Search

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Italy and co‐rapporteur Member State Spain for the pesticide active substance bensulfuron‐methyl are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of bensulfuron‐methyl as an herbicide on rice and spring cereals (spring wheat, spring barley, oat, rye, triticale). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Poland and co‐rapporteur Member State France for the pesticide active substance flufenacet are reported. In addition, the assessment of the confirmatory data following the Article 12 maximum residue limit (MRL) review of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 is also reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of flufenacet as a herbicide on winter cereals. Confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review were assessed. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the assessment of confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State the Netherlands for the pesticide active substance Bacillus subtilis strain RTI477 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of B. subtilis strain RTI477 as a fungicide for the control of soil‐borne diseases in greenhouses (permanent) and walk‐in tunnels and field crops; by drip and drench irrigation on lettuce, cucurbit and solanaceous vegetables; field application by treating tubers whilst laying in furrow on potato; seed treatment application on maize, sunflower, sugar beet and winter oilseed rape. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported when identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State The Netherlands for the pesticide active substance Bacillus velezensis strain RTI301 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of B. velezensis strain RTI301 as a fungicide for the control of soil‐borne diseases in greenhouses (permanent) and walk‐in tunnels (non‐permanent) and field crops; by drip and drench irrigation on lettuce, cucurbit and solanaceous vegetables; field application by treating tubers whilst laying in furrow on potato; seed treatment application on maize, sunflower, sugar beet and winter oilseed rape. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported when identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Finland, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Croatia, for the pesticide active substance amidosulfuron and the assessment of confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of amidosulfuron as a post‐emergence herbicide on winter cereals, spring cereals, flax and grass/pasture (all field uses). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, The Netherlands for the pesticide active substance Phthorimaea operculella granulovirus are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of Phthorimaea operculella granulovirus as an insecticide on tomato (field and greenhouse uses) and on potato (field use) via spraying (tractor drawn or knapsack sprayers) or overhead irrigation. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State Belgium for the pesticide active substance Pythium oligandrum strain B301 and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of Pythium oligandrum strain B301 as a resistance inducer/elicitor to control trunk diseases on grapevines. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State The Netherlands for the pesticide active substance 1‐methylcyclopropene are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council for an amendment in approval conditions. The current approval of 1‐methylcyclopropene includes the specific provision 'Only uses as plant growth regulator for post‐harvest storage in sealable warehouse may be authorised'. The applicant AgroFresh Holding France SAS submitted, in accordance with Article 7 of Reg. (EC) 1107/2009, an application to remove this specific provision in order to allow member states to authorise the use of products containing 1‐methylcyclopropene on outdoor crops pre‐harvest. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use(s) of 1‐methylcyclopropene as a plant growth regulator via spray application on pome fruit. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Poland and co‐rapporteur Member State Hungary for the pesticide active substance triclopyr (variant triclopyr‐butotyl) and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of triclopyr (variant triclopyr‐butotyl) as a herbicide on established pasture and non‐recreational amenity grassland (field use). MRLs were assessed in rice. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Finland, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Estonia, for the pesticide active substance mepiquat (evaluated variant mepiquat chloride) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of mepiquat chloride as a plant growth regulator on cereals and grass (field uses). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessment carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, Spain, for the pesticide active substance difenoconazole are reported. The context of the peer review was that requested by the European Commission following the submission and evaluation of confirmatory information with regard to the consumer risk assessment. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of difenoconazole as a fungicide on pome fruit, carrot, wheat, barley, triticale, rye and oats. The reliable endpoints concluded as being appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, derived from the available studies and/or literature in the dossier peer reviewed, are presented. Concerns were not identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Greece, and co‐rapporteur Member State, France, for the pesticide active substance paraffin oil are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of paraffin oil as an acaricide and insecticide on potatoes, ornamentals (flower bulbs) and orchards (pear/apple), on pome fruit and stone fruit, on field and permanent protected fruiting vegetables and on field and permanent protected roses and on citrus. The reliable end points appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Belgium, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Austria, for the pesticide active substance lenacil are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of lenacil as a herbicide on sugar and fodder beet (field use). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, Malta, for the pesticide active substance clove oil are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions for the amendment of approval were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of clove oil as a preharvest nematicide on tomatoes and cucumbers (permanent greenhouse use). The representative use evaluated for the renewal of approval of clove oil was as post‐harvest fungicide and bactericide on apples, pears and peaches (indoor uses). The reliable endpoints appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Endpoints not relevant to the scope of the proposed amendment of approval conditions will be addressed in the context of the renewal of approval procedure of clove oil running in parallel (AIR IV, EFSA Q‐2016‐00809). Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Spain, and co‐rapporteur Member State, the Netherlands, for the pesticide active substance quinolin‐8‐ol are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of quinolin‐8‐ol as a fungicide and bactericide against soil‐borne pathogens in tomato cultivation in permanent greenhouses applied by drip irrigation. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Ireland, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Poland, for the pesticide active substance dichlorprop‐P and the variant dichlorprop‐P‐2‐ethylhexyl and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of dichlorprop‐P as a herbicide on cereals, grassland and grass seed crops and of the variant dichlorprop‐P‐2‐ethylhexyl as a plant growth regulator on citrus. MRLs were assessed in mandarin and lemon. The conclusions from 2018 were updated in 2024 following the request from the European Commission with regard to the endocrine‐disrupting properties. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In compliance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, EFSA received from the European Commission in 2020 a mandate to provide its reasoned opinion on the toxicological properties and maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the benzimidazole substances carbendazim and thiophanate‐methyl. Specifically, EFSA was asked to assess whether thiophanate‐methyl or carbendazim has clastogenic potential and, in case clastogenic potential can be excluded, to derive toxicological reference values necessary for consumer risk assessment and assessment of maximum residue levels (MRLs). Although these active substances are no longer authorised within the European Union, MRLs were established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (codex maximum residue limits; CXLs), and import tolerances are in place. Based on the assessment of the available data, toxicological reference values and MRL proposals were derived and a consumer risk assessment was carried out. Some information required by the regulatory framework was found to be missing and a possible acute risk to consumers was identified. Hence, the consumer risk assessment was considered indicative only and all MRL proposals derived by EFSA still require further consideration by risk managers. In October 2022, to ensure that MRLs derived by EFSA in its assessment of 2021 are safe for consumers also in view of endocrine‐disrupting properties, EFSA was requested to carry out a follow‐up assessment taking into account the scientific criteria for identifying endocrine disruptors (ED). Based on the outcome of the assessment, the experts agreed that the reference values are also covering the concern related to the identified hazards indicative of endocrine disruption for thiophanate‐methyl. No further considerations on the impact of the ED assessment on the current reference values were needed for carbendazim since the ED criteria are not met for this substance. Therefore, the risk assessment and the MRL recommendations derived in 2021 are confirmed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, France, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Austria, for the pesticide active substance pydiflumetofen and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of pydiflumetofen as a fungicide field application on pome fruits, grapes, potato, fruiting vegetables, cucurbits and Brassica vegetables and updated following the request from Commission to consider additional information submitted and review the risk assessment. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In accordance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) 396/2005, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to review the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the non‐approved active substance profenofos in view of the possible lowering of the MRL. EFSA investigated the origin of the current EU MRLs. Existing EU MRLs are based on Codex Maximum Residue Limits still in place or reflect temporary MRLs set from monitoring data. EFSA performed an indicative chronic and acute dietary risk assessment for the list of MRLs to allow risk managers to take the appropriate decisions. For some commodities, further risk management discussions are required to decide which of the risk management options proposed by EFSA should be implemented in the EU MRL legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In accordance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) 396/2005, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to review the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the non‐approved active substance chlorfenapyr in view of the possible lowering of the MRL set for tea. This current EU MRL is based on an import tolerance established in 2007. EFSA reviewed the toxicological data assessed by other scientific bodies, proposing toxicological reference values to be used for an indicative risk assessment, noting that the values are affected by additional, non‐standard uncertainties. According to the indicative chronic and acute dietary risk assessment the existing MRL for tea does not pose an unacceptable risk for consumers. Further risk management discussions are required to decide which of the risk management options proposed by EFSA should be implemented in the EU MRL legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In accordance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) 396/2005, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to review the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the non‐approved active substance dicofol in view of the possible lowering of the MRL. EFSA investigated the origin of the current EU MRLs. All existing EU MRLs reflect previously authorised uses in the EU or are based on obsolete Codex Maximum Residue Limits. Furthermore, in view of the limitations of the toxicological dataset and related uncertainties, the existing toxicological reference values derived at the EU level cannot be confirmed for dicofol. EFSA therefore proposed lowering all existing EU MRLs for dicofol to the limit of quantification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Belgium, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Greece, for the pesticide active substance metalaxyl‐M are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses for the amendment to the conditions of approval of metalaxyl‐M as a fungicide seed treatment for sunflower and spinach seeds intended to be sown in field and on the basis of data submitted to update the specified level of an impurity in the technical active substance. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the initial competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, the United Kingdom, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Ireland, for the pesticide active substance mecoprop‐P are reported. Due to the UK leaving the EU, the renewal of approval dossier on mecoprop‐P was reallocated to Ireland, as RMS. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of mecoprop‐P as a herbicide on winter and spring wheat (including durum and spelt), barley, rye, oats and triticale. The conclusions were updated following the request from the European Commission to review the risk assessment as regards non‐dietary exposure and the endocrine‐disrupting properties of mecoprop‐P. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Hungary, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Ireland, for the pesticide active substance dimoxystrobin as well as the assessment of maximum residue levels (MRLs) and confirmatory data following the review of the existing MRLs of dimoxystrobin according to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. In June 2023, the European Commission sent a mandate confirming the need to adopt and publish a conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance dimoxystrobin excluding the full assessment of endocrine‐disrupting properties, containing all the results of the peer review process related to the renewal of approval as well as the assessment of the application for MRL for oilseed rapeseed, poppy seed, mustard seed and gold of pleasure seed, and the MRL application addressing the confirmatory data identified during the MRL review under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of dimoxystrobin as a fungicide on oilseed rape and sunflower. MRLs were assessed in rapeseeds, poppy seed, mustard seed and Gold of pleasure seed. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are presented where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Slovenia, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Austria, for the pesticide active substance tritosulfuron are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of tritosulfuron as a herbicide on spring and winter cereals, spring cereals with undersown grasses and maize (field uses). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Belgium, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Greece, for the pesticide active substance mepanipyrim are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of mepanipyrim as a fungicide on table and wine grapes and in field and protected strawberries and tomatoes. The conclusions were updated with regard to the endocrine‐disrupting properties following a mandate received from the European Commission in January 2019. The reliable end points appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Austria and co‐rapporteur Member State Italy for the pesticide active substance folpet and of confirmatory data following the MRL review under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of folpet as a fungicide on barley, wheat and wine grape (field uses) and tomato (field and greenhouse uses). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the confirmatory data, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Greece and co‐rapporteur Member State Finland for the pesticide active substance urea and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of urea as an attractant of fruit fly Bactrocera oleae on olive crops. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the Assessment Group on Glyphosate (AGG), consisting of the competent authorities of France, the Netherlands, Sweden and Hungary, acting jointly as rapporteur Member State for the pesticide active substance glyphosate are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of glyphosate as a herbicide as proposed by the applicants, covering uses pre‐sowing, pre‐planting and pre‐emergence plus post‐harvest in vegetables and sugar beet; post‐emergence of weeds in orchards, vineyards, row vegetables, railway tracks against emerged annual, biennial and perennial weeds. Moreover, uses as spot treatment against invasive species in agricultural and non‐agricultural areas, and in vegetables and sugar beet against couch grass are also included. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In accordance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) 396/2005, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to review the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the non‐approved active substance fenarimol in view of the possible lowering of the MRLs. EFSA investigated the origin of the current EU MRLs. For existing EU MRLs that reflect previously authorised uses in the EU, or that are based on obsolete Codex maximum residue limits, or import tolerances that are not required any longer, EFSA proposed the lowering to the limit of quantification. EFSA performed a chronic and acute dietary risk assessment for the revised list of MRLs to allow risk managers to take the appropriate decisions. For some commodities, further risk management discussions are required to decide which of the risk management options proposed by EFSA should be implemented in the EU MRL legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In accordance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) 396/2005, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to review the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the non‐approved active substance endosulfan in view of the possible lowering of the MRLs. EFSA investigated the origin of the current EU MRLs. For existing EU MRLs that reflect previously authorised uses in the EU, or that are based on obsolete Codex maximum residue limits, or import tolerances that are not required any longer, EFSA proposed the lowering to the limit of quantification or to an alternative MRL. EFSA performed an indicative chronic and acute dietary risk assessment for the revised list of MRLs to allow risk managers to take the appropriate decisions. For all commodities, further risk management discussions are required to decide which of the risk management options proposed by EFSA should be implemented in the EU MRL legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Lithuania, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Latvia, for the pesticide active substance trinexapac and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of trinexapac as a plant growth regulator on barley (winter and spring) and wheat (winter). MRLs were assessed in rye. The conclusions were updated with regard to the endocrine‐disrupting properties following a mandate received from the European Commission in January 2019.The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. The confirmatory data following the review of existing MRLs according to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 were also assessed under this conclusion. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Spain and co‐rapporteur Member State Greece for the pesticide active substance hydrolysed proteins and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of hydrolysed proteins as an insect attractant on olive tree, deciduous fruit tree, stone fruit tree, pome fruit tree, walnut tree, citrus tree, fig tree, persimmon tree, kiwi and blueberry crops. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In accordance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) 396/2005, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to review the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the non‐approved active substances azocyclotin and cyhexatin in view of the possible lowering of these MRLs. EFSA investigated the origin of the current EU MRLs. For existing EU MRLs that reflect previously authorised uses in the EU, or that are based on obsolete Codex Maximum Residue Limits, or import tolerances that are not required any longer, EFSA proposed the lowering to the limit of quantification. EFSA performed an indicative chronic and acute dietary risk assessment for the revised list of MRLs to allow risk managers to take the appropriate decisions. For some commodities under assessment, further risk management discussions are required to decide which of the risk management options proposed by EFSA should be implemented in the EU MRL legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In accordance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) 396/2005, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to review the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the non‐approved active substance bifenthrin in view of the possible lowering of the MRLs. EFSA investigated the origin of the current EU MRLs. For existing EU MRLs that reflect previously authorised uses in the EU, or that are based on obsolete Codex maximum residue limits, or import tolerances that are not required any longer, EFSA proposed the lowering to the limit of quantification or to an alternative MRL. EFSA performed an indicative chronic and acute dietary risk assessment for the revised list of MRLs to allow risk managers to take the appropriate decisions. For some commodities, further risk management discussions are required to decide which of the risk management options proposed by EFSA should be implemented in the EU MRL legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, EFSA has reviewed the maximum residue levels (MRLs) currently established at European level for the group of pesticide active substances cypermethrins. To assess the occurrence of cypermethrin, alpha‐cypermethrin, zeta‐cypermethrin, beta‐cypermethrin residues in plants, processed commodities, rotational crops and livestock, EFSA considered the conclusions derived in the framework of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, the MRLs established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (codex maximum residue limits; CXLs) for cypermethrin, alpha‐cypermethrin and zeta‐cypermethrin as well as the European authorisations and import tolerances reported by Member States and the UK (including the supporting residues data) for cypermethrin and zeta‐cypermethrin. The toxicological profile of zeta‐cypermethrin was also assessed. Based on the assessment of the available data, MRL proposals were derived, and a consumer risk assessment was carried out. Some information required by the regulatory framework was missing and a possible chronic/acute risk to consumer was identified. Hence, the consumer risk assessment is considered indicative only, all MRL proposals derived by EFSA still require further consideration by risk managers and measures for reduction of the consumer exposure should also be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State France and co‐rapporteur Member State Slovenia for the pesticide active substance sulfur and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of sulfur as a fungicide and acaricide on grapevine and cereals (wheat, barley, oat, rye, triticale). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, the Netherlands, for the pesticide active substance (3E)‐dec‐3‐en‐2‐one and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative post‐harvest use of (3E)‐dec‐3‐en‐2‐one on potato as a sprouting inhibitor applied by hot fogging in potato storage rooms. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, the Netherlands and co‐rapporteur Member State, the United Kingdom, for the pesticide active substance ethephon are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of ethephon as a plant growth regulator on cereals (winter and spring barley, winter and spring wheat, winter rye, winter triticale, spelt, durum wheat). The reliable endpoints appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, EFSA has reviewed the maximum residue levels (MRLs) currently established at European level for the pesticide dithianon. To assess the occurrence of dithianon residues in plants, processed commodities, rotational crops and livestock, EFSA considered the conclusions derived in the framework of Commission Regulation (EC) No 33/2008, the MRLs established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission as well as the European authorisations reported by Member States and the UK, including the supporting residues data. Given that a data gap as regards the magnitude of residues of the metabolites 1,4‐naphthoquinone and phthalic acid was identified in the peer review for dithianon in light of confirmatory data, the toxicological profile of these metabolites was also assessed in the framework of the Article 12 MRL review. Based on the assessment of the available data, MRL