The 18th session of the Codex Alimentarius Commit­tee on Contaminants in Foods (CCCF18) successful­ly addressed all the topics on its draft agenda and a few more under “other business”. Worth noting that CCCF18 approved two new international maximum limits (MLs) for the ‘heavy metal’ lead, in dried bark spice and in dried culinary herbs at 2.5 mg/ kg and 2.0 mg/kg respectively (for future inclusion in CXS 193). CCCF18 adopted the sampling plans for total aflatoxins and for Ochratoxin A in certain spices. CCCF18 also adopted a revised version of the existing Codex Code of Practice (CoP) for the prevention and reduction of aflatoxin contamina­tion in peanuts (i.e., CXC 55), but decided to stop working on a ML for total aflatoxins in ready-to-eat peanuts and its associated sampling plan. CCCF18 finalized two other important documents on an internal Guidance to Codex members and observ­ers on data analysis for the development of MLs and improve data collections; and, on the proposed numerical performance criteria (NPC) for methods of analysis (MOA) of total aflatoxins in several nuts and in dried figs. CCCF18 deleted some text in the main standard (CXS 193) referring to health effects of radioactive substances after a nuclear accident. CCCF18 agreed to start several new works, such as the revision of two existing CoPs on pyrrolizidine alkaloids (CXC 74) and on Aflatoxin B1 in raw mate­rials and supplemental feedingstuffs (CXC 45)), and a new CoP on tropane alkaloids. CCCF18 adopted a revised list of priorities for risk assessment and evaluations (e.g., Dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs; Perfluoroalkyl substances (including PFAS); Ethylene Oxide; Bisphenols; etc.) by the FAO/WHO JECFA expert committee. CCCF18 also agreed to return for further elaboration the new CoP on the prevention and reduction of cadmium contamination in (all) foods. Finally, CCCF18 discussed five other business­es, including an update about a possible future new work proposal for a further guidance on food safety aspects related to the use of recycled plastic materials in food contact packaging.¹ 

See more information available about CCCF18 working documents quoted in this article,² as well as in the offi­cial report of the CCCF18 meeting.³ Codex standards, guidelines, codes of practices and related miscellaneous texts quoted in this article are readily and freely available.⁴ Mrs. Sally Hoffer, Chairperson of CCCF18, in her closing remarks said, “I am elevated at the Chair-person’s head table, but I am not: I, and the Committee, wouldn’t deliver much without the chairs and co-chairs [of the electronic, physical, virtual and in-session working groups], who all do the ground work, based on the contributions of all Codex members in collecting, sharing, and analysing the data, and for their inputs to Codex drafts in such a collaborative spirit; including but not limited to the USA, the EU, the Netherlands, Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, India, China, Canada, the United Kingdom, Thailand, and so many more.”

FINAL STANDARDS AND RELATED TEXTS APPROVED BY CCCF18

New MLs for lead (Pb) in dried bark spices and for dried culinary herbs

CCCF18 approved two new international maximum limits (MLs) for the ‘heavy metal’ lead (Pb) in dried bark spice and in dried culinary herbs (respectively at 2.5 mg/kg and 2.0 mg/kg) for final adoption by CAC48, noting that the level applicable to dried culinary herb could be used to derive a related ML for fresh culinary herbs, based on the moisture content of the fresh herb in relation to the dried herb (a note was added). CCCF18 indeed lowered slightly the pro­posals from the EWG (which was 3.0 mg/kg for lead in dried bark spices and 2.5 mg/kg in dried culinary herbs). China expressed its reservations on the two proposed MLs, while India expressed theirs on the dried bark spice only, as India supported rather the EWG proposed ML of 3.0 mg/kg, as India was of the view that a Codex ML should be determined based on the 95^th percentile (P95) value of 59 or more data points. For reasons of data points showing high levels of rejections in domestic production, China also pre­ferred the EWG proposed ML of 3.0 mg/kg for dried bark spice. Regarding dried culinary herbs, China supported an ML of 2.5 mg/kg, citing general sup­port during the previous session and new data from developed countries. The EWG Chair emphasized that there had been several calls for data over the years (in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2024) and that these calls for data included occurrence data of lead in dried bark spices and dried culinary herbs and that the MLs were therefore based on the best data available. Another Member did not support the proposed ML for dried culinary herbs, and their preference was for a lower ML of 1.5 mg/kg.⁵

