(Mrls) for Phosphane and Phosphide Salts According to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005

REASONED OPINION

APPROVED: 25 November 2015 PUBLISHED: 04 December 2015 doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4325

Review of the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for phosphane and phosphide salts according to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

Abstract According to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has reviewed the maximum residue levels (MRLs) currently established at European level for phosphane; this residue may result from the use of phosphane itself or from the use of certain phosphide salts. In order to assess the occurrence of phosphane residues in plants, processed commodities, rotational crops and livestock, EFSA considered the conclusions derived in the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC, the MRLs established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission as well as the European authorisations reported by Member States (incl. the supporting residues data). Based on the assessment of the available data, MRL proposals were derived and a consumer risk assessment was carried out. Although no apparent risk to consumers was identified, some information required by the regulatory framework was missing. Hence, the consumer risk assessment is considered indicative only and some MRL proposals derived by EFSA still require further consideration by risk managers. © European Food Safety Authority, 2015

Keywords: phosphane, phosphide, MRL review, Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, consumer risk assessment, fumigant

Requestor: European Commission Question number: EFSA-Q-2009-00095; EFSA-Q-2009-00151; EFSA-Q-2009-00157; EFSA-Q-2009-00173; EFSA-Q-2012-00944 Correspondence: [email protected]

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Acknowledgement: EFSA wishes to thank the rapporteur Member State Germany for the preparatory work on this scientific output. Suggested citation: EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015. Reasoned opinion on the review of the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for phosphane and phosphide salts according to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325, 88 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4325 ISSN: 1831-4732 © European Food Safety Authority, 2015 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

The EFSA Journal is a publication of the European Food Safety Authority, an agency of the European Union.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 2 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Summary The pesticide active substances aluminium phosphide, calcium phosphide and magnesium phosphide were included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC on 1 September 2009 by Commission Directive 2008/125/EC, while the active substance zinc phosphide was included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC on 1 May 2011 by Commission Directive 2010/85/EU. These substances have subsequently been deemed to be approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, in accordance with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 541/2011. On 1 April 2013, the pesticide active substance phosphane was also approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1043/2012, amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011. Since all these substances were approved after the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 on 2 September 2008, EFSA is required to provide a reasoned opinion on the review of the existing MRLs for phosphane in compliance with Article 12(1) of the aforementioned regulation, phosphane being the common residue generated by these five substances. In order to collect the relevant pesticide residues data, EFSA asked Germany, as the designated rapporteur Member State (RMS), to complete the Pesticide Residues Overview File (PROFile) and to prepare a supporting evaluation report for each substance. The evaluation reports submitted by the RMS and the PROFiles prepared in collaboration with EFSA were made available to the Member States. A request for additional information was addressed to the Member States in the framework of a completeness check period which was initiated by EFSA on 16 March 2015 and finalised on 15 May 2015. After having considered all the information provided, EFSA prepared a completeness check report for each active substance; these reports were made available to Member States on 18 June 2015. Based on the conclusions derived by EFSA in the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC, the MRLs established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the additional information provided by the RMS and Member States, EFSA prepared in October 2015 a draft reasoned opinion, which was circulated to Member States for consultation via a written procedure. Comments received by 09 November 2015 were considered during the finalisation of this reasoned opinion. The following conclusions are derived.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 3 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Table of contents

Abstract ...... 1 Summary ...... 3 Background ...... 5 Terms of reference ...... 6 The active substances and their use pattern ...... 6 Assessment ...... 8 1. Residues in plants ...... 9 1.1. Nature of residues and methods of analysis in plants ...... 9 1.1.1. Nature of residues in primary crops ...... 9 1.1.2. Nature of residues in rotational crops ...... 9 1.1.3. Nature of residues in processed commodities ...... 9 1.1.4. Methods of analysis in plants ...... 9 1.1.5. Stability of residues in plants ...... 9 1.1.6. Proposed residue definitions ...... 10 1.2. Magnitude of residues in plants ...... 10 1.2.1. Magnitude of residues in primary crops ...... 10 1.2.2. Magnitude of residues in rotational crops ...... 12 1.2.3. Magnitude of residues in processed commodities ...... 12 1.2.4. Proposed MRLs ...... 12 2. Residues in livestock ...... 12 3. Consumer risk assessment ...... 13 Conclusions ...... 13 Recommendations ...... 14 References ...... 17 Abbreviations ...... 20 Appendix A – Summary of authorised uses considered for the review of MRLs ...... 22 Appendix B – List of end points...... 72 Appendix C – Input values for the exposure calculations ...... 84 Appendix D – Decision tree for deriving MRL recommendations ...... 86 Appendix E – Used compound code(s) ...... 88

