codex Contact Points
- Interested International Organizations
FROM: Secretary, Codex Alimentarius Commission,
Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme,
Fax: +39 (06) 5705 4593
E-mail: codex@fao.org
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 00153,
Rome, Italy
SUBJECT: DISTRIBUTION OF THE REPORT OF THE 15TH SESSION OF THE CODEX
COMMITTEE ON FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES (ALINORM 10/33/35)

The report of the Fifteenth Session of the Codex Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables will be
considered by the 33rd Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Geneva, Switzerland, 5 – 9 July
2010).

PART A: MATTERS FOR ADOPTION BY THE 33RD SESSION OF THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS
COMMISSION

Draft Standards at Step 8 of the Procedure

1. Draft Section 6 – Marking or Labelling (draft Standard for Bitter Cassava) (para. 23 and
Appendix II)
2. Draft Standard for Apples (para. 47 and Appendix III)
Governments and interested international organizations wishing to submit comments on the above
documents, including the implications they may have for their economic interest, should do so, in writing in
conformity with the Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Standards and Related Texts (Part 3 – Uniform
Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Standards and Related Texts, Procedural Manual of the Codex
Alimentarius Commission), to the above address, preferably by e-mail, before 31 March 2010.

Proposed draft Standards at Step 5 of the Procedure

3. Proposed draft revision to the Standard for Avocado (CODEX STAN 197-1995) (para. 69 and
Appendix IV)
4. Proposed draft Standard for Tree Tomatoes (para. 99 and Appendix VI)
Governments and interested international organizations wishing to submit comments on the above
documents, including the implications they may have for their economic interest, should do so in writing, in
conformity with the Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Standards and Related Texts (Part 3– Uniform
Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Standards and Related Texts, Procedural Manual of the Codex
Alimentarius Commission), to the above address, preferably by e-mail, before 31 March 2010.

PART B: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND INFORMATION

4. Proposed draft Standard for Chilli Peppers (para. 84 and Appendix V)
Governments and interested international organizations wishing to submit comments on the proposed draft
Standard should do so in writing to the above address, preferably by e-mail, before 31 January 2010.
CL 2009/31-FFV ii

5. Proposed Layout for Codex Standards for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (para. 107 and
Appendix VII)
Governments and interested international organizations wishing to submit comments on the propose Layout
should do so in writing to the above address, preferably by e-mail, before 31 January 2011.
6. Proposals for new work on fresh fruits and vegetables (para. 121)
Governments wishing to propose new work on fresh fruits and vegetables should do so in writing, in
conformity with the Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Standards and Related Texts (Part 2 – Critical
Review, Procedural Manual of the Codex Alimentarius Commission), preferably by e-mail, before 31
January 2011.
ALINORM 10/33/35 iii

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The 15th Session of the Codec Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables reached the following conclusions:

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE 33RD SESSION OF THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION
Adoption of draft and proposed draft standards
The Committee agreed:
- to forward the draft Section 6 “Marking or Labelling” of the draft Standard for Bitter Cassava to for
adoption at Step 8 along with the other sections of the Standard held at Step 8 (para. 23 and
Appendix II);
- to forward the draft Standard for Apples for adoption at Step 8 (para. 47 and Appendix III);
- to forward the proposed draft revision of the Standard for Avocado (CODEX STAN 197-1995) (para. 69
and Appendix IV) and the proposed draft Standard for Tree Tomatoes (para. 99 and Appendix VI) for
adoption at Step 5.
Approval of new work
The Committee agreed to request the Commission for approval of new work on a Standard for Pomegranate
(para. 113 and Appendix VIII).
Other matters for consideration
The Committee agreed:
- to request, through the Commission, the Coordinating Committee for Europe to consider the need for a
worldwide standard for chanterelle, and if affirmative, to refer the proposal for its conversion to the
CCFFV for consideration (para. 119); and
- to inform the Commission, through the Executive Committee, of the decision of the UNECE Working
Party on Agricultural Quality Standards to change the title of “UNECE standards” to “UN standards” in
order to obtain guidance from the Commission on appropriate follow-up to this matter (para. 14).
MATTERS OF INTEREST TO THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION
The Committee agreed:
- to return the proposed draft Standard for Chilli Peppers to Step 3 for further comments (para. 84);
- to establish electronic Working Groups on Avocado (para. 70), Chilli Peppers (para. 85), Tree Tomatoes
(para. 100) and Pomegranate (para. 115) to revise or prepare draft and proposed draft standards for
consideration at its 16th Session;
- to attach the proposed Layout for Codex Standards for Fesh fruits and Vegetables to the report for further
comments and consideration at its next session; and to request the Codex Secretariat to prepare a
background document containing discussions in its previous sessions on the issue of point of application
of Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables (paras 106-107);
- to suspend the development of the Glossary of Terms used in the proposed Layout for Codex Standards
for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables, pending further development and eventual finalization of the Layout
(para. 110);
- to discontinue the maintenance of the Priority List for the Standardization of Fresh Fruits and
Vegetables, noting that the proposals for new work would be continuously be requested by means of a
Circular Letter attached to a session report (para. 121); and
- to request the Codex Secretariat to explore the implications of the decision of the UNECE Working Party
on Agricultural Quality Standards to change the title of “UNECE standards” to “UN standards”
(para. 14).
ALINORM 10/33/35 iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Summary and Conclusions........................................................................................................... page iii

th
Report of the 15 Session of the Codex Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables.................. page 1
Summary Status of Work............................................................................................................. page 17
Paragraphs
Introduction 1
Opening of the Session 2-3
Adoption of the Agenda (Agenda Item 1).................................................................................... 4
Matters arising from the Codex Alimentarius Commission and
other Codex Committees (Agenda Item 2a)................................................................................. 5-6
Matters arising from other International Organizations on the Standardization of
Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Agenda Item 2b)............................................................................ 7-15
UNECE Standards for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Agenda Item 2c)........................................ 16
Consideration of Draft Standards at Step 7 (Agenda Item 3)
- Draft Section 6 “Marking or Labelling”
(Draft Standard for Bitter Cassava) (Agenda Item 3a).......................................................... 17-23
- Draft Standard Apples (Agenda Item 3b).............................................................................. 24-47
Consideration of Proposed Draft Standards at Step 4 (Agenda Item 4)
- Proposed Draft Standards for Avocado (Revision) (N19-2008) (Agenda Item 4a)............... 48-70
- Proposed Draft Standard for Chilli Peppers (N17-2008) (Agenda Item 4b)......................... 71-85
- Proposed Draft Standard for Tree Tomatoes (N18-2008) (Agenda Item 4c)........................ 86-100
Layout for Codex Standards for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Agenda Item 5)
- Proposed Layout for Codex Standards for
Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Agenda Item 5a)...................................................................... 101-107
- Glossary of Terms used in the Proposed Layout for Codex Standards for
Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Agenda Item 5b)...................................................................... 108-110
Proposals for Amendments to the Priority List for the Standardization of
Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Agenda Item 6).............................................................................. 111-121
Other Business (Agenda Item 7).................................................................................................. 122
Date and Place of the Next Session (Agenda Item 8)................................................................... 123
Appendices
Appendix I: List of Participants.............................................................................................. page 18
Appendix II: Draft Section 6 “Marking or Labelling” (Draft Standard of Bitter Cassava)..... page 28
Appendix III: Draft Standard for Apples.................................................................................. page 29
Appendix IV: Proposed Draft Revision of the Standard for Avocado
(CODEX STAN 197-1995) (N19-2008)............................................................ page 35
Appendix V: Proposed Draft Standard for Chilli Peppers (N17-2008)................................... page 39
Appendix VI: Proposed Draft Standard for Tree Tomatoes (N18-2008).................................. page 47
Appendix VII: Proposed Layout for Codex Standards for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables............ page 51
Appendix VIII: Project Document for New Work on a Standard for Pomegranate.................... page 59
ALINORM 10/33/35 1

INTRODUCTION
1. The 15th Session of the Codex Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables was held in Mexico City
from 19 to 23 October 2009 at the kind invitation of the Government of Mexico. The Chairperson of the
Committee, Dr Francisco Ramos Gómez, appointed Ms Ingrid Maciel, International Standardization Director,
Ministry of Economy, to chair the Session on his behalf. The Session was attended by delegates from 51
Member countries, one Member Organization and Observers from two international organizations. The List
of Participants is attached as Appendix I.

OPENING OF THE SESSION

2. Dr Francisco Ramos Gómez, Director General, Dirección General de Normas, opened the Session.
Dr Norman Bellino, FAO Representative in Mexico, and Ing. Simón Treviño Alcántara, Director General de
Fomento a los Sistemas Producto, also addressed the Committee.
Division of Competence
3. The Committee noted the division of competence between the European Community and its Member
States, according to paragraph 5, Rule II of the Procedure of the Codex Alimentarius Commission1.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA (Agenda Item 1)2

4. The Committee adopted the Provisional Agenda as its Agenda for the Session.

MATTERS ARISING FROM THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION AND OTHER

CODEX COMMITEES (Agenda Item 2a)3
5. The Committee noted that most of the matters contained in CX/FFV 09/15/2 were for information
purpose only or would be discussed by the Committee in more details under relevant agenda items.
6. In relation with amendments to the section on contaminants of certain commodity standards, the
Committee noted that the Codex Secretariat would amend this section in existing Codex standards for fresh
fruits and vegetables in accordance with the decision of the 32nd Session of the Commission4. It was further
agreed to introduce the same standard language to the draft and proposed draft standards under consideration
by the Committee.

MATTERS ARISING FROM OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ON THE

STANDARDIZATION OF FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES (Agenda Item 2b)5
7. The Committee noted main issues of interest to its work arising from sessions of the UNECE
Working Party on Agricultural Quality Standards and its Specialized Section on Standardization of Fresh
Fruits and Vegetables as well as the OECD Scheme for the Application of International Standards for Fruits
and Vegetables that had been held subsequent to the last session of the Committee.
8. In relation to the activities of the UNECE, the Committee noted that a joint Codex/UNECE
workshop on the application of quality provisions in standards for fresh fruits and vegetables had been
proposed, which might be held back-to-back with the next session of the Committee.
9. The Committee also noted the decision of the Working Party to remove the reference to the
“UNECE” from the cover pages of the standards, which was prompted by (a) the specialized sections who
did not want to give the impression that the standards they develop are meant to be used within the UNECE
region only, (b) the suggested transfer of work of the OECD Scheme, some countries of which are not
UNECE member states, to UNECE and (c) the revised Terms of Reference of the Working Party, approved
by the Committee on Trade and the Executive Committee of the UNECE in 2008, which give equal
participation rights to all member countries of the United Nations.

1
CRD 1
2
CX/FFV 09/15/1
3
CX/FFV 09/15/2; CRD 3 (comments of India)
4
ALINORM 09/32//REP, para. 112
5
CX/FFV 09/15/3; CRD 10 (comments of Mexico)
ALINORM 10/33/35 2

10. Some delegations expressed concern on the change of the title of “UNECE” standards to “UN”
standards as the Working Party is a subsidiary body of the Committee on Trade that operates under the terms
of reference of the UNECE, a regional commission of the United Nations which looks at the economic
development and integration of a particular region, and thus questioned the international coverage of the
standards developed by the Working Party. These delegations supported collaboration between Codex and
UNECE, as set out in the Terms of Reference of the Committee, in particular as regards using UNECE
standards as a basis for the development of Codex worldwide standards. They noted that Codex standards
might require different provisions from those of the UNECE to accommodate the needs of the broader Codex
membership and in view of the different mandates and goals of Codex and UNECE.
11. Other delegations supported close cooperation between Codex and UNECE in order to avoid
duplication of work. These delegations noted that Codex and UNECE could mutually benefit from the work
carried out in their respective subsidiary bodies in order to facilitate the development of international
standards. In this regard, the revision of the working procedures of the Working Party and the more frequent
sessions of its Specialized Section on the Standardization of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables were aimed at
making the Working Party accessible to all member of the United Nations while speeding up the
development of international standards for fresh fruits and vegetables.
12. The Codex Secretariat recalled that effective cooperation had been implemented over the years
between Codex and UNECE with a view to facilitating the harmonization of Codex and UNECE standards.
As regards the matter of the change of the title of “UNECE standards” to “UN standards”, the Secretariat
drew the attention of the Committee to previous discussion on this issue in the Codex Alimentarius
Commission6 and the Codex Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables7 and to the decision of the 54th
Session of the Working Party8 to withdraw the proposal to change the title of the “UNECE standards” to
“UN standards” in view of the response of the Legal Counsel of the United Nations concerning the global
status of Codex standards as related to UNECE standards.
13. The Secretariat also informed the Committee that the Geneva Protocol on Standardization of Fresh
Fruit and Vegetables and Dry and Dried Fruit still refered to the general provisions to be applied in Europe
for the commercial standardization and quality control of fresh fruits and vegetables for international trade
between or to European countries. The UNECE Representative indicated that the Geneva Protocol would be
revised by the Working Party in the framework of the revision of its Working Procedures.
14. In view of the above discussion, the Committee agreed to request the Codex Secretariat to explore
the implications of the above decision of the Working Party and also to inform the Commission, through the
Executive Committee, of this situation in order to obtain guidance from the Commission on appropriate
follow-up to this matter.
15. It was suggested tha the information on the activities of coordinating committees or other regional
intergovermental organization, which might be relevant to the work of this Committee, should be included in
this Agenda Item. The Codex Secretariat informed the Committee that inclusion of activities of other
regional or international organizations might be difficult as the Secretariat did not participate directly in fora
other than the UNECE and the OECD of which the Secretariats in turn participated in the sessions of the
Committee and submited a summary of their activities. However, relevant information on standardization
activities in other Codex subsidiary bodies, in particular coordinating committees, could be provided when
necessary.

UNECE STANDARDS FOR FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES (Agenda Item 2c)9
16. The Committee noted that UNECE standards, as contained in working document CX/FFV 09/15/4,
were made available as references for the development of corresponding Codex standards as directed by the
Executive Committee.10 The Committee agreed that the UNECE standards would be taken into account
when discussing the relevant agenda items.

6
ALINORM 95/37, paras 31-32
7
ALINORM 99/35A, paras 12-21
8
TRADE/WP.7/1998/9, paras 56-59
9
CX/FFV 09/15/4
10
ALINORM 97/3, para. 15
ALINORM 10/33/35 3

CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT STANDARDS AT STEP 7 (Agenda Item 3)

DRAFT SECTION 6 “MARKING OR LABELLING” (DRAFT STANDARD FOR BITTER CASSAVA) (Agenda
Item 3a)11
17. The Committee recalled that the 31st Session of the Commission had decided to return the labelling
section of the draft Standard for Bitter Cassava to Step 6 for further comments, in particular on the
preparation instructions (Section 6.1.2), for consideration by this session of the Committee and endorsement
by the 38th Session of the Committee on Food Labelling (CCFL) and to hold the other sections at Step 8,
with a view to the adoption of the Standard by the Commission in 2010.12
18. Several delegations pointed out that there was currently no scientific basis to confirm that the
processing mentioned in Section 6.1.2 “Preparation Instructions” would effectively remove the cyanogenic
glycosides to a level safe for consumption and suggested that the elaboration of this Standard should be
suspended until the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) reviewed available data
on the occurrence of cyanogenic glycosides in foods and feeds, the mechanisms of releasing hydrogen
cyanide in the human body and the effects of processing on reducing levels of hydrogen cyanide in the final
product and the Committee on Contaminants in Foods (CCCF) provided risk management options based on
the outcome of the risk assessment performed by JECFA.
19. In this respect, several other delegations recalled that there had been an urgent need of several
Members for this Standard and, noting that the evaluation by JECFA could take several years depending on
the availability of the data required for the evaluation, suggested to advance this Standard by amending the
preparation instructions. It was also pointed out that the Committee would be able to review the preparation
instructions when JECFA completed the evaluation and risk management options were provided by the
CCCF. One delegation further pointed out that bitter cassava had already reached the consumers who were
not familiar with its proper preparation and that finalization of this Standard with amended preparation
instructions based on empirical knowledge would be a first step to provide consumers with relevant
information in order to prevent health risks arising from the consumption of bitter cassava.
20. In view of the above discussion, the Committee agreed to consider the amendments to Section 6.1.2
“preparation instructions”. It was agreed to ensure that cassava must not be eaten raw. In order to further
reduce the amount of cyanide in the final product, it was also agreed to provide that in addition to peeling,
the roots should be de-pithed, cut into pieces and rinsed. The Committee noted that bitterness was the
indicator of the presence of cyanogenic glycosides, however, due to the practical difficulties to measure this
parameter during cooking, it was agreed not to include the reference to the elimination of bitterness as a
means to indicate at which point cassava could be regarded as “fully” cooked. It was also pointed out that
cyanogenic glycosides could not be completely eliminated but only be reduced to a level that would not pose
a health risk.
21. With regard to the concern expressed by one delegation on the way these preparation instructions
would be made available to the consumer, the Committee noted that when bitter cassava was sold in
packages the information would be placed on the packages and when sold in bulk, the same information
should be made available to the consumer at the point of sale, for example in the form of a sign
accompanying the produce, as provided in the footnote to Section 6.1.2.
Other Considerations
22. As regards Section 7.2 “Other Contaminants”, the Committee noted that while this section contained
provisions additional to the standard language of the Format for Codex Commodity Standards, it would not
require the endorsement by the CCCF, because the additional provisions did not establish any specific
requirement on contaminants but simply delegated it to national legislation pending the outcome of the work
of the CCCF on cyanogenic glycosides.

11
ALINORM 08/31/35, Appendix III; CX/FFV 09/15/5 (comments of Australia, Brazil and Kenya);
CX/FFV 09/15/5-Add.1 (comments of European Community and Philippines); CRD 3 (comments of India);
CRD 7 (comments of Thailand)
12
ALINORM 08/31/REP, para. 38
ALINORM 10/33/35 4

Status of the draft Section 6 “Marking or Labelling” (draft Standard for Bitter Cassava)
23. The Committee agreed to forward the revised draft Section 6 “Marking or Labelling” of the draft
Standard for Bitter Cassava for endorsement by the CCFL and subsequent adoption by the Commission
along with the other sections of the Standard held at Step 8 (see Appendix II).

DRAFT STANDARD FOR APPLES (Agenda Item 3b)13

24. The Committee noted that the Standard had been adopted at Step 5 and advanced to Step 6 by the
31st Session of the Commission as proposed by the CCFFV. The Committee also noted that the Executive
Committee 14 had encouraged the Committee to finalize the Standard at this session according to the
timeframe set up for completion of the Standard, namely, for final adoption by the Commission in 201015. In
addition, the Committee recalled that at its last session it had agreed to make every effort and to work in a
spirit of compromise to finalize the Standard by this session in order to forward it to the 2010 Commission
and that discussion would focus on those unresolved issues in addition to other general proposals as
necessary16.
25. Based on the above, the Committee examined the draft Standard and made the following
observations and amendments:
Section 2.1 – Minimum Requirements
26. The Committee had an exchange of views on the inclusion of the term “firm” instead of “not soft”.
27. A number of delegations favoured the inclusion of this term as the best qualifier to identify firmness
as a quality parameter under the minimum requirements, for consistency with other Codex standards for
fresh fruits and vegetables having the same provision, and due to the linkages between the minimum and
maturity requirements and the firmness of the apples. It was also noted that the term “firm” was related to a
physical characteristic of the fruit while the term “texture”, used to define “not soft”, referred more to a
sensorial characteristic of the product which was not appropriate for the purpose of this section.
28. Other delegations indicated that the proposed wording was the best compromise between different
industry and trading practices worldwide as the term “firm”, when particularly referred to apples, might have
different interpretation across countries which could lead to technical barriers to trade. It was noted that, in
most of the standards for fresh fruits and vegetables, term “firm” referred to a quality parameter linked to the
quality classes. However, in certain countries, the term “firm”, when specifically applying to apples, was
linked to a condition of the flesh (minimum quality requirement) while in others to a stage of ripening
(maturity requirement), therefore, the inclusion of the term “firm” under the minimum requirement would be
contrary to long standing trading practices established in a number of countries. It was further noted that, if
the term “firm” was to be included as a minimum requirement, there should be a need to have apple varieties
listing in the Standard as this parameter was dependant on the variety, and even within the same variety,
there could be significant variations due to geoclimatic conditions.
29. In view of the above, the Committee agreed to include “firm” as a minimum quality requirement
while inserting a footnote to clarify that firmness in this context was used to indicate an appropriate level of
maturity of the fruit rather than a stage of ripening and that firmness might vary according to varieties.
30. The Delegation of the United States of America indicated that, in relation to apple quality, there is no
uniform accepted international interpretation for the minimum requirement “firm”.