Sampling plans for total Aflatoxins and Ochratoxin A in certain spices (pending endorsement by CCMAS)

CCCF18 concluded all the technical discussions on the sampling plans for total aflatoxins (AFT) and for Ochratoxin A in Nutmeg, Dried Chilli, and Papri­ka (both as a whole or as crushed/cracked/broken/ flakes). CCCF18 sent these sampling plans to the Co­dex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling (CCMAS) for endorsement, and to the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC48) for final approval, and future inclusion into the Codex General Standard on Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed, i.e., the ‘GSTCFF’ (CXS 193). The proposed sampling plans discussed by CCCF18 resulted from an intersessional work of an EWG and a PWG chaired by India.⁶

Revised version of the existing Codex Code of Prac­tice (CoP) for the prevention and reduction of aflatoxin contamination in peanuts (i.e., CXC 55) approved, but discussion on a possible ML for AFT in Ready-to-Eat (RTE) peanuts discontinued

CCCF18 adopted a revised version of the existing Codex Code of Practice (CoP) for the prevention and reduction of aflatoxin contamination in peanuts (CXC 55) based on the outcome of an intersessional work (EWG and PWG) led by Brazil and presented in CCCF18-CRD31, noting one point for further dis­cussion: whether the section on roasting (section 7.6, paragraph 65) in the proposed code should be delet­ed as concerns were expressed that roasting was not recognized in some member countries as a step that could reduce aflatoxin in peanuts, and that aflatoxin could bind to components of the peanut matrix, making them less detectable during routine analytical testing of the “free” mycotoxin. CCCF18 agreed to retain the section on roasting in the final text of the revised CoP.⁷

On a separate note, and discussion, CCCF18 agreed to discontinue the work engaged 10+ years ago on a possible ML for total aflatoxins in RTE peanuts and to inform CAC48 accordingly. CCCF18 recognized that more time should be given for the implementation of the revised CoP and for new data to be generated and submitted to the WHO-GEMS/Food database specifi­cally on AFT levels in RTE peanuts (as per the work­ing definition adopted by CCCF previously). Only then, CCCF18 may consider again discussing a draft ML for AFT in RTE peanuts, as a possible new work in the future.⁸

Informative Guidance to Codex members and observ­ers on data analysis for the development of MLs and improve data collections

CCCF18 finalized a very important internal document in endorsing the main body text of the “Guidance on data analysis for the development of maximum levels and for improved data collection” for Codex mem­bers and Observers generating, collecting, sending occurrence data to the WHO-GEMS/Food database, and analyzing such data from that database. CCCF18 agreed to publish it as an information document on the Codex website, with the understanding that the document would be updated following the implemen­tation of the agreed changes to the WHO-GEMS/Food database’s template (for data collection) and the expe­rience gained in applying the Guidance itself. CCCF18 also agreed to reconvene an EWG, led by the Euro­pean Union, and co-led by Japan, the Netherlands and the USA, to continue elaborating the Guidance, in particular on data analysis for the development of maximum levels and for improved data collection (i.e., on the Guidance’s annexes on (a) “Drawing charts/ graphs and plots on distribution of occurrence data” (annex III), (b) “Presentation of data analysis/statis-tical analysis” (annex V) and (c) “Glossary of terms” (annex VI). The EWG was also tasked to prepare a further discussion paper on (i) the “Determination of outliers/extreme values and handling them” (annex I), (ii) the “Minimum number of data points for estimating high percentile values” (annex II), (iii) the “Prelimi­nary calculation of dietary exposure and its reduction rate to the contaminants from target commodity(ies) at the hypothetical MLs” (annex IV), and (iv) possible topics for future discussion taking into account exist­ing publications, such as IPCS Principles and Methods for the Risk Assessments of Chemicals in Foods (EHC 240, FAO/WHO) for consideration by CCCF19.⁹