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 4 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Background Regulation (EC) No 396/20051 establishes the rules governing the setting and the review of pesticide maximum residue levels (MRLs) at European level. Article 12(1) of that regulation stipulates that EFSA shall provide within 12 months from the date of the inclusion or non-inclusion of an active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC2 a reasoned opinion on the review of the existing MRLs for that active substance. The active substances aluminium phosphide, calcium phosphide and magnesium phosphide were included in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC on 1 September 2009 by means of Commission Directive 2008/125/EC3, while the active substance zinc phosphide was included in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC on 1 May 2011 by Commission Directive 2010/85/EU.4 These substances have subsequently been deemed to be approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009,5 in accordance with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011,6 as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 541/2011.7 On 1 April 2013, the pesticide active substance phosphane was also approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/20098 by means of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1043/2012,9 amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011.10 Hence, in compliance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, EFSA initiated the review of the existing MRLs for phosphane, which is the common residue generated by the use of the above mentioned pesticide active substances. According to the legal provisions, EFSA shall base its reasoned opinion in particular on the relevant assessment report prepared under Directive 91/414/EEC. It should be noted, however, that in the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC only a few representative uses are evaluated, while MRLs set out in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 should accommodate all uses authorised within the EU, and uses authorised in third countries that have a significant impact on international trade. The information included in the assessment report prepared under Directive 91/414/EEC is therefore insufficient for the assessment of all existing MRLs for a given active substance. In order to gain an overview of the pesticide residues data that have been considered for the setting of the existing MRLs, EFSA developed the Pesticide Residues Overview File (PROFile). The PROFile is an inventory of all pesticide residues data relevant to the risk assessment and MRL setting for a given active substance. This includes data on:  the nature and magnitude of residues in primary crops;  the nature and magnitude of residues in processed commodities;

1 Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 February 2005 on maximum residue levels of pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin and amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC. OJ L 70, 16.3.2005, p. 1–16. 2 Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1–32. Repealed by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. 3 Commission Directive 2008/125/EC of 19 December 2008 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include aluminium phosphide, calcium phosphide, magnesium phosphide, cymoxanil, dodemorph, 2,5-dichlorobenzoic acid methylester, metamitron, sulcotrione, tebuconazole and triadimenol as active substances. OJ L 344, 20.12.2008, p. 78–88. 4 Commission Directive 2010/85/EU of 2 December 2010 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include zinc phosphide as active substance and amending Decision 2008/941/EC. OJ L 317, 3.12.2010, p. 32–35. 5 Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC. OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1–50. 6 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 of 25 May 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the list of approved active substances. OJ L 153, 11.6.2011, p.1-186. 7 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 541/2011 of 1 June 2011 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the list of approved active substances. OJ L 153, 11.6.2011, p. 187–188. 8 Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC. OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1–50. 9 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1043/2012 of 8 November 2012 approving the active substance phosphane, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011. OJ L 310, 9.11.2012, p. 24–27. 10 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 of 25 May 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the list of approved active substances. OJ L 153, 11.6.2011, p. 1–186.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 5 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

 the nature and magnitude of residues in rotational crops;  the nature and magnitude of residues in livestock commodities and;  the analytical methods for enforcement of the proposed MRLs. Germany, the designated rapporteur Member State (RMS) in the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC, was asked to complete the PROFile for each active substance and to prepare supporting evaluation reports (Germany, 2009a, 2009b, 2011a, 2013, 2014). The supporting evaluation reports, which were submitted to EFSA between August 2009 and July 2014, and the PROFiles, which were prepared in collaboration with EFSA, were made available to the Member States. A request for additional information was addressed to the Member States in the framework of a completeness check period which was initiated by EFSA on 16 March 2015 and finalised on 15 May 2015. Additional evaluation reports were submitted by France, Germany and the United Kingdom (France, 2015; Germany, 2015a, 2015b; United Kingdom, 2015) and after having considered all the information provided by the RMS and Member States, EFSA prepared a completeness check report which was made available to all Member States on 18 June 2015. Further clarifications were sought from Member States via a written procedure in June–July 2015. Based on the conclusions derived by EFSA in the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC, the MRLs established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the additional information provided by the Member States, EFSA prepared in October 2015 a draft reasoned opinion, which was submitted to Member States for commenting via a written procedure. All comments received by 9 November 2015 were considered by EFSA during the finalisation of the reasoned opinion. The evaluation reports submitted by the RMS (Germany, 2009a, 2009b, 2011a, 2013, 2014, 2015a, 2015b), and the evaluation reports submitted by the Member States France and the United Kingdom (France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015) are considered as supporting documents to this reasoned opinion and, thus, are made publicly available. In addition, key supporting documents to this reasoned opinion are the completeness check reports (EFSA, 2015a, 2015b, 2015c, 2015d, 2015e) and the Member States consultation report (EFSA, 2015f). These reports are developed to address all issues raised in the course of the review, from the initial completeness check to the reasoned opinion. Considering the importance of the completeness check and consultation report, all documents are considered as background documents to this reasoned opinion and, thus, are made publicly available.

Also the chronic and acute exposure calculations for all crops reported in the framework of this review performed using the EFSA Pesticide Residues Intake Model (PRIMo) are key supporting documents and made publicly available.

Terms of reference According to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, EFSA shall provide a reasoned opinion on:  the inclusion of the active substance in Annex IV to the Regulation, when appropriate;  the necessity of setting new MRLs for the active substance or deleting/modifying existing MRLs set out in Annex II or III of the Regulation;  the inclusion of the recommended MRLs in Annex II or III to the Regulation;  the setting of specific processing factors as referred to in Article 20(2) of the Regulation.

