CODEX ALIMENTARIUS: Pesticides Residues in and on food – Main Outcome of CCPR57

The 57^th session of the Codex Alimentarius Committee on Pesticides and Pesticide Residues in and on Foods (CCPR57) addressed all the topics on its agenda. CCPR57 approved about two hundred new max­imum residue limits (MRLs) for various pesticides for final adoption by the next CAC meeting (CAC50, in July 2027) (to become CXLs and for inclusion in the related database). CCPR57 discussed availability and timely submission of data for some compounds, as well as the retention of related CXLs under the 4-year rule or, where justified by sponsor data com­mitments, their extension pending the outcome of the JMPR periodic review, except in some circumstances. CCPR57 agreed with the changes to several com­modity descriptors and notes and amended both the Classification of foods and animal feeds (CXA 4) and the related Principles and guidance on the selection of representative commodities for the extrapolation of MRLs to commodity groups (CXG 84) to enable establishing a single CXL, or group of CXLs for these commodities. CCPR57 reviewed those unsupported compounds without public health concerns sched­uled for periodic review, whereby some compounds (e.g., carbaryl, methyl bromide) were removed from this group and their proposed MRLs were retained pending the outcome of the JMPR periodic review. Other compounds eligible for periodic review, without public health concerns and lacking identi­fied sponsor support, were added for follow-up in accordance with the revised information document on the Management of unsupported compounds without public health concerns scheduled for periodic review. CCPR57 also endorsed a revised priority list of pesticides for evaluation at the 2027 JMPR Meet­ing. CCPR57 welcomed an update on the ongoing harmonization of MRLs for compounds used as both veterinary drugs and pesticides and noted the ongo­ing preparations for the virtual joint session of CCPR and the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs (CCRVDF) scheduled for early 2027 to con­sider single harmonized MRLs for such compounds. CCPR57 was updated on the project to map all CXLs in the Codex pesticide residues database and align them with the revised crop grouping in the Classifica­tion and was presented with the new online database on pesticide residues in food and feed.¹

See more information available about CCPR57 work­ing documents quoted in this article,² as well as in the official report of CCPR57.³ Codex standards, guidelines, codes of practices and related miscellaneous texts quoted in this article are readily and freely available.⁴

MRLs APPROVED AND GENERAL RESERVATION STATEMENT BY THE EU AND SWITZERLAND

MRLs for inclusion in the Codex Database of MRLs⁵

CCPR57 agreed to send about two hundreds MRLs for final adoption by CAC50, as final Codex stan­dards and future inclusion as CXLs into the related Codex database on pesticide residues.⁶ CCPR57 took a risk management decision in retaining all CXLs for clethodim, pending the submission of data by the data sponsor and the outcome of the periodic review of the compound by JMPR, given that the four-year rule applied for CXLs of clethodim had already expired. It took a similar decision for fenbutatin oxide for another year, awaiting the commitment of additional data from the data sponsor to support the periodic review of the compound by JMPR. For metalaxyl, a similar decision was taken for existing (CXL) and draft (MRL) provi­sions, pending the outcome of the JMPR evaluation. For ethoxyquin, CCPR57 agreed that approved MRLs (CXLs) could remain under the four-year rule, noting that the four-year rule for ethoxyquin would expire in 2027; and as such it retained ethoxyquin under the EWG on unsupported compounds without public health concerns, scheduled for periodic review, to con­tinue looking for opportunities to support this com­pound for periodic review given that a Codex member indicated that, although its national pear growers were pursuing collaboration opportunities to generate data on ethoxyquin, a data commitment could not be pro­vided to CCPR/JMPR at this point in time.

The European Union (EU) and Switzerland made a general statement to explain the reasons when they express reservations about the proposed MRLs for final adoption, including when substances may have impact globally relevant impact on the environment (e.g., on pollinating insects essential to agriculture crops’ fecundation, and therefore farming yields).⁷ The USA indicated that, in their view, global environ­mental issues are beyond the mandate of CCPR, and CCPR’s primary focus shall rather be on protection of consumer health and facilitation of global trade, as per its terms of reference and the Codex mandate.

The EU and Switzerland also expressed specific reser­vations on several CXLs linked to some substances.⁸ However, in relation to the CXLs adopted by CAC48, it is also worth noting that the EU indicated that re­garding the toxicological properties of imazalil me­tabolites, the EU reviewed the reservation it had made during CCPR51 (held in 2019) on the CXL of imazalil in bananas, and concluded that the CXL was safe for consumers in the EU, and therefore informed CCPR57 that its reservation could be lifted.

