15th Meeting of the Panel on tools for PRA

2006-03-08/10, Paris


The Panel on tools for PRA met in Paris at the headquarters of the French NPPO. It hold a joint session with the Panel on Phytosanitary Measures mainly to discuss the Risk Management Part of the Scheme. The Panel prepared terms of reference for the Panel to be presented to the Working Party on Phytosanitary Regulations.


The Panel revised the first version of the EPPO decision support scheme on PRA for quarantine pests which was adopted in 2005. It adopted the new version of the introduction to the Pest Risk Management part of the scheme as well as some minor changes in the scheme. The Panel considered that clarifications were needed for questions on post-entry quarantine, specified protected conditions and relative importance of pathways. The Panel also made suggestions for further changes in the risk assessment stage (addition of rating of uncertainty, guidance on how to rate each individual question). These suggestions will be studied at the next Panel meeting. 


The new system of performing PRA for the EPPO region was presented. The EPPO Council had decided to create a new Panel for performing PRA (Panel for PRA). Unlike other EPPO Panels it would have a variable composition depending on the pest studied. The Pest Risk Analyses are performed during the meetings of the Panel, following ISPM N°11 and the EPPO Decision-support Scheme for quarantine pests. The report of PRA is prepared by the Secretariat, together with a complete record of the EPPO decision-support scheme, these documents are reviewed by the Panel.


The reports of PRA together with the records of the EPPO decision-support scheme should then be presented to the Panel on Phytosanitary Measures for peer-review. When consensus is reached, the reports of PRA should be submitted to the Working Party on Phytosanitary Regulations, which should make appropriate recommendations on regulation to the Executive Committee and Council. The report of the PRA should finally be published in support of the recommendation (on the restricted part of the EPPO Website). The report of the PRA should specify the endangered area within the PRA area and include options for management. Management options should be selected by NPPOs. The Panel made some suggestions for the improvement of the procedure. It suggested in particular that all PRA records prepared by such groups should be sent to the Panel on tools for PRA for information to help identifying any unclear question in the decision support scheme.


A computerized version of the EPPO decision support scheme was discussed and the Panel made several suggestions for improving the programme.