2017 Mid-Year Meeting Voting & ERP Panels

D. Proposal for Representative Voting Members  To develop the proposal for voting members that is representative of the registrants for the SPIFAN  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 37 registered  organizations of which 19‐25 organizations would be appropriate to ensure that the perspectives are  covered.    For 25 representatives and using the Broad Perspectives of Registrants as a based, 3% academia would  allow for one (1) institution.  Government is 20% of the registrants, and this would allow for five (5)  agencies.  As industry is 69% of the registrants, this would allow for 17 companies. With NGO being 8%  percent of the registrants, this would allow for two (2) organizations.    Adding the regional perspective, 49% of the registrants are from the US which would make 12 members  representative of the stakeholder registrants from the US.  Also, 29% of the registrants are European.   Therefore, to represent Europe among the stakeholders require seven (7) voting members.  These  numbers need to balance with the regional perspective for the same set of registrants.  Two voting  member from New Zealand is representative of Oceania and one voting member of the other regions.   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.  China may also be represented by the  organization’s counterpart in Switzerland or in the US. 

RECOMMENDATION:

For the AOAC Official Methods Board to review and approved the recommended proposal in Table 2 for  representative voting members for the SPIFAN meeting on Wednesday, March 15, 2017.    

Table 2: Proposed Representative Voting Members  Broad Perspective  Specific Perspective 

Region 

Organization (s) 

1. Academia  2. Government  3. Government  4. Government  5. Government  6. Government 

Research  Regulatory  Research 

Netherlands 

RIKILT 

US 

US FDA  

Uruguay 

LATU 

State Regulatory 

US 

FL Dept. Ag. 

Reference Standards  US 

US NIST 

Laboratory  Standards 

Argentina  Netherlands  New Zealand 

INTI  ISO  IDF 

7. NGO  8. NGO 

IDF 

9. Industry  10. Industry  11. Industry  12. Industry  13. Industry  14. Industry  15. Industry 

Formula  Formula  Formula  Formula  Formula  Formula  Formula 

US  US 

Abbott Nutrition  Mead Johnson 

Switzerland/China  Nestle 

US 

FrieslandCampina 

New Zealand  

Fonterra 

US 

Perrigo‐PBM Nutritionals 

France 

Danone