Numerical Performance Criteria (NPC) for Meth­ods of Analysis (MOA) for total aflatoxins (AFT) for several nuts and dried figs (i.e., Peanuts intended for further processing; tree nuts destined for further processing: almonds, hazelnuts, pistachios, and shelled Brazil nuts; Ready-to-eat tree nuts: almonds, hazelnuts, pistachios and shelled Brazil nuts; and, for Dried figs).

CCF18 agreed to forward these NPC to CCMAS45 for endorsement and inclusion in the general standard on methods of analysis and sampling (CXS 234) and request the Codex Secretariat to amend the relevant sampling plans set in the Codex GSTCFF (CXS 193), by replacing the current NPCs and related texts with a reference to CXS 234, but only once CCMAS would have endorsed the new NPC, and also inform the CAC accordingly.¹⁰ CCCF18 also requested an advice from CCMAS45 on the determination of the appro­priate LOQ for AFT (relationship between individ­ual LOQs for each mycotoxin and the LOQ for total AFT). This issue was handled under the lead of Brazil, which noted that establishing NPC for sum of com­ponents was a complex issue and that, while there was guidance provided in an information document titled, “Approaches which use a ‘sum of components’” pub­lished on the Codex website, such guidance equally stated that NPCs should be set on a case-by-case basis.

Revised list of priorities for assessments and eval­uations by the FAO/WHO expert body JECFA and CCCF follow-up on previous evaluations by JECFA

CCCF18 also adopted a revised priority list of sever­al assessment and evaluation works directed to the FAO/WHO JECFA scientific expert body on chemical substances and toxins (i.e., an update on Dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs, an update on Arsenic (inorganic and organic); full risk evaluations of Scopoletin; Thallium; Perfluoroalkyl substances (e.g., PFOS, PFOA, PFNA, PFHxS); and, Ethylene Oxide (EtO) and 2-Chloro-Eth-anol; a refined exposure assessment to Ochratoxin A (OTA) via occurrence in and consumption of dried fruits; risk assessment of Cadmium and Lead present in Yerba Mate (via the consumption of Yerba Mate infusions)).¹¹ Qatar expressed the need for a JECFA opinion on BPA (and other bisphenols, like BPS and BPF) given current divergent national risk assessments conclusions on the safety (or lack of safety) of these substances would lead to restrictions, entering into effect early 2027. On ETO and 2-CE, Indonesia sug­gested JECFA should assess the risks for EtO and 2-CE separately based on existing scientific literature, while, at the same time, CCCF could invite Codex mem­bers to provide additional occurrence data, given that generating new and primary data to support JECFA evaluation of these compounds was challenging.

CCCF18 noted that both UN agencies, the FAO and the WHO, were prioritizing scientific advice based on Codex criteria and moreover based on resource availability. Increased demands for JECFA evalua­tions (on contaminants, but also on food additives and residues of veterinary drugs) combined with the current reduced donor fundings impacted greatly the ability of JECFA to meeting with all these Codex needs. Regarding JECFA support to CCCF, the WHO representative informed the Committee that the 101st JECFA meeting (scheduled in October 2025) would only be able to perform the requested risk assessment of Arsenic (organic and inorganic), due to WHO budget constraints and on-going restructuration and re-prioritization of the agency. As such, the originally planned evaluation of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs had been deferred, noting that financial limitations also led to the postponement of a veterinary drug res­idue meeting and would likely lead to possible reduc­tions in scope of future JECFA sessions (on all three domains JECFA covers). Both FAO and WHO repre­sentatives called upon countries for increasing their current contribution to or providing extra-funding for the joint FAO/WHO scientific program.