Existing obsolete Codex approved MRLs were pro­posed for revocation by CAC50 (and subsequent dele­tions from the Codex database on pesticide residues).⁹

CCPR57 also noted that draft MRLs withdrawn for discontinuation (i.e., because not agreed or simply replaced by others) were communicated to CAC50 for information only.¹⁰

MRLs which have been retained in their draft stage are also included for information only in the CCPR57 report.¹¹

Concern forms submitted by Republic of Korea and EU

The Republic of Korea submitted a concern form for indoxacarb, boscalid, cyantraniliprole, flubendiamide, thiamethoxam, metaflumizone, clothianidin, and metconazole for Welsh onion and dried Welsh onion. It explained that when samples were prepared, only completely withered leaves, roots and adhering soil had been removed, consistent with commercial practice and earlier JMPR precedents for Allium crops and requested JMPR to reconsider the residue data on Welsh onion that it had submitted, and to discuss updating its guidance for sample preparation. The Member also indicated that additional reference materials on sample preparation would be submitted as soon as possible for the compounds listed in the concern form. The JMPR Secretariat recalled that sample preparation is critical, and that the JMPR meeting made its recommendations on the basis that the information available had indicated that the outer layer was removed in a manner that could underesti­mate residues in the fresh commodity. The JMPR Sec­retariat further advised that the data on indoxacarb could be reconsidered if additional information on sample preparation was submitted to JMPR prior to its 2026 meeting. CCPR57 noted that a review of the Welsh onion data for compounds besides indoxacarb would be undertaken by JMPR pending the submis­sion of additional sample preparation information in accordance with the schedules and priority list of compounds for evaluation / re-evaluation by JMPR. The EU also submitted a concern form for carbaryl for all commodities with existing CXLs and the JMPR Secretariat confirmed that this would be submitted to JMPR for consideration.

Improvements to the Codex database on CXLs and other texts

CCPR57 agreed to forward to CAC50 for final ap­proval a new note to be added to a list of fat-soluble compounds having CXLs for muscle commodities, that would read “The MRL refers to “meat” for which the portion of the commodity to which the MRL applies, and which is analyzed, is the whole commodity (without bones). For fat-soluble pesticides, a portion of the adher­ing fat is analyzed, and MRLs apply to the fat.” The list of substances subject to these changes is provided in Part 1.A of Appendix VI of the CCPR57 report.

Likewise, CCPR57 agreed to forward to CAC50 for final adoption a similar note to a list of non-fat soluble compounds having CXLs for muscle commodities to read “The MRL refers to “meat” for which the portion of the commodity to which the MRL applies, and which is analyzed, is the whole commodity (without bones)”. The list of substances subject to these changes is provided in Part 1.B of Appendix VI of the CCPR57 report.

Finally, for compounds where the fat solubility is not specified, CCPR57 agreed to forward to CAC50 for final adoption a similar note to a list of CXLs for muscle commodities to read: “The MRL refers to “meat” for which the portion of the commodity to which the MRL applies, and which is analyzed, is the whole commodity (without bones). For fat-soluble pesticides, a portion of the adhering fat is analyzed, and MRLs apply to the fat.” The list of substances subject to these changes is provid­ed in Part 1.C of Appendix VI of the CCPR57 report.

CCPR57 further agreed to forward the notes for CXLs on “muscle” commodities established before 2024 in the Codex database for pesticide residues to CAC50 for adoption, as consequential amendments of the above.

CCPR57 also agreed with a few amendments to the Codex Classification of foods and animal feeds used for pesticides residues and included in Codex doc­ument CXA 4 (first adoption of which occurred in 1989), i.e., (a) the addition of “SO 3172 Pennycress, seed, field Thlaspi arvense L.” under Class A-Type 04-Group 23- Subgroup 023A-Small seed oilseeds; (b) the addition of “AM 3604 Pennycress seed, field, meal Thlaspi arvense L.“ under Class C-Type 11-Group 051-Subgroup 052C-Miscellaneous pro­cessed feed products (such as meal, hulls, dried pulp); and (c) the addition of “AB 1231 Tomato pomace, dried” under Class D-Type 13-Group 071-By-prod­ucts derived from fruit and vegetable processing. The proposed additions are included in Part 2 of Appendix VI of the CCPR57 report. CCPR57 agreed to forward to CAC50 for final adop­tion, once amendment to the Table 4 covering “Ex­amples of Selection of Representative Commodities Class A – Primary Food Commodities of Plant Origin” for the “Type 04 Nuts, Seeds, And Saps”, included in the Codex Principles and Guidance on the Selection of Representative Commodities for the Extrapolation of Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides to Commodity Groups (CXG 84). CCPR57 agreed to add “Pennycress seed, field” to the definition of “Small seed oilseeds (SO 2090)” under the “Subgroup 023A Small seed oil­seeds” as part of “Rapeseed” descriptor. The proposed amendment is included in Part 3 of Appendix VI of the CCPR57 report.

“F-note” used for CXLs in milk

CCPR57 agreed that the suffix “F” remains relevant and should therefore be retained in the approved MRLs (CXLs) for several compounds (piperonyl butoxide, propargite, fenvalerate, permethrin, di-flubenzuron, deltamethrin, triadimenol, flumethrin, cyprodinil, famoxadone, fenhexamid), pending their reevaluation by JMPR in accordance with the Codex schedules and priority lists of pesticides for evaluation by JMPR, and, as appropriate, their replacement with MRL recommendations based on the revised Classi­fication. CCPR57 recommended that JMPR should consider data relevant to milk and milk fats when conducting the periodic review of these compounds, as the current CXLs for those compounds were set for milk. According to the JMPR (2005) advice, when the suffix “F” was appended, milk fat should be analyzed. Data will therefore need to be assessed to determine concentrations in milk fats and whole milk to recom­mend two MRLs for milk and milk fats, as is currently done when estimating MRLs for these commodities for fat-soluble pesticides.