13
CX/FFV 09/15/6; CX/FFV 09/15/6-Add.1 (comments of Argentina, India, Mexico, and New Zealand); CX/FFV
09/15/6-Add.2 (comments of Kenya and Philippines); CRD 5 (comments of European Community); CRD 6
(comments of Malaysia); CRD 7 (comments of Thailand); CRD 8 (comments of Indonesia); CRD 9 (comments
of Uruguay)
14
ALINORM 09/32/3, para. 33
15
ALINORM 07/30/35, para. 72
16
ALINORM 08/31/35, para. 92
ALINORM 10/33/35 5

31. The Committee also considered the proposal of India (CRD 8) that the stalk should not be pulled out
in order to ensure that the missing of the stalk did not relate to inappropriate agricultural practices that might
lead to bacterial contamination of the fruit and whether the term “damage caused by pests” should be
changed to “damage caused by pests and diseases” as the pest could be inactivated through appropriate
phytosanitary treatment but the sign of the disease could remain in the fruit. The Committee decided not to
take on board these proposals as the provisions for the stalk as currently drafted adequately provided for the
fruit to remain in good condition and as the term “disease” was already discussed at previous sessions where
it was noted that “disease” was already included in the definition of pests in the relevant IPPC phytosanitary
specification17. The Delegation of India expressed its reservation on the decision not to incorporate its
proposal concerning the stalk.
Section 3 – Provisions concerning Sizing
32. The Committee had an exchange of views on the appropriateness to retain “10.5” or “11.0” Brix
degrees as a minimum soluble solids content for apple varieties of size not smaller than 50 mm or 70 g.
33. Several delegations felt that 10.5° Brix was too low and could therefore lead to immature fruit on the
market. Other delegations supported a minimum Brix level of 10.5 as a good compromise between those
countries not having any provision in this regard and those who preferred higher Brix values. It was noted
that research studies showed no correlation between the size of the fruit and the total content of soluble
solids as an indicator of maturity. It was also noted that this level referred to a minimum Brix level intended
to encompass the majority of the apple varieties traded internationally. In addition, Brix levels could vary
within the same variety according to geoclimatic conditions. In this regard, it was indicated that there were
already small size apple varieties on the market having Brix values lower than 10.5 that still fell within the
sizing provisions set out for these varieties, therefore, raising the Brix level to 11.0 would have the potential
to create technical barriers to trade by limiting industry and marketing innovation. It was further noted that
the minimum Brix level of 10.5 was also in line with the corresponding provisions in the UNECE Standard
for Apples. The Committee noted the advice of the Executive Committee18 that development of lists in
commodity standards could delay the progress of Codex work.
34. In view of the above considerations, the Committee agreed to retain the minimum Brix level of 10.5
for apples of smaller sizes. The Delegation of India expressed its reservation to this decision.
Section 4 – Provisions concerning Tolerances
35. The Committee had an exchange of views on the need to link the provisions in Section 2.3 - quality
classes, in particular the percentages of defects in the Annex, with Section 4.1 - quality tolerances for quality
classes.
36. The Committee noted that the purpose of Section 4.1 (quality tolerances) was to indicate how many
percent of apples in a lot could be below the quality of a particular class in order that the apples of that lot
could be viewed as in compliance with the requirements of that class, while the maximum allowances for
defects indicated in the Annex intended to define the quality of each class, by providing the degree of various
defects allowed for individual apples. Therefore, the Annex is the critical part of the definition of quality (of
individual apples) required for each class in Section 2.3, but was not relevant to Section 4.1, which only
indicates how many percentages of apples could be below the quality as defined in Section 2.3 and the
Annex. The Delegations of India and Thailand expressed their reservation to this decision.
37. The Committee considered the inclusion of different quality tolerances for decay and internal
breakdown at export and import control stage to take into account changes that might occur in fresh fruits
and vegetables during transport and storage due to their tendency to perish. In this regard, the Committee
examined the meaning of the term “decay”, including their proper translation into French and Spanish. It was
explained that this term in French should be translated as “degradation” and not as “pourriture” (rotting), as
decay was a non-progressive defect and that the same term might apply to the Spanish version as well.

17
ALINORM 07/30/35, para. 66
18
ALINORM 09/32REP, para. 9; ALINORM 09/32/3, paras 21-23
ALINORM 10/33/35 6

38. Some countries agreed to retain quality tolerances for decay and internal breakdown only at the
destination point but with lower percentages than those allowed in the Standard and maintained that no
tolerances should be made for “Extra” class in this respect. Some other delegations however noted that such
provisions, including allowance for the presence of internal feeding insects, pests or damage to the flesh
caused by pests, were not usually included in Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables, and were not
allowed by their national phytosanitary requirements.
39. As regards the establishment of specific quality tolerances for decay and internal breakdown at both
export and import stages, it was noted that in certain countries, fresh produce might undergo long storage and
transportation periods prior to arriving at a shipping point, therefore, tolerances for both export/import points
were required. The Committee could not agree on the need to keep the reference to both export/import points
and therefore agreed to retain the tolerances for decay and internal breakdown as proposed in the Standard
while deleting the reference to shipping and destination points so that the application of such provisions
would be up to individual countries.
40. In addition, the Committee amended the quality tolerances for Class II to clarify that, without
prejudice to compliance with the provisions for minimum requirements, a 2% allowance for decay and
internal breakdown would be accepted regardless of the minimum requirements for sound in Section 2.1 due
to the need to keep certain flexibility in the application of the standard account being taken of the perishable
nature of fresh fruits and vegetables and the time involved in storage and transport from the shipping point to
the destination point.
Section 5.1 – Uniformity
41. The Committee agreed to delete option C allowing uniformity in accordance with the national
legislation of the importing country, noting that the inclusion of such text in Codex standards introduced the
risk that the importing countries could use it to justify imposing more stringent requirements which could
create barriers to international trade. In addition, the Committee agreed to insert a general provision by
which there was no size uniformity for apples packed loose in packages or sales packages.
Section 7 – Contaminants
42. The Committee amended the Section in line with its previous decision to align the provision with the
standardized text as set out in the Procedural Manual (see para. 6).
Annex – Maximum Allowance for Defects
43. The Committee had an exchange of views on the figures applied to the different defects but decided
to retain all values as presented in the Table. The Committee recalled that defects like russeting were not
considered as such for certain varieties and that this defect may vary according to varieties and the area in
which they are cultivated, including seasonal variation due to climatic conditions. The Delegation of India
expressed its reservation in regard to this decision.
44. As regards blemishing and bruises caused by scabs (Venturia inaequalis), the Committee noted that
the allowances for defects referred to the damage on the surface of the fruit left by the pest following their
inactivation by the appropriate phytosanitary treatment but not to the presence of the living pest Venturia
inaequalis. In view of this, the Committee agreed to clarify the provisions by referring to scars caused by
scabs and enter a footnote that this provision applied without prejudice to phytosanitary rules of the
importing country.
Other considerations
45. The Delegation of New Zealand, noted that there was on-going and active development of new apple
varieties, driven by novel attributes and functional health benefits, which might be currently left outside the
scope of the Standard. These innovations were consistent with the WHO Global Strategy on Diet, Physical
Activity and Health which was supported by Codex and which encouraged the food industry to introduce
innovative, healthy, and nutritious foods accompanied by clear and consistent labelling to assist consumers
in making informed and healthy choices. The Delegation further noted that Codex standards were drafted to
principally cover products most commonly traded at the time they were developed but they should not be
applied in a way that would restrict trade in innovative products as they become available. In order to allow
for such developments, the Delegation proposed that at the next possible opportunity the Standard be
reviewed and amended to accommodate innovation.
ALINORM 10/33/35 7

46. The Committee noted that the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its subsidiary bodies are
committed to revision as necessary of Codex standards and related texts to ensure that they are consistent
with and reflect current scientific knowledge and other technological developments as set out in the General
Principles of the Codex Alimentarius19.
Status of the draft Standard for Apples
47. The Committee agreed to forward the draft Standard to the Commission for adoption at Step 8 (see
Appendix III).

CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED DRAFT STANDARDS AT STEP 4 (Agenda Item 4)

PROPOSED DRAFT STANDARD FOR AVOCADO (REVISION) (N19-2008) (Agenda Item 4a)20
48. The Committee recalled that at its 14th Session it had agreed to initiate new work on the revision of
the Standard for Avocado, which had subsequently been approved by the 31st Session of the Commission,
and to establish an electronic Working Group on Avocado led by Cuba to prepare a proposed draft Revision
for consideration by the Committee.21 The Committee noted that the scope of the revision as approved by
the Commission was to revise the provisions concerning quality and sizing, as well as consequential
amendment to other sections of the Standard arising from the inclusion of new varieties, and therefore it was
not necessary to review the entire standard.
49. The Committee considered the proposed draft Revision and made the following amendments and
comments:
Section 1– Definition of Produce
50. Several delegations noted that the new paragraph listing the commercial types of avocado did not
cover all commercial varieties traded internationally and therefore proposed to delete this paragraph unless a
comprehensive list of varieties was provided. It was also noted that the listed commercial types were not
normally used in trade to identify the produce but rather botanical grouping of avocados. In view of these
comments, the Committee agreed to delete the second paragraph of this section.
51. The Committee noted that the reference to “commercial types” was made in several other sections
and considered if they could be deleted throughout the Standard. However, since it might be necessary to
refer to commercial types in order to establish differentiated minimum dry matter contents appropriate for
varietal characteristics of avocados in Section 2.1.2, it was agreed to maintain the references to “commercial
types” in square brackets.
Section 2.1 – Minimum Requirements
52. While noting the proposals of several delegations to amend the requirements listed in the bullet
points, the Committee agreed to maintain the provisions without changes, noting that they were largely
common provisions applying to various Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables.
53. The Committee agreed to align the footnote attached to the requirement that the avocados should be
free of any foreign smell with a similar provision applying to a number of Codex standards for fresh fruits
and vegetables. The Committee considered if the “corresponding regulations” could be replaced by “relevant
provisions adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission”; however, since it was not clear if “any other
chemical substances” referred to those used in post-harvest treatment due to phytosanitary requirements,
which might not be covered by the Codex Alimentarius, it was agreed to maintain the current text.

19
Procedural Manual of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, General Principles of the Codex Alimentarius,
Revision of Codex Standards
20
CX/FFV 09/15/7; CX/FFV 09/15/7-Add.1 (comments of Costa Rica, European Community, Iran and New
Zealand); CRD 6 (comments of Malaysia); CRD 7 (comments of Thailand); CRD 8 (comments of Indonesia);
CRD 11 (comments of Paraguay); CRD 12 (comments of Argentina)
21
ALINORM 08/31/35, paras 106-107
ALINORM 10/33/35 8

Section 2.1.1
54. Several delegations proposed to remove the requirement that avocados should be “carefully” picked
because it was impossible to verify the compliance with this requirement at the inspection stage. It was also
pointed out that failure to comply with this requirement would lead to defects in the fruits, such as skin
injuries and bruises, which were already addressed in other sections of the Standard. Other delegations
preferred to maintain this requirement in order to ensure that avocados reach the consumer in a satisfactory
condition.
55. In view of the varying opinions, the Committee agreed to keep this requirement in square brackets
for further consideration. It was further agreed to modify the remaining part of this paragraph in order to give
more clarity to the provision related to the physiological development vis-à-vis the completion of the
ripening process.
Section 2.1.2 – Maturity Requirements
56. The Committee agreed to indicate that minimum dry matter contents were applicable to a lot of fruits
on average and not to individual fruits and to add a footnote to this effect, because avocados tended to have a
large degree of variations in dry matter contents even among fruits in the same lot.
57. The Committee noted that West Indian varieties and its hybrids had lower dry matter contents at
maturity than other varieties and that it was necessary to provide for differentiated minimum dry matter
contents according to varietal characteristics. However, several delegations expressed that the proposed
minimum dry matter contents were not consistent with what was found in avocados produced in their
countries and requested a more careful examination.
58. The Committee noted that delegations were largely in agreement with the dry matter contents for the
first two group of avocados, which were also consistent with the proposed revised UNECE Standard for
Avocados, and agreed to place in square brackets the dry matter contents of the other two groups, for further
consideration on the basis of data provided by countries producing these varieties. It was further noted that
such data should be accompanied by the method of analysis and sampling used so as to facilitate comparison
and that methods of analysis should also be included in this Standard in order to ensure its consistent
application.
59. The Delegation of Argentina expressed its preference for a higher minimum dry matter content of
23% for the Haas variety, while not opposing to advance the Standard with the minimum dry matter content
of 21% as currently proposed.
Section 3 – Provisions Concerning Sizing
60. The Committee agreed to add an introductory sentence before the two proposed options for sizing to
indicate that avocados could be sized by either option (a) weight or (b) count.
61. One delegation noted that the newly added smallest size was applicable only to the Haas variety,
which should have already been covered by the existing Standard, and questioned if this addition was within
the scope of new work, which should focus on revisions arising from the inclusion of new varieties. In this
respect, the Committee noted that this new size was needed to accommodate the current marketing practices
for the early-season Haas variety, which led to sizes smaller than 125 g. It was further noted that this issue
had been recognized and proposed for consideration in the Project Document submitted to the Commission.
The Committee agreed to keep the new size code and the consequential amendment to the minimum weight
of the fruit in square brackets because some delegations felt that it was necessary to examine the implication
of this amendment in consultation with their national stakeholders.
62. Some delegations proposed to review the sizing table because they believed that there were too many
size codes which could pose difficulties in its application; that consecutive size codes should be used and not
only even numbers; and that the intervals of weight bands should be equal. However, recalling the scope of
new work a, the Committee did not undertake a comprehensive review of this table.
63. The Committee noted that the intention of the inclusion of the second option for sizing was to
accommodate different commercial practices, in particular, the use of different net weight trays, and agreed
to amend the provision for the second option to specifically allow for the use of different size codes and
weight bands when a different net weight tray was used.
ALINORM 10/33/35 9

Section 4.2 – Size Tolerances

64. The Committee agreed to delete the requirement for the maximum difference between the smallest
and largest fruit within a package, because the limit of 25 g could be suitable for smaller sizes of avocados
including the proposed smallest size of “32 (S)” but was too restrictive for larger sizes of avocados.
Section 5.1 – Uniformity
65. The Committee agreed to delete the reference to colouring in this section because it did not have
bearing on the quality of the fruit. It was also agreed to delete “if sized”, because sizing was not optional in
this Standard.
66. Concerning the exemption from the uniformity provision for mixed sizes and varieties, several
delegations proposed its deletion because in their view avocados should not be sold as mixture of different
sizes or varieties. Other delegations pointed out that such presentation was allowed, for example in the case
of the Standard for Apples, and proposed that the same should be allowed for avocados. In this respect, some
delegations noted that such practice was not common for avocados unlike the case for apples, for which
distinctively different colour groups existed, which could be placed in the same package for better
presentation. In view of the varying opinions, the Committee agreed to keep this text in square brackets for
further consideration.
Section 6.2.4 – Commercial Identification
67. The Committee agreed to replace “numbers” with “count” in the third bullet point, because it was the
more commonly used term in the sizing of fruits and vegetables and for consistency with the provision in
Section 3.
Section 7 – Contaminants
68. The Committee amended the Section in line with its previous decision to align the provision with the
standardized text as set out in the Procedural Manual (see para. 6).
Status of the proposed draft Standard for Avocado (Revision)
69. The Committee agreed to forward the proposed draft Revision to the Commission for adoption at
Step 5 (see Appendix IV).
70. It was also agree to re-establish the electronic Working Group22 on Avocado, open to all Members
and Observers and led by Cuba, which would work in English and Spanish and prepare a revised draft text,
focusing on provisions concerning quality, in particular maturity requirements, and provisions concerning
sizing, for further comments and consideration at the next session of the Committee.

PROPOSED DRAFT STANDARD FOR CHILLI PEPPERS (N17-2008) (Agenda Item 4b)23
71. The Committee recalled that at its 14th Session it had agreed to initiate new work on a Standard for
Chilli Peppers, which had subsequently been approved by the 31st Session of the Commission, and to
establish an electronic Working Group on Chilli Peppers led by Mexico to prepare a proposed draft Standard
for consideration by the Committee24.
72. The Committee noted that the Delegation of Mexico had prepared a revised proposed draft Standard
taking into account the written comments submitted at the session and based its discussion on this document
(CRD 13). The Committee considered the proposed draft Standard section by section and, in addition to
editorial corrections, made the following amendment and comments.

22
The following members expressed interest in participating in the electronic Working Group: Argentina, Australia,
Bolivia, Burundi, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, European Community, France, Jamaica, Kenya,
Mexico, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Thailand, Uganda and United States of America.
23
CX/FFV 09/15/8; CX/FFV 09/15/8-Add.1 (comments of Argentina, Costa Rica and Japan);
CX/FFV 09/15/8-Add.2 (comments of European Community); CRD 2 (comments of Mexico); CRD 3
(comments of India); CRD 6 (comments of Malaysia); CRD 7 (comments of Thailand); CRD 8 (comments of
Indonesia); CRD 13 (comments of Mexico); CRD 14 (comments of Kenya)
24
ALINORM 08/31/35, paras 106-107
ALINORM 10/33/35 10

Section 1 – Definition of Produce

73. Several delegations questioned if the commercial types listed in this section were comprehensive
enough to cover varieties traded internationally. It was also noted that it was not a common practice in Codex
standards for fresh fruits and vegetables to indicate varieties in the definition of produce. Since the purpose
of the inclusion of these commercial types was to clarify that this Standard covered hot chilli peppers only,
the Committee agreed to remove the reference to commercial types and instead to provide in a footnote that
this standard applied to chilli peppers presenting a minimum pungency of 1,000 Scoville Index. It was
further agreed to remove references to commercial types throughout the document.
Section 2.1 – Minimum Requirements
74. The Committee agreed to the amendments proposed by Mexico to align the provisions with those
widely used in other Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables and also taking into account written
comments submitted to the current session.
Section 2.2 – Classification
75. The Committee held extensive discussion on Table 1 “Classification of chilli peppers according to
quality”, which listed the allowances for various type of defects for each class.
76. One delegation pointed out that the terms used in the table, such as biological, meteorological or
entomological defects, would not be easily understood, because the revised text no longer included Annex B,
which provided the description of each defect group. The Committee agreed to reinstate Annex B to facilitate
the understanding of defects listed in Table 1.
77. The Committee noted that the table had been simplified from the original proposal contained in
CX/FFV 09/15/8, which grouped defects into four categories, to each of which an allowance for defects were
assigned. However, due to time constraints, the Committee could not consider in detail this new proposal and
its implication for classification. It was also noted that when merging two or more defect groups, allowances
for the merged group should take into account the allowance assigned to corresponding defect groups. It was
further noted that the explanatory note placed under Table 1 should be improved so as to clarify how this
table should be interpreted.
78. The Committee agreed to place the entire Table 1 as well as its explanatory note in square brackets
for further consideration. It was noted that the presentation of allowances for defects was significantly
different from other standards for fresh fruits and vegetables, where allowances are usually assigned to
recognizable defects (e.g. scratches, healed cracks and bruises) regardless of the causes for defects (e.g.
mechanical, biological and physiological). The Committee agreed that further consideration of this section
should include the possibility of taking up this more common approach in order to better define the classes
and facilitate its understanding.
Section 3 – Provisions Concerning Sizing
79. One delegation suggested that this table should be reviewed because the commercial types, to which
this table referd in order to provide for size ranges, had been removed from the definition of produce (see
para. 73). Several delegations noted that the sizing table captured only a small subset of commercial types of
chilli peppers available worldwide, while comprehensive listing of varieties would require a significant
amount of resources in its development, which the Committee had tried to avoid during the consideration of
standards for table grapes and apples. In this regard, it was recalled that the Executive Committee had
observed that the use of lists in Codex texts would in general delay the progress of work (see para. 33).
80. In view of these comments, the Committee agreed to place the entire section in square brackets for
further consideration.
ALINORM 10/33/35 11

Section 7 – Food Additives

81. The Committee noted that no other Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables contained a
section on food additives and considered whether this section was required. It was noted that in the General
Standard for Food Additives (CODEX STAN 192-1995), while no food additive was allowed for use in
untreated fresh vegetables (food category 04.2.1.1), certain food additives for surface treatment, such as
preservatives and glazing agents, were allowed for use in surface-treated fresh vegetables (food category
04.2.1.2); therefore, if it was necessary to explicitly allow for use of additives for surface treatment on chilli
peppers, this section should make reference to food additives accepted for use in food category 04.2.1.2.
82. Several delegations expressed the view that food additives were not necessary for chilli peppers and
suggested to delete this section. It was also noted that whether or not to include a section on food additives
was a question applicable to Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables in general and not particularly to
this Standard. The Committee therefore agreed to delete the section on food additives from this Standard and
to have general discussion when it considers the proposed Layout for Codex standards for fresh fruits and
vegetables.
Section 8 – Contaminants
83. The Committee amended the Section in line with its previous decision to align the provision with the
standardized text as set out in the Procedural Manual (see para. 6).
Status of the proposed draft Standard for Chilli Peppers
84. The Committee agreed to return the proposed draft Standard to Step 3 for further comments, in
particular on classification (Section 2.2) and sizing (Section 3) (see Appendix V).
85. It was also agreed to re-establish the electronic Working Group25 on Chilli Peppers, led by Mexico
and open to all Members and Observers, which would work in English and Spanish and prepare a revised
text on the basis of the comments submitted at Step 3, for further comments and consideration at the next
session of the Committee.