The FAO-JECFA Secretariat reprentative further men­tioned that FAO and WHO jointly determine what could be accomplished from the overall work program assigned to JECFA, considering available resources, suitability of experts, existing data available, and it would report on that review work to the CCCF19 accordingly. CCCF18 noted the ongoing FAO/WHO supportive work to address chemical contaminants in water used throughout the agrifood systems, on eval­uating emerging and known contaminants, including pharmaceuticals, agrochemicals, and fluorinated compounds.

With regards to past JECFA evaluations, CCCF agreed to establish a new EWG, led by the European Union to prepare a discussion paper on mycotoxins T-2, HT-2, 4,15-diacetoxyscirpenol (called ‘DAS’) and ergot alka­loids for consideration by CCCF19 and to reconvene a separate WG led by USA to consider the follow-up work on all the outcomes of JECFA evaluations to be held prior to CCCF19.

Update on radionuclides after a nuclear accident

CCCF18 agreed to amend the annex X of the 2024 version of the GSCTFF (CXS 193) by deleting the footnote stating, “The Codex Alimentarius Com­mission at its 18th Session (Geneva 1989) adopted Guideline Levels for Radionuclides in Foods Following Accidental Nuclear Contamination for Use in Interna­tional Trade (CXG 5-1989) applicable for six radionu­clides (⁹⁰Sr, ¹³¹I, ¹³⁷Cs, ¹³⁴Cs, ²³⁹Pu and ²⁴¹Am) during one year after the nuclear accident” and the related para­graph that read, “Significant improvements in the assessment of radiation doses resulting from the human intake of radioactive substances have become available since the adoption of CXG 5”.¹²

Returning the draft Code of Practice on Cadmium in Foods for further elaboration

CCCF18 agreed to return the draft CoP for fur­ther intersessional elaboration with the aim to find a consensus for advancing it at CCCF19. For that purpose, CCCF18 re-established an EWG, led again by the USA, to further develop the CoP, taking into account the discussions held at CCCF18 as well as all the written comments submitted in advanced and raised during the CCCF18 session. That EWG was tasked to refine existing annexes on seaweed and rice and develop new annexes for commodities for which there were specific mitigation measures not covered under general provisions applicable to all foods. To that effect, a circular letter would seek information on general and commodity specific mitigation measures including for cereal and cereal products (e.g., wheat and its derivatives; maize), vegetables (including leafy vegetables), pulses and legumes, and shellfish.

The EWG was also tasked to integrate the existing CoP on the prevention and reduction of cadmium in cocoa beans (CXC 81), possibly as an adapted annex, but only when the general provisions applicable to all foods included in the body of that new CoP would be completed or reaching a near completion stage.

NEW WORK PROPOSALS

Revisions of the existing Code of Practice (CoP) on weed control to prevent and reduce pyrrolizidine alkaloid contamination in food and feed (CXC 74) and its associated Guidance on sampling and anal­ysis performance characteristics for the collection of data to be submitted to the GEMS/food database for pyrrolizidine alkaloids in foods

CCCF18 agreed to start new work on the revision of the Code of practice for weed control to prevent and reduce pyrrolizidine alkaloid contamination in food and feed (CXC 74) by forwarding the project document to the CAC48 for approval as new work.¹³ CCCF18 agreed to include the Guidance on sampling and its key appendix on performance as part of the CCCF18 report, as a reference point to be used for any future calls for data. CCCF18 agreed to establish a new EWG led by Türkiye, and co-led by the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, to revise the existing CXC 74.

Revision of the existing code of practice for the prevention and reduction of aflatoxin B₁ (AB₁) in raw materials and supplemental feedingstuffs for milk-producing animals (CXC 45)

CCCF18 agreed to start new work to revise the CoP for the reduction of AB₁ in raw materials and sup­plemental feedingstuffs for milk-producing animals (CXC 45) and forwarded the revised project docu­ment to the CAC48 for a formal approval of that new work.¹⁴ The goal of such a revision was to refer to new control measures for AB₁, particularly concerning forage crops, silage, hay, oilseeds, pulses, and legumes, aiming for applicability across temperate and tropical climates, noting that climate change impacts and the increasing detection of main metabolite of AB₁ (i.e., aflatoxin M₁) in milk were clearly observable in sev­eral African regions. Structural changes to the Code covered new subsections for purpose/scope, defini­tions, related guidance, general recommendations, and preparation for storage and animal feeding. It was also decided to add cross-references to other relevant Codex texts to avoid any duplication of information. CCCF18 tasked an intersessional EWG, led by Cana­da and co-led by Saudi Arabia, to develop the revised CoP. A circular letter would be issued for Codex members and Observers to share further risk manage­ment best practices, as well as other relevant data and information that could support such a revision.

