1. Potential implications of the Biocidal Product Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 Establishing maximum residue limits for active substances in biocidal products used for food hygiene purposes Eoghan Daly Policy and technical advisor (food)

2. Proposed MRLs for biocidal actives Concerns that limits may be: -Set in an inappropriate manner (‘where appropriate’ but ‘appropriate’ not defined). -Set at impractical levels. -Enforced at inappropriate tiers of the supply chain. -Potential for dual regulation with Regulation 396/2005 (controlling pesticides in food commodities).

3. Potentially significant food hygiene & safety issue Inappropriate restrictions on biocides may increase risk of outbreaks. Reduction in range of biocides available – cumulative impact on MRLs. Capacity of FBOs to monitor and test MRLs.

4. Enforcement may be problematic Certain biocidal actives naturally present in foods -e.g. organic acids, alcohols, hydrogen peroxide. Unclear when MRL becomes enforceable. -Chemicals change, e.g. sugar to alcohol. Who is liable? -Products with several components building up MRLs

5. Enforcement may be problematic Some foods within scope of 396/2005. -E.g. Herbs / salad leaves under both regulations. -BACs and DDAC under both regulations. Rapid detection methods not available in F&D industry -Batch approval not practical / desirable -Validation problematic due to variety of food products

6. Next steps? Prior to any decision: -EFSA’s BIOHAZ Panel should review food safety impact of placing restrictions on disinfectants. Risks from biocidal actives should be considered with risks from pathogens controlled by actives -Adequate consideration should be given to enforcement implications.

7. Role for FLEP Is there a role for FLEP to explore the potential enforcement implications in more detail? Should FLEP encourage assessment by the EFSA BIOHAZ Panel?