proposals were derived and a consumer risk assessment was carried out. Although no apparent risk to consumers was identified, some information required by the regulatory framework was missing. In particular, it is highlighted that the toxicological reference values derived for the metabolite 1,4‐naphthoquinone are provisional only, pending a conclusion on the mutagenicity potential. Hence, the consumer risk assessment is considered indicative only and some MRL proposals derived by EFSA still require further consideration by risk managers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Germany and co‐rapporteur Member State the Netherlands for the pesticide active substance Cydia pomonella granulovirus (CpGV) and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of CpGV as an insecticide on pome fruit (apple, pear, quince, nashi pears, medlars), stone fruit (peach, apricot, nectarine, almond, plum trees), walnut trees (field foliar spray applications, professional and non‐professional uses). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Greece and co‐rapporteur Member State France for the pesticide active substance aluminium silicate calcined (kaolin calcined) and the considerations as regards the Article 12 MRL review of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of aluminium silicate calcined (kaolin calcined) as an insect repellent via broadcast spray application on grapevine, apricot tree, almond tree, cherry tree, hazel tree, walnut tree, peach tree, apple tree, pear tree, quince tree, nashi tree, plum tree, citrus tree, lavender, lavandin and olive tree, as proposed by the applicants. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues was requested by the European Commission, to conclude based upon available evidence if metabolites 3‐phenoxybenzoic acid (PBA) and 3‐(4′‐hydroxyphenoxy)benzoic acid (PBA(OH)), common to several pyrethroid compounds, have genotoxic properties, if they share the (neuro)toxicity profile of their parent compounds, and if evidence allows to conclude on their health‐based guidance values. Available body of evidence consisted of studies from regulatory dossiers submissions, as well as from public literature. In addition, the data gap for short‐term toxicity profile of PBA was addressed by read‐across. Assessment revealed that PBA and PBA(OH) do not raise a concern with respect to genotoxicity. As regards general toxicity, PBA and PBA(OH) have different qualitative (no neurotoxic mechanism) and quantitative (higher NOAELs) toxicity compared to the parent pyrethroid compounds. For both metabolites, acceptable daily intake (ADI) and acute reference dose (ARfD) values were derived at 0.1 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day and 1 mg/kg bw, respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Latvia, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Romania, for the pesticide active substance quartz sand and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative field uses of quartz sand as a game repellent on deciduous and coniferous trees (professional use and non‐professional use), orchards, ornamental shrubs and trees in forestry (professional use and non‐professional use) and seedlings of conifer and deciduous trees in forestry (professional use). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. No concerns are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Slovenia, and co-rapporteur Member State, Finland, for the pesticide active substance rimsulfuron are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of rimsulfuron as an herbicide on maize, potato and tomato and updated following the request to update the risk assessment of rimsulfuron in view of the renewal process under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Norway, and co-rapporteur Member State, the Netherlands, for the pesticide active substance benfluralin are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of benfluralin as a herbicide on chicory and lettuce and updated following the request from Commission to review the risk assessment as regards birds and mammals and aquatic organisms. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, the applicant Syngenta France SAS submitted a request to the competent national authority in France to modify the existing maximum residue level (MRL) for the active substance sedaxane in potatoes. The data submitted in support of the request were found to be sufficient to derive an MRL proposal for potatoes. Adequate analytical methods for enforcement are available to control the residues of sedaxane on the commodity under consideration at the validated limit of quantification (LOQ) of 0.01 mg/kg. Based on the risk assessment results, EFSA concluded that the short‐term and long‐term intake of residues resulting from the use of sedaxane according to the intended agricultural practice is unlikely to present a risk to consumer health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member States, the United Kingdom (former) and France (after withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU), for the pesticide active substance isoflucypram. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of isoflucypram as a fungicide on wheat, rye, triticale, barley and oats (field use). The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, France, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Denmark, for the pesticide active substance triflusulfuron‐methyl are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of triflusulfuron‐methyl as a herbicide on sugar beet, fodder beet, red beet, chicory and witloof (field uses). The peer review also provided considerations on whether exposure to humans and the environment from the representative uses of triflusulfuron‐methyl can be considered negligible, taking into account the European Commission's draft guidance on this topic. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified. An evaluation of data concerning the necessity of triflusulfuron‐methyl as herbicide to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means, including non‐chemical methods is also presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Italy, and co‐rapporteur Member State, France, for the pesticide active substance oxamyl and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of oxamyl as a nematicide on potato and tobacco (field use), on tomato (permanent greenhouse), on cucurbits (edible and inedible peel), pepper, aubergine and plants nurseries of the above‐mentioned crops on soil bed preparation (permanent greenhouse). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]