Development of a new Code of Practice for the prevention and reduction of tropane alkaloids con­tamination in food and feed.

CCCF18 agreed to start new work on a code of practice for the prevention and reduction of tropane alkaloids in food and feed by forwarding the project document to the CAC48 for a formal approval as a new work.¹⁵ CCCF18 tasked a new intersessional EWG, led by China and co-led by Saudi Arabia, to draft this new CoP in taking into account the written comments submitted to CCCF18, comments made at the session, for further consideration and discussion at CCCF19. A circular letter would be issued to re­quest risk management best practices, as well as other relevant data and information to support the develop­ment of the CoP. The discussion paper presenting that new work was developed through a past EWG and an inSession Working Group (ISWG) which were also chaired by China and co-chaired by Saudi Arabia.

Application of Maximum Levels to Multi-Ingredient Products and Analysis of Occurrence Data of Lead in Spice Mixtures

CCCF18 agreed to establish a new EWG, led by Japan and co-lead by India, Panama and the USA to prepare a discussion paper exploring options for guidance on the application of MLs to spice mixtures, for further discussion at CCCF19, using information provided in CCCF18 working document (CX/CF 18/25/18) and the CCCF18-CRD27 as a starting point to perform a further data analysis on spices mixtures, while noting the limited support to establish a single ML for lead in spice mixtures, based solely on the JECFA analy­sis presented at CCCF18. One of the issue discussed was the compatibility of setting a single ML for spice mixtures that would be higher than each individual ML set for each spice present in the mixture with the ALARA principle and good risk management practic­es (i.e., to avoid already prohibited or, at least, ques­tionable blending practices).

No agreement to move forward with the revision of the existing Code of Practice (CoP) for the reduction of acrylamide in foods (CXC 67)

CCCF18 agreed to further develop and refine the discussion paper and the project document supportive of the revision of the existing CoP for the reduction of acrylamide in foods (CXC 67), as well as the proposed draft revisions foreseen to this code, with the help of an intersessional EWG led by India, co-led by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The Codex Secretariat was tasked to issue a circular letter to gather more information on mitiga­tion measures that have been proven to be feasible and effective for application for local and/or regional condi­tions to reduce acrylamide contamination in foods.¹⁶

Post-CCCF19 Future Call for Data on the Occur­rence of AFT in Cereals

CCCF18 agreed to establish an EWG led by Brazil, co-led by Thailand to prepare a discussion paper for consideration at the after-next CCCF plenary (i.e., at CCCF20). The paper would review all data in the WHO-GEMS/Food database to assess the need for revising existing MLs set in the GSCTFF (CXS 193) for total aflatoxins in cereal grains and cereal-derived prod­ucts, considering the derivation of new MLs for specific cereals, and evaluate the need for revising the related Codex Code of Practice on the Prevention and Reduction of Mycotoxin Contamination in Cereals (CXC 51, last revised in 2016). CCCF18 discussed issues like a ML for AFT in Sorghum, a possible separate ML for AFT in husked rice, the influence and impacts of agri-climatic conditions and good practices implemented throughout the supply chain; and, the requirements for a forthcoming call for data (the scope of which is to be prepared by Brazil, together with the JECFA secretariat, for future discussion and approval by CCCF19).