MANAGEMENT OF UNSUPPORTED COM­POUNDS WITHOUT PUBLIC HEALTH CON­CERNS, SCHEDULED FOR PERIODIC REVIEW

CCPR57 agreed on a revised information document for internal use by CCPR for publication as an infor­mation document on the dedicated webpage of the new Codex Alimentarius website. The revised text is included in Appendix VII of the CCPR57 report. CCPR57 used the CRD28 as the basis for its discus­sions and amended “provide detailed information” to “identify” in paragraph 9(i), for clarity. The amendment better reflects that only an interest in supporting a compound needed to be provided to the Chair of the EWG on unsupported compounds, rather than an indication of data commitment.

Substances scheduled for periodic review

CCPR57 agreed to retain all existing CXLs for carbaryl and reconsider the compound at CCPR58 (2027), pending JMPR’s feedback on the public health con­cern submitted for carbaryl (with the reservation ex­pressed by the EU). CCPR57 retained all the proposed MRLs for methyl bromide at their current step until the JMPR would conduct the periodic review of this compound. CXLs for flumethrin in cattle meat and milk were retained, pending CCRVDF29’s prioritiza­tion of this compound for evaluation by JECFA, and reconsider the status of these CXLs at CCPR59 (2028). CCPR57 removed carbaryl, methyl bromide, and flumethrin from the consideration by the EWG on un­supported compounds without public health concerns scheduled for periodic review.

CCPR57 agreed to re-establish the EWG on Unsupported Compounds to continue implementing the Management of unsupported compounds without public health concerns scheduled for periodic review under the leadership of Chile and with the support of Australia, Costa Rica, India, Kenya and Zambia. The EWG was tasked to determine whether data support can be obtained for diphenylamine, hydrogen phos­phide, amitrole, pirimicarb, methiocarb and cadusafos, which were identified as unsupported compounds under the establishment of Codex schedules and priority lists of pesticides for evaluation/re-evaluation by JMPR. The EWG would also examine ethoxyquin, for which JMPR identified insufficient toxicological data to complete the periodic review, noting that the compound is subject to the four-year rule, which will expire in 2027, and determine whether there is support to provide the missing information needed for JMPR to complete the evaluation. The report and recommendations of the EWG will be considered by CCPR58 (2027).

CODEX SCHEDULES AND PRIORITY LISTS OF PESTICIDES FOR SCREENING, EVALUATION, OR RE-EVALUATION BY JMPR.

2027 Schedule for JMPR Evaluations

CCPR57 endorsed the proposed priority list of pes­ticides for evaluation by the 2027 JMPR and submit it to CCEXEC91 (2027) for approval, as included in Appendix VIII of CCPR57 report noting that the 2027 JMPR schedule included 18 new uses and other evalu­ations and 9 periodic re-evaluations.¹²

CCPR57 re-established the EWG on schedules and priorities under the leadership of Australia, aiming at providing a report on the schedules and priority lists for consideration at CCPR58 (2027). CCPR57 also referred diphenylamine, amitrole, methiocarb, and cadusafos to the EWG chaired by Chile on unsupported compounds without public health concern for consid­eration as potential new work (see section above).

ALIGNMENT OF ADOPTED CODEX MRLs (CXLs) IN THE CODEX PESTICIDE RESIDUES DATA­BASE FOLLOWING REVISION OF THE CLASSIFI­CATION OF FOODS AND ANIMAL FEEDS

CCPR57 welcomed the work undertaken by the Codex Secretariat and the consultant to align the CXLs in the Codex Pesticide Residues Database with the revised Classification of Foods and Animal Feeds (CXA 4-1989) and agreed that the report provided a useful framework for identifying amendments required to align existing CXLs and Extraneous MRLs (EMRLs) with the revised Classification, but more time was needed to review it in detail. CCPR57 also noted the feedback from Members and Observers on the ap­proach and structure and eventual improvements to the database and that the rationale supporting the recommendations was clear, sufficiently detailed, and technically sound to facilitate informed review and the submission of comments. CCPR57 requested the Co­dex Secretariat and the consultant to continue working on the remaining Classes and respective types, groups, subgroups, and issue a circular letter to seek Members and Observers inputs on the issues for consideration and decision, with a sufficient time to allow the review of all the future proposals. The Codex Secretariat was tasked to prepare a consolidated document with rec­ommendations for consideration for CCPR58, with the proposed support of the USA and China.

COORDINATION OF WORK BETWEEN CCPR AND CCRVDF

CCPR57 indicated their continued support for the Joint CCPR/CCRVDF EWG and noted the upcoming virtual joint session of CCPR and CCRVDF. CCPR57 encour­aged Codex Members and Observers to liaise with their veterinary service counterparts to coordinate positions and actively participate in the work of the Joint EWG; and encouraged them to participate in the virtual joint session of CCPR and CCRVDF in 2027.¹³

OTHER MATTERS REFERRED BY JMPR, FAO, WHO, and IAEA

FAO/WHO JMPR standard operating procedures and JMPR Manual

CCPR57 noted the information provided by JMPR, welcomed its efforts to develop a guidance document to strengthen JMPR governance in a transparent

manner, and looked forward to its timely finalization. Indeed, the FAO-JMPR Secretariat indicated that FAO and WHO were developing draft standard operating procedures for JMPR to strengthen its governance and that the document remained under development to be subject to internal clearance by both FAO and WHO before its finalization. Although the document was intended primarily for internal use, FAO and WHO could consider how best communicating on its key elements after the work was completed.

