Posts

EUROPE-COM : draft list of co-formulants banned in PPP

The EU draft regulation implementing the list of co-formulants that shall not be used in plant protection products or adjuvants (Annex III of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009) was discussed in the SCoPAFF meeting of 16 and 17 July 2019.

Co-formulants are unacceptable in plant protection products if it is established that their use or their residues have a harmful effect on human or animal health or have an unacceptable effect on plants or on the environment.

According to the draft list, the following co-formulants are considered as unacceptable:

– substances with a harmonized classification as carcinogens, category 1A or 1B, or as cell mutagens, category 1A or 1B, or as toxic to reproduction, category 1A or 1B,

– substances identified as persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB),

– substances identified as substances of very high concern due to endocrine disrupting properties,

– substances identified as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP),

– substances restricted under REACH where their use as a co-formulant in plant protection products is covered by the restriction,

– substances already identified as unacceptable co-formulants for plant protection products by Member States (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Spain and Norway) or during the renewal of approval process of active substance (i.e. POE-tallowamines),

– in-can preservatives that were not approved under the Biocide Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 due to unacceptable risks for human health and the environment (i.e. PHMB),

 

The draft regulation sets that unacceptable co-formulants may be present as unintentional impurities in other co-formulants provided their individual concentration in the finished plant protection product or adjuvant is less than 0.01 % (w/w) unless a different LoQ (Limit of Quantification) is provided.

At last, the draft Regulation sets that Member States must withdraw authorisations of products containing any of the listed unacceptable co-formulants at the latest by 2 years after entry into force of the list. A grace period of 12 months may be granted.

To download:

Draft Commission Regulation modifying Annex III of Regulation (EC) 1107/2009 and its Annex

 

Lynxee consulting’s team is at your disposal to answer your questions.

Contact us! http://lynxee.consulting/en/contact/

EUROPE: Adoption of Timelines for Additional Data on ED for AIR III Active Substances

As adopted by the Commission, the new scientific criteria to identify endocrine disruptors (ED) (Reg. (EU) 2018/605) and the associated EFSA/ECHA guidance (EFSA Journal 2018;16(6):5311) are applicable for the assessment of all active substances (AS) since 10 November 2018, including the AS being under renewal (AIR III renewal programm) for which no draft regulation has been voted by the Committee.

For those AS still being under renewal by 10 November 2018, the Reg. (EU) No 2018/1659, recently adopted, amends Reg. (EU) No 844/2012 to define new timelines specifically dedicated to the submission and assessment of complementary data as regards endocrine disruption. A summary of the new timelines is presented below.

AS for which the new EFSA conclusion is not adopted by 10 November 2018:

  • If additional data are deemed necessary by Member States (MS) and EFSA to assess if the ED criteria are met: data expected are detailed and justified, and a period between 3 and 30 months is set for the submission by the applicant (depending on the type of data required).
  • If no additional data are deemed necessary by MS and EFSA to assess if the ED criteria are met: after having been informed, the applicant may submit additional data as regards ED properties of the AS within 3 months.
  • For both situations described above, the applicant may also provide supporting information as regards the potential derogation for ED active substances according to Article 4(7) of Reg. (EC) No 1107/2009 within the respective period set.
  • After the submission of data by the applicant, the RMS shall produce a revised renewal assessment report (RAR) within 90 days. Then, after the submission of the revised RAR, a conclusion on the AS shall be adopted by EFSA within 120 days. This period includes a consultation of MS and of the applicant on the revised RAR.
  • Non-requested data or data submitted by the applicant after the expiry of the period set for its submission will not be considered.

AS for which the new EFSA conclusion is adopted by 10 November 2018 (but no draft Regulation has been voted by the Committee):

  • The Commission may consider that additional information as regards endocrine disruption are needed to apply the adopted criteria and hence request a revision of the assessment by EFSA within a reasonable time period.
  • In the case of a revision request, same conditions and timelines as presented above (AS for which the new EFSA conclusion is not adopted by 10 November 2018) apply.
  • If no data are submitted by the applicant, EFSA shall conclude the assessment within 30 days.