The active substances and their use pattern There are no ISO common names for the active substances under assessment because they were all named in accordance with the IUPAC nomenclature. It is noted however that phosphane was previously referred to as phosphine (former IUPAC name). The five active substances under assessment belong to the group of phosphane generating compounds, phosphane being the toxicologically active component. These compounds are used as fumigants to control insects, rodents, rabbits and moles (and other non-rodent vertebrates), or in the

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 6 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

case of zinc phosphide, as an oral poison in baits against rodents. The mode of action is by inhibition of cellular respiration. The chemical structures of the five active substances and their main metabolite are reported in Appendix E. The five active substances were evaluated in the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC with Germany designated as rapporteur Member State (RMS). For aluminium phosphide, calcium phosphide and magnesium phosphide, the representative uses supported during the peer review process were as a rodenticide, talpicide and leporicide to control rodent and non-rodent vertebrates by fumigation of underground tunnels and burrows in cropland and non-cropland situations (for all three substances), and as a fumigant to control insects in various harvested plant products and in empty warehouses or transportation facilities (for aluminium and magnesium phosphide only). Following the peer review, which was carried out by EFSA, a decision on inclusion of the three active substances in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC was published by means of Commission Directive 2008/125/EC, which entered into force on 1 September 2009. According to Regulation (EU) No 540/2011, the three substances are also deemed to have been approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. These approvals are restricted to ready-to-use products and as rodenticide only outdoor uses may be authorised. In addition, authorisations should be limited to professional users. For zinc phosphide, the representative use supported during the peer review process was as a rodenticide in forestry. Following the draft assessment report submission however, the notifier voluntarily withdrew, in accordance with Article 24e of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2229/2004,11 its support for the inclusion of zinc phosphide in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. Consequently, a decision on non-inclusion of the active substance was published by means of Commission Decision 2008/941/EC,12 which entered into force on 02 January 2009. A resubmission application was subsequently made in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 33/200813 and a peer review was carried out by EFSA. Following this peer review, a decision on inclusion of the active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC was published by means of Commission Directive 2010/85/EU, which entered into force on 1 May 2011. According to Regulation (EU) No 540/2011, zinc phosphide is deemed to have been approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. This approval is restricted to uses as rodenticide in the form of ready-to-use baits placed in bait stations or target locations. For phosphane, the representative uses supported during the peer review process comprised gassing applications as an insecticide on stored cereals, cacao, coffee, fatty seeds or dried fruits. Following the peer review, which was carried out by EFSA, was approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 by means of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1043/2012, which entered into force on 1 April 2013. According to the approval restrictions, authorisations for phosphane should also be limited to professional users. EU MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts are established in Annex IIIA of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 while EU MRLs for hydrogen phosphide (equivalent to phosphane) in cereals were also established in Annex II of the same regulation. The latter correspond to the CXLs established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), legally implemented at EU level under Council Directive 86/362/EEC14 and subsequently transferred to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, by means of Regulation

11 Commission Regulation (EC) No 2229/2004 of 03 December 2004 laying down further detailed rules for the implementation of the fourth stage of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Council Directive 91/414/EEC, OJ L 379, 24.12.2004, p. 13. 12 Commission Decision 2008/941/EC of 8 December 2008 concerning the non-inclusion of certain active substances in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing these active substances, OJ L 335, 13.12.2008, p. 91–93. 13 Commission Regulation (EC) No 33/2008 of 17 January 2008 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Directive 91/414/EEC as regards a regular and an accelerated procedure for the assessment of active substances which were part of the programme of work to in Article 8(2) of that Directive but have not been included into its Annex I. OJ L 15, 18.01.2008, p. 5. 14 Council Directive 86/362/EEC of 24 July 1986 on the fixing of maximum residue levels for pesticide residues in and on cereals. OJ L 221, 7.8.1986, p. 37.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 7 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

(EC) No 149/200815. However, the MRLs for hydrogen phosphide included in Annex II are already covered by the MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts included in Annex IIIA and therefore considered obsolete by EFSA. For the purpose of this MRL review, the critical uses of aluminium phosphide, calcium phosphide, magnesium phosphide, phosphane and zinc phosphide currently authorised within the EU have been collected by the RMS and reported to EFSA. The additional GAPs reported by Member States during the completeness check were also considered. Member States did not report any use authorised in third countries that might have a significant impact on international trade. According to the information reported, aluminium phosphide, magnesium phosphide and phosphane are authorised for fumigation of stored goods against insects; the details of the authorised GAPs are given in Appendix A. Calcium phosphide and zinc phosphide are not authorised for this type of application. Aluminium phosphide, calcium phosphide, magnesium phosphide and zinc phosphides may also be authorised as rodenticides. While zinc phosphide may solely be used in a targeted manner as granular bait, ready-to-use bait or block bait in field crops, vegetable crops, orchards, vineyards, meadows, pastures, ornamentals, forestry or storage rooms, the other three compounds may be used for fumigation of underground tunnels and burrows to control rodent and non-rodent vertebrates in cropland and non-cropland situations. Considering that these authorisations are of less relevance for the consumer exposure, they are not reported in Appendix A. Phosphane is not authorised for this type of application. According to the definitions of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, the pesticide use of phosphane and phosphide salts is limited to products of plant origin in an unprocessed state or having undergone only simple preparation, such as milling, drying or pressing. EFSA is aware that phosphane generating compounds may also be authorised for fumigation of processed commodities. Such authorisations are however governed by the legislation on biocides and do not fall under the remit of EFSA. Furthermore, such authorisations would require the setting of specific MRLs for processed commodities, which are currently not established under Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Authorisations for fumigation of processed commodities were therefore not considered by EFSA within this framework.

Assessment EFSA has based its assessment on the evaluation reports prepared by the RMS (Germany, 2009a, 2009b, 2011a, 2013, 2014), the Draft Assessment Reports (DAR), the additional reports and their addenda prepared under Council Directive 91/414/EEC (Germany, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c, 2007d, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2009c, 2009d, 2010a, 2010b, 2011b), the conclusions on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the different active substances (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010, 2012a), and the evaluation reports submitted during the completeness check (France, 2015; Germany, 2015a, 2015b; United Kingdom, 2015). The assessment is performed in accordance with the legal provisions of the uniform principles for evaluation and authorisation of plant protection products as set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 546/201116 and the currently applicable guidance documents relevant for the consumer risk assessment of pesticide residues (European Commission, 1996, 1997a-gg, 2000, 2010a,b, 2011 and OECD, 2011). More detailed information on the available data and on the conclusions derived by EFSA can be retrieved from the list of end points reported in Appendix B.

