ApprovedbyOfficialMethods Board, November 13, 2008
ApprovedbyAOACBoardof Directors, December 9, 2008
AppealsProcessAppended–September 2009
RevisedbyAOACBoardof Directors,May 25, 2011
Page 5 of 6
ExpertReviewPanel SelectionCriteria:
1.
AOAC paid consultants andAOAC staff should not act asChairs of ERPs.
2.
Members of theBoDmay act as votingmembers but it is recommended that they sit
as non-votingmembers of the panel, unless theCSO can demonstrate that there are so
few experts in the field available to the community that they are needed tomove the
project forward.
3.
Paid consultants ofAOAC andAOAC staffmaynot serve as votingmembers on
ERPs.
4.
If a single business location is represented bymore than one person on anERP, that
location shall have onlyone vote.
5.
TheChair of theERPmust be amember ofAOAC INTERNATIONAL.
Appeals Process:
ERP -Openness of Process andAppeals:
The entireERP reviewprocess is fullyopen. Any interested party (person, agency,
organization, association, company, Chief ScientificOfficer (CSO), or group) shall have
the right to comment.
Appeals or comments are sent to theAOACStaff.
Technical decisions by theERP are final and are not subject to reviewor appeal. Other
questions or issues regardingprocedures, conflict of interest, or improprietymaybe
appealed to thePresident of theAOAC INTERNATIONAL.
All written concernswill be considered and given a response.
If there is disagreement between theCSO and theOfficialMethodsBoard reviewers, the
CSOmay appeal to theChair of theOfficialMethodsBoard for consideration. The
OfficialMethodsBoard can select an impartial panel to review the issue, whichmust
report to theOfficialMethodsBoardwith a resolutionwithin 21 days of its assignment.
