AOAC CASP Meeting Minutes, March 2020

V. Report from the Microbial Contaminants Working Group, Julie Bramante, CDPHE

Bramante provided a presentation on the work of the Microbial Contaminant Working Group. Since the last CASP meeting this group met ix times by teleconference and drafted one SMPR, Standard Method Performance Requirements for Detection of Salmonella in Cannabis and Cannabis Products. She gave an overview on Salmonella species, reviewed definitions used in the SMPR, the SMPR method performance requirements, and the comments that were received. Several questions were taken – one participant asked if the SMPR included guidance on sampling, Bramante replied that it did not but that may be another SMPR in the future. Another participant if this is measured in CFU per gram and Bramante replied that it is not quantitative, just presence or absence, and one other participant highlighted a minor error, that the SMPR says “mass spectroscopy” and that should be “mass spectrometry” and Bramante stated that will be fixed before publication. AOAC staff asked if there was anyone present who was opposed to moving this forward for balloting and there was not. Audino started by congratulating Julie Kowalski and Julia Bramante for recently being listed among the 20 most influential people in cannabis science. 7 She added that she is now the science advisor for the overall AOAC CASP program, and that Kowalski has now taken over as Chair of this working group. She then provided a presentation on the work of the Chemical Contaminant Working Group since the last CASP meeting. She thanked working group members and highlighted that this has been the largest working group in AOAC’s history and gave a special thank you to Mike Halvorson, Monica San Miguel, and AOAC Staff. There were five (5) teleconferences for this working group since the last CASP meeting and one SMPR has been developed, Determination of Heavy Metals in a Variety of Cannabis and Cannabis Derived Products. She then gave an overview of heavy metals, regulatory schemes, and the method performance requirements from the SMPR. The SMPR’s required analytes are arsenic, cadmium, mercury and lead, but other metals may be included optionally. After reviewing the comments Audino asked if there was any opposition to moving this SMPR to a ballot and there was none. Kowalski then provided an update on the work of this group since she assumed the Chair position, which has been focused on development of an SMPR for mycotoxins. The working group has already had one (1) call to discuss the topic of mycotoxins. On January 28 the group discussed analytes and matrices as well as a need for consolidated information. The group is considering development of two (2) SMPRs – a screening/’semi-quant’ SMPR as well as a quantitative SMPR. She explained that mycotoxins are toxic metabolites of fungi, and that the SMPRs will look at total aflatoxins and ochratoxin A at a minimum. The matrices will include flower, concentrate products and finished products. The group will next work to consolidate information per state for the USA, Canada and other countries on analytes, reporting individual or total aflatoxins, maximum residue limits and requested matrices. The next telecon of this group will be held in a few weeks and Kowalski encouraged members of the group to contact her (JAKScience@outlook.com) and AOAC staff member Dent (cdent@aoac.org) if they are interested in participating. VI. Report from the Chemical Contaminants Working Group – Susan Audino, Audino & Associates

Predecisional Draft, Do Not Distribute 7 https://thecannabisscientist.com/power-list/2020

4