FÜR RISIKOBEWERTUNG BUNDESINSTITUT

Similar documents
Reproductive toxicity classification under CLP (Regulation (EC) no 1272/2008 on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of chemicals)

Pesticide risk assessment: changes and perspectives for mammalian toxicology in the new EC regulation 1107/2009

Draft Concept Paper. 05. Mai Seite 1 von 20

Questions and Answers on Candidates for Substitution

Recent Developments and Future Plans in the EFSA Assessments of Pesticides. Hermine Reich Pesticides Unit

ASSESSING ENDOCRINE DISRUPTING SUBSTANCES

Biocidal Products Committee (BPC)

Biocidal Products Committee (BPC)

of the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety

REASONED OPINION. European Food Safety Authority 2, 3. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) / of XXX

Justification for the selection of a candidate CoRAP substance UPDATE

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

RISK MANAGEMENT OPTION ANALYSIS CONCLUSION DOCUMENT

Classification & Labelling Introduction

ECPA position paper on the criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties under Regulation

Developmental neurotoxicity & REACH

Endocrine Disruptors

Potential Impacts Regarding Human Health Risk Assessment

APPROVED: 05 February 2016 PUBLISHED: 15 February 2016

Official Journal of the European Union. (Non-legislative acts) REGULATIONS

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

Justification for the selection of a substance for CoRAP inclusion

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL

The regulatory landscape. The now and the not yet

Committee for Risk Assessment RAC. Annex 3. Records. of the targeted experts consultations November 2012 on. Cycloxydim

Committee for Risk Assessment RAC

Cumulative risk assessment legal

DRAFT COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) /... of XXX

APPROVED: 17 March 2015 PUBLISHED: 27 March 2015

Classification of developmentally toxic pesticides, low dose effects, mixtures perspective of the industry

STUDIES TO EVALUATE THE SAFETY OF RESIDUES OF VETERINARY DRUGS IN HUMAN FOOD: GENERAL APPROACH TO ESTABLISH AN ACUTE REFERENCE DOSE

Test guidelines and guidance documents in the field of plant protection products

Substance Evaluation Conclusion document EC No SUBSTANCE EVALUATION CONCLUSION DOCUMENT. as required by REACH Article 48.

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

Justification Document for the Selection of a CoRAP Substance

EFSA Statement regarding the EU assessment of glyphosate and the socalled

European Union legislation on Food additives, Food enzymes, Extractions solvents and Food flavourings

GLP in the European Union Ecolabel detergents, GLP and accreditation

This document is submitted by the lead registrant, BASF SE on behalf of the Methanol REACH Consortium

Trisodium nitrilotriacetate (NTA)

First Phase of Impact Assessment on Endocrine Disruptors:

Lead Metal and the 9 th ATP to CLP: Frequently Asked Questions

Substance Name: Silicic acid, lead salt. EC Number: CAS Number: MEMBER STATE COMMITTEE SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION OF

Practical guidance for applicants on the submission of applications on food additives, food enzymes and food flavourings

COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU).../... of XXX

EFSA Info Session Pesticides 26/27 September Anja Friel EFSA Pesticides Unit (Residues team)

BfR Proposal for a Harmonised Procedure for Estimating the Dermal Absorption

Substance Name: imidazolidine-2-thione (2-imidazoline-2-thiol) EC Number: CAS Number: SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION OF

Properties criteria - BASTA

APPLICATION FOR AUTHORISATION: ESTABLISHING REFERENCE DNELs FOR 1-BROMOPROPANE (1-BP)

Evaluation of active substances in plant protection products Residues Anja Friel European Food Safetey Authority, Parma/ Italy

EC Number: CAS Number: SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION OF AS A SUBSTANCE OF VERY HIGH CONCERN BECAUSE OF ITS CMR 1 PROPERTIES

Outcome of the pesticides peer review meeting on general recurring issues in mammalian toxicology

Biocidal Products Committee (BPC)

Good Laboratory Practice. EU-Serbia screening meeting Brussels, 19 June 2014

Ongoing review of legislation on cadmium in food in the EU: Background and current state of play

Genotoxicity Testing Strategies: application of the EFSA SC opinion to different legal frameworks in the food and feed area

Restrictions in the use of biocides for disinfection procedures

Better Training for Safer Food Initiative

Challenges of MoA/HRF under CLH

Substance Name: Sulfurous acid, lead salt, dibasic. EC Number: CAS Number: SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION OF

