Probably the latter. Additives compliance is a complex area and...

Probably the latter. Additives compliance is a complex area and a lot of it is based on historical concessions and shades of gray in policy. Problem in this situation IMO is the compounding nature of prior concerns of people in the area. The data should have been evaluated in an objective manner and re-testing should have been carried out prior to any major actions, given the levels involved. It's called professionalism, and it is often clouded by politics IMO. It would be a shame if a viable process is canned based on anything other then an objective analysis. Everybody misses out this way. All IMHO.