PROPOSED DRAFT STANDARD FOR TREE TOMATOES (N18-2008) (Agenda Item 4c)26
86. The Committee recalled that at its 14th Session it had agreed to initiate new work on a Standard for
Tree Tomatoes, which had been approved by the 31st Session of the Commission, and to establish an
electronic Working Group on Tree Tomatoes led by Colombia to prepare a proposed draft Standard for
consideration by the Committee.27
87. The Committee considered the proposed draft Standard section by section and made the following
comments and amendments:
Title
88. The Committee agreed to retain the term “Tree Tomatoes” in the English and Spanish versions and
to use the term “Tamarillo” in the French version while allowing other names according to regions in a
footnote.
Section 2 – Definition of Produce
89. The Committee made a number of amendments to align the provisions with those usually applying
across Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables.
Section 2.1 – Minimum Requirements
90. The Committee reworded the provision for the stalk to make it clear that the stalk should be present
to the first knot without being cut.

25
The following members expressed interest in participating in the electronic Working Group: Argentina, Australia,
Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Nigeria, Panama,
Paraguay, Thailand and United States of America
26
CX/FFV 09/15/9; CX/FFV 09/15/9-Add.1 (comments of Argentina and Iran); CX/FFV 09/15/9-Add.2
(comments of New Zealand); CRD 7 (comments of Thailand); CRD 14 (comments of Kenya)
27
ALINORM 08/31/35, paras 106-107
ALINORM 10/33/35 12

91. The Committee amended footnote 2 relating to the smell caused due to the use of preservatives to
refer to the General Standard for Food Additives (GSFA). The Committee noted that the absence of
provisions in the General Standard for a particular food additive or for a particular use of a food additive (e.g.
provisions for a particular preservative for use in surface treatment for fresh fruits) did not necessarily mean
that their use were not allowed by the GSFA as set out in the Preamble of the GSFA.
92. In Section 2.1.1, the Committee agreed to delete the words “for consumption” for consistency with
other Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables carrying the same provision. In addition, the Committee
considered a proposal to amend footnote 3 by which mature tree tomatoes should have full colour to the
calyx, however, it was noted that not all varieties presented a uniform colour when mature. The Committee
therefore decided to leave the provision unchanged.
Section 2.2.1 – “Extra” Class
93. The Committee agreed to delete the reference to “commercial type” for consistency with the
provisions for definition of produce (Section 1) which referred only to “commercial varieties” and to apply
this change across the document.
Section 2.2.2 – Class I
94. The Committee agreed to delete the provisions for “curved stalk” as it was not related to a defect of
the shape of the fruit and was not relevant for the quality of the final product.
Section 3 – Sizing
95. The Committee had an exchange of views on the appropriateness to retain the current provisions for
sizing, e.g. sizing tables for diameter and weight including reference to the number of units per packages, or
to have a general statement stating how tree tomatoes can be sized, e.g. diameter, weight, count, etc., with no
indication of size codes and numerical ranges associated with them in order to provide for flexibility in the
application of different sizing practices across the world.
96. A delegation noted that using two different size codes (letters and numbers) for sizing by diameter
and by weight might cause confusion and that the diameter was not a reliable indicator for sizing as tree
tomatoes vary in shape e.g. round, oblong, etc., therefore, sizing by diameter should be deleted. It was noted
that sizing by diameter was a practice linked to a technology used by growers and an established trading
practice in certain countries and that keeping both sizing tables would provide for flexibility in the
implementation of the Standard. In addition, it was noted that replacing the sizing tables by a general
statement might have implications on the size tolerances and uniformity of the produce in the package and
that if such an option was to be included at least a minimum size should be established to ensure uniformity.
In this regard, it was further noted that a general statement would not provide for harmonization of sizing
especially as Codex standards are used as reference for national regulations and to ensure fair practices in
food trade and that opening up the sizing provisions might introduce technical barriers to trade by potentially
allowing stricter sizing practices than necessary for trading tree tomatoes.
97. The Committee could not reach a decision on the approach to sizing and therefore agreed to retain
the two options and to place the entire section in square brackets, including other related provisions that
might need adjustments based on the sizing approach to be taken by the Committee, e.g. sizing tolerances. In
taking this decision, the Committee agreed to include count provisions alongside weight to show how count
and weight corresponded and also to allow count to be used fully as an alternative to weight. Consequently,
footnote 4 on the number of units per packages was deleted as no longer necessary.
Section 7 - Contaminants
98. The Committee amended the Section in line with its previous decision to align the provision with the
standardized text as set out in the Procedural Manual (see para. 6).
Status of the proposed draft Codex Standard for Tree Tomatoes
99. The Committee agreed to forward the proposed draft Standard to the Commission for adoption at
Step 5 (see Appendix VI).
ALINORM 10/33/35 13

100. The Committee also agreed to reconvene the electronic Working Group28 on Tree Tomatoes, led by
Colombia, working in English and Spanish and open to all Members and Observers, to further revise the
document, in particular Section 3 on sizing and those related provisions that might need adjustments
vis-à-vis the sizing provisions in Section 3, e.g. size tolerances, for further comments and consideration at its
next session.

LAYOUT FOR CODEX STANDARDS FOR FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES (Agenda Item 5)

PROPOSED LAYOUT FOR CODEX STANDARDS FOR FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES (Agenda Item 5a)29
101. The Committee recalled that the last session had some general and specific considerations on the
proposed layout and agreed to request further comments for consideration at its present session.30 The
Committee acknowledged that, due to time constraints, it would be unable to have detailed discussion on the
individual sections of the proposed layout and agreed to have general discussion on the approach to be taken
in the development of this document, which could facilitate its consideration at subsequent sessions of the
Committee.
102. It was noted that the definition of produce should address the issue of point of application of the
standards, in particular the identification of provisions that should apply at export and/or import control
stages, this being important especially in relation to the establishment of specific quality tolerances to take
into account certain degree of deterioration such as decay and internal breakdown, which may occur in fresh
products during transport and storage due to their development and perishable nature. In this regard, a proper
reference to the relevant sections of the Guidelines for Food Import Control Systems (CAC/GL 47-2003)
should be included in the layout to address issues relating to acceptance, rejection, re-grading, etc. at the
inspection level. In addition, the layout should address the linkages between quality provisions and quality
tolerances; essential quality provisions that should be listed in the quality classes; how defects should be
addressed in the quality classes e.g. quantitative as opposed to qualitative qualifiers (numerical values,
percentages instead of use of terms like “practically”; “very slight”, “slight”, etc.); how to approach maturity
requirements e.g. minimum requirements as opposed to a general statement to facilitate inclusiveness of the
standards; how to approach sizing provisions e.g. sizing tables indicating size codes/ranges as opposed to
general statement to accommodate worldwide industry and trading practices and the linkages with uniformity.
It was further noted that clarification was also needed as per the inclusion of varieties and/or commercial
types as derived from the discussion of the standards for avocados and chilli peppers.
103. It was also noted that there should be a clear understanding of the status of the layout as a guidance
document to assist the Committee in the development of standards for fresh fruits and vegetables and not as a
rigid framework to follow whereby the provisions therein were enough in itself to justify their inclusion in
the standards, therefore, provisions in the layout should be applied in a flexible way taking into account the
characteristics proper to the product being standardized. In this regard, the introductory statement should be
further strengthened to highlight this fact.
104. It was further noted that the layout should continue to be developed for consistency across Codex
standards for fresh fruits and vegetables while focusing on essential quality and safety provisions to enhance
product quality, promote fair trading principles and reduce compliance costs across the industry. In this
regard, the scope should include a paragraph to allow for innovative products that are outside the specified
provisions in the standards so that they do not become technical barriers to trade. In addition, the labelling
provisions should conform to the General Standard for the Labelling of Pre-packaged Foods (CODEX
STAN 1-1985) in particular as regards country of origin labelling. In addition, it was indicated that the status
of the layout should be clear as to whether it would be a document for internal use by the Committee.

28
The following members expressed interest in participating in the electronic Working Group: Australia, Bolivia,
Mexico, New Zealand, Philippines and United States of America.
29
ALINORM 08/31/35, Appendix V; CX/FFV 09/15/10 (comments of Australia, Brazil, European Community and
Iran); CX/FFV 09/15/10-Add.1 (comments of Mali, Philippines and United States of America); CRD 3
(comments of India); CRD 6 (comments of Malaysia); CRD 7 (comments of Thailand); CRD 9 (comments of
Uruguay); CRD 11 (comments of Paraguay); CRD 15 (UNECE Standard Layout on Fresh Fruit and Vegetables)
30
ALINORM 08/31/35, para. 35
ALINORM 10/33/35 14

105. Other comments addressed the need for harmonization between Codex and UNECE layouts in order
to ensure fair trade practices and to avoid duplication of work; whether the section on food additives should
be maintained as some additives like preservatives were actually used as post-harvest surface treatment of
certain products while other comments claimed that no additives should be used in fresh fruits and
vegetables; the need to harmonize the use of size codes (numbers versus letters and descending versus
ascending orders); the inclusion of essential provisions e.g. removal of provisions that are not usually applied
in Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables like those relating to inclusion of list of varieties; the
inclusion of some guidance about what provisions should not be addressed in an international standard like
that of Codex.
106. The Committee noted that the issue of point of application of Codex standards for fresh fruits and
vegetables, including the establishment of specific quality tolerances at export/control stages, had already
been discussed at previous sessions and therefore agreed to request the Codex Secretariat to prepare a
background document containing discussions at its previous sessions and other relevant information on this
matter with a view to facilitating discussion of this issue.
Conclusion
107. The Committee agreed to consider the proposed Layout for Codex Standards for Fresh Fruits and
Vegetables at its next session in the light of the above discussion and to attach the proposed Layout to the
report of this meeting for further comments.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED IN THE PROPOSED LAYOUT FOR CODEX STANDARDS FOR FRESH FRUITS
31
AND VEGETABLES (Agenda Item 5b)

108. The Committee recalled that at its last session it had had an exchange of views on the need for a
glossary of terms (terminology) used in Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables including the most
appropriate place to incorporate this in the proposed Layout. In view of the discussion held, that Committee
had agreed to establish an electronic Working Group lead by France, to prepare a glossary of terms used in
the proposed Layout for Codex standards on fresh fruits and vegetables with particular regard to the
definitions of “Extra” Class, Class I and Class II for comments and consideration by this session of the
Committee.32
109. Some delegations expressed the view that the terms addressed in the glossary should be extended to
define those terms used in Codex standards for fresh fruits and vegetables that might not be necessarily
addressed as part of the standardized language in the proposed Layout.
110. The Committee noted that the development of the glossary was linked to the provisions applied in
the proposed Layout. However, in view of the discussion held on the approach, in particular as per the
essential quality provisions that should be addressed in the Layout, the Committee agreed to suspend the
development of the glossary pending further development and eventual finalization of the provisions in the
Layout.

PROPOSALS FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE PRIORITY LIST FOR THE STANDARDIZATION

OF FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES (Agenda Item 6)33
111. In view of the finalization of the Standards for Bitter Cassava and Apples, the Committee considered
proposals for new work and other related issues as indicated below.

31
CX/FFV 09/15/11; CX/FFV 09/15/11-Add.1 (comments of Argentina and Iran); CX/FFV 09/15/11-Add.2
(comments of Brazil); CRD 3 (comments of India); CRD 7 (comments of Thailand); CRD 9 (comments of
Uruguay)
32
ALINORM 08/31/35, paras 32-35
33
ALINORM 08/31/35, Appendix VI; CX/FFV 09/15/2; CX/FFV 09/15/12 (comments of Brazil, European
Community and Iran); CX/FFV 09/15/12-Add.1 (comments of Iran and Philippines); CRD 3 (comments of
India); CRD 4 (comments of United States of America); CRD 5 (comments of European Community); CRD 6
(comments of Malaysia); CRD 11 (comments of Paraguay)
ALINORM 10/33/35 15

Pomegranate
112. The Committee noted that the 32nd session of the Commission agreed to refer the proposal for a
Standard for Pomegranate to the CCFFV for consideration as new work in recognition of the strong interest
of many members to elaborate a worldwide standard for this produce and noting that the critical review by
the Executive Committee had not indicated any deficiency in the project document.
113. Several delegations expressed their support for the development of a worldwide standard for
pomegranate. The Committee therefore agreed to request the Commission for approval of new work on
Pomegranate (see Appendix VIII).
114. The Committee noted that the Project document was already accompanied by a proposed draft
Standard, which had been prepared by Iran in consultation with other interested countries, and considered if
an accelerate procedure could be requested to the Commission. In this regard, it was also noted that without
asking for an accelerate procedure, the Committee could still finalize the standard at its next session if the
standard was ready for adoption at Step 5/8, which would provide for flexibility in case the Committee might
need to give further consideration to the Standard as its next session. In view of the above, the Committee
agree to proceed with the normal procedure.
115. The Committee further agreed to establish an electronic Working Group34 on Pomegranate led by
Iran, open to all Members and Observers and working in English only, which would prepare a proposed draft
Standard for comments and consideration at its next session, pending the approval of new work by the 33rd
Session of the Commission.
Durian
116. The Committee recalled that the 61st Session of the Executive Committee had recommended that the
Commission refer back the proposal for new work on durian to this Committee with a request to reconsider
the justification for new work in conformity with the Criteria of Work Priorities Applicable to Commodities,
especially as regards potential trade barriers, and refer this question for advice to the Coordinating
Committee for Asia (CCASIA), especially to consider whether the development of a regional standard would
be appropriate.35 It was further recalled that at the request of the Delegation of Thailand, the 31st Session of
the Commission agreed to refer this question back to this Committee in view of the current workload of the
CCASIA36.
117. The Committee noted that there was no Project document submitted to the current session. The
Delegation of Thailand expressed interest to pursue new work on durian at the next session of the
Committee.
Chanterelle
118. The Committee noted that the conversion of the Codex Standard for Fresh Fungus “Chanterelle”
(European Regional Standard CODEX STAN 40-1981) into a worldwide standard had been referred to the
Committee as a result of an earlier request of the Commission as part as of the process of updating
commodity standards including the potential conversion of regional standards into worldwide standard. The
Committee recalled that no action had been taken on this request and that at its last session it had agreed to
keep chanterelle in the Priority List pending the finalization of the UNECE Standard for Chantarelle.
119. Noting that the 65th Session of the UNECE Working Party (November 2009) was likely to adopt the
Standard for Chanterelle, the Committee agreed to request, through the Commission, the Coordinating
Committee for Europe, which had elaborated this Regional Standard, to consider the need for a worldwide
standard for chanterelle and, if affirmative, to refer a proposal for its conversion to the CCFFV for
consideration, accompanied by a project document.

34
The following members expressed interest in participating in the electronic Working Group: Argentina, Australia,
Bolivia, Chile, India, Japan, Thailand and United States of America.
35
ALINORM 08/31/3A, para.100
36
ALINORM 08/31/REP, para.103
ALINORM 10/33/35 16

Other considerations
120. The Committee recalled that the Priority List had first been prepared at its first session in 1988, well
before the current process of critical review based on Project documents was put into place. Noting that most
of the commodities currently contained in the list had not been considered by the Committee on the basis of a
project document and that any new work should be, when proposed to the Commission, accompanied by a
project document, the Committee agreed to discontinue the maintenance of the priority list.
121. The Committee noted that the proposals for new work would continuously be requested by means of
a Circular Letter attached to a session report and that any members were invited to propose new work by
submitting a project document well in advance of the meeting in order to allow for sufficient time for other
members to consider the proposal.

OTHER BUSINESS (Agenda Item 7)

122. The Committee noted that there were no other matters to discuss under this Agenda Item.

DATE AND PLACE OF THE NEXT SESSION (Agenda Item 8)

123. The Committee was informed that the 16th Session of the Codex Committee on Fresh Fruits and
Vegetables was tentatively scheduled to be held in Mexico in approximately 18 months. The exact time and
venue would be decided between the Codex and the Mexican Secretariats.
ALINORM 10/33/35 17

SUMMARY STATUS OF WORK

DOCUMENT REFERENCE
SUBJECT MATTER STEP ACTION BY
(ALINORM 10/33/35)
Draft Section 6 “Marking or Governments para. 23
Labelling” (Draft Standard for 8 38th CCFL and
Bitter Cassava) 33rd CAC Appendix II
Draft Standard for Apples Governments para. 47
8 38th CCFL and
33rd CAC Appendix III
Proposed draft revision of the Governments paras 69-70
Standard for Avocados (CODEX 33rd CAC and
5
STAN 197-1995) (N19-2008) EWG led by Cuba Appendix IV
16th CCFFV
Proposed draft Standard for Tree Governments paras 99-100
Tomatoes (N18-2008) 33rd CAC and
5
EWG led by Colombia Appendix VI
16th CCFFV
Proposed draft Standard for Chilli Governments paras 84-85
Peppers (N17-2008) 2/3 EWG led by Mexico and
16th CCFFV Appendix V
Proposed draft Standard for 33rd CAC paras 113 and 115
Pomegranate 1/2/3 EWG led by Iran and
16th CCFFV Appendix VIII

Proposed Layout for Codex Governments paras 106-107

Standards for Fresh Fruits and – Codex Secretariat and
Vegetables 16th CCFFV Appendix VII
Glossary of Terms used in the para.110
Proposed Layout for Codex
Suspended –
Standards for Fresh Fruits and
Vegetables
Proposals for new work on fresh Governments para.121
–
fruits and vegetables 16th CCFFV
ALINORM 10/33/35 18
List of Participants Appendix I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS
LISTA DE PARTICIPANTES
Chairperson: Dr. FRANCISCO RAMOS GÓMEZ
Président: Director General de Normas
Presidente: Secretaría de Economía
Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No. 6
Sección Fuentes
Naucalpan de Juárez
Estado de México
C.P. 53950
Tel: 57 29 93 00 Ext. 43200-43201
Fax: 55 20 97 15
E-mail: framos@economia.gob.mx

Assistant to the Chairperson: INGRID MACIEL PEDROTE

Assistant du Président: Director de Normalización Internacional
Asistente del Presidente: Dirección General de Normas
Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No. 6
Sección Fuentes
Naucalpan de Juárez
Estado de México
C.P. 53950
Tel: 57 29 94 80
Fax: 55 20 97 15
E-mail: imaciel@economia.gob.mx