Biocidal Products Committee (BPC)

Challenges in environmental risk assessment (ERA) for birds and mammals and link to endocrine disruption (ED) Katharina Ott, BASF SE, Crop Protection

TNsG on Annex I Inclusion Revision of Chapter 4.1: Quantitative Human Health Risk Characterisation

pesticides in the EU regulatory framework Prof Andreas Kortenkamp

Justification for the selection of a candidate CoRAP substance

VVH BELOUKHA Page 1 of 29. REGISTRATION REPORT Part A. Risk Management

Food additives and nutrient sources added to food: developments since the creation of EFSA

Risk Management Option Analysis Conclusion Document

(Text with EEA relevance) Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee ( 1 ),

The Impact of REACH on the Hazard Communications of US substances. Raymond M. David, Ph.D., DABT Manager, Toxicology BASF Corporation

Justification for the selection of a candidate CoRAP substance

Substance Name: Fatty acids, C16-18, lead salts. EC Number: CAS Number: SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION OF

European Commission Directorate General for Health and Consumers

Social dialogue. WG Health, Safety and Responsible Care. CLP Regulation

Risk Management Option Analysis Conclusion Document

1,1 - iminodipropan-2-ol

Annex II - List of enforceable provisions of REACH and CLP

Application of the calculation method in regulatory risk assessment. Part 1 The issue of animal studies

Room: 0D Centre Albert Borschette Rue Froissart Brussels, Belgium

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 1. Review report for the active substance Copper compounds

REASONED OPINION. European Food Safety Authority 2. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy

Comments CLH proposal Cadmium hydroxide

Assessment and regulation of endocrine disrupters under European chemical legislations Susy Brescia Chemicals Regulation Directorate (CRD) HSE

Regarding Establishment of a Uniform Limit in a Positive List System concerning Agricultural Chemicals Residues in Food etc.

Annex to a news release

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) (Question No EFSA-Q )

Benzothiazole-2-thiol (2-MBT)

Roadmap of SVHC identification and implementation of REACH risk management measures 1

Substance Evaluation Conclusion document EC No SUBSTANCE EVALUATION CONCLUSION DOCUMENT. as required by REACH Article 48. for.

TECHNICAL REPORT OF EFSA. List of guidance, guidelines and working documents developed or in use by EFSA 1

Nice, France, 4 th June, 2018 E.F.E.O. European Federation of Essential Oils. Legislation update

MEMBER STATE COMMITTEE SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION OF DIHEXYL PHTHALATE AS A SUBSTANCE OF VERY HIGH CONCERN BECAUSE OF ITS CMR PROPERTIES 1

1 OJ L 354, , p OJ L 80, , p. 19.

Committee for Risk Assessment RAC

EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY DIRECTORATE-GENERAL. PHARMACEUTICAL COMMITTEE 21 October 2015

Risk Assessment Report on sodium hypochlorite Human Health Part. CAS No.: EINECS No

Transcription:

BUNDESINSTITUT FÜR RISIKOBEWERTUNG Legal and Practical Aspects of the Cut-off Criteria for Reproductive Toxic and Endocrine Disrupting Effects for Approval and Classification of Pesticides in Europe Roland Solecki, Rudolf Pfeil Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany

CUT OFF CRITERIA for substances with reproductive toxic and endocrine disrupting effects (points 3.6.4. and 3.6.5 of ANNEX II of REGULATION (EC) 1107/2009) Legal and practical issues that still need to be resolved Possible procedures for implementing the cut off Criteria for C&L for reproductive toxicity Consideration of hazard-based & risk-based cut - off Reproductive toxicity Endocrine Disrupting Properties (ED) Co-ordination between the new Regulations for Pesticides and CLP Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 2

Current approval criteria: risk assessment Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market Risk assessment for pesticide approval Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market entered into force on 15 July 1991. Dir. 91/414/EEC stipulates that a.s. contained in PPP must be assessed regarding the possible risk for humans, animals.. Only when this risk assessment confirms that their use does not constitute a risk, the a.s. entered in the EU positive list. This means that preparations with these active substances may be approved in the individual Member States of the EU. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 3

