Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance DE-126, referred to as meptyldinocap in Commission Decision 2006/589/EC

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 United Kingdom, for the pesticide active substance DE-126 are reported. It is noted that the decision recog...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: European Food Safety Authority
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2014-01-01
Series:EFSA Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/3473.pdf
Description
Summary: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 United Kingdom, for the pesticide active substance DE-126 are reported. It is noted that the decision recognising the completeness of the dossier was adopted by the European Commission with the name meptyldinocap (Commission Decision 2006/589/EC). However, the ISO common name meptyldinocap refers only to the E - isomer. As this active substance has been specified as a mixture of E - and Z - isomers with a defined ratio range, the name meptyldinocap cannot be used for this substance. Hence, the manufacturer development code DE-126 has been used as the name for this substance in this conclusion. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Regulation EU No 188/2011. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of DE-126 as a fungicide on grapes. The reliable endpoints concluded as being appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, derived from the available studies and literature in the dossier peer reviewed, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework as well as the assessments that could not be finalised based on the available data are listed. In addition, a high risk to aquatic organisms, in particular to aquatic invertebrates, was identified with the available assessments.
ISSN:1831-4732