70 / 88
D. Proposal for Representative Voting Members
To develop the proposal for voting members that is representative of the registrants for the ISPAM
meeting. There is a maximum of 30 seats possible; however, with the number of registrants, 30 voting
seats may be more than is needed to represent the stakeholder panel. There are 58 registered
organizations of which 27 organizations would be appropriate to ensure that the perspectives are
covered.
For 27‐29 representatives and using the Broad Perspectives of Registrants as a based, 4% academia would
allow for one (1) institution. Government is 16% of the registrants, and this would allow for four (4)
to five (5) agencies. As industry is 71% of the registrants, this would allow for 19 ‐ 20 companies. With
NGO being 9% percent of the registrants, this would allow for two (2) to three (3) organizations.
Adding the regional perspective, 56% of the registrants are from the US which would make 14‐15
members representative of the stakeholder registrants from the US. Canadian registrants total 12%,
which would allow for 3 representatives. Also, 23% of the registrants are European. Therefore, to
represent Europe among the stakeholders allows seven (7) voting members. These numbers need to
balance with the regional perspective for the same set of registrants. Two voting members from Oceania
is representative of Oceania and one voting member for Asia. Brazil may be represented by the US as the
organization that is in Brazil is also in the US and the organization may opt to be represented by its
US counterpart.
RECOMMENDATION:
For the AOAC Official Methods Board to review and approved the recommended proposal in Table 2 for
representative voting members for the ISPAM meeting on Tuesday, March 14, 2017.
Table 2: Proposed Representative Voting Members
Broad
Perspective
Specific Perspective
Region
Organization (s)
1. Academia
Research
US
FARRP‐Univ. of Nebraska
2. Government
Regulatory
Canada
Health Canada / CFIA
3. Government
Regulatory
Canada
Canadian Grain Commission
4. Government
Regulatory
US
US FDA
5. Government
Regulatory
Belgium
European Commission
6. Government
Regulatory
Austria
AGES
7. NGO
Product Certification
US / France
GFCO‐GIG / AFNOR
8. NGO
Research
Austria
MoniQA
9. NGO
Research
Germany
German Center for Food Chemistry
10. NGO
Independent
France
AOAC Food Allergen Community
11. Industry
Food
US
General Mills
12. Industry
Food
US
PepsiCo/Quaker Oats
13. Industry
Food
Japan
Nippon Ham
14. Industry
Food
US
Nestle