On the revision of the JMPR manual, work had begun but was progressing slowly due to resource constraints at FAO and WHO levels, and some challenges in identifying appropriate experts to undertake the work. CCPR will be updated in the future when further progress be made.

Screening assessment following the lowering of health-based guidance values (HBGV) of reference

CCPR57 thanked the JMPR for considering CCPR56’s request to screen the CXLs JMPR had proposed for withdrawal following a periodic review in which HB-GVs had been lowered, to help CCPR identify poten­tial consumer health risks. CCPR57acknowledged that the 2025 JMPR Meeting indicated that screening with­drawn CXLs might not be possible where a change in residue definition had occurred; any such screening undertaken might be subject to significant uncertainty and, in such cases, should not necessarily be used to conclude on the risk to consumers. CCPR57 further noted that consideration was required for substances where HBGVs had been lowered, as in the case of phosmet, where exceedances of HBGVs had been identified for several commodities while JMPR could not conclude the risk assessment for certain other commodities. CCPR57 noted the 2025 JMPR recom­mendation encouraging Members and Observers to identify economically important CXLs in advance of a periodic review and to provide relevant information in a timely manner and agreed to revisit the status of phosmet at this session (see endnote x below).

Stability of pesticide residues in stored commodities and revision of OECD technical guidance TG 506

CCPR57 noted the publication of the revised OECD TG 506 on stability of pesticide residues in stored commodities, as well as the major changes introduced in this revision (e.g., alignment with the the revised Codex Classification for Food and Feed, a reorganiza­tion of the plant commodities into four matrix groups (high water, high acid, high oil and dry commodities), and new principles for minimum data requirements and extrapolation between commodities) and wel­comed the JMPR’s decision to take these principles into account; while encouraging sponsors to submit data that take these principles into account.

Dietary burden calculation for updates on maximum residue limits (MRLs) for animal commodities

CCPR57 welcomed the JMPR decision to include comprehensive input tables for dietary burden calcu­lations in the JMPR report. CCPR57 noted that the 2025 JMPR Meeting had agreed to include compre­hensive input tables for dietary burden calculations in the JMPR report, including feed commodities evaluated in previous years. The 2025 JMPR Meeting undertook new dietary burden calculations for all compounds evaluated and concluded that publishing the summary input tables, together with the OECD feed calculation methodology, would provide suffi­cient transparency to reproduce the calculations and the dietary burden.

Publication of the intake calculations for the me­tabolites assessed with the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) approach in the report

CCPR57 thanked JMPR for addressing the queries raised by CCPR and noted that the JMPR report included the relevant summary information table on TTC calculations to improve transparency. Indeed, the 2025 JMPR Meeting agreed to include in its report a summary table presenting the residue input values used for TTC calculations, together with explanatory comments where necessary, but that due to report size constraints and practical limitations, the TTC calcu­lation outputs would not be included as such. JMPR had considered publishing the calculation outputs, but it concluded that publishing the input values, together with the dietary intake models already available, pro­vided sufficient transparency and reproducibility.

Guidance Document for WHO Monographers and Reviewers

At the 2025 JMPR Meeting, experts reviewed the latest draft of the guidance document for WHO-JMPR monographers and reviewers and provided comments to improve its clarity and consistency. The 2025 JMPR Meeting further recommended revising the draft guidance document as soon as possible and circulat­ing it for a final round of comments. CCPR57 wel­comed the reported progress made in developing the guidance document and looked forward to its finaliza­tion at the next JMPR Meeting.

Plasma and/or blood area under the concentration– time curve (AUC) ratio use for identification of major rat metabolites

The WHO-JMPR Secretariat informed CCPR57 of the discussions held at the 2025 JMPR Meeting on the use of plasma and/or blood area under the con­centration-time curve (AUC) ratios to identify major rat metabolites. The Secretariat explained that JMPR had concluded that AUC ratios should not be used as the sole criterion for identifying major metabolites because AUC is not a direct measure of systemic ex­posure on a mass balance basis.

Non-linear toxicokinetics guidance electronic working group (EWG)

The JMPR EWG on non-linear toxicokinetics was continuing its work on practical guidance to support JMPR reviewers and monographers in interpreting toxicological data. The Secretariat further informed CCPR57 that the 2025 JMPR Meeting had recom­mended that the EWG continue its work.

Integration of data from new approach methodologies into JMPR’s pesticide safety assessments

CCPR57 noted the ongoing work to explore the inte­gration of new approach methodologies (NAMs) into JMPR pesticide safety assessments. JMPR Secretariat explained that these methodologies could improve the efficiency and accuracy of pesticide safety evaluations while supporting efforts to reduce reliance on animal testing. The Secretariat further indicated that JMPR was considering how to incorporate NAMs into future evaluations through updates to WHO-IPCS Environ­mental Health Criteria 240: Principles and Methods for the Risk Assessment of Chemicals in Food. CCPR57 welcomed the initiative of JMPR to expand the ap­plication of new approach methodologies (NAMs) in pesticide safety evaluation and recognized the value of these methodologies in advancing the reduction, refinement and replacement of animal testing; and encouraged sponsors to submit NAMs data and pro­vide feedback to support the appropriate use of these methodologies.