Review of Codex Standards for Contaminants (i.e., MLs and associated sampling plan and/or related CoPs) Possibly Requiring an Update

Based on the work from a EWG and VWG, led by Canada, CCCF18 agreed to move several existing standards from the wish-lists A and B to the Overall Highest Priority List (‘OHPL’) on (a) ML of Cadmium in cereal grains; (b) Ochratoxin A in coffee (and its related CoP (CXC 69)); (c) Seven MLs for aflatoxins in various cereals and cereal-based foods; and (d) MLs for Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in smoked and dried foods (and its related CoP (CXC 68)). It also agreed to add new prioritization criteria, rationale and other information to justify entries in the ‘OHPL’ and also track (in a new annex to the OHPL) the various on-going re-evaluations of sampling plans (for alignment with CXG 50, where relevant), and to be part of the annual circular letter. CCCF18 therefore agreed to re-convene a PWG prior to CCCF19, led by Canada, and update the lists based on the comments to be received in response to a new Circular Letter. Last, CCCF18 agreed to establish a new EWG, led by New Zealand and co-led by Canada to review the current ML set for Methylmercury in Tuna (and its associated sampling plan), pending con­sideration of the overall workload of CCCF19.

OTHER ISSUES DISCUSSED

CCCF18 also discussed other businesses on (a) an update about possible future new work proposal on a guidance on food safety aspects related to the use of recycled plastics in food packaging (USA);¹⁷ (b) a proposal for the development of a new Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Ochratoxin A in Dried Fruits (Türkiye);¹⁸ (c) a proposal to identify maximum levels (MLs) in the GSCTFF (CXS 193) that do not have corresponding methods of analysis or numeric performance criteria (NPC) in the standard on methods of analysis and sampling (CXS 234), and the identification of appropriate analytical methods or NPC for these MLs (Brazil);¹⁹ (d) the in­clusion of the MLs set for marine biotoxins (saxitoxin group, okadaic acid group, domoic acid group, breve-toxin group and azaspiracid group) in Section 1.5 of the Codex Standard for live and raw bivalve molluscs (CXS 292) into CXS 193 (Codex Secretariat);²⁰ and, (e) the outcome of the evaluation of the CCCF activi­ties for the period 2020-2023 (The Netherlands).²¹

The publication will be posted to World Food Regulation Review soon.