 

To download:

Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659 of 7 November 2018 amending Reg. (EU) No 844/2012 in view of the scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties introduced by Reg. (EU) No 2018/605.

 

See also our previous articles:

EUROPE – COM: Availability and applicability of the EFSA/ECHA guidance on identifying endocrine disruptors

 

Lynxee consulting’s team is at your disposal to answer your questions.

Contact us! http://lynxee.consulting/en/contact/

 

EUROPE: Publication of the supporting study for the ‘REFIT’ of Reg. (EC) No. 1107/2009 and No. 396/2005

The European Commission started in 2016 the application of the Regulatory Fitness and Performance programme (REFIT) to the European Regulation on pesticides (Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009) and their residues (Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005). The aim of applying the REFIT programme is to assess if the current Regulations are ‘fit for purpose’ and meet the needs of citizens, businesses and public institutions in an efficient manner. In particular, the evaluation addresses synergies, gaps, inefficiencies and administrative burdens.

The main evaluation criteria set out to be addressed in relation to this REFIT Evaluation are:

  • Effectiveness of the intervention
  • Efficiency in relation to resources used
  • Relevance in relation to identified needs and problems
  • Coherence with other interventions with common objective
  • EU added value compared to what could have been achieved by EU country or international action.

The evaluation study, based on those criteria, which will support the REFIT evaluation was conducted between 2017 and 2018 by external contractors. The final report of the study was recently published (18 October 2018) and can be downloaded from the links below.

The analysis is based on data collected via case studies and consultation of stakeholders (EFSA, European Commission, Member State competent authorities, SME panel, etc.) and via an open public consultation which involved almost 10,000 citizens. The data analysis notably included timeline tracking and an analysis of the costs and benefits of the Regulations.

The main conclusions of the external evaluation study are:

  • The pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 led to an improved harmonisation of active substance and plant protection product (PPP) registration procedures in the EU, and it contributes to the protection of both human health and the environment. Nevertheless, important issues affecting the regulatory processes were identified. The lack of capacity and resources in MSs and at EFSA and the zonal system (in particular mutual recognition) not delivering as expected are among the key issues identified.
  • The MRL Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005 is generally effective in achieving its objectives. It ensures a high level of consumer protection and facilitates the functioning of the internal EU market. The main difficulties identified are related to the MRL revision procedure according to Art. 12, which is considered not ‘fit for purpose’. Besides, the current provisions for setting MRLs for non-chemical active substances are deemed inadequate.

The following issues were also underlined for both Regulations:

  • The delay for implementing and applying several provisions (e.g. assessment of the cumulative risk for consumers) creates obstacles to ensuring a high level of protection for both human health and the environment.
  • Active substances and PPPs not assessed in a timely manner often lead to unsatisfactory evaluations in light of the latest scientific and technical knowledge. The delays also lead to uncertainty and unpredictability which affect companies, particularly SMEs, in their capacity to innovate and to propose alternative solutions to replace hazardous substances.

The Commission REFIT evaluation, based on the results of this external evaluation study, is foreseen to be finalised in the first half of 2019.

 

To download:

Study supporting the REFIT Evaluation of the EU legislation on plant protection products and pesticides residues (Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and Regulation (EC) No 396/2005)

Executive summary

Final report

Annexe I : Synopsis report

Annexe II : Methodology and cost calculations

Annexe III : Consultation activities – surveys and interviews

 

Lynxee consulting’s team is at your disposal to answer your questions.

Contact us! http://lynxee.consulting/en/contact/

 

EUROPE: Draft report of the PEST Committee on the Union’s authorisation procedure for pesticides

Nine years after the adoption of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 and following the recent controversy about the renewal of the active substance glyphosate, a special committee, the so-called ‘PEST’, was mandated in 2018 by the European Parliament for an analysis of the current authorisation procedure for pesticides in the Union. The final objective of the committee is to present recommendations on the procedure in order to achieve a high level of protection of human and animal health, and the environment.

A draft version of the PEST committee report has recently been made available online (please refer to the link below). A final version of the report is to be expected by the end of the year.

 

To download:

Draft report of the PEST Committee (25 August 2018)

 

Lynxee consulting’s team is at your disposal to answer your questions.

