G/SPS/W/292/Rev.4  
 
19 June 2018  
(18-3825) Page: 1/3 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original: English  
 
PESTICIDE MAXIMUM RE SIDUE LEVELS (MRLS):  
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENDORSEMENT BY THE S PS COMMITTEE IN THE FIFTH REVIEW 
OF THE OPERATION AND  IMPLEMENTATION OF TH E SPS AGREEMENT  
SUBMISSION BY : ARGENTINA, AUSTRALIA, BRAZIL , CANADA, CHILE , COLOMBIA, C OSTA RICA , 
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, JAPAN, KENYA, MADAGASCAR , NEW ZEALAND , PANAMA, PARAGUAY,  
PERU, UGANDA, THE UNITED STATES AND URUGUAY1 
Revision  
The following communication, received on 1 8 June 2018 is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegations of Argentina , Australia, Brazil , Canada , Chile, Colombia , Costa Rica , 
Dominican  Republic , Japan , Kenya , Madagascar , New Zealand , Panama , Paraguay , Peru, Uganda , 
the United States  and Uruguay .  
 
_______________  
 
 
Argentina, Australia , Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic , Japan, 
Kenya, Madagascar, New Zealand, Pan ama, Paraguay, Peru, Uganda,  the United States and 
Uruguay  confirm the central importance of risk analysis, in accordance with the SPS Agreement – 
including assessing, managing and communicating risks associated with pesticide use – to 
protecting public health and the environment, while enabling the safe use of plant protection 
products and facilitating international trade. We acknowledge the broad ran ge of MRL -related 
issues that are currently having a significant impact on trade in food and agricultural products. We 
believe that the SPS Committee can play a constructive role in addressing these trade -related 
concerns. We propose to continue to advance  work in the Committee on trade -related issues on 
MRLs by incorporating the following recommendations into the report of the Fifth Review.  
1  ENABLE JMPR TO BETTE R RESPOND TO INCREAS ED DEMAND AND MONITO R 
PROGRESS ON NEW CODE X MRLS  
1.1.  Members of the SPS Committee  identified that despite the significant efforts to date by the 
Joint Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO) Meeting on 
Pesticide Residues, known as "JMPR", to streamline procedures and to manage the process of 
scientif ic review as efficiently as possible, the number of nominations put forward by the Codex 
Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR) for evaluation of new compounds and new uses, as well 
as for periodic re -evaluations of existing MRLs, by the JMPR far exceeds i ts current capacity. 
Further, the absence of MRLs for use in traded products is a significant concern, particularly for 
specialty crop and minor use products, and for agricultural products produced in developing 
countries.  
1.2.  Members also noted options to ena ble additional efficiencies in the Codex process to help 
maintain the relevance of Codex MRLs to all m ember countries and, in turn, facilitate countries' 
abilities to adopt Codex MRLs.  
                                                
