35 / 435
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
June 22, 2016
AOAC INTERNATIONAL Official Methods Board
Deborah McKenzie, Staff Liaison – Deborah McKenzie
OMB Working Group on Review of Candidate Methods
AOAC’s pathway to Official Methods of Analysis does not guarantee
Official Methods of
Analysis
. However, trying to demonstrate due diligence has led to repetitive calls for
methods for the same analytes/matrices with the results being either, few to no methods
submitted, to methods being reviewed by the ERP and deemed to require further
optimization and/or development with subsequent cycles of review prior to adoption.
AOAC is investigating ways to increase the number of methods that will likely meet the
SMPR submitted for identified stakeholder priorities, and ways of end potential open cycles
of review of methods that ERPs determine do not meet the SMPRs sufficiently for adoption
as
Official Methods of Analysis
.
AOAC OMB formed a working group that held its initial meeting on Wednesday, May 11,
2016 and led by Shauna Roman, with working group members including Erin Crowley, Don
Gilliland, Kate Mastovska, and Tom Phillips along with Delia Boyd and Deborah McKenzie.
Absent with regrets was ERP chair, Darryl Sullivan.
McKenzie provided examples from both SPIFAN and SPDS. Roman provided a flowchart of
what the process should include. The working group agreed that there was no need for any
changes in policy at this time, but rather:
More focus could be on more explicit training for ERP chairs
Additional communications with potential method authors regarding ERP comments
Reinforcement of deadlines and timelines for submission
These measures will also coincide with additional communications measures earlier in the
process at the Advisory Panel and Stakeholder Panel meetings pre‐SMPR formation.
Attachments:
Examples (McKenzie) and Flowchart (Roman)
AOAC OMB Meeting Book
34