Updates on upcoming dietary risk assessment activities

The WHO-JMPR Secretariat informed CCPR57 that FAO and WHO planned an ad hoc expert meeting on dietary exposure assessment methodologies for pesticide residues, to be held from September 28th to October 2nd, 2026 in New Delhi (India). CCPR57 expressed its appreciation to FAO and WHO for convening the ad hoc expert meeting on dietary risk assessment methodologies for pesticide residues, and noted the update on preparations for the meeting, including the need to ensure the transparency and inclusiveness of the process and consultation between JMPR and CCPR57 encouraged Members and Ob­servers to actively contribute to the ongoing work led by FAO and WHO on this matter; and looked forward to the ad hoc meeting’s positive outcome, which would facilitate well-informed consideration of this topic at future CCPR sessions. The ad hoc expert meeting aimed to consider available dietary expo­sure models, including the Global Estimated Chronic Dietary Exposure (GECDE) and the deterministic cal­culation method International Estimated Daily Intake (IEDI) approaches, and identify the most appropriate model for JMPR use. The meeting would also con­sider comments and concerns raised by Members at CCPR sessions, supported by background documents prepared for expert review. In addition, the meeting is expected to provide recommendations to FAO, WHO, and JMPR, with the outcomes to be considered and summarized in the General Considerations section of the JMPR report.

Report from IAEA

CCPR57 noted the information provided in the reporting document and commended the Joint FAO/ IAEA Centre for their capacity building and other ac­tivities concerning the safety of pesticides and chem­icals in general, in food and feed, using nuclear and related techniques, to strengthen capacities in devel­oping countries; and encouraged further cooperation between Codex, Member countries and the Joint FAO/ IAEA Centre in this regard.

Global Alliance on Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs)

The FAO Representative informed CCPR57 of the launch of a Global Alliance on Highly Hazardous Pes­ticides by FAO, WHO, UNEP and UNDP. The Alliance intends to offer a global mechanism to coordinate efforts to address the risks associated with HHPs, sup­porting countries in promoting safer alternatives and strengthening the sound management of chemicals in agriculture and food systems.

FAO/WHO Joint activities

JMPS – The FAO Representative informed CCPR57 that the 24th Session of the FAO/WHO Joint Meeting on Pesticide Specifications (June 2025) evaluated 31 FAO and WHO pesticide specifications, updated its internal operating procedures, and addressed com­ments on the FAO/WHO manuals on specifications for chemical and microbial pesticides. The FAO

Representative highlighted the publication of the third edition of the Manual on Development and Use of FAO and WHO Specifications for Chemical Pesti­cides, which provided updated international guidance for developing evaluating, and applying pesticide specifications to support the quality control of pesti­cide products worldwide.

JMPM – The FAO Representative informed CCPR57 that the 18th Session of the FAO/WHO Joint Meeting on Pesticide Management (October 2025) discussed developing new guidance on the use of drones for pesticide applications, the registration of minor-use pesticides, risk communication, and the monitoring and management of pesticide resistance. The FAO Representative reported that JMPM considered several emerging issues, including the International Code of Conduct on Pesticide Management and Indigenous Peoples (ICCPM) regarding the Free, Prior and In­formed Consent (FPIC), RNA-based pesticides, nano-technology applications in pesticide formulations, and antimicrobial resistance in the plant sector. The FAO Representative highlighted the publication of four new guidance documents to help countries strengthen pesti­cide regulation, reduce risk, and improve compliance.

The publication is posted in the September 2026 World Food Regulation Review. Find the full WFRR library here.