ARGENTINA
ARGENTINE BOLIVIA
BOLIVIE
VIDAL Nicolás
Encargado de Negocios A.i TORREZ Zamora Marco Antonio
Embajada de la Rep. Argentina en México Jefe Nacional de Inocuidad Alimentaria SENASAG
Tel: 5520 9430 Ministerio de Desarrollo Rural y Tierra
E-mail: piradaembajada@prodigy.net.mx Calle Jose Natush S/n SENASAG Oficina Nacional,
Trinidad- Bolivia
CHICHIZOLA Gabriela Tel: 591 3462 8107 Ext 1601
Embajada de la Rep. Argentina en México Fax: 591 34624194
Tel: 5520 9430 E-mail: mtorrez@hotmail.com
E-mail: comercialembajada@prodigy.net.mx
BRAZIL
AUSTRALIA BRÉSIL
AUSTRALIE BRASIL
SOLOMON Robert FONTES Coelho Leandro Karina
Manager, International Foods Standards Fiscal Federal Agropecuàrio
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Ministèrio de Agricultura, Pecuària y Abastecimiento
GPO Box 858 Esplanada Dos Ministérios, Bloco D, Anexo B,
Canberra ACT 2601 Sala 352
Australia Tel: 5561 32183251
Tel: 61 2 6272 5945 Fax: 5561 3224 4322
Fax: 61 2 6272 3025 E-mail: karina.leandro@agricultura.gov.br
E-mail: rob.solomon@daff.gov.au
DE CASTRO Silva Alexandre
BENNETT Richard Fiscal Federal Agropecuário
Product Integrity Manager Ministèrio de Agricultura, Pecuària y Abastecimiento
Horticulture Australia Limited Esplanada Dos Ministérios, Bloco D, Anexo B,
PO Box 1968 Sala 352
Shepparton VIC 3632 Tel: 55 61 3218 3251
Australia Fax: 5561 3224 4322
Tel: 61358253753 E-mail: alexandre.silva@agricultura.gov.br
Fax: 61358255031
E-mail: richard.bennett@horticulture.com.au
ALINORM 10/33/35 19
List of Participants Appendix I
BURKINA FASO ECHEVERRÍA Vásquez Héctor Andrés
Agregado Agrícola
KOROGHO Sana Embajada de Chile, Consejería Agrícola
Inspecteur Phytosanitaire, Chef du Service Controle Calle del Río 23.Col. Barrio de Santa Catarina
Phytosanitare et Pesticides Del. Coyoacàn. C.P. 04100 Mèxico D.F.
Ministère de L’Agriculture, de L´Hydraulique et des Tel: 5658 4928
Ressources Halieutiques E-mail: hector.echeverria@consejagri.org
Direction de la Protection des Vegetaux
01 BP 5362 Ouagadougou 01 Burkina Faso COLOMBIA
Tel: (00226) 5036 19 15 COLOMBIE
(00226) 5036 18 65
E-mail: sageko2000@yahoo.fr MUNAR León Ricardo Enrique
Profesional de Normalización
BURUNDI Instituto Colombiano de Normas Tecnicas y Certificación
ICONTEC
NZINAHORA Gervais Carretera 37 N°52-95 Bogota D.C.
Permanent Technical Secretary Tel: 571 6078888 Ext. 1442
Burundi Bureau of Standards and Quality Control (BBN) Fax: 571 3150613
Boulevard de la Tanzanie Nº500 E-mail: rmunar@icontec.org
P.O.BOX 3535Bujumbura / Burundi
Tel: 257 79 43 57 56 CIFUENTES Rodríguez Giovanny
257 22 22 15 77 Ingeniero Agrícola
257 22 22 18 15 Instituto Nacional de Vigilancia de Medicamentos y
Fax: 257 22 22 55 95 Alimentos (INVIMA)
E-mail: nzigervais2002@yahoo.fr Cra.68d #17- 11 Zona Industrial Montevideo (Bogotá D.C)
Tel: 2948700 Ext. 3924
CANADA Cel: 300 558 9037
CANADÁ Fax: 2948700 Ext. 3920
REDDICK Ronna E-mail: gcifuentesr@gmail.com
Regulatory Officer
COOK ISLANDS
Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Policy and Programs
ÎLES COOK
Branch, Agrifood, Meat and Seafood Safety Directorate,
ISLAS COOK
Agrifood Division, Performance Management and Liaison
Section,1400 Merivale Road, NGATOKO Ta Ngatoko
T1/4/327,Ottawa,Ontario,Canada, K1A0Y9 Director Biosecurity National Codex Contact Point
Tel: (613) 773-6190 National Codex Contact Point, P.O.Box 96, Ministry of
Fax:(613) 773 6282 Agriculture, Government of the Cook Islands, Cook Islands
E-mail: ronna.reddick@inspection.gc.ca Tel: +682 28 711
Fax: +682 21 881
CHILE E-mail: nngatoko@agriculture.gov.ck
CHILI
COSTA RICA
URRUTIA ANABALÒN Antonieta
Negociaciones Multilaterales MONTEVERDE Castro Gina
División Asuntos Internacionales. Supervisora Fitosanitaria
Servicio Agrícola y Ganadero. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería Servicio Fitosanitario
Av. Bulnes 140 Santiago, Chile del Estado, Departamento de Exportaciones Costa Rica
Tel: 00562 3451585 Tel: (506) 2260 8300 Etx.2054
Fax: 00562 3451578 (506) 2260 6721
E-mail: antonieta.urrutia@sag.gob Fax: (506) 2260 6721
E-mail: gmonteverde@protecnet.go.cr
PANIAGUA Ramírez Karla
Asistente de la Consejería Agrícola ROJAS Gómez Marcela Patricia
Embajada de Chile, Consejeria Agricola Secretaría Técnica del Codex en Costa Rica
Calle del Rio 23, Col. Barrio de Santa Catalina Ministerio Economía, Industria y Comercio
Del. Coyoacàn, C.P.04100 Mèxico, D.F. Secretaria Técnica del Codex
Tel: 56 58 49 28 San José, Costa Rica
E-mail: karla.paniagua@consejagri.org Tel: (506) 2235 2700 Ext. 265
Fax: (506) 2260 6721
ESCUDERO Mira Paulina E-mail: mrojas@meic.go.cr
Departamento de Frutas y Hortalizas.
Asociación de Exportadores de Chile,
Cruz del Sur 133 piso 2. Las Condes Santiago, Chile
Tel: 00562 4724 720
E-mail: pescudero@asoex.cl
ALINORM 10/33/35 20
List of Participants Appendix I
CUBA EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
COMMUNAUTÉ EUROPÉENNE
SÁNCHEZ García Cira Margarita COMUNIDAD EUROPEA
Jefe Calidad, Bioseguridad y Medio Ambiente
Instituto de Investigaciones en Fruticultura Tropical HOLMA Risto
Ministerio de Agricultura Administrador Responsible for Codex Issues
Presidente del Comité Técnico de Normalización Sobre Directorate General Health and Consumers
Frutas y Hortalizas Frescas NC CTN 54 Rue Froissart 101 2/48
7ma Ave. # 3005 entre 30 y 32, Miramar, Playa. B-1049 Brussels
Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba Tel: (+32 2) 2998683
C.P. 10600 Fax: (+ 32 2) 2998566
Tel: (537) 209-3401 E-mail: risto.holma@ec.europa.eu
Fax: (537) 2046794
E-mail: calidad@iift.cu VALENTIN Sandrine
Administrator
SPECH Abreu Gwendolyne Unit C2 Olive oil, Horticultural Products
Especialista Office L130-7/58
Ministerio de Comercio Exterior y La Inversion Extranjera B-1049 Bussels- Belgium
Dirección de Exportaciones. Infanta N°16 Esquina 23. Tel: 00 32 229 668 75
Vedado Plaza de la Revolución Ciudad de la Habana C.P. Fax: (+ 32 2) 2998566
10400 E-mail: sandrine.valentin@ec.europa.eu
Tel: (537) 835 74 29
Fax: (537) 835 74 27 VAN der Stappen Rudy
E-mail: gwendolyne.spech@mincex.cu Deputy Head of Unit
DG AGRI Unit C2 Horticultural Products, Olive Oil
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Rue de la Loi 130 Office 7/77
RÉPUBLIQUE DOMINICAINE B1049 Brussels Belgium
REPÚBLICA DOMINICANA Tel: 00-32-2-29 54509
Fax: (+ 32 2) 2998566
DE JESÚS Santos Josué E-mail: Rudy.van-der-Stappen@ec.europa.eu
Director Técnico, en la Dirección General de Normas y
Sistemas de Calidad, DIGENOR FRANCE
Secretaría de Estado de Industria y Comercio (SEIC) FRANCIA
Av. México, Edificio de Oficinas Gubernamentales Juan
Pablo Duarte, TRIVES-CREMIEUX Marie Isabelle
Santo Domingo, D.N. Rep. Dominicana. Inspector de la DGCCRF
Tel: 809 686 2205, ext.295 Directorate for Competition Policy,
E-mail: josue.maxfro@gmail.com Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control Ministry of Economy,
codexsespas@yahoo.com Industry and Employment
Teledoc 251-59 Bd Vicent Auriol – 75703 Paris CEDEX 13
ERITREA France
ÉRYTHRÉE Tel: 00 33 144 97 31 52
E-mail: marie-isabelle.cremieux@dgccrf.finances.gouv.fr
MUSSIE Jovanni
Head of Laboratory of Eritrean Standards Institution GERMANY
Eritrean Standards Institution, 171-1 N °9, P.O.Box 245, ALLEMAGNE
Asmara, Eritrea ALEMANIA
Tel: +291 1 120525
Fax: +291 1 120425 HENNING Christiane
E-mail: mussiejovanni@yahoo.com Oberregierungsrätin
Federal Ministry of Food
ETHIOPIA Agriculture and Consumer Protection
ÉTHIOPIE PO Box 14 02 70, D-53107 Bonn
ETIOPÍA Tel: 49 (0)228/ 99 529 - 4958
E-mail: Christiane.Henning@bmelv.bund.de
YALEM Berehan I Abraha
MRS INDIA
Chemical Society of Ethiopia and National Codex Committee INDE
Member
Former Presidant &Chemical Society & Ethiopia DAVE Sanjay
Adiss Abeba, Ethiopia Director
P.O.Box 3516, +251 11 320 3439 Agricultural & Processed Food Products Export
Tel: +52 11 911 403 427 Development Authority (APEDA), Ministry of Commerce,
E-mail: yalemgidey@yahoo.com Govt.of India New Delhi
Tel: +91 11 2651 3162
Fax: +91 11 2651 9259
E-mail: director@apeda.com
ALINORM 10/33/35 21
List of Participants Appendix I
REDDY L. Shivarama IMPAGNATIELLO Ciro
Dy. Commissioner (Hort) Italian Codex Committee
Ministry of Agriculture,Govt. of India New Delhi Ministero delle Politiche Agricole Alimentari e Forestali
Tel: +91 11 2338 1850 Via XX Settembre, 20, 00187 Roma, Italy
Fax: +91 11 2338 8756 Tel: +39 06 46656046
E-mail: shivareddy22@yahoo.co.in Fax: +39 06 4880273
E-mail: ciro.impagnatiello@libero.it
INDONESIA c.impagnatiello@politicheagricole.gov.it
INDONÉSIE
JAMAICA
ERVANDIARI Islana JAMAÏQUE
Deputy Director, Biosafety Control of Plant Product,
Indonesian Agricultural Quarantine Agency Ministry of GOLDSMITH Juliet
Agriculture, Jln. Harsono RM, No. 3 Pest Risk Analyst
Ragunan Jakarta Ministry of Agriculture & Fisheries,
E Building, 5th Floor Hope Gardens, Kingston 6
Tel: 62217821637 Tel: 1 876 977 7160
Fax: 62217821637 Fax: 1 876 977 7160
E-mail: ervandiari61@yahoo.com E-mail: jugoldsmith@moa.gov.jm
julietgoldsmith@gmail.com
TUNUS Metrawinda
Expert Team on International Cooperation JAPAN
Indonesian Agricultural Quarantine Agency Ministry of JAPON
Agriculture Jln. Harsono RM, No. 3 Building E, Jakarta JAPÓN
Selatan. Indonesia.
Tel: 6221 4750 873 YOSHIO Ayako
E-mail: superangel1222@yahoo.com International Affairs, Food Safety and Consumer Policy
Division, Food Safety and Consumer Affairs Bureau,Ministry
PURWANTI Annisa Tyas of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Third Secretary Tel: +81-3-3502-8732
Indonesian Embassy Fax: +81 3 3507 4232
Julio Verne No.27, Col. Polanco E-mail: ayako_yoshio@nm.maff.go.jp
11560 Mexico, D.F
Tel: 5280 6363 KENYA
E-mail: annisatyas.kbrimexico@gmail.com GITHINJI Mary
Plant Health Inspector
PASARIBU Charles
Assistant Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service,
Indonesian Embassy P.O.Box 49592 00100 Nairobi Kenya
Julio Verne No.27, Col.Polanco Tel: +254 667154, +254 (0)20 353 6171
11560 México D.F E-mail: mgithinji@kephis.org
Tel: 5280 6363 NYANGI Chacha Simon
E-mail:economics3@hotmail.com Secretary External Trade
IRAN Ministry of Trade,
Box 43137 Nairobi 00100GPO
IRÁN
Tel: 254722523114
AHMADI Nadia Fax: 25402315011
Senior Expert on Fruits and Vegetables E-mail: simonnyangi@yahoo.com
Institute of Standard and Industrial Research of Iran
P.O.Box: 31585-163 Karaj-Iran MAINA John Kabue
Tel: 0098-9121938143 Assistant Manager Quality Assurance
Fax: 0098 2612803889 Kenya Bureau of Standards
E-mail: n_ahmadi@isiri.org.ir P.O.Box 54974-00200
Nairobi-Kenya
ITALY Tel+254-020-605490
ITALIE E-mail: kabuej@keb.org
ITALIA
MADAGASCAR
FIDEGHELLI Carlo
Centro di Ricerca per la Frutticoltura RAHARINJATOVO Noro Lanto Lydie
Via Fioranello, 52, 00134 Roma, Italy Responsable Du Laboratiore D´Hygiene Des Aliments et de
Tel:+39 06 793481630 L´Environnement Institut Pasteur de Madagascar
Fax: +39 06 79348110 Institut Pasteur de Madagascar BP 1274 Antananarivo 101
E-mail: isfrmfid@mclink.it Madagascar
carlo.fideghelli@entecra.it Tel: (261) 20 22 412 72 / (261) 33 07 618 79
Fax: (261) 20 22 415 34
E-mail: nravaoni@pasteur.mg
ALINORM 10/33/35 22
List of Participants Appendix I
MALI NEPAL
MALÍ NÉPAL
SAKO Mahamadou LAMA Jiwan Prava
Directeur Général Adjoint/ Agence Nationale de la Sécurité Director General
Sanitaire des Aliments Department of Food Technology and Quality Control
Agence Nationale de la Sécurité Sanitaire des Aliments Babar Mahal. Kathmandu Nepal.
Tel: + (223)20220754 Tel: 977 1 4262369
+ (223)66799979 Fax: 977 1 4262337
E-mail:mahamadousako@yahoo.fr E-mail: jiwanlama@gmail.com
dgdftqc@mail.com.np
MEXICO
MEXIQUE NETHERLANDS
MÉXICO PAYS-BAS
PAÍSES BAJOS
CASTORENA Contreras José Juvenal
Director de Cultivos Agroindustriales VAN TILBORG Van Loon Ingebord
Coordinador del SC 13 de Frutas y Hortalizas Frescas del DRS
CMCAC Ministry of Agriculture, Prins Clauslaan 8, 2595 AJ The
Tel: (55) 3871 1000 Ext. 33294 Hague, Netherlands
Fax: (55) 3871 1000 Tel: 0031 70 378 6561
E-mail: jose.castorena@sagarpa.gob.mx E-mail: i.van.tilborg@minlnv.nl
JIMÉNEZ Rodríguez Gabriela Alejandra NEW ZEALAND
Jefa de Departamento de Seguimiento Operativo a los NOUVELLE-ZÉLANDE
Sistemas Producto. NUEVA ZELANDIA
Secretaria del Subcomité Nacional No.13 Frutas y Hortalizas
Frescas del CMCAC PAK Henry
Tel: (55) 3871 1000 Ext. 28313 Technical Manager
E-mail: gjimenez.dgvdt@sagarpa.gob.mx Avocado Industry Council
P.O. Box 13267
VÁZQUEZ Morales Mateo Tauranga 3141, New Zealand
Asesor Tel: +647 571 6147
Subcomité Nacional No.13 Frutas y Hortalizas Frescas del Fax: +647 571 6145
CMCAC E-mail: henrypak@nzavocado.co.nz
Tel: (55) 55 386360
E-mail: mateo.360921@hotmail.com JONES Gary
Business Manager
CHÁVEZ González Carlos Pipfruit New Zealand INC
UNIFRUT, A.C. 207 st Anbyns st West
Tel: (614) 413 7726 Hastings 4122
Fax: (614) 413 1833 Tel: +646 873 7080
E-mail: unifrut@prodigy.net.mx Fax: +646 873 7089
E-mail: gary.jones@pipfruitnz.co.nz
RAMÍREZ Meraz Moisés
Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales Agrícolas y FAWCET Phillip
Pecuarias INIFAP Senior Programme Manager (International Standards)
Carretera Tampico Mante Km. 55, Villa Cuauhtémoc, New Zealand Food Safety Authority
Tamaulipas, México P.O. Box 2835, Wellington
CP. 89610 Tel: +64 4 894 2656
Tel: 836 2760168 Fax:+64 4 894 2675
E-mail: mramirezmz@yahoo.com.mx E-mail: phil.fawcet@nzfsa.govt.nz
CANCHE Canche Eduardo NIGERIA
Gerente de Promotora Agroindustrial de Yucatán, S.A. de NIGÉRIA
C.V
Tel: (999) 912 4222 ADEGBOYE, Abimbola Opeyemi
E-mail: ecanche@habanero-yucatan.com Chief Regulatory Officer
National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and
CANALES Alberto Fábian Control NAFDAC
Instituto Mexicano de Normalización y Certificación Plot. 2032 Olusegum Obasanjo, Way
Tel: 55464546 Wuse, Zone 7, Abuja, Nigeria
E-mail: afabian@imnc.org.mx Tel: + 234 805 317 0810
E-mail: adegboye.a@nafdac.gov.ng
GONZÁLEZ Ferrusca Monica Gabriela bimbostica@yahoo.com
Instituto Mexicano de Normalización y Certificación
Tel: 55464546 ATUNBI Victoria Oladunni
E-mail: mggonzales@imnc.org.mx Chief Agric Officer
Nigeria Agric Quarantine Service (NAQS)
GALLARDO Barrón Lizbeth Mayra South West Zonal HQ, Opposite MM2
Instituto Mexicano de Normalización y Certificación PMB 12026, Ikeja, Lagos, Nigeria
Tel: 55464546 Tel: +234 802 334 4616
E-mail: lmgallardo@imnc.org.mx E-mail: voatunbi@yahoo.com
ALINORM 10/33/35 23
List of Participants Appendix I
EGWUONWU Chinyere Virginia PARAGUAY
Chief Standards Officer
Standards Organisation of Nigeria AYALA Franco Pablo
52 Lome Street, Wuse Zone7, Abuja Nigeria Director de Calidad e Inocuidad de Productos Vegetales
Tel: +234 80330084570 Servicio Nacional de Calidad y Sanidad Vegetal y de
E-mail: chiokeyegwu@yahoo.com Semillas (SENAVE) Paraguay
Tel: 595 21 44 15 49
BELLO, Salihu Fax: 595 21 44 14 91
Asst. Chief Regulatory Officer E-mail: direccioncalidad_inoc@senave.gov.py
National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and payalafranco@yahoo.com
Control
Plot. 2032 Olusegum Obasanjo, Way PHILIPPINES
Wuse, Zone 7, Abuja, Nigeria FILIPINAS
Tel: + 234 803 632 1076 GUIANG Edna M
E-mail: bello.s@nafdac.gov.ng Chairperson, Sub. Committe on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables
NWAGBARA, Charles Emeka Bureau of Plant Industry
Assistant Chief Standards Officer Department of Agriculture 692 San Andres Street Malate
Standards Organisation of Nigeria Manila PHILIPPINES
52 Lome st Wuse Zone 7, Abuja Nigeria Tel: 632 5240779
Tel: + 234 8072 801 989 E-mail: emguiang@yahoo.com
E-mail: nwagbara.charles@yahoo.com LAYESE Gilberto F.
National Codex Contact Point
PAKISTAN
Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards
PAKISTÁN
Department of Agriculture
ZAHOOR Ahmad Malik Diliman, Q.C, Philippines
Director General/P.D. Tel. (02) 455 2856
National Animal & Plant Health Inspection Services E-mail: bafpsda@yahoo.com.gov.ph
Ministry of Food, Agriculture & Livestock
B-Block Pak Secretariat Room No. 316 SAMOA
Government of Pakista FONG Frank
Islamabad Assistant Chief Executive Officer Policy, Planning
Tel: 92 (0) 51 9211298 Communication
92(0) 51 9207376 Ministry of Agriculture and Fisherries P.O.Box.1874, Apia,
Fax: 92 (0) 51 9220988 Samoa
E-mail: naphis.pk@hotmail.com Tel: (685) 28097
E-mail: frank.fong@maf.gov.ws
YOUSFANI Abdul Majid
Commercial Counselor SAUDI ARABIA
Comercial Section, Embassy of Pakistan, ARABIE SAOUDITE
Hegel No. 512, Colonia Polanco, ARABIA SAUDITA
Delegación Miguel Hidalgo,
México Distrito Federal, AL TUWARIQI Hani
C.P. 11570, México Assistant to the Director General of the plant Protection
Tel: +52 55 5003 4280 Department. Ministry of Agriculture
E-mail: yuosfani64@gmail.com Ministry of Agriculture, King Abdulaziz Road, Riyadh,
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
PANAMA Tel: +9665 55 49 28 66
PANAMÁ Fax: + 9661 40 35 899
ABREGO Ruiz Federico E-mail:hzafrin@yahoo.com
Jefe del Departamento de Agroquímicos AL-HARBI Abdulaziz R.
Ministerio de Desarrollo Agropecuario Saudi Food & Drug Authority
República de Panamá 3292 North Hi-Way Almafel Unit 1 Riyadh 13312-6288
Río Tapia, Tocumen Tel: 966 505 400 870
Tel: (507) 220 0733 / 6780 4236 E-mail: arharbi.@hotmail.com
Fax: (507) 220 7981
E-mail: fedabreg@mida.gob.pa SENEGAL
fedabreg@yahoo.com SÉNÉGAL

