Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance clodinafop (variant evaluated clodinafop‐propargyl). (7th July 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Anastassiadou, Maria; Arena, Maria; Auteri, Domenica; Brancato, Alba; Bura, Laszlo; Carrasco Cabrera, Luis; Chaideftou, Eugenia; Chiusolo, Arianna; Court Marques, Danièle; Crivellente, Federica; De Lentdecker, Chloe; Egsmose, Mark; Fait, Gabriella; Greco, Luna; Ippolito, Alessio; Istace, Frederique; Jarrah, Samira; Kardassi, Dimitra; Leuschner, Renata; Lostia, Alfonso; Lythgo, Christopher; Magrans, Oriol; Mangas, Iris; Miron, Ileana; Molnar, Tunde; Padovani, Laura; Parra Morte, Juan Manuel; Pedersen, Ragnor; Reich, Hermine; Santos, Miguel; Serafimova, Rositsa; Sharp, Rachel; Stanek, Alois; Sturma, Juergen; Szentes, Csaba; Terron, Andrea; Tiramani, Manuela; Vagenende, Benedicte; Villamar‐Bouza, Laura;
• Is Part Of: EFSA journal. Volume 18:Number 7(2020)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2020-07-07
• Subjects: clodinafop‐propargyl -- clodinafop -- peer review -- risk assessment -- pesticide -- herbicide; Food -- Europe -- Safety measures -- Periodicals; Food Safety; Food -- Safety measures; Europe; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Government Publications, International; Internet Resources; Periodicals; Periodicals; 363.19209405
• DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6151
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1831-4732

Abstract

Abstract: 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, Greece, and co‐rapporteur Member State, Germany, for the pesticide active substance clodinafop‐propargyl 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 clodinafop‐propargyl as a herbicide on wheat, rye and 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. The European Commission mandated EFSA to reconsider the acceptable operator exposure level (AOEL) setting and to update the non‐dietary exposure assessment if needed.