Subject: Decree on requirements for starch, legumes, oilseeds and products thereof
Starch Europe would like to comment on the Czech Republic draft ‘Decree on requirements for starch, legumes, oilseeds and products thereof’ - hereinafter “the draft decree”- in the frame of the TRIS notification.
Besides asking alignment with EU, international standards, and/or industry practice - failing to do so would jeopardise global trade - we also kindly ask clarification for the rationale behind certain provisions and ask amendments of others.
Paragraph 2 – Definition of certain terms
Definition of ‘starch’
Point 1 a) of the draft decree reads: “a)starch means powder obtained by isolation from starchy raw materials of vegetable origin, possibly subsequently modified by physical means or by enzymes.”
Starch Europe would like to ask alignment with the definition included in the so-called Food Information to Consumers Regulation[1], where ‘starch’ covers “Starches, and starches modified by physical means or by enzymes”[2]
Definition of ‘maltodextrin’
Point 1 b) of the draft decree reads: “b) Maltodextrin means starch modified by enzymatic hydrolysis of starch.”
In the EU, glucose syrups are regulated in Directive 2001/111/EC on certain sugars intended for human consumption. According to this directive, glucose syrup has at least DE 20. A definition of maltodextrin is not laid down in EU legislation, but the DE requirement for glucose syrup indirectly means that starch hydrolysates with DE < 20 fall under maltodextrins. A more suitable definition is therefore: Maltodextrin is prepared as a white powder or concentrated solution by partial hydrolysis of starch with safe and suitable acids and enzymes. and has a dextrose equivalent (D.E.) of less than 20. This definition is internationally consistent with the Food Chemical Codex monograph for maltodextrins and with the American definition in 21CRF184-1444 maltodextrin.
Furthermore, we have noticed that the draft decree refers to “Enzyme modified starches/Maltodextrins”[3]. This may lead to confusion as for the concept of, as stated above, a) Maltodextrins; and b) Enzyme modified starches. Also, this is not in line with EU legislation[4].
Finally, maltodextrins also exist in liquid form, and this is not reflected in the draft decree. It is necessary that the draft decree specifies that is only covers maltodextrins in dry form.
Provisions on Modified starches not authorised as food additives – Currently, twelve modified starches are authorised as food additives under the EU Additives Regulation[5]. In the draft decree, requirements which would apply to enzyme treated starches which are not considered to be food additives under EU legislation are not fully aligned to JECFA specifications monograph. We would therefore suggest alignment with applicable JECFA specifications regarding moisture content and abstain from a limit for nitrogen or protein [6].
Starch Europe comments on paragraph 3 - Starch and starch products (1) Classification of starch products into types, groups, and subgroups that reads
- (1) The classification of starch and starch products into types, groups, and subgroups is set out in Annex 1 to this Decree.
Starch Europe would like to highlight that “types” appears to refer to species in the table ( no field for ‘type’) and ‘group’ to botanical origin (see annex I). ‘Product types’ and ‘botanical origin’ would be better terminology than “types” to identify different types of starches.
In addition, the draft decree requires that maltodextrins are declared on the consumer label with their DE. Starch Europe wants to comment that DE is not a familiar term for the average consumer. In addition, the mandatory nutritional value declaration already provides the consumer with understandable and more precise information regarding the presence of sugars and carbohydrates. Starch Europe would like you to omit the requirements on labelling the DE for maltodextrins.
Annex 2. Table 1 Physical and chemical requirements for starch/native starch
Please note that native starches are covered by the attached monograph- Att. 2[7].
Annex 2 - table one – Physical, chemical and sensory requirements for the quality of starch and starch products
Starch Europe strongly advise to consider business practice, international and national requirements. In the table below we suggest two types of amendments, but first we provide the rationale behind our suggestions:
- Taking business practice into account - We suggest replacing reference to Content of N-substance in dry matter % with ‘protein content N x factor, e.g. 6.25)”, as this corresponds to current business practice based on the FCC monograph for food starch, unmodified.
- The table refers to the Number of stipes visible to the naked eye per 1 dm2:
- We do not understand the reason for including this parameter. It is indeed covered in the European Pharmacopeia and not relevant to agri-food standards. We therefore ask removal of this parameter from Annex 1 table 2.
- When Czech authorities should identify regulatorily valid reasons to maintain this parameter, we would like to highlight that reference to “stipes’ appears to be confusing. We believe that being this paragraph related to potato starch, the draftsman intended to refer to ‘spot’ or ‘speckle’.