Contact us! http://lynxee.consulting/en/contact/

 

Sanco 13170 (14 July 2015) on Renewal of the Authorisation of PPP according to Article 43

This guidance document, updated on 14 July 2015, has been developed to elaborate the procedures for the renewal of authorisations of PPPs according to Article 43 of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009.

The procedures described only apply to renewals of authorisations based on active substances for which approval is renewed under the Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009, and where safe uses have been demonstrated.

Lynxee consulting focuses on the key steps of the renewal of the authorisation of a PPP according to Article 43:

Steps

What to submit?

When to submit?

Notification of the application

to each MS where renewal of authorisation is seek

  • notification form

By the deadline for the submission of the supplementary dossier for the renewal of the active substance

First step application

to the zRMS and cMS

  • updated template of the notification form;

  • indication of agreement on the studies which are needed and where possible an expected timeframe,

  • indication on which parts of the risk assessment need updating (preferably agreed in pre-submission meetings with zRMS);

  • a “data matching list” regarding references relied upon (where relevant).

2 months following the publication of the EFSA conclusions

Second step application

to the zRMS and cMS

  • a copy of the authorisation;

  • any new information required as a result of amendments in data requirements, and criteria (changes to  endpoints arising from the active substance renewal);

  • evidence/justification that the new data submitted are the result of data requirements or criteria which were not in force when the authorisation of the plant protection product was granted or necessary to amend the conditions of approval;

  • any information to demonstrate that the product complies with the requirements (conditions and restrictions) set out in the Regulation on the renewal of the approval of the active substance;

  • a report on the monitoring information, where the authorisation was subject to monitoring;

  • a complete updated draft Registration Report in which the changes to the risk assessment are highlighted;

  • a list of intended uses including a statement that no significant changes compared to previous authorisations (in the zone) exists.

  • a justification for each data point for which not all information is available as specified in Article 43(2) (outstanding data)

  • a comparative assessment for products containing candidates for substitution (to be assessed by each MS)

Within 3 months from the date of entry into force of the decision of renewal of the approval of the active substance.

At the same time the

application should be included into the EU PPP Application management System.

Data protection

The applicant may seek advice by the individual MS about the status of protected/non-protected studies.

The data generated because they were necessary for the renewal of the authorisation benefit from a data protection period of 30 months from the applicability of the decision of renewal of the authorisation.

New information related to active substance renewal

The applicant shall take into account the list of “old” and “new” studies and the list of critical endpoints that have been changed during the active substance renewal procedure in order to build the updated draft Registration Report of the PPP renewal.

Outstanding data at the 3 months deadline

Five circumstances can result in data being outstanding.The applicant must provide an appropriate justification for each situation where data is missing at the three months deadline.

The data directly related to a (new) endpoint as listed in EFSA conclusion and for which the time is too short to produce the requested study should be submitted as soon as possible taking into account the time necessary to conduct the studies (generally within 2 years).

Timelines

The zonal RMS should complete its assessment of the new information 6 months after receipt of the information (this period includes a 3 week commenting time for the applicant and the MSs of the relevant zone(s)). And then this allows 3 months for the other MSs to conduct comparative assessment (if necessary) and to decide on the renewal of their authorisations.

After every step in the procedure the EU PPP Application management System should be updated respectively by the applicant or by the concerned MS.

Products containing more than one active substance

For products containing two or more active substances the applicant shall apply for a renewal of authorisation after the renewal of each active substance contained in the PPP.

However, if the PPP contains two or more active substances and the approval of the second active substance expires within 12 months of the first one, zRMS and MSs should evaluate the data submitted for both active substances after the data for the second active substance are submitted.

 

http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/approval_active_substances/guidance_documents/docs/gd_renewal_1107-2009_rev_13.pdf

 

Lynxee consulting’s team is at your disposal to manage the renewal process of your products.
Contact us! http://lynxee.consulting/en/contact/

 

TRAINING: EU Regulation and French requirements

We propose a new training course on EU Regulation (Regulation 1107/2009) and French requirements.
Duration: 1 day. Languages: English or French.
We can customise this training course according to your needs. Please feel free to let us know your specific expectations!