   
  
G/SPS/GEN/1740   
18 October 2019  
(19-6828) Page: 1/1 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original: Spanish  
 
  
SPECIFIC TRADE CONCE RNS – EUROPEAN UNION MRLS  FOR BUPROFEZIN, 
DIFLUBENZURON, CHLOR OTHALONIL, ETHOXYSUL FURON,  GLUFOSINATE,  
IMAZALIL, IOXYNIL, I PRODIONE,  MOLINATE,  PICOXYSTROBIN  
AND TEPRALOXYDIM (NO . 448)  
COMMUNICATION FROM C OLOMBIA, COSTA RICA, CÔTE D'IVOIRE,  
ECUADOR, GUATEMALA, PANAMA AND PARAGUAY  
The following communication, dated 16 October 2019, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Ecuador, Guatemala, Panama and Paraguay . 
 
________ _______  
 
Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Ecuador, Guatemala, Panama and Paraguay would like to ask 
the European Union the following questions related to  specific trade concern No. 448 and 
MRL amendments.  
EUROPEAN UNION AMEND MENTS OF MRLS FOR IM AZALIL (G/SPS/N/EU/319)  
1.  What is the scientific justification for establishing an  MRL of 0.01 mg/kg for imazalil in bananas 
and depart ing from the relevant international standard (Codex Alimentarius ), which sets an MRL of 
2.0 mg/kg?  
2.  Is the MRL of 0.01 mg/kg based on scientific principles? In particular, is it based on an 
assessment, as appropriate to the circumstances, of the risks to human life or health, taking into 
account risk assessment techniques developed by the relevant international organizations?  
3.  Could yo u share how, in the assessment of risks, the following were taken into account: available 
scientific evidence; relevant processes and production methods; relevant inspection, sampling and 
testing methods; prevalence of specific diseases or pests; existence  of pest - or disease -free areas; 
relevant ecological and environmental conditions; and quarantine or other treatment?  
4.  Could you share how, in assessing the risk and determining the measure to be applied for 
achieving the appropriate level of protection fro m such risk, the following were taken into account 
as relevant economic factors: the potential damage in terms of loss of production or sales in the 
event of the entry, establishment or spread of a pest or disease; the costs of control or eradication 
in th e territory of the importing Member; and the relative cost -effectiveness of alternative 
approaches to limiting risks?  
5.  How was the objective of minimizing the negative effects on trade taken into account when 
determining that the MRL for imazalil in bananas  should be reduced from 2.0 to 0.01 mg/kg, which 
in practice implies prohibiting imports of bananas for which this substance has been used?  
6.  How is reducing the MRL for imazalil in bananas to 0.01 mg/kg justified when the MRL s for other 
products posing a si milar risk are maintained or reduced slightly?  
7.  If it is considered that there is insufficient  relevant scientific evidence demonstrat ing the safety 
of the MRL set out by the Codex Alimentarius, why was the measure not notified as provisional while 
the EU s eeks to obtain the additional information necessary for a more objective assessment of risk 
and reviews the MRL accordingly within a reasonable period of time?  
__________  