Taking existing national requirements into account - In Germany, there are guidance in place for starch and starch products, which establish 2 qualities of wheat starch, notably A and B wheat starch[8]. Whereas A wheat starch is somehow covered in Annex2, Table 1), B starch is completely missing. If the decree were to be adopted in its current format, B-wheat starch would be labelled as ‘wheat starch’ in Germany, but not in the Czech Republic.
The considerations above led us to formulate the request of amending Annex 2 Table as shown in the document we attached, including our comments to the draft Decree. What does not show in that attachment is the need to differentiate between
- Wheat A Starch, with Dry matter content % = at least 85, and Protein content : At most 5.7;
and Wheat B Starch with Dry matter content % = at least 85 and Protein Content: At most 5
Annex 2, Table 2 –Sensory requirements for starch/native starch reads: Appearance: very fine loose powder without undesirable admixtures. The explanatory note adds that ‘Undesirable admixtures are physical impurities, dust, sand, soil, stones, and glass or metal particles’.
Starch Europe would appreciate a clarification of what is meant by ‘dust’ in this context.
Furthermore, one consequence of the proposed wording in the explanatory note would be that sand would be considered to be part of ash. Undesirable admixtures are physical impurities, dust, sand, soil, stones, and glass or metal particles. It is expected that sand, as impurity, will reflect in the ash content. It is not necessary to regulate the same matter twice. Furthermore, as starch is defined as including starch modified with enzymes of physically modified starch, appearance can also be granules, agglomerated particles or flakes. To build on this point, the text is very confusing on this part as it seems to mix different kind of foreign bodies.
Referring to "without undesirable admixtures" is not clear enough. We believe a quantification (in mm) of the foreign bodies would be needed and, in addition, the exclusion from their "admixtures" of reference to the inorganic products such as sands, dust as they are analyzed through the ash content, which is framed in annex 2, table 1.
Annex 2 table four – Physical and Chemical requirements for enzyme-modified /maltodextrin starch and physically modified starches
Table four does not list the different botanical origins. As a consequence, this would be interpreted as suggesting that same values apply for the different parameters. This would not be correct. Since the ash content of potato starch is naturally higher than that of cereal starches (see also Table 1 and our comment thereon), this difference will also have to be reflected in the limit for the ash content of enzyme-modified/maltodextrin and physically modified starch based on potato starch. The ash content of enzyme-modified/maltodextrin and physically modified starch based on potato starch must be 1.2% in dry matter (compared to the standard in table 1 + 0.6%, as is also applied for products based on wheat starch). As it stands, Annex II table four is incomplete and leaves out essential information.
We kindly ask Czech authorities to amend so as to include a differentiation among botanical origins, or to explain the rationale for its missing indication from table four, of the different botanical origins and why, on the contrary, the draftsman chose to include such differentiation in Annex 2 table one.
Annex 2, table 5 - Sensory requirements for enzyme-modified starch/maltodextrin, physically modified starch, and powdered pudding – This table describes colour as either greyish or yellowish white. We kindly ask that reference to possible ‘white’ colour is added or, alternatively, explain why the draftsman chose not to list it.
Annex 3 to Decree No .../2025 Tolerable negative weight tolerances for packages of starch/native starch, enzyme modified starch/maltodextrin, and physically modified starch
Starch Europe would like to put forward two requests:
Scope and coherence with existing national legislations
Ultimately, Starch Europe would like to ask clarification of the scope of the decree also to avoid any risk of incoherence with existing EU legislation. In this frame:
- We would appreciate clarification on whether suggested provisions are applicable B2C or B2B as well and, hence, what labelling consequences they would entail.
- We recommend Czech authorities verify coherence of the draft decree with existing international legislation. One example where failing to do so may lead to confusion, is the national transposition of the so called ‘EU sugars directive’, (2001/111) which includes products of the starch industry. Substance 7 for glucose syrup in the annex states: “The purified and concentrated aqueous solution of nutritive saccharides obtained from starch and/or inulin”. Article 2(5) specifically covers glucose-fructose syrups:
We remain at your disposal, for any clarification.
Best regards,
Nelli Hajdu
STARCH EUROPE Managing Director
[1]Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004 (Text with EEA relevance)Text with EEA relevance, (OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 18)
[2] Annex VII, part B or regulation 1169/2011, see footnote one for full reference.
[3] Paragraph 3 (4); Annex I table.
[4] Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on food additives (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 354, 31.12.2008, p. 16–33
[5] Please see footnote 3 for reference
[7] Food Chemicals Codex, Guid-D30744-284A – as attached. Hyperlink not available due to copyrights
[9] Council Directive of 20 January 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the making-up by weight or by volume of certain prepackaged products (76/211/EEC), OJ L 46, 21.2.1976, p. 1–11.