ENDNOTES

1. The Codex Alimentarius Committee for Pesticide Res­idues (‘CCPR’) is the specialized body of the Codex Alimentarius Commission Food Standard Program dealing with pesticide active matters and their related maxi­mum residue limits (MRLs) in and on foods as well as in certain animal feedstuffs moving in international trade where this is justified for reasons of protection of human health. CCPR also sets priority lists for the evaluation of pesticide active matters by the Joint FAO/ WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR). CCPR57 session was held in Chile and chaired by chaired by Dr Lifang Duan and Dr Fengzu Zhang served as the assis­tant to the chairperson and was broadcast online upon pre-registration. CCPR57 appointed Shiu Hoi Yan Fio­na (China), Sonia Alkafy Baldi (United Arab Emirates (UAE)) and Sara McGrath (United States of America (USA)) to act as rapporteurs for this session. The next plenary session (CCPR58) was tentatively scheduled to be held from 31st May to 4th June 2027. See also Codex website news page about CCPR57 outcome at https:// codex.fao.org/news/news-detail/2026/09/17/57th-com-mittee-meeting-scrutinizes-pesticides-for-residue-safe-ty-and-receives-updates-on-database-modernization. ↩︎
2. See https://codex.fao.org/meetings/d/ccpr-57-1 ↩︎
3. See https://codex.fao.org/codex-committees/gener-al-subject-committees/CCPR/about ↩︎
4. See https://codex.fao.org/codex-committees/gener-al-subject-committees/CCPR/related-codex-texts ↩︎
5. See Codex Database on Pesticides Residues at https://codex.fao.org/codex-texts/codex-online-databas-es/pesticides-residues ↩︎
6. See Appendix II of the CCPR57 report. Notable MRLs for final adoption (CXLs) by CAC50 (non-exhaustive  list): (a) Cyfluthrin/betacyfluthrin, with a notable 0,4 ppm in grapes, 5 ppm in dried grapes (i.e., currants, rai­sins and sultanas), and 15 ppm in dried grape pomace, (b) Bifenthrin, with a notable 20 ppm in edible citrus oil, 3 ppm Mammalian fats (except milk fats) (group), and 1.5 ppm in Cranberry; (c) Pyriproxyfen, with a notable 4 ppm in mustard greens, 3 ppm in grapes, and 1.5 ppm in cherries (subgroup); (d) Cyprodinil, with a notable 0.6 ppm in mango, and 0.5 ppm in papaya; (e) Pyraclostrobin, with a notable 0.8 ppm in spices, seeds (subgroup), 0.5 ppm in mammalian fats (except milk fats)(groups), and 0.3 ppm in eggplants (sub­group); (f) Fludioxonil, with a notable 7 ppm in melons and for watermelons (with (Po) note) with the inclusion of a note “except melon and watermelon” to the CXL for group of fruiting vegetables, cucurbits and a 2 ppm in milk fats (group) for which for monitoring and regu­latory purposes, whole milk is to be analysed, and the result compared to the MRL for whole milk; (g) Trifloxystrobin, with a notable 60 ppm in edible orange oil, 1.5 ppm in , dried citrus pulp and 0.8 ppm in lemons and limes (including citron) (subgroup); (h) Indoxacarb, with a notable 6 ppm in milk fats (group) for which for monitoring and regulatory purposes, whole milk is to be analysed, and the result compared to the MRL for whole milk and a 2 ppm in Mammalian fats (except milk fats) (group); (i) Boscalid, with a notable 2 ppm in ppm in milk fats (group) for which for monitoring and regulato­ry purposes, whole milk is to be analysed, and the result compared to the MRL for whole milk and a 0.7 ppm in mammalian fats (except milk fats) (group) and 0,1 ppm in milks (group); (j) Difenoconazole, with one MRL at 0,9 ppm in spices seeds subgroup; (k) Azoxystrobin, with one MRL at 1.5 ppm in Chinese broccoli; (l) Spinetoram, with a notable 10 ppm in Chinese broccoli; (m) Metaflumizone, with a notable 0.6 ppm in eggplants (subgroup), in tomato and in peppers (subgroup) applying provisionally to okra, martynia and roselle; (n) Clothianidin, with a notable 0.4 ppm in avian edible offal (group) and in mammalian edible offal (group); (o) Etoxazole, with a notable 6 ppm in stover of sweet corn (on a dried weight basis) and a 0.15 ppm in avocado; (p) Flubendiamide, with a notable 6 ppm in milk fats (group) for which for monitoring and regulatory purposes, whole milk is to be analysed, and the result compared to the MRL for whole milk and a 1.5 ppm in mammalian fats (except milk fats) (group); Fluopyram, with a notable 8 ppm in (mamma­lian) edible offal (group), 5 ppm in avian edible offal (group), and 1.5 in avian muscle (group) as well as in Muscle (from mammals other than marine mammals) (group) and mammalian fats (except milk fats) (group); Thiamethoxam, with a notable 0.15 ppm in milks (group); (s) Dinotefuran, with a notable 0.7 ppm in durian and 0.6 ppm in mango; (t) Cyantraniliprole, with a notable 40 ppm in herbs (herbaceous plants) (subgroup), 70 ppm in dried hops, and a 150 ppm in dried herbs (herbaceous plants) (subgroup), and a 1.5 ppm in papaya and in mammalian edible offal (group); (u) Pyriofenone, with a notable 15 ppm in dried chili peppers, 1.5 ppm in eggplants (subgroup) and in pep­pers (subgroup) provisionally applying to okra, martynia and roselle; (v) Metconazole, with a notable 1.5 ppm in dried Welsh onion; (w) Mefentrifluconazole, with a notable 15 ppm in dried tomato, 3 ppm in grapes, 15 ppm in dried grape pomace as well as in dried grape (currants, raisins and sultanas); (x) Broflanilide, with a notable 15 ppm in soya bean, hay and/or straw on a dried weight basis, 3 ppm in dried chili peppers, 2 ppm in spinach and in leaves of Brassicaceae (subgroup), 1.5 ppm in leaf of Lettuce and 0.8 ppm in head of Lettuce; Acynonapyr, with a notable 100 ppm in edible mandarins oil, 1.5 ppm in mandarins (including man­darin-like hybrids) (subgroup), 15 ppm in dried apple pomace and 5 ppm dried pulp of on mandarins (both on a dry weight basis) and 3 ppm in apple; Mepiquat Chloride, with a notable 30 ppm in cot­ton seeds and 60 ppm in cotton seed meal; (aa) Metarylpicoxamid, at the 0.01 ppm LOQ level; (ab) Proquinazid, with a notable 5 ppm in dried apple pomace, 0.4 ppm in grapes, 1.5 ppm in dried grape (currants, raisins and sultanas), noting that the 0.3 mg/ kg for the group of pome fruits was a risk management decision; (ac) Tiafenacil, at the LOQ levels (0.01 ppm or 0.03 ppm, depending on the commodity). See Appen­dix II of the CCPR57 report. ↩︎