Current approval criteria: risk assessment Dose-response relationship Threshold Concept 10 0 9 0 FX 8 0 % 7 0 6 0 5 0 4 0 10 100 1 000 1 000 0 Hazard identification p pm NOAEL for parental effects Absorption, NOAELs for bioavailability reproductive effects Assessment Factor Exposure assessment A Exposure assessment B Exposure assessment Z External ARfD ADI Route specific AEC Systemic AOEL Risk Characterisation No concern Annex I inclusion Concern No Annex I inclusion Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 4

Legal and practical issues that still need to be resolved Directive 91/414/EEC vs. Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market Approval of pesticides should not depend primarily on carcinogenic, reprotoxic and endocrine disrupting properties when, instead, threshold values can be established above which a health risk is to be expected. The potential exposure of consumers, operators, workers and bystanders should also be taken into account. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 5

Legal and practical issues that still need to be resolved Substances should present a clear benefit for plant production and not expected to have any harmful effect on human or animal health... the decision on acceptability or non-acceptability of such substances should be taken at Community level on the basis of harmonised criteria. These criteria should be applied for the first approval of a substance under this Regulation. For active substances already approved, the criteria should be applied at the time of renewal or review of their approval. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 6

Future approval criteria: Cut-off for CMR Cat 1 and ED PPP - Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market An active substance, safener or synergist shall only be approved if it is not or has not to be classified as mutagen category 1A or 1B. carcinogen category 1A or 1B * toxic for reproduction category 1A or 1B * is not considered to have endocrine disrupting properties that may cause adverse effects in humans * * unless... exposure of humans is negligible Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 7

Possible procedures for implementing the cut-off criteria Definitions Negligible exposure for C & R & ED the product is used in closed systems or in other conditions excluding contact with humans and where residues of the active substance, safener or synergist concerned on food and feed do not exceed the default value set in accordance with Article 18(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 Closed systems do not exclude necessarily exposure of bystanders and residents. A MRL of 0.01 mg/kg food for all compounds (PPP regulation) is not a health-based scientific decision criterion to protect consumers. A pragmatic and science-based definition of negligible exposure might be based on TTC concept or Exposure < 10 % (< 1%) ADI, ARfD, AOEL NOAEL reprotox & carcinogenicity / 1000 Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 8

Future approval criteria: Cut-off for CMR Cat 1 and ED Hazard identification Risk Characterisation Exposure assessment Classification and labelling for Carcinogenicity Mutagenicity Reproductive Toxicity. Annex I Inclusion Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 9

Classification for reproductive toxicity CLP - Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures Harmonised classification and labelling for active substances used in plant protection products and biocidal products In this classification system, reproductive toxicity is subdivided under two main headings: (a) Adverse effects on sexual function and fertility; (b) Adverse effects on development of the offspring Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 10

Hazard categories for reproductive toxicants Category 1A: Known human reproductive toxicants The classification is largely based on evidence from humans. Category 1B: Presumed human reproductive toxicants The classification is largely based on data from animal studies. clear evidence of an adverse effect in the absence of other toxic effects, or adverse effect is considered not to be a secondary non-specific consequence. mechanistic information raises doubt about relevance for humans, classification in Category 2 may be more appropriate. Category 2: Suspected human reproductive toxicants some evidence from humans or experimental animals, possibly supplemented with other information, and evidence is not sufficiently convincing to place the substance in Category 1. effects in the absence of other toxic effects, or considered not to be a secondary non-specific consequence. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 11

Classification for fertility effects Adverse effects on sexual function and fertility Any effect of substances that has the potential to interfere with sexual function and fertility. This includes, but is not limited to, alterations to the female and male reproductive system, adverse effects on onset of puberty, gamete production and transport, reproductive cycle normality, sexual behaviour, fertility, parturition, pregnancy outcomes, premature reproductive senescence, or modifications in other functions that are dependent on the integrity of the reproductive systems. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 12

Classification for developmental effects (1) Adverse effects on development of the offspring Developmental toxicity includes, in its widest sense, any effect which interferes with normal development of the conceptus, either before or after birth, and resulting from exposure of either parent prior to conception, or exposure of the developing offspring during prenatal development, or postnatally, to the time of sexual maturation Therefore, for pragmatic purpose of classification, developmental toxicity essentially means adverse effects induced during pregnancy, or as a result of parental exposure Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 13

Classification for developmental effects (2) Adverse effects on development of the offspring The major manifestations of developmental toxicity include: death of the developing organism, structural abnormality, altered growth, and functional deficiency. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 14