DUCREUX Bethancourt Abraham Antonio ALHOUSSEYNOU ROMTAR Hanne

Jefe del Departamento de Protección de Alimentos Chef de Bureau Quarantaine des Plantes Gestionnaire du
Ministerio de Salud Panamá PNI/SPS
Ancón Vía Principal Ministère de L´Agriculture et de la Sécurité Alimentaire
Edificio 253 Direction de la Protection des Végétaux BP:20054 Thiaroye
Tel: 512 9182/67858828 Dakar, Senegal
E-mail: bioducreux17@hotmail.com Km 15 Rte de Rufisque
www.minsa.gov.pa Tel: 00 221 77 640 75 17
E-mail:almhanne@yahoo.fr
ALINORM 10/33/35 24
List of Participants Appendix I
SIERRA LEONE SWEDEN
SIERRA LEONA SUÈDE
SUECIA
SCOTT Sylvetta
Ministry of Health and Sanitation JANSSON Kerstin
127 Circular Road, Freetown, Sierra Leone Deputy Director
Tel: 076 622 705 Ministry of Agriculture
E-mail: omoscott@hotmail.com Animal and Food Division
SE-103 33 Stockholm
SPAIN Tel: (+46) 8 4051168
ESPAGNE Email: kerstin.jansson@agriculture.ministry.se
ESPAÑA
ROSQVIST Catharina
CABALLERO Hierro Francisco Javier Senior Administrative Officer
Consejero Técnico Ministry of Agriculture
Subdirección General de Frutas y Hortalizas, Aceites de Animal and Food Division
Oliva y Vitivinicultura; Ministerio de SE-103 33 Stockholm
Medio Ambiente y Medio Rural y Marino; C/Alfonso XII, Tel: +46 8 405 37 82
62; 28071 Madrid; España E-mail: catharina.rosqvist@agriculture.ministry.se
Tel: +34 91 347 66 60
Fax: +34 91 347 67 20 CORTES Cesar
E-mail: jcaballe@mapa.es Head of Unit
Council of the European Union,
CLIMENT Guimerá Matilde Rue de la Loi 175, 1000 Brussels,
Consejera Comercial Belgium.
Embajada de España Oficina Económica y Comercial Tel:+32 2 281 6114
Presidente Masaryk 473, Col. Polanco; 11530 E-mail: Cesar.Cortes@consilium.europa.eu
Tel: (55) 91 38 60 40
Fax: (55) 91 38 60 50 SWITZERLAND
E-mail: mcliment@comercio.mityc.es SUISSE
SUIZA
COBOS Puyol Eva
Analista de Mercado WUERZNER Michael
Embajada de España Oficina Económica y Comercial Scientific Officer
Presidente Masaryk 473, Col. Polanco; 11530 Federal Office for Agriculture FOAG
Tel: (55) 91 38 60 40 Plants Products Unit Mattenhofstrasse 5, 3003 Berne
Fax: (55) 91 38 60 50 Switzerland
E-mail: ecobos@comercio.mityc.es Tel: +41 31 322 25 26
E-mail: michael.wuerzner@blw.admin.ch
ESPIÑA Troitiño Estrella Carmen
Analista de Mercado THAILAND
Embajada de España Oficina Económica y Comercial THAÏLANDE
Presidente Masaryk 473, Col. Polanco; 11530 TAILANDIA
Tel: (55) 91 38 60 40
Fax: (55) 91 38 60 50 KOSIYACHINDA Suraphong
E-mail: eespina@comercio.mityc.es Chairman of Sub Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables
National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food
SURINAME Standards,
50 Phaholyothin Road, Ladyao, Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900
LIEVELD Peñalver Gladys Thailand
Food Tecnologist Tel: 662 561 2277
Ministery of Health (Bureau of Public Health) Fax: 662 561 3357
Tel: 597 8672 969 E-mail: numfon1986@yahoo.com
Fax: 597 491452
E-mail: gladyslieveld@yahoo.com PHONKLIANG Korwadee
Standard Officier
SWAZILAND National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food
SWAZILANDIA Standards,
MASUKU Lungile 50 Phaholyothin Road, Lad yao, Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900
MS Thailand
Namboard (National Agricultural Marketing Board) Tel: 662 561 2277
Tel:518 604 012 Fax: 662 561 3357
E-mail: lungile@Namboard.co.sz E-mail: korwadeep@hotmail.com
ALINORM 10/33/35 25
List of Participants Appendix I
TONGA CHILTON Robin
Assistant Head, Standardization y Training
MANU Viliami Toalei United States Department of Agriculture, AMS Fruit and
Deputy Director Vegetables Programs, Fresh Products Branch, Training and
Ministry of Agriculture Food Forestry & Fisheries, P.O. Box Development Center, 100 Riverside Parkway,Suite 101,
14, Fredericksburg, Virginia 22406
NUKUALOFA, Kingdom of Tonga. Tel: 540-361-1130
Tel: (676) 37474 E-mail: robin.chilton@ams.usda.gov
Fax: (676) 23093
E-mail: mafsoils@kalianet.to LOWERY Kenneth
International Trade Specialist
UGANDA United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign
OUGANDA Agricultural Service, 1400 Independence Avenue, Room
APOLOT Stella 5934, Washington DC 20250/1014
Senior Standards Officer Tel: 202 720 5461
Uganda National Bureau of Standards E-mail: Kenneth.Lowery@fas.usda.gov
Tel: 256 4142 86 123
ARCHER Jim
Fax:256 6414 86 123 Manager
E-mail: stella.apolot@unbs.go.ug North West Fruit Exporters
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA 105 South 18th St Yakima, WA 98901
RÉPUBLIQUE-UNIE DE TANZANIE Tel: 509-576-8004
REPÚBLICA UNIDA DE TANZANIA Fax: 509-576-3646
E-mail: jarcher @goodfruit.com
NDOSSI Godwin D.
Tanzania Food and Nutrition Center GUERRERO Raúl
22 Ocean Road, P.O.Box 977 Consultor
Dares Salaam Tel: 805 898 1830
United Republic of Tanzania E-mail: guerrero_raul_j@yahoo.com
Tel: +255 22 211 8138
URUGUAY
Fax: +255 22 213 8060
SCALONE ECHAVE, Miguel Angel
CHINAMO Elias Ingeniero Agrónomo
Assistant Director Environmental Health, Hygiene and Técnico de la DIGEGRA- MGAP en calidad y poscosecha de
Sanitation hortalizas y frutas.
Ministry of Health and Social Welfare Dirección Gral.de la Granja
P.O Box 9083, DAR-ES-Salaam, Tanzania Ministerio de Ganaderia, Agricultura y Pesca.
Tel: +255 784 831623 Dr. Carlos M de Pena 4894 esq.Garzón.
Fax: +255 22 2138060 CP. 12.900 Montevideo
E-mail: chinamoebm@yahoo.co.uk Tel: (598-2)304 7379
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Fax: (598-2)304 74 22
ÉTATS-UNIS D´ AMÉRIQUE E-mail: piraraja@adinet.com.uy
ESTADOS UNIDOS DE AMERICA mscalone@mgap.gub.uy

LAFOND Dorian A. VANUATU

International Standards Coordinator
THOMPSON Alick Berry
Office of the Deputy Administrator Project Manager
AMS fruit and Vegetable Programs Vanuatu Chamber of Commerce Industry,
1400 Independence Ave. SW P.O. Box 189, Port Vila, Vanuatu, South West Pacific.
Tel: 202-690-4944 Tel: (678) 27543
Cell: 202-577-5583 Fax: (678) 27542
Fax: 202-720-0016 E-mail: alick.thompson@live.com
E-mail:dorian.lafond@fas.usda.gov
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
MU Donald Dongmin ORGANISATIONS INTERNATIONALES
Alternate Delegate
ORGANIZACIONES INTERNACIONALES
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and
Drug Administration, HFS 820, College Park, MD 20780, IICA
USA
Tel: 973 960 4556 FLORES Ponce Jaime
E-mail: dongmin.mu@fda.hhs.gov Regional Specialist in Agricultural Health and Food Safety
Interamerican Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture
STUCK Karen Esquina de Puente Victoria, Edificio Centro Villasmil, Piso
U.S. Codex Manager 11 Oficina 1102, Apartado postal 5345, Caracas 1010,
U.S. Codex Office Venezuela.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Tel: (58 212) 571 8055
1400 Independece Ave.,SW Room 1661-S, Stop 0240 Fax: (58 212) 576 3150
Washington DC,20250-0240 E-mail: jflores@iica.int.ve
Tel: 202 690-2057
Fax: 202 690-0820
E-mail: Karen.Stuck@osec.usda.gov
ALINORM 10/33/35 26
List of Participants Appendix I
UNECE MELGAR Rivera Yessika Nayelli
Asistente para la Atención del Codex Alimentarius
CRAM Martos Virginia Dirección General de Normas
Director Trade and Timber Division Secretaría de Economía
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No. 6
Palais des Nations, Office 452 Sección Fuentes
CH-1211 Geneva 10 Naucalpan de Juárez
Tel: +41(0) 22 917 27 45 CP. 53950
Fax: +41(0) 22 917 00 37 Estado de México
E-mail: virginia.cram-martos@unece.org Tel: (5255) 5729 9100 Ext. 43220
FAO/WHO SECRETARIAT Fax: 5520 9715
SECRETARIAT FAO/OMS E-mail: codexmex2@economia.gob.mx
SECRETARÍA FAO/OMS TECHNICAL SUPPORT
KUSUKAWA Masashi SUPPORT TECHNIQUE
Food Standards Officer SOPORTE TÉCNICO
Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme
FIQUEROA Gamboa Jesús
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
Subdirector para la Atención de la ISO e IEC
00153 Rome, Italy Dirección General de Normas
Tel: +39 06 570 54796 Secretaría de Economía
Fax: +39 06 570 54593 Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No.6
E-mail: masashi.kusukawa@fao.org Sección Fuentes, Naucalpan de Juárez
BRISCO López Gracia Teresa C.P. 53950, Estado de México
Food Standards Officer Tel: (5255) 5729 9300, Ext. 43217
Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme Fax: 5520 9715
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla E-mail: jfigueroa@economia.gob.mx
00153 Rome, Italy
SUÁREZ Ochoa Isabel
Tel: +39 06 570 52700 Becario
Fax: +39 06 570 54593 Dirección General de Normas
E-mail: gracia.brisco@fao.org Secretaría de Economía
SECRETARÍA TÉCNICA Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No.6
TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT Sección Fuentes, Naucalpan de Juárez
SECRETARIAT TECHNIQUE C.P. 53950, Estado de México
Tel: (5255) 5729 9100, Ext. 43220
LÓPEZ ZÁRATE Jorge Antonio Fax: 5520 9715
Subdirector para la Atención del Codex Alimentarius y E-mail: codexmex1@economia.gob.mx
otros Organismos
Dirección General de Normas MARTINEZ Calvario Nadia Danusia
Secretaría de Economía Becario
Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No. 6 Dirección General de Normas
Sección Fuentes, Naucalpan de Juárez Secretaría de Economía
CP. 53950 Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No.6
Estado de México Sección Fuentes, Naucalpan de Juárez
Tel: (5255) 5729 9100 Ext. 43218 C.P. 53950, Estado de México
Fax: 5520 9715 Tel: (5255) 5729 9300, Ext. 43220
E-mail: jalopezz@economia.gob.mx Fax: 5520 9715
E-mail: codexmex@economia.gob.mx
VIZUETH Chávez Michelle
Jefe de Oficina para la Atención del Codex Alimentarius COLÍN Méndez Juana
Dirección General de Normas Becario
Secretaría de Economía Dirección General de Normas
Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No. 6 Secretaría de Economía
Sección Fuentes Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No.6
Naucalpan de Juárez Sección Fuentes, Naucalpan de Juárez
CP. 53950 C.P. 53950, Estado de México
Estado de México Tel: (5255) 5729 9300, Ext. 43220
Tel: (5255) 5729 9100 Ext. 43220 Fax: 5520 9715
Fax: 5520 9715 E-mail: codexmex1@economia.gob.mx
E-mail: codexmex@economia.gob.mx
ALINORM 10/33/35 27
List of Participants Appendix I
HERNÁNDEZ Morales Jade Hauyma
Asistente Técnico
Normas Técnicas PROTLCUEM
Dirección General de Normas
Secretaría de Economía
Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No.6
Sección Fuentes, Naucalpan de Juárez
C.P. 53950, Estado de México
Tel: (5255) 5729 9300, Ext.43219
Fax: 5520 9715
E-mail: jhernadezm@economia.gob.mx
REYES Pérez Mario Alberto
Jefe de Oficina para la Atención de la ISO
Dirección General de Normas
Secretaría de Economía
Av. Puente de Tecamachalco No.6
Sección Fuentes, Naucalpan de Juárez
C.P. 53950, Estado de México
Tel: (5255) 5729 9300, Ext. 43220
Fax: 5520 9715
E-mail: mreyes@economia.gob.mx
ALINORM 10/33/35 28
Bitter Cassava Appendix II

DRAFT STANDARD FOR BITTER CASSAVA

(Section 6 “Marking or Labelling”)
(at Step 8)

6. MARKING OR LABELLING
6.1 CONSUMER PACKAGES
In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods
(CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:
6.1.1 Nature of Produce
Each package shall be labelled as to the name of the produce and type (bitter) and may be labelled as
to the name of the variety.
6.1.2 Preparation Instructions6
A statement indicating the following is required:
- cassava must not be eaten raw;
- cassava shall be peeled, de-pithed, cut into pieces, rinsed and fully cooked before consumption; and
- cooking or rinsing water must not be consumed or used for other food preparation purposes.
6.2 NON-RETAIL CONTAINERS
Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and
indelibly marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment.
6.2.1 Identification
Name and address of exporter, packer and/or dispatcher. Identification code (optional)7.
6.2.2 Nature of Produce
Name of the produce and type (bitter) if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the
variety (optional).
6.2.3 Origin of Produce
Country of origin and, optionally, district where grown or national, regional or local place name.
6.2.4 Commercial Identification
- Class;
- Size (size code or minimum and maximum diameter in centimetres);
- Net weight;
- Preparation instructions (see Section 6.1.2).
6.2.5 Official Inspection Mark (optional)

6
In the case of unpackaged bitter cassava, information on safe handling and preparation shall be made available to
the consumer at the point of sale.
7
The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.
However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or equivalent
abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.
ALINORM 10/33/35 29
Apples Appendix III
DRAFT STANDARD FOR APPLES
(at Step 8)

1. DEFINITION OF PRODUCE
This Standard applies to fruits of commercial varieties (cultivars) of apples grown from Malus
domestica Borkh, of the Rosaceae family, to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after preparation and
packaging. Apples for industrial processing are excluded.

2. PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY

2.1 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the apples
must be:
- whole, the stalk (stem) may be missing, provided the break is clean and the adjacent skin is not
damaged;
- sound, produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for consumption is
excluded;
- firm1;
- clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter;
- practically free of pests and damage caused by them affecting the general appearance of the produce;
- free of abnormal external moisture, excluding condensation following removal from cold storage;
- free of any foreign smell and/or taste;
- free of damage caused by low and/or high temperatures;
- practically free of signs of dehydration.
2.1.1 The apples must have colour that is characteristic of the variety and the area in which they are grown.
The development and condition of the apples must be such as to enable them:
- to withstand transport and handling; and
- to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination.
2.2 MATURITY REQUIREMENTS
Apples must be at a stage of development that enables them to continue the ripening process and to
reach a stage of ripeness required in relation to the varietal characteristics.
In order to verify the minimum maturity requirements some parameters such as: morphological
aspects, firmness and refractometric index can be considered.
2.3 CLASSIFICATION
In accordance with the defects allowed in the Annex - Maximum Allowance for Defects, apples are
classified in three classes defined below:

1
Firmness in this context is used to indicate an appropriate level of maturity of the fruit rather than a stage of
ripening and it is acknowledged to vary according to apple varieties.
ALINORM 10/33/35 30
Apples Appendix III
2.3.1 “Extra” Class
Apples in this class must be of superior quality. The flesh must be sound. They must be characteristic
of the variety. They must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects, provided
these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in
the package2.
2.3.2 Class I
Apples in this class must be of good quality. The flesh must be sound. They must be characteristic of
the variety. The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the general
appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package2:
- a slight defect in shape and development;
- a slight defect in colouring;
- slight skin or other defects (see the Annex).
2.3.3 Class II
This class includes apples which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy the
minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. The following defects, however, may be allowed,
provided the apples retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping quality and
presentation2:
- defects in shape and development;
- defects in colouring;
- skin or other defects (see the Annex).
2.4 COLOURING
In all classes, in the absence of national legislation, the following colour codes may be applied except
for green and yellow apple varieties:
Code Percentage of colour
A 75% or more
B 50 % or more
C 25% or more
D Less than 25%

3. PROVISIONS CONCERNING SIZING

Size is determined by maximum diameter of the equatorial section or by weight of each apple.
For all varieties and all classes the minimum size is 60 mm if measured by diameter or 90 g if
measured by weight. Fruit of smaller sizes may be accepted provided the Brix level of the produce meets or
exceeds 10.5° Brix and the size is not smaller than 50 mm or 70 g.