7. The EU expressed its general reservations to the advancement of proposed MRLs in the following situa­tions, and that Switzerland would be supporting all EU reservations as their residue risk assessment approach and policies for setting MRLs were the same as that of the EU: (a) the compound is related to environmental issues of a global nature such as the decline of pollinators and the accumulation of persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic substances in the environment; and/or (b) the proposed CXL is not safe for European consum­ers (including an assessment of whether the Codex resi­due definition ensures an equivalent level of protection); and/or (c) toxicological data are not available at EU level or are available but not yet assessed at EU level; and/or (d) the proposed CXLs are not sufficiently sup­ported by data as per the FAO Manual or other agreed requirements; and/or (e) the residue definition set by JMPR is not compatible with the residue definition set at EU level; and/or (f) the CXL is not acceptable to the EU with respect to areas such as supporting data, extrapolations, as well as environmental issues of global nature in accordance with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules. ↩︎
8. The EU (and Switzerland) expressed specific reser­vations on the advancement of a few proposed MRLs for different rationale (excess in exposure compared to HBGV or acute intake concern for EU consumers; ongoing EU assessment or review of HBGV; proposed MRLs derived from metabolism studies whereas a lower MRL could be derived based on feeding studies; lack of information on a residue definition or insuffi­cient toxicological data about some metabolites or the substance itself at EU level; review of MRLs at EU level; lack of consistency with the conditions for applying the proportionality approach as outlined in the FAO Manu­al 2016; increased dietary burden, insufficient data on the toxicity and genotoxicity of various metabolites and degradation products formed during processing at high temperature; ongoing periodic re-evaluation of a substance in the EU; preference for a lower MRL; “fat” qualifier to be removed; contribution of thiamethoxam and its metabolite clothianidin to the worldwide decline of pollinators; concerns expressed during CCPR56 on acetamiprid due to potential acute consumer risks relat­ed to developmental neurotoxicity; request for a re-eval­uation of the compound as high priority; keep on-hold pending outcome of an assessment of an import toler­ance for some commodities; analytical methods avail­able to lower the proposed limit; etc.) for the following substances: Cyfluthrin / Betacyfluthrin; Bifenthrin; Pyriproxyfen; Cyprodinil; Pyraclostrobin. Fludioxonil; Indoxacarb; Boscalid; Spinetoram; Metaflumizone; Clothianidin; Thiamethoxam; Flubendiamide; Fluopyram; Acetamiprid; Dinotefuran; Cyantraniliprole; Metconazole; Mefentrifluconazole; Broflanilide; Acynonapyr; Metarylpicoxamid; Proquinazid; Tiafenacil. Thailand also expressed a few health concerns, due to exposure assessments performed based on Thailand national food consumption data. ↩︎
9. See Appendix III of the CCPR57 report. Provisions were revoked for Malathion (all existing CXLs, while CCPR57 only retained CXLs in blueberries, cher­ries (subgroup), cottonseed, maize, sorghum grain, and wheat under the four-year rule, noting that the four-year rule would expire in 2030)(**); Disulfoton; Cyfluthrin/beta-cyfluthrin; Bifenthrin; Pyriproxyfen; Cyprodinil; Pyraclostrobin; Fludioxonil; Tri-floxystrobin; Indoxacarb; Boscalid; Spinetoram Metaflumizone; Clothianidin; Etoxazole; Flubendiamide; Fluopyram; Thiamethoxam; Dinotefuran; Cyantraniliprole; Pyriofenone; Metconazole; Mefentrifluconazole; Broflanilide; Mepiquat Chloride. (**) The EU, the Russian Federation and Switzerland noted that JMPR identified exceedances for the CXLs of phosmet for pome fruit and citrus fruit and was unable to conclude on dietary risks for tree nuts (group) and cottonseed. These Members indicated that the CXLs were not considered safe for consumers and expressed their reservations on their retention under the four-year rule. The JMPR Secretariat also explained that a full assessment was not possible at the next JMPR meeting in 2026 due to capacity constraints, but phosmet could nevertheless be considered by CCPR57 for evaluation by the 2027 JMPR meeting. The EWG chair on Priori­ties clarified that phosmet has already been scheduled for a full evaluation by the 2028 JMPR meeting but the compound could be accommodated on the 2027 schedule once the commodities for which data would be submitted were confirmed. The Observer for CropLife International, on behalf of the data sponsor, confirmed that there was continued data support for the retained CXLs and advised that residue trials were ongoing and would be submitted to JMPR at the end of 2027. The Observer further noted that the JMPR assessment was a screening (tier 1) assessment only and not a full evaluation. ↩︎
10. See Appendix IV of the CCPR57 report. The provi­sions withdrawn by CCPR57 relate to draft MRLs for Dimethoate (two provisions in dried pulp of sweet and sour oranges (including orange-like hybrids)(sub-group)), Omethoate (two provisions in dried pulp of oranges and sweet and sour oranges (including or­ange-like hybrids)(subgroup)), Guazatine (two provi­sions in cereal grains (group) and citrus fruits (group)); and Proquinazid (two provisions in apple and pear). ↩︎
