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 Czech Republic and co-rapporteur Member State Hungary for the pesticide active substance daminozide 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 daminozide as a plant growth regulator in ornamentals (field and greenhouse). 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., (© 2025 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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, Denmark, and co-rapporteur Member State, Germany, for the pesticide active substance clomazone 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 clomazone as a herbicide on potato and spring/winter oilseed rape. 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., (© 2025 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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, France, for the pesticide active substance spinosad 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 spinosad as insecticide on bulb/dry onions, maize (fodder and grain), sweet corn, grapes (table and wine), lettuce, potato, aubergine, pepper and tomato. MRLs were assessed in field leek and field and greenhouse strawberries, cane fruits, lettuce & plants salad (others), spinach and similar leaves (others), herbs and edible flowers (others), cardoons, rhubarb and animal commodities. 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., (© 2025 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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 Austria for the pesticide active substance lysate of Willaertia magna C2c Maky 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 use of lysate of Willaertia magna C2c Maky as a fungicide against downy mildew ( Plasmopara viticola ) on grapevines and table grapes. 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 were not identified., (© 2025 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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 Germany for the pesticide active substance phosphine 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 phosphine as a post-harvest indoor insecticide to control insects infesting stored grains (barley, oat, rye, wheat), cacao and coffee beans, tree nuts and oilseeds and dried fruit via gassing application (gas-tight rooms/container). 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., (© 2025 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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 Slovakia for the pesticide active substance gibberellic acid 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 use of gibberellic acid as a plant growth regulator on seedless grapes (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 when identified., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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 Slovakia for the pesticide active substance gibberellins (GA4/GA7) 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 gibberellins (GA4/GA7) as a plant growth regulator on apple and pear (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 when identified., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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 Finland for the pesticide active substance fenoxaprop-P-ethyl 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 fenoxaprop-P-ethyl as a post-emergence herbicide in wheat, durum wheat, rye, triticale and barley to control annual monocotyledonous weeds. 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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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 bixlozone 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 bixlozone as an herbicide on winter cereals (wheat and barley), winter oilseed rape and maize via soil broadcast spray application in field. 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., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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, Poland, for the pesticide active substance penoxsulam 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 penoxsulam as a herbicide on rice and chicory. 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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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 Austria for the pesticide active substance elemental iron 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 elemental iron in field and greenhouses (permanent and non-permanent structures) via granule application by spreading on all edible and non-edible crops, ornamental plants and amenity grassland to control molluscs. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

This guidance document provides a tiered framework for risk assessors and facilitates risk managers in making decisions concerning the approval of active substances (AS) that are chemicals in plant protection products (PPPs) and biocidal products, and authorisation of the products. Based on the approaches presented in this document, a conclusion can be drawn on the impact of water treatment processes on residues of the AS or its metabolites in surface water and/or groundwater abstracted for the production of drinking water, i.e. the formation of transformation products (TPs). This guidance enables the identification of actual public health concerns from exposure to harmful compounds generated during the processing of water for the production of drinking water, and it focuses on water treatment methods commonly used in the European Union (EU). The tiered framework determines whether residues from PPP use or residues from biocidal product use can be present in water at water abstraction locations. Approaches, including experimental methods, are described that can be used to assess whether harmful TPs may form during water treatment and, if so, how to assess the impact of exposure to these water treatment TPs (tTPs) and other residues including environmental TPs (eTPs) on human and domesticated animal health through the consumption of TPs via drinking water. The types of studies or information that would be required are described while avoiding vertebrate testing as much as possible. The framework integrates the use of weight-of-evidence and, when possible alternative (new approach) methods to avoid as far as possible the need for additional testing., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2023 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

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 (3 E )-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 (3 E )-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., (© 2023 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2022 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2022 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2022 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

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., (© 2022 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)