4. PROVISIONS CONCERNING TOLERANCES

Tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in each lot for produce not satisfying the
requirements of the class indicated.
4.1 QUALITY TOLERANCES
The application of the following tolerances should take into accounts that at stages following export;
products may show in relation to the requirements of the standard:
- a slight lack of freshness and turgidity;

2
Skin and other defects must not exceed the limits as defined in the Annex.
ALINORM 10/33/35 31
Apples Appendix III
- for products graded in classes other than the “Extra” Class, a slight deterioration due to their
development and their tendency to perish.
4.1.1 “Extra” Class
Five percent by number or weight of apples not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting
those of Class I or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.
Included therein shall be allowed not more than 1.0 % for apples affected by decay or internal
breakdown
4.1.2 Class I
Ten percent by number or weight of apples not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting
those of Class II or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.
Included therein shall be allowed not more than 1% for apples affected by decay or internal
breakdown
4.1.3 Class II
Ten percent by number or weight of apples satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the
minimum requirements, with the exception of apples affected by decay or internal breakdown that should not
be more than 2%.
Included therein shall be allowed, a maximum of 2% by number or weight of fruit which may show
the following defects:
- cork like blemishing (bitter pit);
- slight damage or unhealed broken skin /cracks;
- presence of internal feeding insects/pests or damage to the flesh caused by pests.
4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES
For all classes of fruit subjected to rules of uniformity, 10% by number or weight of apples not
meeting the size indicated on the package.
This tolerance may not be extended to include produce with a size below 50 mm or 70 g if the
refractometric index is below 10.5 °Brix

5. PROVISIONS CONCERNING PRESENTATION

5.1 UNIFORMITY
The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only apples of the same origin, quality,
size (if sized) and variety. For “Extra” Class, colour should be uniform. Sales packages (of a net weight not
exceeding 5 kg) may contain mixtures of varieties and sizes provided they are uniform in quality, and for
each variety concerned, its origin. The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of
the entire contents except for mixed sizes and varieties.
The uniformity of apples may be measured in accordance with one of the following options:
A. By diameter:
The maximum diameter difference of apples in the same package shall be limited to
- 5 mm if the diameter of the smallest apples is less than 80 mm.
- 12 mm if the diameter of the smallest apple is equal to or over 80 mm.
Or
B. By weight:
The maximum difference by weight between apples in the same package shall be limited to:
- 15 g if the weight of the smallest apple is 90 g.
- 20 g if the weight of the smallest apple 90 g and over but under 135 g.
ALINORM 10/33/35 32
Apples Appendix III
- 30 g if the weight of the smallest apple is 135 g and over but under 200 g.
- 40 g if the weight of the smallest apple is 200 g and over but under 300 g.
- 50 g if the weight of the smallest apple is over 300 g.
There is no size uniformity for apples packed loose in the package or sales package.
5.2 PACKAGING
Apples must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used inside the
package must be new3, clean, and of a quality such as to avoid causing any external or internal damage to the
produce. The use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade specifications is allowed,
provided the printing or labeling has been done with non-toxic ink or glue.
Apples shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International Code of
Practice for Packaging and Transport of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).
5.2.1 Description of Containers
The containers shall meet the quality, hygiene, ventilation and resistance characteristics to ensure
suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the apples. Packages must be free of all foreign matter and
smell.
6. MARKING OR LABELLING
6.1 CONSUMER PACKAGES
In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods
(CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:
6.1.1 Nature of Produce
If the produce is not visible from the outside, each package shall be labelled as to the name of the
produce and may be labelled as to name of the variety, class, colour code (if used) and size/weight or the
number of pieces presented in rows and layers.
6.2 NON-RETAIL CONTAINERS
Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and
indelibly marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment. For produce
transported in bulk, these particulars must appear on a document accompanying the goods.
6.2.1 Identification
Name and address of exporter, packer and/or dispatcher. Identification code (optional)4.
6.2.2 Nature of Produce
Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the variety or varieties
(where appropriate).
6.2.3 Origin of Produce
Country of origin and, optionally, district where grown or national, regional or local place name.
6.2.4 Commercial Identification
- Class;
- Size (if sized);
- Colour code (if used).

3
For the purposes of this Standard, this includes recycled material of food-grade quality.
4
The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.
However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or equivalent
abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.
ALINORM 10/33/35 33
Apples Appendix III
6.2.5 Official Inspection Mark (optional)4
7. CONTAMINANTS
7.1 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum levels of the Codex General
Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995).
7.2 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum residue limits for pesticides
established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
8. HYGIENE
8.1 It is recommended that the produce covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and
handled in accordance with the appropriate sections of the Recommended International Code of Practice –
General Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and
Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003), and other relevant Codex texts such as Codes of Hygienic Practice and
Codes of Practice.
8.2 The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the
Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods (CAC/GL 21-1997).
ALINORM 10/33/35 34
Apples Appendix III
ANNEX
MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE FOR DEFECTS

Defects Allowed “Extra” Class Class I Class II

• smooth net-like 3% 20% 50%

of surface area of surface area of surface area
Russetting outside
Calyx/stem cavity
• smooth solid 1% 5% 33%
of surface area of surface area of surface area

accumulation for both types of russetting 3% 20 % 50%

should not exceed the following of surface area of surface area of surface area

Accumulated Blemishes & Bruising:

- Bruises with slight discoloration; 0.50 cm2 1.0 cm2 1.5 cm2 6
- Scars caused by Scabs5 (Venturia 0.25 cm2 1.0 cm2
inaequalis);
1.0 cm2 2.5 cm2
- other defects/blemish including healed
hail marks
----
Stem or Calyx cracks (healed or well cured) 0.5 cm 1 cm
----
Maximum length of elongated shaped 2 cm 4 cm
defects

Russetting can be simply described as a “brownish roughened area or streaks on the skin of the apple”. In
some apple varieties rusetting is a characteristic of the variety and for others a quality defect. Allowances for
russetting will be applied to apple varieties that russetting is not a characteristic of.

5
This provision applies without prejudice to the applicable plant protection rules.
6
Bruising with discoloration and dark blemishes not blending with skin color are accepted in this Class.
ALINORM 10/33/35 35
Avocado Appendix IV
PROPOSED DRAFT REVISION OF
THE STANDARD FOR AVOCADO (CODEX STAN 197-1995) (N19-2008)
(at Step 5)

1. DEFINITION OF PRODUCE
This Standard applies to commercial varieties (cultivars) of avocados grown from Persea americana
Mill. (Syn. Persea gratissima Gaertn), of the Lauraceae family, to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after
preparation and packaging. Parthenocarpic fruit and avocados for industrial processing are excluded.

2. PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY

2.1 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the avocados
must be:
- whole;
- sound, produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for consumption is
excluded;
- clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter;
- practically free of pests and damage caused by them affecting the general appearance of the produce;
- free of abnormal external moisture, excluding condensation following removal from cold storage;
- free of any foreign smell and/or taste1;
- practically free of damage caused by low and/or high temperatures;
- having a stalk not more than 10 mm in length which must be cut off cleanly. However, its absence is
not considered a defect provided the place of the stalk attachment is dry and whole.
2.1.1 The avocados must [ have been carefully picked. Their development should ] have reached a stage of
physiological development which will ensure proper completion of the ripening process, in accordance with
criteria proper to the variety [ and/or commercial type, ] and to the area in which they are grown. The mature
fruit should be free of bitterness.
The development and condition of the avocados must be such as to enable them:
- to withstand transport and handling; and
- to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination.
2.1.2 Maturity requirements
The fruit should have an average minimum dry matter content2 at the harvest, according to the variety,
to be measured by drying to constant weight:
- 21 % for the variety Hass;
- 20 % for the varieties Torres, Fuerte, Pinkerton, Ettinger, Edranol, Reed , Zutano;
- [ 18 % ] for the other varieties Suardía, Lula, Choquette, Collinson, Booth, and other not defined
(including Guatemalan West x Indian hybrids);
- [ 16% ] for West Indian varieties Catalina, Sicilia, Wilson popenoe, Pollock, Simmonds and other no
defined.
2.2 CLASSIFICATION
Avocados are classified in three classes defined below:

1
This provision allows for smell caused by preservatives, or any other chemical substances, used in conformity
with the corresponding regulations.
2
This requirement applies to a fruit lot and not to individual fruits.
ALINORM 10/33/35 36
Avocado Appendix IV
2.2.1 “Extra” Class
Avocados in this class must be of superior quality. In shape and colouring they must be characteristic
of the variety. They must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects, provided
these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in
the package. If present, the stalk must be intact.
2.2.2 Class I
Avocados in this class must be of good quality and show the typical colour and shape of the variety.
The following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the general appearance
of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package:
- slight defects in shape and colouring;
- slight skin defects (corkiness, healed lenticels) and sunburn; the maximum total area should not exceed
4 cm2.
The defects must not, in any case, affect the flesh of the fruit.
The stalk, if present, may be slightly damaged.
2.2.3 Class II
This class includes avocados which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy the
minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. The following defects, however, may be allowed,
provided the avocados retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping quality and
presentation:
- defects in shape and colouring;
- skin defects (corkiness, healed lenticels) and sunburn; the maximum total area should not exceed 6 cm2.
The defects must not, in any case, affect the flesh of the fruit.
The stalk, if present, may be damaged.

3. PROVISIONS CONCERNING SIZING

Avocados can be sized through one of the following options:
a) by the weight of the fruit, in accordance with the following table3:
Size Code Weight
(in grams)
2 > 1220
4 781 to 1 220
6 576 to 780
8 461 to 575
10 366 to 460
12 306 to 365
14 266 to 305
16 236 to 265
18 211 to 235
20 191 to 210
22 171 to 190
24 156 to 170
26 146 to 155

3
Nevertheless, no account should be taken for a given fruit of a deviation of more or less than 2% with regard to the
size code indicated on the package.
ALINORM 10/33/35 37
Avocado Appendix IV
28 136 to 145
30 125 to 135
[ 32 (S) ] [ 124 to 80 ]
The minimum weight of avocados must not be less than 125 g [ , except for the Hass that is 80 g ].
b) by count of fruits. These size codes and weight bands are based on 4 kg net weight tray. Where
different net weight tray is used, different size codes and weight bands may apply.

4. PROVISIONS CONCERNING TOLERANCES

Tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in each package for produce not satisfying
the requirements of the class indicated.
4.1 QUALITY TOLERANCES
4.1.1 “Extra” Class
Five percent by number or weight of avocados not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting
those of Class I or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.
4.1.2 Class I
Ten percent by number or weight of avocados not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting
those of Class II or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.
4.1.3 Class II
Ten percent by number or weight of avocados satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the
minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting, marked bruising or any other
deterioration rendering it unfit for consumption.
4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES
For all classes, 10% by number or weight of avocados corresponding to the size immediately above or
below that indicated on the package.

5. PROVISIONS CONCERNING PRESENTATION

5.1 UNIFORMITY
The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only avocados of the same origin, variety [
and/or commercial type ], quality and size [ except for mixed sizes and varieties ]. The visible part of the
contents of the package must be representative of the entire contents.
5.2 PACKAGING
Avocados must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used inside
the package must be new4, clean, and of a quality such as to avoid causing any external or internal damage to
the produce. The use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade specifications is allowed,
provided the printing or labelling has been done with non-toxic ink or glue.
Avocados shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International Code
of Practice for Packaging and Transport of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).
5.2.1 Description of Containers
The containers shall meet the quality, hygiene, ventilation and resistance characteristics to ensure
suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the avocados. Packages must be free of all foreign matter and
smell.

4
For the purposes of this Standard, this includes recycled material of food-grade quality.
ALINORM 10/33/35 38
Avocado Appendix IV
6. MARKING OR LABELLING
6.1 CONSUMER PACKAGES
In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods
(CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:
6.1.1 Nature of Produce
If the produce is not visible from the outside, each package shall be labelled as to the name of the
produce and may be labelled as to name of the variety [ and/or commercial type ].
6.2 NON-RETAIL CONTAINERS
Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and
indelibly marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment. For
produce transported in bulk, these particulars must appear on a document accompanying the goods.
6.2.1 Identification
Name and address of exporter, packer and/or dispatcher. Identification code (optional)5.
6.2.2 Nature of Produce
Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the variety [ or
commercial type ] (optional).
6.2.3 Origin of Produce
Country of origin and, optionally, district where grown or national, regional or local place name.
6.2.4 Commercial Identification
- Class;
- Size expressed in minimum and maximum weight in grams;
- Code number of the size scale and count of fruits when it is different from reference number;
- Net weight (optional).
6.2.5 Official Inspection Mark (optional)

7. CONTAMINANTS
7.1 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum levels of the Codex General
Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995)
7.2 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum residue limits for pesticides
established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

8. HYGIENE
8.1 It is recommended that the produce covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and
handled in accordance with the appropriate sections of the Recommended International Code of Practice –
General Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and
Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003), and other relevant Codex texts such as Codes of Hygienic Practice and
Codes of Practice.
8.2 The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the
Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods (CAC/GL 21-1997).

5
The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.
However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or equivalent
abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.
ALINORM 10/33/35 39
Chilli Peppers Appendix V
PROPOSED DRAFT CODEX STANDARD FOR CHILLI PEPPERS (N17-2008)
(at Step 3)
1. DEFINITION OF PRODUCE
This Standard applies to commercial varieties of chilli peppers1 (hot ajies) grown from Capsicum spp.,
of the Solanaceae family, , to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after preparation and packaging. Chilli
peppers for industrial processing are excluded.
2. PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY
2.1 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the chilli
peppers must be:
- whole, the stalk (stem) may be missing, provided that the break is clean and the adjacent skin is not
damaged;
- sound, produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for consumption is
excluded;
- firm;
- clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter;
- practically free of pests and damage caused by them affecting the general appearance of the produce;
- free of abnormal external moisture excluding condensation following removal from cold storage;
- free of any foreign smell and/or taste;
- free of damage caused by low and/or high temperatures;
- practically free of signs of dehydration.
2.1.1 The development and condition of the chilli peppers must be such as to enable them:
- to withstand transport and handling; and
- to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination.
2.2 CLASSIFICATION
Chilli peppers are classified in three classes defined below:
2.2.1 “Extra” Class
Chilli peppers in this class must be of superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety. They
must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects as set out in Table 1, provided
these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in
the package.
2.2.2 Class I
Chilli peppers in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety. Slight
defects, as set out in Table 1, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the general appearance
of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package.
2.2.3 Class II
This class includes chilli peppers which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy
the minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. Defects, as set out in Table 1, however, may be
allowed, provided the chilli peppers retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping
quality and presentation.

1
Chilli peppers presenting a minimum pungency of 1000 Scoville Index.
ALINORM 10/33/35 40
Chilli Peppers Appendix V
[ Table 1: Classification of chili peppers according to quality

Classes
Defects group
Extra I II

Biological,
When defects affect an When defects affect an
metereological,
Free of damage area not higher than 1.0% area between 1.0 – 3.0%
climate and
of the total surface area of the total surface area
entomological

Mechanical, When defects affect an When defects affect an When defects affect an
physical, and area up to 0.5% of the area between 1.0 – 2.0% area between 1.0 – 3.0%
physiological total surface area of the total surface area of the total surface area

Note: The table shows the percentages of defects by unit of chilli pepper which do not mean the sum of total
defects. ]
3. PROVISIONS CONCERNING SIZING
[ Size is determined by the length and/or weight of the chilli peppers, in accordance with Table 2.
Table 2: Classification of chilli peppers by size and commercial type

ANCHO (Capsicum annuum L. var annuum Grupo ancho)

SMALL MEDIUM LARGE EXTRA LARGE

Length (cm.) < 10.0 10.0 – 11.9 12.0 -14.0 >14

Weight (g) 80.0 – 110.0 110.0 -129.9 130.0 – 150.0 >150

DE ARBOL (Capsicum annuum L. var annuum Grupo cajense)

SMALL MEDIUM LARGE EXTRA LARGE

Length (cm.) <6 6.0 – 7.9 8.0 – 10.0 >10

Weight (g) 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0

HABANERO (Capsicum chínense Jacq. Grupo habanero)

SMALL MEDIUM LARGE EXTRA LARGE

Length (cm.) <2 2.0 – 3.9 ≥4

Not applicable
Weight (g) --- --- ---

JALAPEÑO (Capsicum annuum L. var annuum Grupo jalapeño)

SMALL MEDIUM LARGE EXTRA LARGE

Length (cm.) 3.0 – 4.9 5.0 – 7.5 7.6 – 9.0 > 9.0

Weight (g) < 15 15.1 – 24.9 25 – 35 > 35

ALINORM 10/33/35 41
Chilli Peppers Appendix V

MANZANO (Capsicum pubescens Ruiz & Pay)

SMALL MEDIUM LARGE EXTRA LARGE

Length (cm.) <6 6 a 8.5 >8.5

Not applicable
Weight (g) < 36 36 - 56 >56

SERRANO (Capsicum annuum L. var annuum Grupo serrano)

SMALL MEDIUM LARGE EXTRA LARGE

Length (cm.) 3.5 – 5.0 5.0 – 7.5 8.0 – 10.0

Not applicable
Weight (g) 5.0 – 7.0 6.0 – 9.0 8.0 – 14.0

]
4. PROVISIONS CONCERNING TOLERANCES
Tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in each package (or in each lot for produce
presented in bulk) for produce not satisfying the requirements of the class indicated.
4.1 QUALITY TOLERANCES
4.1.1 “Extra” Class
5 % by number or weight of chilli peppers not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting
those of Class I or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.
4.1.2 Class I
10% by number or weight of chilli peppers not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting
those of Class II or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.
4.1.3 Class II
10% by number or weight of chilli peppers satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the
minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting or any other deterioration
rendering it unfit for consumption.
4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES
For “Extra” Class, 5% by number or weight of chilli peppers corresponding to the size immediately
above and/or below that indicated on the package.
For Classes I and II, 10% by number or weight of chilli peppers corresponding to the size immediately
above and/or below that indicated on the package.
5. PROVISIONS CONCERNING PRESENTATION
5.1 UNIFORMITY
The contents of each package (or lot for produce presented in bulk) must be uniform and contain only
chilli peppers of the same origin, quality, size and variety. The visible part of the contents of the package (or
lot for produce presented in bulk) must be representative of the entire contents.
ALINORM 10/33/35 42
Chilli Peppers Appendix V
5.2 PACKAGING
Chilli peppers must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used
inside the package must be new2, clean, and of a quality such as to avoid causing any external or internal
damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade specifications is
allowed, provided the printing or labelling has been done with non-toxic ink or glue.
Chilli peppers shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International
Code of Practice for Packaging and Transport of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).
5.2.1 Description of Containers
The containers shall meet the quality, hygiene, ventilation and resistance characteristics to ensure
suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the chilli peppers. Packages (or lot for produce presented in
bulk) must be free of all foreign matter and smell.
5.3 PRESENTATION
The chilli peppers may be presented under one of the following forms:
a) In bulk (bags);
b) In consumer packages.
6. MARKING OR LABELLING
6.1 CONSUMER PACKAGES
In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods
(CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:
6.1.1 Nature of Produce
If the produce is not visible from the outside, each package (or lot for produce presented in bulk)
should be labelled as to the name of the produce and may be labelled as to name of the variety3.
6.2 NON-RETAIL CONTAINERS
Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and
indelibly marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment. For produce
transported in bulk, these particulars must appear on a document accompanying the goods.
6.2.1 Identification
Name and address of exporter, packer and/or dispatcher. Identification code (optional)4.
6.2.2 Nature of Produce
Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. Name of the variety (optional)3.
6.2.3 Origin of Produce
Country of origin and, optionally, district where grown or national, regional or local place name.
6.2.4 Commercial Identification
- Class;
- Size;
- Variety.

2
For the purposes of this Standard, this includes recycled material of food-grade quality.
3
The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the variety.
4
The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.
However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or equivalent
abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.
ALINORM 10/33/35 43
Chilli Peppers Appendix V
6.2.5 Official Inspection Mark (optional)
8. CONTAMINANTS
8.1 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum levels of the Codex General
Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995).
8.2 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum residue limits for pesticides
established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
9. HYGIENE
9.1 It is recommended that the produce covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and handled
in accordance with the appropriate sections of the Recommended International Code of Practice – General
Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables
(CAC/RCP 53-2003), and other relevant Codex texts such as Codes of Hygienic Practice and Codes of
Practice.
9.2 The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the
Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods (CAC/GL 21-1997).
ALINORM 10/33/35 44
Chilli Peppers Appendix V
ANNEX A
DEFINITIONS FOR COMMERCIAL TYPES OF FRESH CHILLI PEPPERS
Specific definitions are included herein for the different types of commercial chilies governed by this
Standard
1.1 Ancho (Capsicum annuum L. var annuum Grupo ancho)
Fruits are conic-shaped (heartlike), with cylindrical or flat body with well-defined “cajete”. They have
pointed or truncated apex (flat), with two or three cores and the wall or thick and resistant pericarp. Its color
ranges from light to dark green.
1.3 De Árbol (Capsicum annuum L. var annuum Grupo cajense)
Long and thin cylindrical and waved-body fruits, from 6 to 12 cm length and from 0.7 to 1.0 cm diameter,
with two to three cores. Its color is emerald green to bright red when totally ripe. They have pointed apex.
1.4 Habanero (Capsicum chínense Jacq. Grupo habanero)
These fruits are hollow berries formed by 2, 3 and 4 cores (cavities), being predominant the three-core fruit.
They present characteristic forms and sizes (flared or triangular core); they are green in physiological
ripeness (ripeness point) and orange when totally ripe, as well as intermediate colors characteristic in the
ripeness process (apericado and/or pinto). The fruit surface (epidermis) is smooth and slightly rough with
bright appearance. These fruits may be very hot or extremely hot and have a characteristic smell.
1.5 Jalapeño (Capsicum annuum L. var annuum Grupo jalapeño)
Conical or long fruits, with cylindrical or marked bodies according to the number of cores (3 or 4 cores).
Smooth body or with intermediate cork-like body (± 30%). They must have thick pericarp (0.4 to 0.6 cm
thick) and solid.
1.6 Manzano (Capsicum pubescens Ruiz & Pay)
Fruits of fleshy berries, from two to four cores, bright light yellow or red color; they have different sizes and
characteristic forms, flat or pointed apex, smooth and marked body, depending on the amount of cores. They
must be of thick pericarp and generally an apple-like form. The seeds are black and they are housed in
whiten placentas.
1.7 Serrano (Capsicum annuum L. var annuum Grupo serrano)
Straight and long cylindrical-form fruits, smooth and bright epidermis, emerald to dark green color that
present from two to three cores and no internal cavities.
ALINORM 10/33/35 45
Chilli Peppers Appendix V
ANNEX B
TABLE 3: DESCRIPTION OF DEFECTS ACCORDING TO ORIGIN
GROUP OF DESCRIPTION
DEFECTS
− Mechanical cracks: these are fissures on the fruit’s pericarp caused
by handling and mechanical actions.
− Scratches: lesions on the pericarp of the fruit caused by a violent
MECHANICAL
rubbing.
− Bruises: soft areas or spots in the pericarp or in the skin caused by
knocks or compressions.