15 Commission regulation (EC) No 149/2008 of 29 January 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing Annexes II, III and IV setting maximum residue levels for products covered by Annex I thereto. OJ L 58, 1.3.2008, p. 1. 16 Commission Regulation (EU) No 546/2011 of 10 June 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards uniform principles for evaluation and authorisation of plant protection products. OJ L 155, 11.06.2011, p. 127–175.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 8 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

1. Residues in plants

1.1. Nature of residues and methods of analysis in plants

1.1.1. Nature of residues in primary crops Data on metabolism in plants were not provided and considered not necessary. Zinc phosphide is applied in a targeted manner, exclusively as bait against rodents, and therefore significant residues in plants resulting from the use of this compound are in any case not expected (EFSA, 2010). The other phosphides, in contact with soil or atmospheric moisture, are rapidly hydrolysed to phosphane (PH3) and their corresponding hydroxides [i.e. Al(OH)3, Ca(OH)2 and Mg(OH)2], this decomposition depending mainly on temperature and soil/air humidity. After treatment the major part of phosphane is volatilised and diluted in air or oxidised to phosphorous oxyacids (phosphinate, phosphonate, phosphate…). When fumigating underground tunnels and burrows, residues may also be re-adsorbed onto soil but no significant uptake of phosphane by plants is expected (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c). Hence oxidation of phosphane to phosphorous compounds is the sole degradation pathway expected, also after application of phosphane itself as a fumigant (EFSA, 2012a).

1.1.2. Nature of residues in rotational crops As for primary crops, data were not provided and considered not necessary. Where phosphides or phosphane are applied in bait stations or used for fumigation of stored goods, the assessment of residues in rotational crops is not relevant. When fumigating underground tunnels and burrows, residues may be re-adsorbed onto soil but no significant uptake of phosphane by plants is expected (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c).

1.1.3. Nature of residues in processed commodities As for primary crops, data were not provided and considered not necessary. Oxidation of phosphane to phosphorous compounds (phosphinate, phosphonate, phosphate…) is the sole degradation pathway expected (see section 1.1.1).

1.1.4. Methods of analysis in plants During the peer review of phosphane, an analytical method using GC-NPD was evaluated and validated for the determination of phosphane in dry commodities (cereal grain), high water content commodities (tomatoes) and one specific matrix (coffee beans) with an LOQ of 0.01 mg/kg (EFSA, 2012a). An ILV (for cereal grain and coffee beans) and a confirmatory method (using a 2nd GC column with different polarity) are available, and validation of the method in acidic commodities is not required because extraction is performed under pH controlled conditions. A separate method, also using GC-NPD, was evaluated and validated for the determination of phosphane in high oil content commodities (shell fruit) with an LOQ of 0.01 mg/kg (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b), but an ILV and a confirmatory method were not reported for this crop group. Hence it is concluded that phosphane can be monitored in all plant commodities (including difficult matrices) with an LOQ of 0.01 mg/kg, but an ILV and a confirmatory method are still required for high oil content commodities. EURLs commented during the consultation of MSs that even lower LOQ values may be achieved in routine enforcement but EFSA is of the opinion that the above mentioned LOQs are sufficient to ensure adequate consumer protection.

1.1.5. Stability of residues in plants Data were not provided and considered not necessary, provided that samples were analysed within 24 hours of sampling or stored under liquid nitrogen for few days, phosphane being a very volatile compound.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 9 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

1.1.6. Proposed residue definitions Most of the phosphorous oxidation products expected from the use of phosphides or phosphane are widespread in nature and of no toxicological concern. EFSA notes that one of these oxidation products (phosphonic acid) may also originate from the use of fosetyl and phosphonate compounds, for which MRLs are currently established within the EU. However, the RMS Germany reported residue trials where phosphane residues were oxidised to phosphonic acid which was subsequently determined by a colorimetric assay (Germany, 2014). Since the results of these trials are in the same range as the trial results obtained following direct measurement of phosphane (using NPD detection), EFSA concluded that potential deposits of phosphonic acid following fumigation with phosphane are negligible. Hence, considering that stored fumigated commodities may contain residual gaseous phosphane (adsorbed and interstitial) and residual metal phosphide may incidentally contaminate treated goods when reaction with atmospheric moisture is incomplete, the residue definition for monitoring and risk assessment was proposed as the sum of phosphane and phosphane generators (relevant phosphide salts), determined and expressed as phosphane. Analytical methods for monitoring of the proposed residue definition are available although an ILV and a confirmatory method are still required for high oil content commodities.