1. The CCCF is the specialised body of the Codex Ali-mentarius Commission Food Standard Program dealing with contaminants and toxins in and on foods (and in feedstuffs as far it may affect the safety of animal-de­rived foods, such as milk, meat, offal, etc.). It establishes maximum or guidelines levels for contaminants and naturally occurring toxicants in food and feed, assigns risk assessment priorities to the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives, Contaminants and Veterinary Drugs (JECFA); reviews methods of analy­sis and sampling; elaborates prevention and reduction codes of practice for related subjects; and considers other matters assigned to it by the Commission or other Committees in its area of competence. The session was chaired by Dr Sally Hoffer, Manager Safe and Sustain­able Food, Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, Plant Agro Chains and Food Quality (the Netherlands). The CCCF18 session was attended by 79 Member Countries (including 52, present in person), one Member Organization and 23 Observer organiza­tions. The next plenary session (CCCF19) was tenta­tively scheduled from 19 to 23 October 2026, noting the kind offer of Egypt to co-host that session (in Egypt), subject to future confirmation. CCCF18 praised the work of retiring Marie-Ange Delen for the Netherlands’ CCCF secretariat and her career as NL-Codex delegate. CCCF18 also paid a tribute to Dr. Pisan Pongsapitch from the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives of Thailand (retiring) for his immense science-based con­tributions to the Codex Alimentarius texts (and negoti­ations) including but not limited to CCCF texts and his long-lasting legacy in staff-training on Codex matters in Thailand and the rest of South-East Asian region. 
2. See https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/ meetings/detail/en/?meeting=CCCF&session=18& 
3. See https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/ meetings/en/ 
4. See https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/ codex-texts/en/ 
5. See Appendix III of the CCCF18 report. CCCF18 considered first the outcome of an Electronic Working Group (EWG) chaired by Brazil, recalling JECFA also issued a new call for data requesting the exclusion of data when potentially linked to economic adulteration. Submitted data were processed early 2025. 
6. See appendix IV of CCCF18 report. 
7. See Appendix V of CCCF18 report.
8. The discussion was based on the outcome of an inter-sessional work of an EWG, led and managed by India. India explained that the proposal to set up a ML of 10 µg/kg for RTE peanuts was primarily based on data provided by the WHO-GEMS/Food database adminis­trator (limited to and from seven countries, with only three in the top 10 of peanut producing countries, reflec­tive of an inadequate geographical representation of the data) and described occurrence data calculated for four countries (Brazil, India, Thailand, USA), demonstrating ranges of 6.06 / 8.33 – 44.275 µg/kg. Strong concerns were expressed regarding the data assessed and the approach taken for the establishment of the proposed ML. CCCF18 agreed that more time was needed for the implementation of the revised CoP for the pre­vention and reduction of aflatoxin contamination in peanuts (CXC 55), just finalised by the CCCF18 session. Such time would be used by countries to submit more geographically representative data and in accordance with the working definition for RTE peanuts, as well as the on-going restructuring of the WHO-GEMS/Food database’s template. 
9. See Appendix IX of the CCCF18 report (and to be published by end 2025 on https://www.fao.org/ fao-who-codexalimentarius/resources/inf-doc/en/). The elaboration of this long document (and all its pending annexes) has been carried out by the European Union, as the Chair of the EWG and the ISWG and its co-chairs from Japan, the Netherlands and the USA (plus a couple of other key countries and experts). Several new aspects were discussed, such as the submission of paired samples (before and after processing) to the WHO-GEMS/Food database to better assess the efficacy of a CoP and processing in reducing contaminant levels, along with the appropriateness of the WHO-GEMS/ Food database’s template for this purpose; the require­ment for Limit of Quantification (LOQ) reporting to become mandatory, with Limit of Detection (LOD) re­porting being optional; the use of datasets with (nearly) all quantified results without reporting LOD/LOQ; the guarantees to be provided on implementation of CoP and the exclusions of datasets by the EWG relating to non-implementation of the CoP; and the reference to both parametric and non-parametric statistical meth­ods. CCCF18-CRD39 was used as the basis for the discussion. CCCF18 went through the entire document and approved proposed changes. The WHO-JECFA Secretariat highlighted the importance of the WHO-GEMS/Food database and confirmed feasibility to amend the database’s template (as per the new guid­ance) but he noted that changes previously directed by the CCCF to the WHO-GEMS/Food coordinator could not be implemented due to a lack of adequate resources and called upon Codex member countries to support – financially or in kind – the maintenance of the database and template. The FAO-JECFA Secretariat observed that several issues currently being addressed by the EWG (and in particular in the annexes of the guidance document) were already detailed in existing documents, such as the Environmental Health Criteria (EHC) 240, published jointly by FAO and WHO under the UN-IPCS program. The FAO-JECFA Secretariat suggested that the EWG could review such documents to avoid duplication of efforts and ensure further efficiency. 
10. See Appendix X of CCCF18 report. 
11. See Appendix XI of CCCF18 report. 