− Scars: these are caused by some pests that scratch the surface of the
fruit, the trips among them.
Biological and − Fractures: these are caused by some worms that feed from the fruit’s
Entomological pericarp.
− Stings and/or punctures: these are wounds that can be more or less
deep, carried out by pests and birds, mainly.

− Spots and dots of rotting caused by fungus, bacteria or virus: one of

the most common diseases is the anthracnose, fungus disease that by
attacking the fruits causes typical brown necrotic lesions, some
times darker that can cover wide surfaces. It is caused by fungus
belonging to the genres Colletotrichum (Glomerella),
Gloeosporium, Gnomonia, Marssonina, Mycosphaerella, Neofabrae
and Pseudopeziza.
MICROBIOLOGICAL
− Rot of the peduncular extreme: this is caused by fungus or bacteria
that attack the fruit in the base of the peduncle and, in many cases,
permeates to the flesh and the seeds.
− “Fumagina”: this is caused by the fixation, in film form, of the
fungus mycelium Capnodium sp., which forms spots with the
appearance of layers of soot. It affects the surface of the fruit.

METEOROLOGICAL − Sunburns: is the change of colour of some areas in the surface of the
AND CLIMATE fruit caused by excessive exposure to the sun.
RELATED

− Deformations: alterations of the fruits form in relation to the ones

corresponding to their specie or variety.
− Physiological crack: these are fissures on the pericarp of the fruit
GENETIC-
caused by the effect of the ripeness process.
PHYSIOLOGICAL
− Softening: the softening of the fruit mainly caused by the advanced
state of the ripeness process or because the fruit is harvested before
its physiological maturity (tender).
ALINORM 10/33/35 46
Chilli Peppers Appendix V
ANNEX C
TABLE 4: SCOVILLE INDEX FOR DIFFERENT FRESH CHILLI PEPPERS

Variety Scoville Index

Ancho 1,000 – 1,500

Chilaca 1,000 – 1,500

De árbol 15,000 – 30,000

Habanero 100,000 – 350,000

Jalapeño 2,500 – 5,000

Manzano 30,000 – 60,000

Serrano 5,000 – 15,000

TABLE 5: METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR PUNGENCY

PROVISION METHOD

Chillies – Determination of Scoville Index ISO 3513:1995

Chillies and chilli oleoresins - Determination of total

ISO 7543-1:1994
capsaicinoid content: Part 1 - Spectrometric method

Chillies and chilli oleoresins - Determination of total

capsaicinoid content: Part 2 - Method using high-performance ISO 7543-2:1993
liquid chromatography
ALINORM 10/33/35 47
Tree Tomatoes Appendix VI
PROPOSED DRAFT STANDARD FOR TREE TOMATOES1 (N18-2008)
(at Step 5)
1. DEFINITION OF PRODUCE
This Standard applies to commercial varieties of tree tomatoes grown from Cyphomandra betacea
Sent, of the Solanaceae family, to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after preparation and packaging. Tree
Tomatoes for industrial processing are excluded.
2. PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY
2.1 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the tree tomatoes
must be:
− whole;
− sound, produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for consumption is
excluded;
− clean and practically free of any visible foreign matter;
− practically free of pests and damage caused by them affecting the general appearance of the produce;
− free of abnormal external moisture, excluding condensation following removal from cold storage;
− free of any foreign smell and/or taste2;
− firm;
− fresh in appearance;
− with the stalk present to to the first knot.
2.1.1 The tree tomatoes must have been carefully picked and have reached an appropriate degree of
development and ripeness3 account being taken of the characteristics of the variety and the area in which
they are grown.
The development and condition of the tree tomatoes must be such as to enable them:
− to withstand transport and handling; and
− to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination.
2.2 CLASSIFICATION
Tree tomatoes are classified in three classes defined below:
2.2.1 “Extra” Class
Tree tomatoes in this class must be of superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety. They
must be free of defects, with the exception of very slight superficial defects, provided these do not affect the
general appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package.
2.2.2 Class I
Tree tomatoes in this class must be of good quality. They must be characteristic of the variety. The
following slight defects, however, may be allowed, provided these do not affect the general appearance of
the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package:
− slight defects in shape;

1
Commonly known in certain regions bytamarillo.
2
This provision allows for smell caused by preservatives used in compliance with the General Standard for Food
Additives (CODEX STAN 192-1995).
3
The maturity of the tree tomatoes can be gauged visually from its external colouring and confirmed by examining
flesh content and using the iodine test.
ALINORM 10/33/35 48
Tree Tomatoes Appendix VI
− slight defects of the skin such as scratches and blemishes, not exceeding more than 10% of the
total surface area of the fruit.
The defects must not, in any case, affect the pulp of the fruit.
2.2.3 Class II
This class includes tree tomatoes which do not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes, but satisfy
the minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1 above. The following defects, however, may be allowed,
provided the tree tomatoes retain their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping quality and
presentation:
− defects in shape, such as extension or flattening of the apex;
− defects in colouring and of the skin such as scratches and blemishes, not exceeding 20% of the
total surface area of the fruit.
The defects must not, in any case, affect the pulp of the fruit.
[3. PROVISIONS CONCERNING SIZING
A) Size is determined by the maximum diameter of the equatorial section or the weight of each fruit or
count of fruits, in accordance with the following tables:

Size code Diameter (in millimeters)

A ≥61
B 60 – 55
C 54 – 51
D 50 – 46
E ≤45

Size code Weight (in grams) Number of fruit (count per

single-layer tray)
1 > 125 < 28
2 101 – 125 28/30/33
3 75 – 100 33/36
4 < 75 39/42

B) Tree tomatoes may be sized by diameter, weight or count.

When sized by diameter, size is determined by the maximum diameter of the equatorial section.]
4. PROVISIONS CONCERNING TOLERANCES
Tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in each package for produce not satisfying
the requirements of the class indicated.
4.1 QUALITY TOLERANCES
4.1.1 "Extra" Class
Five percent by number or weight of tree tomatoes not satisfying the requirements of the class, but
meeting those of Class I or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.
4.1.2 Class I
Ten percent by number or weight of tree tomatoes not satisfying the requirements of the class, but
meeting those of Class II or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of that class.
ALINORM 10/33/35 49
Tree Tomatoes Appendix VI
4.1.3 Class II
Ten percent by number or weight of tree tomatoes satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor
the minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting or any other deterioration
rendering it unfit for consumption.
[4.2 SIZE TOLERANCES
For all classes, ten percent by number or weight of tree tomatoes corresponding to the size
immediately above and/or below that indicated on the package.]
5. PROVISIONS CONCERNING PRESENTATION
5.1 UNIFORMITY
The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only tree tomatoes of the same origin,
variety, quality, colour and size. The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of the
entire contents.
5.2 PACKAGING
Tree tomatoes must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used
inside the package must be new4, clean, and of a quality such as to avoid causing any external or internal
damage to the produce. The use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade specifications is
allowed, provided the printing or labelling has been done with non-toxic ink or glue.
Tree tomatoes shall be packed in each container in compliance with the Recommended International
Code of Practice for Packaging and Transport of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).
5.2.1 Description of Containers
The containers shall meet the quality, hygiene, ventilation and resistance characteristics to ensure
suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the tree tomatoes. Packages must be free of all foreign matter
and smell.
6. MARKING OR LABELLING
6.1 CONSUMER PACKAGES
In addition to the requirements of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods
(CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:
6.1.1 Nature of Produce
If the produce is not visible from the outside, each package shall be labelled as to the name of the
produce and may be labelled as to the name of the variety.
6.2 NON-RETAIL CONTAINERS
Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and
indelibly marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment.
6.2.1 Identification
Name and address of exporter, packer and/or dispatcher. Identification code (optional)5.
6.2.2 Nature of produce
Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside.
6.2.3 Origin of produce
Country of origin and, optionally, district where grown or national, regional or local place name.

4
For the purposes of this Standard, this includes recycled material of food-grade quality.
5
The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and address.
However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or equivalent
abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.
ALINORM 10/33/35 50
Tree Tomatoes Appendix VI
6.2.4 Commercial identification
− Class;
− Size (size code or diameter or weight range or count);
− Net weight (optional).
6.2.5 Official Inspection Mark (optional)
7. CONTAMINANTS
7.1 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum levels of the Codex General
Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CODEX STAN 193-1995).
7.2 The produce covered by this Standard shall comply with the maximum residue limits for pesticides
established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
8. HYGIENE
8.1 It is recommended that the produce covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and
handled in accordance with the appropriate sections of the Recommended International Code of Practice –
General Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and
Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003), and other relevant Codex texts such as Codes of Hygienic Practice and
Codes of Practice.
8.2 The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the
Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods (CAC/GL 21-1997).
ALINORM 10/33/35 51
Layout Appendix VII
PROPOSED STANDARD LAYOUT FOR
CODEX STANDARDS FOR FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES

Secretariat Note: In the text the following conventions are used:

[ text ]: For optional texts or text for which several alternatives exist depending on the produce.
{ text }: For text which explains the use of the standard layout. This text does not appear in the
standards.

INTRODUCTION
- This Layout is for use by the Codex Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables;
- The Layout is intended to guide the Committee in developing standards to encourage a consistent format,
consistent terminology, and where appropriate, consistent provisions;
- When drafting standards, the Committee should consult this format, as well as UN/ECE standards
according to the Committee’s Terms of Reference;
- The Committee may omit or add text from the Layout as appropriate for the produce concerned for
Codex purposes.
1. SCOPE
This Standard applies to [part of the produce being standardized of]1 commercial varieties [and/or
commercial types]1 of [common name of the produce] grown from [Latin Botanical reference in italics
followed where necessary by the author's name] to be supplied fresh to the consumer, after preparation and
packaging. [Common name of the produce] for industrial processing are/is excluded.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….......2
2. DESCRIPTION
(To be developed)
3. PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY
3.1 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the tolerances allowed, the [common
name of produce or part of the produce being standardized] must be:
- whole;3
- sound, produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it unfit for consumption is
excluded;
- clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter;4
- practically free of pests and damage caused by them affecting the general appearance of the produce;
- free of abnormal external moisture, excluding condensation following removal from cold storage;
- free of any foreign smell and/or taste;5
- fresh in appearance;
- free of damage caused by low and/or high temperature;
- ………………………………………2
……………………………………………...……………………………………………………………2

1
{depending on the nature of produce the provision(s) in brackets may be removed as not applicable/necessary}
2
{Additional provisions may be made for specific standards depending on the nature of produce}
3
{depending on the nature of produce, a deviation from this provision or additional provisions are allowed}
4
{with regard to traces of soil, a deviation from this provision is allowed depending on the nature of produce}
5
This provision allows for smell caused by conservation agents used in compliance with corresponding
regulations.
ALINORM 10/33/35 52
Layout Appendix VII
3.1.1 The [common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] must have been
carefully [harvested/picked/etc.]6 and have reached an appropriate degree of development and ripeness in
accordance with criteria proper to the variety [and/or commercial type]1, the time of
[harvesting/picking/etc.]6, and to the area in which they are grown.
The development and condition of the [common name of the produce or part of the produce being
standardized] must be such as to enable them:
- to withstand transport and handling, and
- to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination.
- ………………………………………2
3.1.2 MATURITY REQUIREMENTS
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...7
3.2 CLASSIFICATION
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...8
{or in case the produce is classified into category classes}
[Common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] are/is classified in
[two/three]6 classes defined below:
3.2.1 "Extra" Class
[Common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] in this class must be of
superior quality. They must be characteristic of the variety [and/or commercial type]1. They must be free of
defects with the exception of very slight superficial defects provided these do not affect the general
appearance of the produce, the quality, the keeping quality and presentation in the package.
(In addition,) they must be:2
- ..............................................................................................................................
- ..............................................................................................................................
3.2.2 Class I
[Common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] in this class must be of good
quality. They must be characteristic of the variety [and/or commercial type]1. The following slight defects,
however, may be allowed provided these do not affect the general appearance of the produce, the quality, the
keeping quality and presentation in the package:
- ..............................................................................................................................9
- ..............................................................................................................................
(In addition,) they must be:2
- ..............................................................................................................................
- ..............................................................................................................................
[The defects must not, in any case, affect the [flesh/pulp/etc.]6 of the [fruit; produce; part of the
produce being standardized or common name of the produce.]6.
3.2.3 Class II
This class includes [common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] which do
not qualify for inclusion in the higher classes but satisfy the minimum requirements specified in Section 2.1
above. The following defects, however, may be allowed provided the [common name of the produce or part
of the produce being standardized] retain se their essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping
quality and presentation:

6
{depending on the nature of produce one of these words or another more appropriate word may be used}
7
{to be elaborated depending on the nature of produce}
8
{for special standards where it does not appear necessary to establish a classification, only the minimum
requirements apply}
9
{Defects allowed, depending on the nature of produce}
ALINORM 10/33/35 53
Layout Appendix VII
- ..............................................................................................................................9
- ..............................................................................................................................
(In addition,) they must be:2
- ..............................................................................................................................
- ..............................................................................................................................
[The defects must not, in any case, affect the [flesh/pulp/etc.]6 of the [fruit; produce; part of the
produce being standardized or common name of the produce.]6.
4. PROVISIONS CONCERNING SIZING
Size is determined by the [average]1 [weight/length/circumference/(maximum) diameter of the
equatorial section/etc.]6 of the [fruit; produce; part of the produce being standardized or common name of the
produce]6 [with a minimum weight/length/circumference/diameter of …]1, 6, in accordance with the
following table:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….10
5. PROVISIONS CONCERNING TOLERANCES
Tolerances in respect of quality and size shall be allowed in each package [or in each lot for produce
presented in bulk]1 for produce not satisfying the requirements of the class indicated.
5.1 QUALITY TOLERANCES
5.1.1 "Extra" Class
Five percent by number or weight of [common name of produce or part of the produce being
standardized] not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting those of Class I or, exceptionally,
coming within the tolerances of that class.
- ……………………………….11
- ……………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...2
5.1.2 Class I
Ten percent by number or weight of [common name of produce or part of the produce being
standardized] not satisfying the requirements of the class, but meeting those of Class II, or exceptionally,
coming within the tolerances of that class.
- ……………………………….11
- ……………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...2
5.1.3 Class II
Ten percent by number or weight of [common name of produce or part of the produce being
standardized] satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor the minimum requirements, with the
exception of produce affected by rotting or any other deterioration rendering it unfit for consumption.
- ……………………………….11
- ……………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...2
5.2 SIZE TOLERANCES
For all classes:12 10% by number or weight of [common name of the produce or part of the produce
being standardized] corresponding to the size immediately above and/or below that indicated on the package.
……………………………………….………………………………………………………………….13

10
{Provisions on minimum and maximum sizes, size range depending on the nature of produce, the variety, the
commercial type and possibly the individual classes}
11
{Possible tolerances for individual defects depending on the nature of produce}.
12
{for individual standards, however, different provisions according to the individual classes may be laid down}
ALINORM 10/33/35 54
Layout Appendix VII
6. PROVISIONS CONCERNING PRESENTATION
6.1 UNIFORMITY
The contents of each package [or lot for produce presented in bulk]1 must be uniform and contain only
[common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] of the same origin, quality and size
(if sized)14.
………………...........................................................................................................................................2
The visible part of the contents of the package [or lot for produce presented in bulk]1 must be
representative of the entire contents.
6.2 PACKAGING
[Common name of the product or part of the produce being standardized] must be packed in such a
way as to protect the produce properly. The materials used inside the package must be new15, clean and of a
quality such as to avoid causing any external or internal damage to the produce. The use of materials,
particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade specifications is allowed provided the printing or labelling has
been done with non-toxic ink or glue.
[Common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] shall be packed in each
container in compliance with the Recommended International Code of Practice for Packaging and Transport
of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 44-1995).
6.2.1 Description of Containers
The container shall meet the quality, hygiene, ventilation and resistance characteristics to ensure
suitable handling, shipping and preserving of the [common name of the produce or part of the produce being
standardized].
Packages [or lot for produce presented in bulk]1 must be free of all foreign matter and smell.
6.3 PRESENTATION
The [common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] must/may be presented
under one of the following forms:16
6.3.1 …………………………
6.3.2 …………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….17
7. PROVISIONS CONCERNING MARKING OR LABELLING
7.1 CONSUMER PACKAGES
In addition to the requirement of the Codex General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods
(CODEX STAN 1-1985), the following specific provisions apply:
7.1.1 Nature of Produce
If the produce is not visible from the outside, each package [or lot for produce presented in bulk]1 shall
be labelled as to the name of the produce and may be labelled as to name of the variety [and/or commercial
type]1.
7.2 NON-RETAIL CONTAINERS
Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the same side, legibly and
indelibly marked, and visible from the outside, or in the documents accompanying the shipment.
[For produce transported in bulk these particulars must appear on a document accompanying the
goods.]1

13
{Possible provisions concerning admissible limits of deviations for sized or unsized produce}.
14
{In addition for individual standards uniformity concerning variety and/or commercial type, colouring, type of
presentation, etc. may be laid down depending on the nature of produce}.
15
For the purposes of this Standard, this includes recycled material of food-grade quality.
16
{Specific provisions relating to the presentation of the produce may be included at this point.}
17
{For individual standards more stringent provisions concerning the presentation in the "Extra" Class may be laid
down.}
ALINORM 10/33/35 55
Layout Appendix VII
7.2.1 Identification
Name and address or exporter, packer and/or dispatcher. Identification code (optional)18.
7.2.2 Nature of Produce
Name of the produce if the contents are not visible from the outside. [Name of the variety and/or
commercial type (optional).]6
............................................................................................................................2
7.2.3 Origin of produce
Country of origin and, optionally, district where grown, or national, regional or local place name.
7.2.4 Commercial specifications
- Class;
- Size (if sized);
- ...........................................................................................................................2
7.2.5 Official Inspection Mark (optional)
[8. FOOD ADDITIVES
Untreated fresh fruits and vegetables
This Standard applies to fresh fruits and vegetables as identified in Food Categories 04.1.1.1 Untreated
fresh fruits and 04.2.1.1 Untreated fresh vegetables (including mushrooms and fungi, roots and tubers, pulses
and legumes (including soybeans), and aloe vera), seaweeds, and nuts and seeds and therefore, no food
additives are allowed in accordance with the provisions of the General Standard for Food Additives
(CODEX STAN 192-1995) for these categories.
Treated fresh fruits and vegetables
Food additives listed in Tables 1 and 2 of the General Standard for Food Additives (CODEX STAN
192-1995) in Food Categories 04.1.1.2 (Surface-treated fresh fruit) and 04.2.1.2 (Surface-treated fresh
vegetables, (including mushrooms and fungi, roots and tubers, pulses and legumes, and aloe vera), seaweeds,
and nuts and seeds) may be used in foods subject to this Standard.
or
INS No. Name of the Food Additive Maximum Level
### Xxx Limited by GMP
or
### Xxx numerical level
(subject to endorsement by
the Codex Committee on
Food Additives and inclusion
and the General Standard for
Food Additives)
]1, 2, 3, 6
9. CONTAMINANTS
9.1 PESTICIDE RESIDUES
[Common name of the produce or part of the produce being standardized] shall comply with those
maximum residue limits established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission for this commodity.