1.2. Magnitude of residues in plants

1.2.1. Magnitude of residues in primary crops Aluminium phosphide, calcium phosphide, magnesium phosphide and zinc phosphide, may be used as a rodenticide. Zinc phosphide is applied in a targeted manner, exclusively as bait against rodents, and therefore significant residues in plants resulting from the use of this compound are in any case not expected (EFSA, 2010). The other three compounds are used for fumigating underground tunnels and burrows and residues may be adsorbed onto soil. Nevertheless, during the peer review of these active substances it was already demonstrated on the basis of public literature that a significant uptake of phosphane by plants is not expected (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c). Regarding the fumigation of stored goods, only the use of aluminium phosphide, magnesium phosphide or phosphane is authorised. To assess the magnitude of phosphane residues resulting from this type of application, EFSA considered all residue trials reported by the RMS in the relevant evaluation reports (Germany, 2009a, 2009b, 2014) and additional trials submitted during the completeness check (France, 2015; Germany, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015). These data also include the residue trials previously evaluated in the framework of the peer review (EFSA, 2008a, 2008c, 2012a). When selecting the trials compliant with authorised GAPs, EFSA took into consideration the following criteria:  Because phosphane generating compounds are normally completely converted to phosphane and residue levels are mainly influenced by the atmospheric concentration of phosphane, the phosphane generator used in the trials is not expected to impact on the final residue levels. Trials performed with aluminium or magnesium phosphide were therefore considered adequate to support authorisations of phosphane (or vice versa).  Only the trials that complied with all the GAP parameters were considered by EFSA, the most essential GAP parameters being the atmospheric concentration of phosphane during the treatment and the withholding period (WHP).  In case a WHP of 0 days was supported (i.e. cereals), the ventilation time was also considered as an essential parameter (i.e. until concentration of phosphane < 0.01 ppm). In this particular case, if the ventilation criteria applied in the trial were not well documented, the trial was disregarded. Furthermore, considering the volatility of phosphane, EFSA only selected residue trials where samples were stored under liquid nitrogen, unless they were analysed within 24 hours of sampling. Exceptions to this criterion were also accepted in the following cases:  Some trial samples reported for tree nuts, pulses, coffee beans and spices, which were stored for 2–4 days under normal freezer conditions (−18° C) were considered acceptable because results of these trials were in line with results observed in the other trials.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 10 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

 Sample storage conditions were not reported for the residue trials supporting authorisation of phophane in tree nuts, coffee beans and cocoa beans, trials were considered acceptable by EFSA because the GAPs reported for aluminium and magnesium phosphide on the same crops are expected to be more critical. For these reasons, trials selected by EFSA may be different from the trials previously selected by Member States in their evaluation reports. Furthermore, if additional residue trials were to be elaborated in the future, samples should be analysed within 24 hours of sampling, unless they are stored under liquid nitrogen. Based on the selection of EFSA, the number of residue trials and extrapolations were evaluated in accordance with the European guidelines on comparability, extrapolation, group tolerances and data requirements for setting MRLs (European Commission, 2011). The following considerations were made by EFSA.

Pistachios The number of residue trials on pistachios supporting the GAP authorised for aluminium and magnesium phosphide is in principle compliant with the data requirements. However, four additional residue trials on pistachios which were performed with a lower application rate, resulted in higher residue levels after treatment. Considering that the residue levels for tree nuts without shells (or open shells) are expected to be lower than residue levels for tree nuts with shells, a clarification for this discrepancy is still required (see also the discussion for oilseeds).

Oilseeds The number of residue trials on linseed supporting the GAP authorised for aluminium and magnesium phosphide is in principle compliant with the data requirements. However, several trials on oilseeds and nuts have demonstrated that the decline of residues is slower in commodities with shell than in commodities without shell. This effect may be explained by a slow migration of phosphane through the shell during the treatment. After treatment this trapped residue will also require more time to be again released in the atmosphere. In fact, this effect is confirmed by residue trials on sunflower seeds (with shell) which were performed with a lower application rate but resulted in residue levels higher than those observed in the trials with linseed. Eight residue trials performed on oilseeds with shell and compliant with the GAP for aluminium and magnesium phosphide are therefore still required. Furthermore, the GAP for phosphane is not supported by any residue trial and eight residue trials supporting this GAP are also required (performed on oilseeds with shell).

Cereals Only the authorised GAP for magnesium phosphide is supported by data: four residue trials on wheat grain and four residue trials on maize grain. As the residue levels observed for maize grain were significantly higher than the residue levels observed for wheat grain and a justification for this discrepancy could not be retrieved, it was tentatively assumed that the higher levels observed in maize grain are related to the size of the grain and a distinction was made between small grain cereals (barley oats, rice, rye and wheat) and large grain cereals (maize). Considering the uncertainties regarding the classification of millet, sorghum and buckwheat, it was considered more prudent to classify these three crops as large grain cereals within this framework. Four additional trials on a small grain cereal and four additional trials on large grain cereal, all compliant with the GAP for magnesium phosphide, are in any case still required to confirm these findings. The authorised GAPs for aluminium phosphide and phosphane were not supported by adequate residue trials. Several trials were reported by the RMS but results of the trials were not consistent and study reports were too limited to retrieve justifications for these discrepancies. Most of the trials also did not contain information on the ventilation criteria applied in the trials while this is an essential criterion when a WHP of 0 days is supported. The trials on cereals reported by France and the United Kingdom during the completeness check period could also not be considered by EFSA since they did not specify the cereal grain tested. Hence, eight residue trials on a small grain cereal and eight residue trials on a large grain cereal are in principle still required to support the critical GAP for aluminium phosphide which seems more critical than the GAP reported for magnesium phosphide.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 11 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Cocoa beans The number of residue trials supporting the authorised GAP for magnesium phosphide is not compliant with the data requirements but the reduced number of trials is considered acceptable considering the low variability of residues observed in the available trials. However, the authorised GAP for aluminium phosphide is not supported by adequate residue trials and at least four residue trials compliant with this GAP are required.