Classification for developmental effects (3) Maternal toxicity Developmental effects which occur even in the presence of maternal toxicity are considered to be evidence of developmental toxicity, unless it can be unequivocally demonstrated on a case-by-case basis that the developmental effects are secondary to maternal toxicity. Moreover, classification shall be considered where there is a significant toxic effect in the offspring, e.g. irreversible effects such as structural malformations, embryo/foetal lethality, significant post-natal functional deficiencies. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 15

Classification for developmental effects (4) Maternal toxicity Classification shall not automatically be discounted for substances that produce developmental toxicity only in association with maternal toxicity, even if a specific maternally-mediated mechanism has been demonstrated. In such a case, classification in Category 2 may be considered more appropriate than Category 1. when a substance is so toxic that maternal death or severe inanition results, or the dams are prostrate and incapable of nursing the pups, it is reasonable to assume that developmental toxicity is produced solely as a secondary consequence of maternal toxicity and discount the developmental effects. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 16

Consideration of hazard-based cut-off criteria Reproductive toxicity CLP - Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 Annex I; 3.7 Reproductive toxicity For the purpose of classification hazard classes Reproductive Toxicity are differentiated into: CAT 1 may damage fertility or unborn child CAT 2 suspected of damaging fertility or unborn child Additional category effects on or via lactation Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 17

Consideration of hazard-based and risk-based cut off criteria Reproductive toxicity Cat. 21 10 0 9 0 FX % 8 0 7 0 6 0 5 0 4 0 10 100 1 000 1 000 0 Hazard-based Classification p pm NOAEL for parental effects Absorption, NOAELs for bioavailability reproductive effects Assessment Factor 10X Exposure assessment A Exposure assessment B Exposure assessment Z External ARfD ADI Route specific AEC Systemic AOEL Risk Characterisation TTC No concern Concern Decision on approval Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 18

Consideration of hazard-based cut-off criteria Reproductive toxicity ec.europa.eu/sanco_pesticides/public/index.cfm If the criteria applied at the time of renewal or review of their approval. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 19

Consideration of hazard-based cut-off criteria Endocrine Disrupting Properties PPP - Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 By 14 December 2013, the Commission shall present a draft of the measures concerning specific scientific criteria for the determination of ED properties to be adopted... Pending the adoption of these criteria, substances that are or have to be classified, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, as carcinogenic category 2 and toxic for reproduction category 2, shall be considered to have endocrine disrupting properties. In addition, substances such as those that are or have to be classified, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, as toxic for reproduction category 2 and which have toxic effects on the endocrine organs, may be considered to have such endocrine disrupting properties. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 20

Joint DE-UK Proposal for potency-based cut-off criteria Endocrine Disrupting Properties Evaluate all available toxicological data of the substance Substance is classified as CMR Cat 1A or 1B under the CLP Reg.? Are there adverse effects potentially related to ED in intact organisms in acceptable studies? NO YES Does the available evidence demonstrate that ED mode of action in animals is plausible? YES Are the effects judged to be relevant to humans? YES Are serious ED effects observed at or below the STOT-RE Cat 1 guidance values of the CLP Regs $? YES NO NO NO Substance is not deemed an ED of regulatory concern: Proceed with standard risk assessment Substance is an ED for regulatory purposes Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 21

Joint DE-UK Proposal for potency-based cut-off criteria Endocrine Disrupting Properties Analysis of relevance for humans Use IPCS human relevance framework for robust and transparent conclusion (Boobis et al., 2008); If no information, assume human relevance; If effects not relevant to humans, they could still be relevant to non-target species in the environment. Can human relevance be reasonably excluded on the basis of fundamental qualitative differences in key events between animals and humans? MOA not relevant YES NO Can human relevance be reasonably excluded on the basis of fundamental quantitative differences in key events between animals and humans? Potential ED with relevance to humans Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 22 NO

Coordination between PPP and CLP Regulation Workshop on Harmonised Classification and labelling (CLH) of active substances in Plant Protection Products 12. April and 13. April 2011 at the BfR in Berlin Cooperation at the European level in the assessment of human health hazards of active substances in Plant Protection Products (PPP) under the Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and the harmonised classification and labelling of active substances under the Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 Goals of the Workshop: to finalise discussion on how the two processes can most efficiently be linked between RMS, EFSA and ECHA. to raise awareness in MSs (CAs for PPP evaluation and for C&L) and to communicate importance of the issue and the possible solutions. to discuss and recommend solutions regarding formatting problems a (how to facilitate compilation of PPP and C&L dossiers in form and content). to discuss possibilities and practicalities for submission of IUCLID 5 dossiers to support technical preparation of dossiers for C&L and Annex I inclusion. to improve harmonised interpretation and reporting for of CMR studies, discuss scientific principles of interpretation to avoid conflicting interpretations e.g. for Reproductive Toxicity.. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 23