1 Ministers of Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatemala,  
Japan, Kenya, Madagascar, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uganda, the United States and Uruguay signed a joint 
statement supporting the recommendations contained in this submission. See WT/MIN(17)/52.  G/SPS/W/292/Rev.4  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.3.  We believe the Committee should encourage Members, as a matter of some urgency, to 
approach their Codex representatives to highlight the trade issues raised during discussions on 
MRLs at the SPS Committee  and to participate actively in their inter -ministerial discussions on MRL 
issues. Members should encourage national discus sions of options that could enable a more 
productive Codex MRL system ; and  in particular, to hasten discussions on ways to achieve 
sustainable funding for the scientific bodies . Such discussions would take place in the context of 
national resource availabi lity, and could include, inter alia, options for increasing support to JMPR, 
increasing representative expert participation and other forms of support for the scientific bodies 
as well as encouraging program mes to support submission of data from developing  countries 
especially on minor crops. The Committee should also invite regular updates from Codex on its 
progress in the evaluation of new compounds and new uses.  
2  STRENGTHEN NOTIFICAT ION PRACTICES OF MEM BERS FOR GREATER TRA NSPARENCY 
AND PREDICTABILITY O N MRLS 
2.1.  Members have emphasized the need for greater transparency and predictability in Members' 
regulatory approaches to pesticide registration, in the setting of national MRLs and in the adoption 
of Codex MRLs. Several participants noted that the WTO notific ation process can be a powerful tool 
for identifying potential trade problems associated with proposed MRLs. They stressed that the 
processes for accepting comments on notifications and for taking comments into account are 
primary vehicles for reducing and  preventing adverse trade impacts resulting from new or revoked 
MRLs.  
2.2.  We believe the SPS Committee should consider ways for WTO Members to provide greater 
transparency and predictability worldwide on MRLs by urging Members to: (1) notify all proposed 
changes to their MRLs, including changes to MRLs that are based on international standards; and 
(2) review and improve their ability to take the comments of their trading partners meaningfully 
into account when considering proposed changes on MRLs.  
3  REPORT TO T HE COMMITTEE ON INTE RNATIONAL AND REGION AL ACTIVITIES ON 
MRLS  
3.1.  Members have identified important information on harmonization and other collaborative 
activities taking place in international and regional forums other than Codex, such as the 
Organization for  Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Asia -Pacific Economic 
Cooperation (APEC), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and the East African 
Community (EAC). The goal s of these collaborative activities include, inter alia , strengthenin g food 
safety, public health and environmental protection both domestically and globally; strengthening 
the scientific basis and enhancing regulatory efficiency by leveraging the scientific and regulatory 
resources of the international community; minimizin g unwarranted trade barriers related to 
pesticide regulatory requirements; and, facilitating trade and competition.  
3.2.  There have been many instances in which a creative initiative developed in a regional forum 
has produced benefits worldwide. For example, th e OECD MRL calculator and use of a common 
application format, known as the OECD dossier, has been taken up by JMPR and many national 
authorities, thereby enabling greater alignment of MRLs. Further, these tools have also enabled 
these national authorities to work collaboratively to improve the harmonization of MRLs, including 
through Global Joint Reviews and regional economic integration efforts, such as those of the EAC. 
Participants also discussed activities on global data generation and global joint revi ews that are 
being used as the basis of widely -accepted MRLs by many countries.  
3.3.  Many developing countries have benefited from participation in the Codex process and some 
developing countries are seeking to dovetail their national and regional efforts to th ose of the 
OECD, NAFTA and APEC in order to encourage registrations of new substances that could enable 
greater access to lower -risk chemistries by their producers.  
3.4.  We believe the Committee should welcome efforts by Members of these regional initiatives 
and the relevant observer organizations to provide regular updates to the Committee on their 
harmonization and other collaborative activities on MRLs. Such information could provide the basis 
for other Members to take up creative new MRL -related initiatives at the national and regional G/SPS/W/292/Rev.4  
 
- 3 - 
 
  levels to improve harmonization to Codex MRLs as well as to regional MRLs where relevant, in 
order to facilitate trade.  
4  COLLABORATE ON SOLUT IONS FOR MRLS FOR MI NOR USE AND SPECIALT Y CROPS  
4.1.  Members have noted the need for develop ing countries to have greater access to newer, 
lower -risk alternative pesticides to replace pesticides that are no longer supported by the 
manufacturers. Members explained the often complex and difficult issues involved in enabling 
greater access to minor -use and  low-risk chemistries in developing countries, and suggested 
careful analysis of  these issues in order to arrive at practical and effective solutions. The SPS 
Committee heard presentations on efforts of the EAC, as well as the capacity building activities on 
minor use associated with the IR -4 program of Rutgers University, the US  Department of 
Agriculture, and the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF), which provided creative 
and collaborative examples of practical ways in which Members  have begun to effectively address 
these issues, including through the Global Minor Use Summits.  
4.2.   Members also noted that regulatory approval procedures that are not aligned with 
international best practices (such as the OECD guidance documents on pesticide registration) can 
add unnecessary costs and act as a disincentive to potential registrants. In the case of the EAC, 
its members are working to identify and prioritize products based on grower needs that could be 
registered at the regional level, thereby increasing the attractiveness of the business case for 
investment.  
4.3.  We believe the SPS Committee s hould invite Members, on a voluntary basis, to explore ways 
in which their domestic regulatory approaches to pesticide registration and use can impact – both 
negatively and positively – the incentives of the private sector to invest in registration and 
stewardship of lower -risk alternative pesticides in their countries. The SPS Committee should also 
invite Members to evaluate their own minor use needs and to collaborate in global data generation 
activities.  
5  DISCUSS THE ROLE OF THE COMMITTEE IN INC REASING CO ORDINATION AND 
HARMONIZATION  
5.1.  Lastly, we note the important role of the Committee conferred by Article 3.5 of the 
SPS Agreement to monitor the process of international harmonization, and by Article 12.2 to 
sponsor technical consultation and study with the o bjective of increasing coordination and 
integration between international and national systems and approaches for establishing tolerances 
for contaminants in foods. We believe the Committee should follow up on the trade -related issues 
outlined above.  
5.2.  We re commend the Committee include all of the recommendations  put forward  in this paper 
in its Report of the Fifth Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement.  
__________