Other crops Regarding the fumigation of stored tree nuts (other than pistachios), herbs, pulses, herbal infusions and spices, the number of residue trials supporting the authorised GAPs is compliant with the data requirements. For tea and coffee beans, the number of residue trials supporting the authorised GAPs is not compliant with the data requirements but the reduced number of trials is considered acceptable considering the low variability of residues expected after fumigation treatments. Hence no further residue trials are required.

1.2.2. Magnitude of residues in rotational crops Residues in rotational crops are not expected (see also section 1.1.2).

1.2.3. Magnitude of residues in processed commodities Aluminium phosphide and magnesium phosphide are authorised for fumigation of dried fruits and vegetables, while phosphane is authorised for fumigation of dried fruits only. Residue trials supporting those authorisations were selected according to the criteria defined under section 1.2.1. Available data indicate that measurable residues (exceeding the monitoring LOQ of 0.01 mg/kg) are not expected in dried fruits and vegetables after fumigation. Phosphane generating compounds may be authorised as a biocide for fumigation of further processed commodities, but such authorisations do not fall under the remit of the current MRL review. Regarding the treatment of the raw agricultural commodities, processing studies are not required as they are not expected to affect the outcome of the risk assessment. However, if more robust processing factors were to be required by risk managers, in particular for enforcement purposes, additional processing studies would be needed.

1.2.4. Proposed MRLs Consequently, the available data are considered sufficient to derive MRL proposals as well as risk assessment values for all commodities under evaluation. Considering however that further residue trials are still required to confirm certain MRL proposals and that the analytical method for enforcement of residues in high oil content commodities is not fully validated, MRL proposals for tree nuts, oilseeds and cereal grains are tentative only. Although authorisations were reported for dried fruits and vegetables, MRLs could not be derived for these commodities because MRLs should normally be established for the raw agricultural commodities. Considering however, that available residue trials indicated absence of measurable residues in dried fruits and vegetables after fumigation, MRL proposals and risk assessment values for these commodities were not considered necessary in this case.

2. Residues in livestock Aluminium phosphide, magnesium phosphide and phosphane are authorised for use on several crops that may be fed to livestock. Livestock dietary burdens were therefore calculated for different groups of livestock using the agreed European methodology (EC, 1996). The input values for all relevant commodities have been selected according to the recommendations of JMPR (FAO, 2009) and are summarised in Appendix C. The dietary burdens calculated for all groups of livestock were found to exceed the trigger value of 0.1 mg/kg DM. Behaviour of residues should therefore be assessed in all commodities of animal origin.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 12 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Specific data to assess the nature of residues in livestock are not available, but available rat metabolism studies demonstrated that in mammalians phosphane is mainly oxidised to phosphonate and phosphinate, and accumulation of residues in tissues was not observed (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010, 2012a). As for plant commodities, considering the elementary nature of the phosphane, oxidation to phosphorous compounds is the sole degradation pathway expected in livestock. Further studies investigating the nature of residues in livestock are therefore not necessary. Regarding the magnitude of residues, residue levels in tissues resulting from the exposure of livestock to phosphane could not be adequately elucidated by EFSA. Phosphane was shown to be extensively metabolised in the rat and feeding studies with phosphonic acid (assessed for the review of MRLs of fosetyl) indicate that occurrence of phosphonic acid in animal tissues is only expected after exaggerated exposures (EFSA, 2012b). Residues in livestock resulting from the use of phosphane (generating compounds) are therefore expected to be negligible and the setting of MRLs in commodities of animal origin is probably not required. However, EFSA is of the opinion that this issue still needs to be addressed adequately and the conclusion derived by EFSA is therefore only tentative. If this issue is not addressed in the future, risk managers may also consider a WHP of 3 days after fumigation of large grain cereals. This restriction would significantly reduce the livestock dietary burden and the calculated burdens would result below the trigger value of 0.1 mg/kg DM for all groups of livestock. In this case, a fall-back MRL of 0.15 mg/kg in large grain cereals may be considered on a tentative basis because additional trials on large grain cereals are in any case still required.

3. Consumer risk assessment In the framework of this review, only the uses reported in Appendix A were considered, but phosphane was previously also assessed by the JMPR. The CXLs, resulting from this assessment by JMPR and adopted by the CAC, are now international recommendations that need to be considered by European risk managers when establishing MRLs. In order to facilitate consideration of these CXLs by risk managers, the consumer exposure should in principle be calculated both with and without consideration of the existing CXLs. However, only for small grain cereals the CXL (0.1 mg/kg) is established at a level higher than the MRL derived in the framework of this assessment (0.05 mg/kg); all other CXLs are covered by the EU MRL proposals. Furthermore, the CXL of 0.1 mg/kg in cereals grains may lead to a significant intake of residues by livestock and information supporting this CXL could not be retrieved by EFSA (CXL was assessed by JMPR in 1967-1971). It was therefore not considered appropriate to include this in the EU risk assessment, and chronic and acute exposure calculations were therefore only performed for the uses reported in the framework of this review, using revision 2 of the EFSA Pesticide Residues Intake Model (PRIMo) (EFSA, 2007). Input values for the exposure calculations were derived in compliance with the decision tree reported in Appendix D. Hence, for those commodities where a (tentative) MRL could be derived by EFSA in the framework of this review, median and highest residue values were derived according to the internationally agreed methodologies (FAO, 2009). All input values included in the exposure calculations are summarised in Appendix C. These input values do not consider dried fruits and vegetables because residues in these commodities are expected to be negligible after fumigation. The calculated exposures were compared with the toxicological reference values for phosphane, derived by EFSA (2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010, 2012a) under Directive 91/414/EEC. The highest chronic exposure was calculated for the WHO cluster diet B, representing 7.3 % of the ADI, and the highest acute exposure was calculated for maize, representing 12 % of the ARfD. Although (major) uncertainties remain due to the data gaps identified in the previous sections, this indicative exposure calculation did not indicate a risk to consumers.

