101. The Committee agreed to add one new compound to the priority list, spinosad (insecticide), which had been proposed by the United States. It was tentatively scheduled for toxicological and residue evaluations in 2001.
102. Phenthoate, phoxim, and thiometon were not supported for periodic reevaluation, although the veterinary uses of phoxim would be supported. DDT was tentatively scheduled for residue evaluation in 2000 for consideration of EMRLs in chicken meat. The Committee agreed to request national monitoring data by a Circular Letter to facilitate the establishment of an EMRL for this commodity.
103. The Committee noted that proposals for pesticides to be placed on the priority list generally arrive very late, often at the session itself. To facilitate the earlier submission of such proposals, the Committee agreed to distribute a Circular Letter at the same time as issuing the report of the Committee. The Committee requested that the agendas of the JMPR be placed on the FAO’s Plant Protection Division home page.
104. The number of pesticides to be reviewed by the JMPR, particularly the FAO Panel, was beyond its review capacity. The Committee requested the Delegation of Australia to develop a paper for the next Session outlining additional criteria that could be applied for prioritization of pesticides which would result in a better utilization of the resources available to the JMPR while meeting the needs of the Committee. The Committee agreed that indicative lists of studies be provided to the JMPR Secretaries by 1 March of one year before the scheduled evaluations.
105. The Committee thanked the informal group on priorities, under the chairship of Dr R. Eichner (Australia) for preparing the priority list[33].
