The 17thPlenary Meeting of the Eighth National Review Committee of Pesticide Registration was convened in Beijing on July 10, 2015. 36 members should attend the meeting, but 32 were actually present, meeting relevant provisions of theCharter of National Review Committee of Pesticide Registration. During the meeting, participating members carefully reviewed the pesticide products applying for official registration and discussed related issues. The minutes are as follows.
(I) Review of the pesticide products applying for official registration
This meeting reviewed altogether 20 pesticide products (16 in the preliminary review, 4 in the final review), including 5 herbicides, 3 insecticides, 8 fungicides, 1 hygienic insecticide and 3 plant growth regulators, involving 37 products of 22 pesticide manufacturers. The members agreed after careful and meticulous reviews that, firstly, 9 products of 5 categories including promazine pyrazosulfuron-methyl, kresoxim-methyl, metazachlor, MCPA-isoctyl and Chlorophenoxyacetic Acid Sodium Salt were approved for official registration; secondly, 24 products of 12 categories including furfurylaminopurine, chlorempenthrin, coumoxystrobin, fluxapyroxad, dimethyl disulfide, bacillus amyloliquefaciens, cyproconazole, amicarbazone, prochloraz copper salt, dinotefuran, tetramycin, tolfenpxrad were temporarily disapproved for official registration, and enterprises may supplement related materials and resubmit an application based on the requirements of the National Review Committee of Pesticide Registration; thirdly, 4 products of 3 categories including chlorhematin, benzovindiflupyr and trifloxysulfuron sodium were disapproved for official registration.
(II) Opinions on the registration of pesticides used for ornamental flowers, lawns, non-croplands and forestry
Given the rather common phenomenon of the same source of ornamental and edible flowers, and in order to avoid potential risks ofedible ornamental flowers or misusing pesticides on food crops, and to prevent the exposed people from risks of pesticides used on ornamental flowers, laws, non-croplands and forestry, the National Review Committee of Pesticide Registration suggested: the pesticide products that can be used either on food crops or on ornamental flowers, lawns, non-croplands and forestry shall be firstly registered for the use on food crops and then for the use on other crops (except for pesticide products only applicable to this kind of crops or areas); or both are registered for the use on food crops and the use on ornamental flowers, lawns, non-croplands and forestry. At the same time, the review committee also suggested that competent departments shall strengthen supervisions on the already registered pesticide products used only for ornamental flowers, lawns, non-croplands and forestry, etc.
(III) Opinions on deregistration of flubendiamide used on paddy rice
According to the environmentalfate study, ecotoxicology test data and surface water monitoring data and risk assessment report, the use of flubendiamide on paddy rice may haveunacceptablerisks to invertebrates (daphnia magna) and extreme risks to the aquatic environment. Most members recognized the test and evaluation results and suggested no more acceptance and approval of the application for the registration of flubendiamide for use on paddy rice (including the application for renewal registration) and suggested the revocation of the registration for its use on paddy rice. But few members believed that further tests should be carried out to prove relevant risks.
(IV) Opinions on revoking and altering the registration of some high-toxic pesticide products
In order to practically implement relevant provisions ofFood Safety Law,Agricultural Product Quality Security LawandRegulation on Pesticide Administration, the review committee suggested revoking the registration of methidathion; revoking the registration of phorate, isofenphos-methyl and carbofuran for use on sugarcane; altering the range of use of methyl bromide and nitrochloroform to soil fumigation and revoking the use of methyl bromide and nitrochloroform for other purposes except for soil fumigation.
(V) Opinions on paraquat replacedsafe-formulation registration management
In order to guarantee the production, transportation and use safety of paraquat, the meeting discussed issued related to strengthening the paraquat replacedsafe-formulaions registration management. The review committee agreed unanimously to revise the toxicity of paraquat as high toxicity based on the result of tests of paraquat through mouth, skin and inhalation. Given that safety issues related to paraquat are not yet effectively resolved, most members suggested no more acceptance and approval of applications for the registration of paraquat (including the application for renewal of registration), and suggested revoking in due time the existing registration of paraquat. Only few members suggested taking the using effect and related business interests into full consideration and postponing the adoption of restricted measures for paraquat.
Copyright by Institute for the Control of Agrochemicals,Ministry of Agriculture ,P.R.China