REP11/PR JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME ...

REP11/PR 2
10. In reply to the request from the Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods (CCRVDF), the in-session Working
Group on Methods of Analysis had considered the paper on the development of performance characteristics for multi-residue
analysis methods for veterinary drugs in foods and the Committee agreed with the recommendation of the working group that a
clearly described request and more background information were necessary for making any specific recommendations for discussion
at is future sessions.
REPORT ON ITEMS OF GENERAL CONSIDERATION BY THE 2010 JOINT FAO/WHO MEETINGS ON PESTICIDE RESIDUES
(JMPR) (Agenda Item 4a) 4
2.1 Consideration regarding JMPR capacity and resources
11. The FAO JMPR Secretariat gave a brief introduction about the issue of JMPR capacity and resources, and suggested that
information in Chapter 2.1 could be helpful when discussing this issue under Agenda item 13(a). The WHO JMPR Secretariat
informed delegates that in WHO, the provision of scientific advice is not supported by the core budget but by voluntary contributions
from member states. He further informed the Committee that WHO does not have the secured resources to conduct the JMPR
related activities in 2012.
2.2 Need for appropriate consumption data
12. The Committee was advised that the JMPR assessment of the dietary exposure is a crucial step in the risk assessment
process for pesticides and it can be at the origin of concerns between member states and the Codex Alimentarius. During its last
meeting, the JMPR recommended that WHO collect new data on large portions to improve the ability for JMPR assessment to cover
a wide range of national consumption patterns. The World Health Organization, with the help of its network of Collaborating Centres,
has launched a call to collect these data. WHO urged the delegates to follow up on this issue within their respective countries and to
raise the attention of the competent authorities to answer this call.
13. The Committee noted that new data would be provided by Thailand and EU member states. The Delegation of Australia
proposed that a call for data be distributed to ensure that all competent authorities will be informed.
2.3 Update about the GEMS/Food programme
14. The Committee was informed that the GEMS/Food programme aims to collect data on food consumption and on the
occurrence of chemicals in food. A new web based application was developed this year with the support of the US Food and Drug
Administration. This system will allow member states to upload their data directly on the WHO website and will also allow the
competent authorities to access the WHO database.
2.4 Information on the use of pesticides required for the estimation of residue levels in minor crops
15. The Committee was informed that the 2010 JMPR reviewed the residue data on minor crops conducted in a number of
developing countries and submitted by the Pesticides Initiative Programme (PIP). However, no approved label or an official letter
including the authorized GAP was provided from the responsible government agency. The JMPR evaluated the submitted residue
data, and conditionally made recommendations for maximum residue levels for some minor crops, leaving the final decision on
acceptance to the CCPR. The JMPR emphasized that the official use patterns are one of the essential requirements and that data
submitters should comply with the requirements as specified in the FAO Manual.
16. The Delegation of Kenya expressed their appreciation to the JMPR for its consideration of the need for Codex MRLs to be
established for minor crops and the diverse GAPs in developing countries. The Delegation of Kenya committed to provide the
necessary information on the officially recognized /authorized GAPs, including labels by April, 2011 and suggested advancing the
proposed maximum residue limits.
2.5 Principles and guidance on the selection of representative crops for the extrapolation of MRLs
17. As requested by the 42 nd Session of the CCPR, the 2010 JMPR reviewed the text of the proposed principles and guidance on
the selection of representative crops for the extrapolation of MRLs to commodity groups and provided further guidance on how it
estimates group maximum residue levels. The JMPR commented that the guidance will be particularly useful during the planning
stages of supervised trials to ensure that the residue data will be sufficient to support group MRLs.
18. The Delegation of the EU supported the initiative to establish clear rules for extrapolations, but was not in favour of
extrapolating the highest MRL for the subgroup with the most critical residue situation to the whole crop group.
4 Section 2 of the 2010 JMPR Report. Comments from Kenya (CRD 5); EU (CRD 15); and China (CRD 19).