Conclusions Aluminium phosphide, calcium phosphide, magnesium phosphide and zinc phosphide, may be used as a rodenticide. Data supporting these authorisations were not provided and not required. Indeed, zinc phosphide is applied in a targeted manner, exclusively as bait against rodents, and therefore significant residues in plants resulting from the use of this compound are in any case not expected.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 13 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

The other three compounds are used for fumigating underground tunnels and burrows in cropland and non-cropland situations. Although residues may be adsorbed onto soil, a significant uptake of residues by plants is not expected. Aluminium phosphide, magnesium phosphide or phosphane may also be authorised for fumigation of stored goods. In contact with atmospheric moisture, these compounds are rapidly hydrolysed to phosphane (PH3) and their corresponding hydroxides, and subsequent oxidation of phosphane to phosphorous compounds is the sole degradation pathway expected, both in raw agricultural commodities and in processed products. Phosphorous compounds being widespread in nature and of no toxicological concern, no further data on the nature of residues in plants were required and the residue definition for monitoring and risk assessment was proposed as the sum of phosphane and phosphane generators (relevant phosphide salts), determined and expressed as phosphane. Analytical methods for monitoring of the proposed residue definition are available although an ILV and a confirmatory method are still required for high oil content commodities. Regarding the magnitude of residues, the available residue trials were considered sufficient to derive MRL proposals as well as risk assessment values for all commodities under evaluation. Considering however that further residue trials are still required to confirm certain MRL proposals and that the analytical method for enforcement of residues in high oil content commodities is not fully validated, MRL proposals for tree nuts, oilseeds and cereal grains are tentative only. The livestock dietary burden was found to exceed the trigger value of 0.1 mg/kg DM for all groups of livestock. As for plant commodities, considering the elementary nature of the phosphane, oxidation to phosphorous compounds is the sole degradation pathway expected in livestock. Further studies investigating the nature of residues in livestock are therefore not necessary. However, the actual levels present in tissues following exposure of livestock to phosphane could not be adequately elucidated by EFSA. It is acknowledged that such residues will most likely be negligible and that the setting of MRLs in commodities of animal origin is probably not required. However, EFSA is of the opinion that this issue still needs to be addressed adequately and the conclusion derived by EFSA is therefore only tentative. Chronic and acute consumer exposure resulting from the authorised uses reported in the framework of this review was calculated using revision 2 of the EFSA PRIMo. The highest chronic exposure represented 7.3 % of the ADI (WHO cluster diet B) and the highest acute exposure amounted to 12 % of the ARfD (maize). The CXL for small grain cereals is the only CXL to be established at a level higher than the MRLs derived in the framework of this assessment; all other CXLs are covered by the EU MRL proposals. However, this CXL may lead to a significant intake of residues by livestock and information supporting this CXL could not be retrieved by EFSA. It was therefore not considered appropriate to include this CXL in the EU risk assessment

Recommendations MRL recommendations were derived in compliance with the decision tree reported in Appendix D of the reasoned opinion (see summary table). All MRL values listed as ‘Recommended’ in the table are sufficiently supported by data and are therefore proposed for inclusion in Annex II to the Regulation. The remaining MRL values listed in the table are not recommended for inclusion in Annex II because they require further consideration by risk managers (see summary table footnotes for details). In particular, some tentative MRLs need to be confirmed by the following data:  an ILV and a confirmatory method for monitoring of phosphide in high oil content commodities;  clarifications regarding the discrepancies observed for pistachios;  additional residue trials supporting authorisations on oilseeds and cereal grains;  data confirming that occurrence of phosphane and its oxidation products (phosphonic acid in particular) is negligible in livestock products (data gap mainly relevant for large grain cereals which are the main contributors to the livestock dietary burden).

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 14 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

It is also highlighted that the MRL derived for cocoa beans results from a GAP with magnesium phosphide, while the GAP reported for aluminium phosphide supported by data. EFSA therefore identified the following data gap which is not expected to impact on the validity of the MRLs derived but which might have an impact on national authorisations:  additional residue trials supporting the authorisation of aluminium phosphide on cocoa beans. If the above reported data gaps are not addressed in the future, Member States are recommended to withdraw or modify the relevant authorisations at national level. Regarding the missing information on the occurrence of residues in livestock, risk managers may also consider a WHP of 3 days after fumigation of large grain cereals. This restriction would significantly reduce the livestock dietary burden and the calculated burdens would result below the trigger value of 0.1 mg/kg DM for all groups of livestock. In this case, a fall-back MRL of 0.15 mg/kg in large grain cereals may be considered on a tentative basis because additional trials on large grain cereals are in any case still required. EFSA also highlights that apart from the existing EU MRLs already listed in Table 1, EU MRLs were previously also established in Annex II of the Regulation for hydrogen phosphide in cereals. These MRLs were however considered obsolete by EFSA and it is recommended to delete the MRL list for hydrogen phosphide currently included in Annex II.