12. See Appendix II of CCCF18 report. Note also that the IAEA representative udpated the session on the on-going work to elaborate an information document on natural radionuclides in food, feed and drinking wa­ter, with comments from Codex members reviewed by the IAEA/FAO/WHO and that the revised (non-Codex) information document would be published on the IAEA website, and a related web link would be made available on the Codex website. 
13. See Appendix VI of CCCF18 report. The proposed revision would aim at (a) identifying additional foods that are affected by pyrrolizidine alkaloid contami­nation such as grains and grain-based products, teas, herbal infusions, herbal and pollen-based food supple­ments, salad plants, culinary herbs, spices, honey, and pollen; (b) addressing specific practices for beekeep­ing not covered under the measures for weed control mentioned in the current CoP; (c) integrating new approaches to weed control in primary production and recommendations for food and feed establishments on good manufacturing/hygiene practices; (d) describing measures that are practicable and feasible for small and medium enterprises; (e) handling pasture management while taking into account the sensitivity of different animal species to pyrrolizidine alkaloids based on new findings published in recent scientific literature; (f) identifying measures on how to deal with supplements (ayuvedic/herbal products) when they are regulated as foods; and, (g) defining the inherent levels of pyr-rolizidine alkaloids in plants and the risks associated with different animal species. The WHO representative indicated that in addition to the WHO-GEMS/Food database, Codex Members could also use the food consumption statistics included in the FAO/WHO Global Individual Food Consumption Data Tool (FAO/ WHO GIFT) and in the CIFOCOss (FAO/WHO Chronic Individual Food Consumption Data summary statistics). 
14. See Appendix VII of the CCCF18 report. 
15. See Appendix VIII of the CCCF18 report. 
16. CCCF18 agreed that more time was needed to further develop the discussion paper and project document, to better understand the scope of the work and the revisions needed, the proposed organization of the revised CoP, and to identify more information on existing mitigation strategies since the adoption of the CoP in 2009 that could be included in the CoP. CCCF18 agreed to request the Codex Secretariat to issue another circular letter to gather more information (in addition to the comments in response to CL 2024/79-CF) on mit­igation measures to reduce acrylamide in foods. Food-DrinkEurope informed the Committee that it was in the process of updating the FDE toolbox for the reduction of acrylamide in foods and indicated that it could also help revising the CoP. 
17. CCCF18 agreed to request the USA, with assistance from Canada, Japan, the European Union and other interested Codex members (such as India or China) to prepare and submit a discussion paper and project doc­ument on possibly developing a guidance related to food safety aspects of recycled plastics in food packaging, for consideration and discussion by CCCF19. CCCF18 noted that this topic would fall under its remit, rather than the Codex Committee on Food Additives (CCFA). China indicated that at this time there was no clear evidence confirming a link between the use of recycled plastics and food safety or/and any issues related to fair practices in trade. China noted that a more robust scientific foundation should first be established by the FAO and WHO before a new Codex work could be con­sidered. China also questioned whether CCCF was the appropriate committee to undertake this task, suggest­ing that it might fall more suitably under the mandate of CCFA. CCCF18 clarified that the discussion paper would only compile all information and views relevant to the topic. CCCF19 would then be invited to consider the discussion paper and decide on the suitable step(s) forward. IUFoST pointed out that food contact applica­tions have attracted much innovation within the food science and technology and food production commu­nities, and that a discussion paper would allow wider perspectives on how international standardization and harmonization of practices could be achieved in food contact applications within Codex. 
18. CCCF agreed to establish an EWG led by Türkiye and co-chaired by the United Kingdom (UK) to refine the discussion paper and project document for the de­velopment of a new CoP for the prevention and reduc­tion of Ochratoxin A in dried fruits, for consideration and further discussions by CCCF19. 
19. Brazil expressed its intent to prepare a discussion paper to identify methods or NPC for MLs in CXS 193 for which there are no methods in CXS 234. CCCF18 expressed its appreciation to Brazil for this offer and noted Costa Rica willingness to assist in the preparation of such a discussion paper, for consideration and further discussions by CCCF19. 
20. CCCF18 agreed to request the Codex Secretariat to include the MLs for these marine biotoxins into the GSCTFF (CXS 193) and inform the CAC accordingly. The Codex Secretariat also indicated that CAC could also send a request to the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products (CCFFP) to consider removing the MLs from CXS 292 to avoid possible inconsistencies with CXS 193 in the future, pending a decision by CAC on the status of CCFFP (currently adjourned sine die). 
21. The Chairperson explained that the CCCF18-CRD07 document aimed at containing feedback from Codex members and observers on their experience in attending CCCF sessions. She acknowledged the re­sponses provided by delegates to previous post-meeting surveys in the past years and explained the Host country’s follow-up actions to address the issues identified in such responses. She invited delegates to provide further comments by emailing the Dutch Host Secretariat, im­mediately after the CCCF18 session.