- Print Friendly - Help

AgVetLink February 2004: Page 7

Previous page  | Contents |  Next page

---

Requirements of the ‘expert panel’ during the GRAS process

When the ‘expert panel’ receives a Generally Recognised As Safe (GRAS) application, it will have already been assessed as meeting the criteria for inclusion onto the stated GRAS list. The Assessor (Technical Standards-Toxicology) will have viewed the supporting data provided with the application and decided whether it is sufficient to support its inclusion.

The most useful supporting data is its inclusion on international GRAS lists, particularly the US and EU lists. If this has not been provided, the Assessor will search these international lists and note their inclusion when forwarding applications to the ‘expert panel’. However, inclusions on international GRAS lists should not be the sole form of supporting material. As this is a non-fee paying process, it is the job of the applicant to provide enough data for the assessor to be completely happy with the inclusion of the substance on the New Zealand GRAS list – the job of the ‘expert panel‘ should not be time consuming.

The job of the ‘expert panel’

• To view the list of substances presented to them and, using their knowledge and experience, note any immediate issues that come to mind, particularly if they have knowledge that might preclude a substance from being GRAS.
• If a substance is known to them, then all aspects of safety, for the proposed use, should be considered – still using their own knowledge.
• If a substance is not known, it should simply be noted.

Because there are nine ‘experts’ on the panel, it is likely that someone will have knowledge about each of the proposed GRAS substances, hopefully covering them all. The proposal document is also put out for public discussion, thus subjecting it to a wide range of opinion.

This filter system should be sufficient enough that our ‘experts’ at NZFSA can observe and moderate the inclusion of GRAS substances without having to use excessive resources.

Compliance update

Since the holiday break, the ACVM Group has ‘hit the ground running’ in the compliance area. For the months of December 2003 and January 2004, 15 compliance matters have been reported and are under investigation. A number of these relate to advertising claims on products that have not been approved by the ACVM Group.

The ACVM Group has put together an ‘active’ compliance list of those companies/persons who are of ongoing concern to us in regards to non-compliance. This will mean that over the next 12 months, companies/persons on the list could be audited as a result of repeat non-compliances and/or may be included in our ongoing ‘slice of life’ audits carried out for specific category types (e.g. equine, homeopathic etc.) where we would be taking particular note of manufacture, sale, and use of such products in these fields.

Imports Review Programme

The NZFSA is currently undertaking a review of the arrangements that control imports that are covered by legislation administered by the NZFSA. This includes:

• imported food and ingredients
• food-related products (e.g. tableware)
• agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines
• stock feed and pet food.

The review team is made up of non-NZFSA staff and will be led by Dr John Hellstrom, ex-chair of the Biosecurity Council. The team includes a public health expert, an economist, an animal feedstuffs specialist and a project manager. Julian Waters, who was also part of the Expert Panel for the Antibiotic Resistance Review, is one of the team members with a good understanding of the ACVM-related issues. The review is one of a range of projects, each dealing with specific parts of the imports puzzle. The related projects that come under the scope of the main programme include:

• A Strategic Review of Arrangements Controlling the Importation of Food and Food-related Products into New Zealand
• Trans-Tasman Imports Inspection Review
• Imports Food Risk Profiling
• BSE Categorisation Process Review.