18
The national legislation of a number of countries requires the explicit declaration of the name and
address. However, in the case where a code mark is used, the reference “packer and/or dispatcher (or
equivalent abbreviations)” has to be indicated in close connection with the code mark.
ALINORM 10/33/35 56
Layout Appendix VII
9.2 OTHER CONTAMINANTS
[Common name of the produce or common name of the produce being standardized] shall comply
with those maximum levels for contaminants established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission for this
commodity.
10. HYGIENE
10.1 It is recommended that the produce covered by the provisions of this Standard be prepared and handled
in accordance with the appropriate sections of the Recommended International Code of Practice - General
Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969), Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables
(CAC/RCP 53-2003) and other relevant Codex texts such as Codes of Hygienic Practice and Codes of Practice.
10.2 The produce should comply with any microbiological criteria established in accordance with the
Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods (CAC/GL 21-1997).
[11. METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING
………………………………………………………………………………………………………7]1
ALINORM 10/33/35 57
Layout Appendix VII
{Depending on the nature of the produce a list of varieties can be included in the annex.}
Annex
<Non-Exhaustive><Exhaustive> List of ...........Varieties
Some of the varieties listed in the following may be marketed under names for which trademark protection
has been sought or obtained in one or more countries. Names believed by the FAO and WHO to be varietal
names are listed in the first column. Other names by which the FAO and WHO believe the variety may be
known are listed in the second column. Neither of these two lists are intended to include trademarks.
References to known trademarks have been included in the third column for information only. The presence
of any trademarks in the third column does not constitute any license or permission to use that trademark –
such license must come directly from the trademark owner. In addition, the absence of a trademark in the
third column does not constitute any indication that there is no registered/ pending trademark for such a
variety.19
Varieties Synonyms Trade names {Other information depending on the produce}

19
Disclaimer:
(1) Some of the varietal names listed in the first column may indicate varieties for which patent protection has been
obtained in one or more countries. Such proprietary varieties may only be produced or traded by those authorized
by the patent holder to do so under an appropriate license. FAO and WHO take no position as to the validity of
any such patent or the rights of any such patent-holder or its licensee regarding the production or trading of any
such variety.
(2) FAO and WHO endeavoured to ensure that no trademark names are listed in columns 1 and 2 of the table.
However, it is the responsibility of any trademark owner to notify FAO and WHO promptly if a trademark name
has been included in the table and to provide FAO and WHO (see addresses below) with an appropriate varietal,
or generic name for the variety as well as adequate evidence ownership of any applicable patent or trademark
regarding such variety so that the list can be amended. Provided that no further information is needed from the
trademark holder, the Codex Alimentarius Commission will change the list accordingly at the session following
receipt of the information. FAO and WHO take no position as to the validity of any such trademarks or the rights
of any such trademark owners or their licensees.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO)
(FAO) Avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva 27
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 00100 Rome, Italy Switzerland
Telephone: +39 06 5705 1 Telephone: (+ 41 22) 791 21 11
Fax: +39 06 5705 3152 Facsimile (fax): (+ 41 22) 791 3111
Telex: 625852/610181 FAO I / Telex: 415 416
Cable address: FOODAGRI ROME Telegraph: UNISANTE GENEVA
Email: FAO-HQ@fao.org
ALINORM 10/33/35 58
Layout Appendix VII

{In the case of lists of varieties where only very few trade marks appear, the list may be presented as follows
(inclusion of references to trade names in footnotes}
Annex
<Non-Exhaustive><Exhaustive> List of Varieties
Some of the varieties listed in the following may be marketed under names for which trademark protection
has been sought or obtained in one or more countries. Names believed by the FAO and WHO to be varietal
names are listed in the first column. Other names by which the FAO and WHO believe the variety may be
known are listed in the second column. Neither of these two lists are intended to include trademarks.
References to known trademarks have been included in footnotes for information only. The absence of a
trademark in the footnotes does not constitute any indication that there is no registered/ pending trademark
for such a variety.20
Varieties Synonyms {Other information depending on the produce}

Variety “xyz”21

20
Disclaimer:
(1) Some of the varietal names listed in the first column may indicate varieties for which patent protection has been
obtained in one or more countries. Such proprietary varieties may only be produced or traded by those authorized
by the patent holder to do so under an appropriate license. FAO and WHO take no position as to the validity of
any such patent or the rights of any such patent-holder or its licensee regarding the production or trading of any
such variety.
(2) FAO and WHO endeavoured to ensure that no trademark names are listed in the table. However, it is the
responsibility of any trademark owner to notify FAO and WHO promptly if a trademark name has been included
in the table and to provide FAO and WHO (see addresses below) with an appropriate varietal, or generic name
for the variety as well as adequate evidence ownership of any applicable patent or trademark regarding such
variety. Provided that no further information is needed from the trademark holder, the Codex Alimentarius
Commission will change the list accordingly at the session following receipt of the information. FAO and WHO
take no position as to the validity of any such trademarks or the rights of any such trademark owners or their
licensees.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO)
(FAO) Avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva 27
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 00100 Rome, Italy Switzerland
Telephone: +39 06 5705 1 Telephone: (+ 41 22) 791 21 11
Fax: +39 06 5705 3152 Facsimile (fax): (+ 41 22) 791 3111
Telex: 625852/610181 FAO I / Telex: 415 416
Cable address: FOODAGRI ROME Telegraph: UNISANTE GENEVA
Email: FAO-HQ@fao.org

21
The proprietary trademark {include the trade name here followed by the appropriate superscript TM or ®} may
only be used for the marketing of fruit from this variety with the express authorization of the trademark owner.
ALINORM 10/33/35 59
Project Document Appendix VIII
PROJECT DOCUMENT FOR NEW WORK ON A STANDARD FOR POMEGRANATE

1. The purpose and the scope of the Standard

The scope of the standard is pomegranate of the Puniceae family, which is supplied fresh to the consumer
after proper preparation and packaging. The objective of the standard is to consider the characteristics of
pomegranate for fresh consumption within the framework of an international document.
2. Relevance and timeliness
Due to the growing trend of the worldwide production and trade in pomegranates, it is necessary to establish
standards covering the safety, quality and hygiene of the fruit; a reference agreed upon by international
consensus between the main producing and trading countries. In addition, the drafting of a codex standard
for pomegranate will help to protect consumers' health and to promote fair trade in accordance with current
international agreements.
Pomegranates are planted and grown in many regions of the world including countries such as Turkey,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Armenia, Georgia, Tajikistan, Jordon, Egypt, Italy, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, Libya,
Lebanon, Sudan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Mauritania, Morocco, Cyprus, Spain, Greece, France, China, Japan,
and the U.S.A. However, among these countries, Iran, India and the United States of America have the
highest area under cultivation with the greatest varietals diversity. Consumption of pomegranate in Iran is
estimated to be on average between 7-8 kg per person per year.
The global production, trade and consumption of pomegranates and the fruit’s derivatives and by-products
are clearly on the rise. More significantly, the present status of this fruit is not limited to any particular region
and hence justifies the elaboration of an international standard commensurate with the pomegranate’s true
standing as an increasingly valuable worldwide commodity.
3. Main aspects to be covered
The standard entails aspects related to quality, size, safety and labeling in order to provide adequate product
characteristics and to protect consumer's health. To supply high quality safe products, the objective of the
standard are to:
- Establish the minimum requirements for pomegranates, including and in addition to the quality class
parameters.
- Define the categories to classify pomegranates in accordance with the characteristics of the fruit
- Establish tolerances regarding quality and size permitted in packaged pomegranates.
- Include the provisions to be considered related to the uniformity of the packaged product and the
packaging used.
- Include provisions for the labeling and marking of the product in accordance with the general standard
for the labeling of prepackaged foods
- Include provisions for contaminants with reference to the general standard for contaminants and toxins in
foods
- Include provisions for hygiene with reference to the recommended international code of practice for
hygiene and general principles of food hygiene
ALINORM 10/33/35 60
Project Document Appendix VIII
4. Assessment against the Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities
General criterion
Consumer protection from the point of view of health and the prevention of fraudulent practices. Quality of
the produce to meet consumer needs and the minimum requirements of food safety. The elaboration of the
standard for pomegranates would be to the benefit of developing countries in particular, because developing
countries are the major producer, exporter and consumer of pomegranates.
Criteria applicable to commodities
a) Volume of production and consumption in individual countries and volume and pattern of trade
between countries:
Area under cultivation in Iran in the calendar year 21st March 2005-21st March 2006 was 7,404 hectares of
seedlings and 56,329 hectares of fruit bearing trees. Production in the same period was 705,166 Metric tons.
Yield per hectare was 12,519 kg. Total world wide production of pomegranate is approximated at 1,500,000
tons and Iran produces some 47% of world production.
In addition, Iran has the highest area under cultivation, the highest production level and is the number one
exporter worldwide. Tables 1 and 2 show the relative status of the major pomegranate producing countries.

Table 1. Pomegranate production in 2007-2008

Country Production (tons)
Iran 870,161
India 849,000
USA 110,000
Turkey 80,000
Tunisia 75,000
Spain 35,000
Source: Data by the Plant Protection Department of the Iranian Ministry of Agriculture, National
Horticulture Information Service of National Horticulture Board, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India,
United States Department of Agriculture

Table 2. Area under cultivation in 2007-2008

Country Area under cultivation (ha)
Iran 69,027
India 54,755
USA 15,000
Turkey 8,500
Tunisia 12,600
Spain 3,000
Source: Data by the Plant Protection Department of the Iranian Ministry of Agriculture, National
Horticulture Information Service of National Horticulture Board, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India,
United States Department of Agriculture
Iran is at the top of list of pomegranate exporting countries. In 2007 Iran exported over 32,951 metric tons
worth USD 36,925,660. Main importing countries were Republic of Korea, Russia followed by various West
European countries. Table 3 shows the relative worldwide distribution of Iranian exports in 2006:
Table 3. Worldwide exports of pomegranate from Iran in 2006 (tons)
Country 2006
Afghanistan 5.1
Albania 34.5
Armenia 257.9
ALINORM 10/33/35 61
Project Document Appendix VIII
Austria 19.5
Bahrain 267.9
Belarus 20
Canada 0.1
Cyprus 0.5
Denmark 18
England 169.5
Finland 0
France 4.5
Germany 464.5
Georgia 2
Greek 242.9
Holland 1677.4
Iraq 37
Ireland 0.2
Italy 198.7
Japan 85.1
Kuwait 109.4
Malaysia 0
Qatar 33.9
Republic of Korea 10719.3
Russia 11304.9
Saudi Arabia 0.1
Singapore 0
Sweden 100.3
Switzerland 55.7
Thailand 1.8
Turkey 185.7
Ukraine 1080.2
United Arab Emirates 180.2
Source: Data by the Plant Protection Department of the Iranian Ministry of Agriculture and the Iranian
Customs Authority
Worldwide pomegranate production and trade has displayed a significant upward trend during the past
decade; in the case of Iran in particular, having experienced a significant boost from 2003 onwards. Table 4
and the corresponding graphs (‘a’ and ‘b’ below) reveal the pattern of Iranian pomegranate exports during
the period covering the years 2001 to 2007:

Table 4.Exports of pomegranate from Iran during 2001-2007

Year Quantity (tons) USD Value
2001 10,413.8 2,097,827
2002 11,375.8 2,826,553
2003 14,075.5 5,269,310
2004 26,197.6 15,796,955
2005 26,270.6 18,384,719
2006 29,564.8 34,135,229
2007 32,951.2 36,925,660
Source: Data by the Plant Protection Department of the Iranian Ministry of Agriculture and the Iranian
Customs Authority
ALINORM 10/33/35 62
Project Document Appendix VIII
Graph a. Exported quantities

35000

30000

25000

20000

15000 Quantity (ton)

10000

5000

0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Graph b. Exported value

40000000
35000000
30000000
25000000
20000000
USD Value
15000000
10000000
5000000
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

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

international trade: Many importers have commented that Pomegranates (from Iran) are exported under the
conditions of the national Iranian standard. They would prefer to import the fruit under international criteria
based on a codex standard. Therefore, the new work would provide internationally recognized specific
standards in order to enhance international trade and to accommodate the importers requirements.
Forecasts show that the overall consumption of and trade in pomegranates is on the rise and in the first
International conference on pomegranate in Turkey in October 2006, among the orchard fruits, pomegranate
was chosen as the fruit of the next decade. International Standard Organization (ISO) has in the past drawn
up a basic standard for pomegranate fruit. In addition, the European Union also requires a certificate of
Global GAP for any fresh fruit or vegetable supplied in EU countries. Due to absence of a global standard
for pomegranate, and work already undertaken by any other international organization (like UN/ECE) on
pomegranate (UN/ECE has not framed a standard for fresh pomegranates). Incorporation of these aspects
under this point is necessary as per the Procedural Manual.
Hence, to incorporate all existing disparate standards in a single improved comprehensive standard
acceptable across board internationally, the establishment of a codex standard is seen as a necessity.
As a result, by eliminating the variable (sometimes conflicting) sets of rules and regulations, trade barriers
will be reduced and we would gain a comprehensive legal framework for the minimum acceptable standards
for pomegranates internationally.
c) International or regional market potential: International and regional markets have shown an increase
and growing trade of this product in the world over the last six years.
ALINORM 10/33/35 63
Project Document Appendix VIII
d) Amenability of the commodity to standardization: The characteristics of pomegranates, from its
cultivation through to harvest, fruit characteristics, cultivar varieties, composition, quality and packaging all
lend to adequate parameters for the standardization of the product. An outline of some characteristics,
botanical definition, origin, ecological conditions of Pomegranates:
Pomegranate, attractive deciduous and somewhat thorny large shrub or small tree (Punica granatum L.)
belonging to the family Punicaceae, native to semitropical Asia (Iran) and naturalized in the Mediterranean
region in very early times. It has long been cultivated as an ornamental and for its edible fruit. The fruit,
about the size of an apple, bears many seeds, each within a fleshy crimson seed coating, enclosed in a tough
yellowish to deep red rind. Pomegranates are either eaten fresh or used for syrup, in which the juice of the
acid fruit pulp is the chief ingredient. The astringent properties of the rind and bark have been valued
medicinally for several thousand years, especially as a vermifuge. The pomegranate is now cultivated in
most warm climates. Pomegranates are classified in the division Magnoliophyta, class Magnoliopsida, and
order Mortals, family Punicaceae.
The leaves are opposite or sub-opposite, glossy, narrow oblong, entire, 3-7 cm long and 2 cm broad. The
flowers are bright red, 3 cm in diameter, with five petals (often more on cultivated plants). Flowers are
hermaphrodite with 4-8 leathery sepals and equal number of red petals, numerous stamens and variable
number of carpals, which together make lower ovary. The fruit is a berry, between an orange and a grapefruit
in size, 7-12 cm in diameter with a rounded hexagonal shape, and has thick reddish skin and many seeds.
Table 5. Nutritional value of Pomegranate (per 100 g edible portion)
Compositions Unit Q.T.Y
Water g 80-82.3
Energy kcal 63-78
Protein g 0.5-0. 95
Fat g 0.3-0.9
Carbohydrates g 16.4
Fiber g 0.2-0.6
Ash g 0.5
Phosphorus mg 8.0
Iron mg 0.3
Potassium mg 259
Calcium mg 3.0
Sodium mg 3.0
Manganese mg 3.0
Zinc mg 0.12
Magnesium mg 0.15
Copper mg 0.07
Selenium mg 0.6
Panthothenic acid mg 0.596
Vitamin B1 mg 0.03
Vitamin B2 mg 0.03
Vitamin B3 mg 0.03
Vitamin C mg 4-6

Pomegranate is a small tree, usually not more than 5.0 meters height and it is adapted to arid or semi arid
climates with mild winters. Pomegranate is fairly drought tolerant and can grow on calcareous or acid soils.
Iran is among the countries of the temperate region of the northern hemisphere and relatively close to the
equator. But being relatively distant from large bodies of water, its precipitation is low and is considered as
an arid region. On the other hand, having high mountain ranges as well as a central desert, Iran possesses
variable climates and ecological niches.
ALINORM 10/33/35 64
Project Document Appendix VIII
Large parts of Iran within the boundaries of central desert (Dasht-e-kavir and Kavir-e-Loot) have arid or
semi-arid conditions which make them suitable for pomegranate and pistachio production. In fact, in all of
the provinces bordering the central desert, cultivation of pomegranate has been going on from ancient times
for its economical, ornamental, and Medicinal properties. Areas under cultivation, rate of expansion,
varietals diversity, and yield per tree and product quality are considerable. All of these point to the fact that
pomegranate is an endemic tree of Iran.
e) Coverage of the main consumer protection and trade issues by existing or proposed general
standards: There is no general commodity standard covering pomegranates. The new work will enhance
consumer protection and facilitate pomegranate trade by establishing an internationally agreed quality
standard.
f) Number of commodities which would need separate standards indicating whether raw, semi-
processed or processed: A single standard for pomegranate will cover all varieties of pomegranate traded
worldwide.
g) Work already undertaken by other international organizations in this field: The Iranian national
standard and the ISO standard for Pomegranate have been drafted and are implemented.
Iran is considered the origin and the major genetic reservoir of pomegranates. Iran is the number one
producer and exporter of pomegranate in the world. Furthermore, due to suitable climate, the quality of
Iranian pomegranates is the best among commercially available in international trade. It is for this reason that
Republic of Korea, which ranks first among countries importing pomegranate, imports only from Iran.
ISIRI 262, 2007 was prepared by the national technical committee of Iran on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables.
This national standard specifies requirements and test methods for pomegranate fruit and applies to
commercial cultivars of Pomegranate grown from Punica granatum (L.) of the Punicacea family, to be
supplied fresh to consumer, after preparation and packaging. Pomegranates for industrial processing are not
covered by the said standard.
The ISO standard (ISO 23393:2006) specifies some requirements and test methods for pomegranate fruit too,
but on many criteria and parameters – such as terms and definitions, classification, fruit sizing, tolerances,
classes and presentation – there are some inadequacies and it would merit an update and a revision.
To that end, Iran is in the process of proposing some recommendations for the revision of the ISO standard
as well.
5. Relevance to the Codex strategic objectives
The elaboration of a codex standard for pomegranate is in line with the strategic objective to promote the
maximum application of codex standards by countries in their national legislation and to facilitate
international trade. This proposal is based on scientific considerations and contributes to state the minimum
quality requirements for pomegranates for human consumption, with the purpose of protecting the
consumer's health and achieving fair practices in the food trade. This proposal is relevant to Activity 1.2
“Review and develop Codex standards and related texts for food quality” of the Strategic Plan 2008-2013.
6. Information on the relation between the proposal and other existing Codex documents
This is proposed as a new global standard and has no relation to any other existing Codex text on this item,
except that the standard will make references to relevant standards and related texts developed by general
subject committees. In fact, there is no comparable standard for fresh pomegranates framed by any global
body.
7. Identification of any need for any requirements for and availability of expert scientific advice
For the elaboration of this project document, the information generated by the research working group at the
national level for the characterization of pomegranates has been taken as reference. Therefore, in the case of
requiring any further information in the course of the elaboration of the standard, this group of experts may
be consulted.
8. Identification of any need for technical input to the standard from external bodies so that this can be
planned for
There is not expected to be any need for technical input from external bodies on this matter.
ALINORM 10/33/35 65
Project Document Appendix VIII
9. Proposed time schedule
DATE ADVANCE AND PROCEDURES
October 2009 CCFFV: Agreement to initiate new work as a global standard.
July 2010 CAC: Approval of new work.
May 2011 CCFFV: Consideration of the proposed draft Standard at Step 4.
July 2011 CAC: Adoption at Step 5 or 5/8 [depending on the progress of development].
[October 2012] [CCFFV: Consideration of the draft Standard at Step 7]
[July 2013] [CAC: Adoption at Step 8]