Bénédicte Vagenende Pesticides Unit Crop Protection European Regulatory Conference, March 2015 EFSA’s role in the evaluation of active substances 1

2 Introduction to EFSA and the Pesticides Unit Peer review of active substances New actives and review programme Commission specific mandates on approved substances Pesticides residues and MRL MRL Reasoned opinions Commission specific mandates and other activities Pesticides Steering Network activities New procedure DAR/RAR dispatch and background documents conclusion CONTENT

3 EFSA VISION E E uropean F F ood S S afety A A uthority The European reference body Covers the entire food chain Assess, advise, communicate Independent, trusted, based on sound science Openness & transparency Technical reports on confirmatory data published New format for MRL Reasoned Opinions, publication of Evaluation Report Documents of the Pesticide Steering Network New services for applicants

4 Pesticides Unit activities Maximum Residue Levels MRLs  Reasoned Opinions  Annual report Supports the Scientific Panel for pesticides PPR (Plant Protection Product and their Residues).  Opinions  Guidance documents  Ad-hoc mandates Coordinates the Peer Review of active substances Provides Conclusions for single active substances to support the EU decision- makers

5 Pesticides Unit activities Maximum Residue Levels MRLs  Reasoned Opinions  Annual report Supports the Scientific Panel for pesticides PPR (Plant Protection Product and their Residues).  Opinions  Guidance documents  Ad-hoc mandates Coordinates the Peer Review of active substances Provides Conclusions for single active substances to support the EU decision- makers

The Peer Review Process Dossier submission EFSA PEER REVIEW EFSA, (co)RapporteurM S, other MSs, Commission, Applicant, Public 1. Commenting phase 2. Evaluation of comments and possible clock-stop 3. Expert’s consultation Commission +MSs Plants, Animals, Food and Feed Committee Approval/Non Approval D/RAR Draft/Review Assessment Report National authorisation PPP by MSs EFSA Conclusion EFSA Risk Assessment 11

7 Output of a scientific peer review Identity and Phys/Chem properties Mammalian Toxicology & Workers/Bystander/residents risks Residues & Consumers risks Environmental Fate and Behaviour Ecotoxicology & environmental risks Conducted by EFSA scientific staff and risk assessment experts from the Member States Includes: Data gaps and identified concerns List of endpoints proposed by EFSA EFSA CONCLUSION

8 40 Conclusions New active substances First conclusions under Reg. 1107/2009 Renewals and amendments of approvals First conclusions of AIR-II renewals Confirmatory data Reviews under Art Technical reports Basic substances Confirmatory data (new EFSA responsibility) Bee study protocols ( new EFSA involvement) EFSA PEER-REVIEW OUTPUTS 2014

9 Assessment of “cut-off” criteria in the EFSA conclusions Scientific assessment of risks associated to endocrine effects Complementing the interim criteria Next steps for cooperation with ECHA on C&L proposals Aligning DARs and CLH reports MRL applications as part of the dossier Import tolerances included in the conclusion if approved in the exporting country Scientific peer reviewed literature NEW ELEMENTS IN EFSA CONCLUSIONS

10 Literature search in Reg (EC) No 1107/2009 SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEWED LITERATURE Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 requires that applicants provide “Scientific peer-reviewed open literature, [...], on the active substance and its relevant metabolites dealing with side-effects on health, the environment and non-target species and published within the last ten years before the date of submission of the dossier...” as determined by the European Food Safety Authority. Literature search in Reg (EU) No 844/2012 (AIR III) Article 7(1)(m) of Regulation (EU) No 844/2012 requires that “the supplementary dossier should contain summaries and results of scientific peer-reviewed open literature, as referred to in Article 8(5) of Reg (EC) No 1107/2009”.

11 SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEWED LITERATURE Objectives of the EFSA guidance on submission of scientific peer-reviewed open literature for the approval of pesticide active substances under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. EFSA Journal 2011;9(2):2092 To ensure that literature search is exhaustive and covers all the relevant data requirements for the active substance and metabolites. To ensure that the literature search and the selection of the relevant papers is done minimising bias and according to the principles of systematic review (i.e. methodological rigour, transparency, reproducibility). To ensure that relevant scientific papers are properly incorporated in the dossier and assessed.

12 SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEWED LITERATURE Literature review reports Should contain: title, authors, summary, protocol (objectives and relevance criteria), search methods and results (Table 2), results of study selection process (Table 3, Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6). All Literature Review Reports should be incorporated in Doc K of the dossier (Section 9 or 11, in accordance with SANCO/10181/2013 – rev. 2.1). Relevant or unclearly relevant full papers are incorporated in the respective Doc K and summarised/assessed in Doc M

13 SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEWED LITERATURE Doc K should contain the Literature Review Reports covering scientific literature searches for data requirements in toxicology, residues in food/feed, enviromental fate and ecotoxicology Doc K should contain full papers identified as relevant or of unclear relevance in the respective folders Doc M should contain summaries and assessment of relevant or unclearly relevant full papers

14 Published during 2014 Health assessment of chlorpyrifos Aquatic risk of imidacloprid Bee study protocols On going Risk of neonicotinoids foliar uses to bees … SPECIFIC REQUEST FROM EC

15 Pesticides Unit activities Maximum Residue Levels MRLs  Reasoned Opinions  Annual report Supports the Scientific Panel for pesticides PPR (Plant Protection Product and their Residues).  Opinions  Guidance documents  Ad-hoc mandates Coordinates the Peer Review of active substances Provides Conclusions for single active substances to support the EU decision- makers

MRL REASONED OPINIONS Reviewing MRLs for approved/non-approved active substances (Art 12 ROs) – 2014: Reasoned opinions on 44 substances – Work-plan published as appendix to the dedicated PSC minutes New proposals and modifications of existing MRL (Art 10 ROs) – 2014: Reasoned opinions on 42 applications – Streamlined RO and MS Evaluation reports to be published as background documents to EFSA Opinions 17

MRL REASONED OPINIONS EC Request under Art. 43 – 2014: fosetyl, didecyldimethylammonium chloride (DDAC) and benzalkonium chloride (BAC), carbofuran, fipronil, saflufenacil – On-going: atrazine, metalaxyl and metalaxyl-M, lambda- cyhalothrin 18

EFSA comments on the proposed Codex MRLs evaluated by JMPR New version of PRIMo Revision of MRL review procedures and templates Database with List of Endpoints trusted by EFSA OTHER ON-GOING ACTIVITIES AND FUTURE PLANS

19 plan and monitor the risk assessment process integrate risk assessment and MRL setting processes coordinate with the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) prioritisation of guidance development PESTICIDES STEERING NETWORK ACTIVITIES Main title Major tasks:

20 cooperation on Classification and labelling alignment: aligning DAR and CLH report Proposals for new guidance development on Birds and mammals FOCUS Repair action Isomers PESTICIDES STEERING NETWORK ACTIVITIES Main title On-going activities:

21 NEW PROCEDURE DAR/RAR DISPATCH AND BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS CONCLUSION EFSA Document Management System as file exchange platform instead of courier Facilitate sanitisation procedure and dossier submission Unique project: single user name and password, access limited in time for security reasons Alignment of commenting period for Applicant, Member States and Public

22

Thank you for your attention 23