11. See Appendix V of the CCPR57 report. The draft pro­visions retained for further discussion relate to Metalaxyl (sweet peppers, (including pimento or pimiento)); Methyl Bromide (in various foods such milled cereals, cocoa beans and products, dried fruits, and several nuts); Metalaxyl (in edible orange oil and in sweet and sour oranges (including orange-like hybrids)(sub-group)); and Flutriafol (all types of rice). ↩︎
12. See Appendix VIII of the CCPR57 report. Substances to be subject to a periodic review in 2027 – Pirimiphosmethyl (in cereal grains); Piperonyl butoxide (in all commodities); Pyrethrins (in all commodities); 2,4-D (in Citrus fruit, Pome fruit, Stone fruit, Berries and other small fruits, Tree nuts, Potato, Maize (grain, fodder), Sorghum, Wheat (grain, straw), Rye (grain, straw), Rice (grain, straw), Sweet corn, Soya bean (bean, straw), Sugar cane, Cotton seed, Grass (hay/fodder), Products of animal origin); Quintozene (in all commodities), Permethrin (periodic review of CXLs for Broccoli, sweet corn, leaf lettuce, spinach, soybean, potato, Maize and new proposed MRLs for apples, asparagus, alfalfa, pear, fruiting vegetables – cu-curbits (cucumber and summer squashes, and melons)); Clethodim (toxicological assessment proposed for 2027; residue assessment proposed for 2028 for soybean, oilseed rape, legumes, pulses, potatoes, sunflower, cotton and sugar beer; and residue assessment proposed for 2029 for the remaining crops); Methyl bromide (Bromomethane) (in all commodities); 2-Phenylphenol (in citrus); Diphenylamine (Referred to the EWG on un­supported compounds with no public health concerns as no support for review was identified (former petitioner was Cerex Agri). Substances for review for new uses  and other evaluations by JMPR in 2027 – Buprofezin (in blueberry, and extrapolations in subgroup eggplants, and subgroups in eggplant and eggplant-like commodities, small fruit vine climbing, peaches, and low growing berries); Fluindapyr (in soybeans, rice and barley); Bifenthrin (in kiwi, clover, coffee, safflower, date); Fenpropidin (in Soybean); Pydiflumetofen (in banana, papaya, and mango); Tebuconazole (in Japanese persimmon, tea and ex­trapolation to the subgroup peaches); Afidopyropen (in tea and tea processing, and strawberry); Imidacloprid (in cumin and cardamom, based on monitoring data, and extrapolation in subgroups on stems and petioles, on Brassica leafy vegetables, on succulent peas without pods, and on sunflower seeds); Zoxamide (in bananas and onions, and extrapolation to the subgroup toma­toes); Pyraclostrobin (in soybeans and papaya, and extrapolation in the group bulb vegetables and in the subgroups on cane berries and on bush berries); Azoxystrobin (in cumin based on monitoring data whereas no MRLs are available); Cyazofamid (in mandarin – Unshiu orange and extrapolation on the subgroups tomato, eggplant, beans with pods, beans without pods, tuberous and corm vegetables); Florylpicoxamid (in avocado, blueberry, citrus, sweet potato); Propylene oxide (in tree nuts (almonds and walnuts); Prothioconazole (in stone fruit (except peach) e.g., plum, cherry, and apricot, in pome fruit, and in grape); Picoxystrobin (Cumin based on monitoring data); Betacyfluthrin (in cumin and cardamom based on monitoring data); and substances subject to the con­cern form put forward by Republic of Korea for use in Welsh onions, with the issue of information sampling procedure (Boscalid, Cyantraniliprole, Flubendiamide, Thiamethoxam, Metaflumizone, Clothianidin, Metconazole). ↩︎
13. The USA, as Chair of the Joint CCPR/CCRVDF EWG, also speaking on behalf of the co-chair, Brazil, introduced the item and recalled that the work of the Joint EWG aimed to facilitate the establishment of har­monized MRLs for dual-use compounds, where Codex limits differed depending on whether a compound had been evaluated as a veterinary drug or a pesticide. The Joint EWG Chair further recalled that CAC44 (2021) had established the Joint EWG to advance this work. The Joint EWG Chair informed CCPR57 that partic­ipation in the Joint EWG had been limited and that progress had been affected by the different meeting cycles of CCPR and CCRVDF. To improve efficiency and facilitate timely progress, CCRVDF and CCPR support­ed convening a virtual Joint EWG meeting, followed by a virtual joint CCPR/CCRVDF session. The Joint EWG Chair further recalled that CAC48 (2025) endorsed this approach, reaffirmed the terms of reference of the Joint EWG, and requested preparation of a draft agenda for the virtual joint CCPR/CCRVDF session for consider­ation by CAC49 (2026), which further supported this work. The Joint EWG Chair informed CCPR57 that a dedicated webpage for the joint work of CCPR and CCRVDF had been established on the Codex website to facilitate information sharing on the Joint EWGs’ work and the upcoming virtual joint CCPR/CCRVDF session. The Joint EWG Chair concluded by noting that in April 2026 the Joint EWG held a virtual meeting and that the outcomes of those discussions, including recommendations for consideration by the virtual joint CCPR/CCRVDF session and for further follow-up work in the Joint EWG, were available in the VWG report on the Joint CCPR/CCRVDF webpage. The Joint EWG Chair also noted that work conducted in the VWG and ongoing in the Joint EWG would support preparations for the virtual joint CCPR/CCRVDF session sched­uled for late February 2027. Members supported the recommendations in the working paper and expressed their willingness to participate actively in the work of the Joint EWG and the upcoming virtual joint CCPR/ CCRVDF session. ↩︎