Workshop Classification of Pesticides Break out group 1 Scope streamlining and integration of the procedures for active substances in PPP for Annex I inclusion under the Reg. (EC) No 1107/2009 and for Classification and Labelling (C&L). Main goals how 2 processes could most efficiently be linked between RMS, EFSA, ECHA as prepared by ECHA discussion paper and reflected in the outline paper to consider the anticipated workloads stemming from the PPP programmes in relation to the capacity of the ECHA process with a view to ensuring appropriate planning, management and prioritisation procedures. to raise awareness in Member States and to communicate the importance of the issue and possible solutions. to prepare a draft working document on the both processes. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 24

Workshop Classification of Pesticides Break out group 2 Scope scientific and practical issues in assessment and interpretation of CMR studies and requirements concerning adequate scientific content according to Reg. (EC) No 1107/2009 and Reg. (EC) No 1272/2008. Main goals how to facilitate compilation of CLH dossiers by the RMS; how to integrate additional relevant documents from the pesticide process, to facilitate the harmonised preparation of dossiers for both procedures. to improve harmonised interpretation and reporting of CMR studies, including Reproductive Toxicity to discuss scientific principles of interpretation of relevant studies, e.g., Reproductive Toxicity to avoid conflicting interpretations and different reporting of same studies, e.g., Reproductive Toxicity. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 25

Workshop Classification of Pesticide Company One set of data, Submission of IUCLID 5 RMS Hazard Characterisation CoC Registry of Intentions EFSA DAR CLH Dossier ECHA DAR to EFSA EFSA Public Consultation EFSA Opinion Building EFSA Conclusion DG SANCO Decision on Approval Inclusion in Annex I, PPP Reg. Mutual engagement, Manual of Decisions, Information exchange C&L Dossier Submission ECHA Public Consultation RAC Opinion Building RAC Opinion DG ENV & DG ENTR Decision on C&L Inclusion in Annex IV, CLP Reg. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 26

Coordination between PPP Regulation and CLP Concluding remarks C&L Workshop (1) Aim: Proposals for C&L from EFSA and ECHA should be identical, at best. How to reach this aim? 1. Improvement of procedural issues 2. Improvement of scientific issues Procedural issues: 1. Processes (PPP, CLP) should be run in cooperation. 2. Revision of the DAR is necessary in order to meet CLP requirements. 3. IUCLID-file should also be submitted for PPP assessment in order to save work for RMS. Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 27

Coordination between PPP Regulation and CLP Concluding remarks C&L Workshop (2) Scientific issues: 1. Identical data base (for PPP and CLP decisions) is essential for receiving identical conclusions. 2. Harmonized application of CLP criteria is essential for receiving identical conclusions. Workshop output: Publication of results: CIRCA and COM SANCO website save all background documents of the workshop and the report in a public folder in CIRCA at the following address: http://circa.europa.eu/public/irc/sanco/eccoman1/library?l=/new_section Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 28

Coordination between the Regulations for PPP & biocides Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing on the market and use of biocidal products New: Hazard based exclusion criteria for the biocide approval Article 5 1) The following active substances shall not,, be included in Annex I: a) classified as, carcinogen category 1A or 1B; b) classified as, mutagen category 1A or 1B; c) classified as, toxic for reproduction category 1A or 1B; d) identified as having endocrine disrupting properties; e) fulfill the criteria for being PBT or vpvb f) are persistent organic pollutants.. 2) However included in Annex I if.. one of the following conditions is met: a) exposure of humans in a biocidal product, is negligible, in particular used in closed systems or strictly controlled conditions; b) active substance is necessary to control a serious danger ; c) not including would cause disproportionate negative impacts Roland Solecki & Rudolf Pfeil DevTox Workshop Berlin 2011 Seite 29

BUNDESINSTITUT FÜR RISIKOBEWERTUNG Thank you for your attention! Federal Institute for Risk Assessment Thielallee 88-92 D-14195 Berlin Tel. 0 30-84 12-3470 Fax 0 30-84 12-3260 Roland.Solecki@bfr.bund.de www.bfr.bund.de