Table 1: Summary table

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 15 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Code Commodity Existing Existing Outcome of the review number EU MRL CXL MRL Comment (a) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) 401040 Sesame seed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401050 Sunflower seed 0.1 - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401060 Rape seed 0.1 - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401070 Soya bean 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401080 Mustard seed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401090 Cotton seed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401100 Pumpkin seeds 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401110 Safflower 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401120 Borage 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401130 Gold of pleasure 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401140 Hempseed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401150 Castor bean 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500010 Barley grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500020 Buckwheat grain 0.1 0.1 0.7 Further consideration needed(b) 500030 Maize grain 0.1 0.1 0.7 Further consideration needed(b) 500040 Millet grain 0.1 0.1 0.7 Further consideration needed(b) 500050 Oats grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500060 Rice grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500070 Rye grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500080 Sorghum grain 0.1 0.1 0.7 Further consideration needed(b) 500090 Wheat grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 610000 Tea 0.05* - 0.02 Recommended(c) 620000 Coffee beans 0.05* - 0.15 Recommended(c) 630000 Herbal infusions 0.05* - 0.02 Recommended(c) 640000 Cocoa (fermented beans) 0.05* 0.01* 0.02 Recommended(c) 800000 Spices 0.05* 0.01* 0.02 Recommended(c) – Other products of plant See Reg. – – Further consideration needed(d) and animal origin 149/2008 * Indicates that the MRL is set/proposed at the limit of quantification. (a): Commodity code number, as listed in Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 (b): Tentative MRL is derived from a GAP evaluated at EU level, which is not fully supported by data but for which no risk to consumers was identified; CXL (if available) is not supported by data and cannot be considered within the EU assessment (combination E-I in Appendix D). (c): MRL is derived from a GAP evaluated at EU level, which is fully supported by data and for which no risk to consumers is identified; CXL (if available) is not supported by data and cannot be considered within the EU assessment (combination G-I in Appendix D). (d): There are no relevant authorisations or import tolerances reported at EU level; no CXL is available. Either a specific LOQ or the default MRL of 0.01 mg/kg may be considered (combination A-I in Appendix D).

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 16 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

References European Commission, 1996. Appendix G. Livestock Feeding Studies. 7031/VI/95 rev.4, 22 July 1996. European Commission, 1997a. Appendix A. Metabolism and distribution in plants. 7028/IV/95-rev., 22 July 1996. European Commission, 1997b. Appendix B. General recommendations for the design, preparation and realization of residue trials. Annex 2. Classification of (minor) crops not listed in the Appendix of Council Directive 90/642/EEC. 7029/VI/95-rev.6, 22 July 1997. European Commission, 1997c. Appendix C. Testing of plant protection products in rotational crops. 7524/VI/95-rev.2, 22 July 1997. European Commission, 1997d. Appendix E. Processing studies. 7035/VI/95-rev.5, 22 July 1997. European Commission, 1997e. Appendix F. Metabolism and distribution in domestic animals. 7030/VI/95-rev.3, 22 July 1997. European Commission, 1997f. Appendix H. Storage stability of residue samples. 7032/VI/95-rev.5, 22 July 1997. European Commission, 1997g. Appendix I. Calculation of maximum residue level and safety intervals.7039/VI/95 22 July 1997. As amended by the document: classes to be used for the setting of EU pesticide maximum residue levels (MRLs). SANCO 10634/2010, finalised in the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health at its meeting of 23–24 March 2010. European Commission, 2000. Residue analytical methods. For pre-registration data requirement for Annex II (part A, section 4) and Annex III (part A, section 5 of Directive 91/414. SANCO/3029/99- rev.4. European Commission, 2010a. Classes to be used for the setting of EU pesticide Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs). SANCO 10634/2010 Rev. 0. Finalised in the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health at its meeting of 23–24 March 2010. European Commission, 2010b. Residue analytical methods. For post-registration control. SANCO/825/00-rev.8.1, 16 November 2010. European Commission, 2011. Appendix D. Guidelines on comparability, extrapolation, group tolerances and data requirements for setting MRLs. 7525/VI/95-rev.9, March 2011. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2007. Reasoned opinion on the potential chronic and acute risk to consumers’ health arising from proposed temporary EU MRLs. The EFSA Journal 2007, 32r, 1-1141. Available online: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/it/efsajournal/pub/32r EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2008a. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance aluminium phosphide. The EFSA Journal 2008, 182r, 1-78. doi.2903/j.efsa.2009.182r EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2008b. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance calcium phosphide. The EFSA Journal 2008, 183r, 1-59. doi.2903/j.efsa.2008.183r EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2008c. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance magnesium phosphide. The EFSA Journal 2008, 190r, 1-73. doi.2903/j.efsa.2009.190r EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2010. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance zinc phosphide. EFSA Journal 2010;8(7):1671, 48 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1671 EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2012a. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance phosphane. EFSA Journal 2012;10(3):2595, 41 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2595

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 17 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2012b. Reasoned opinion on the review of the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for fosetyl according to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. EFSA Journal 2012;10(11):2961, 65 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2961 EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015a. Completeness check report on the review of the existing MRLs of aluminium phosphide prepared by EFSA in the framework of Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, 14 October 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015b. Completeness check report on the review of the existing MRLs of calcium phosphide prepared by EFSA in the framework of Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, 18 June 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015c. Completeness check report on the review of the existing MRLs of magnesium phosphide prepared by EFSA in the framework of Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, 18 June 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015d. Completeness check report on the review of the existing MRLs of phosphane prepared by EFSA in the framework of Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, 14 October 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015e. Completeness check report on the review of the existing MRLs of zinc phosphide prepared by EFSA in the framework of Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, 18 June 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2015f. Member States consultation report on the review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts prepared by EFSA in the framework of Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, 23 November 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 2009. Submission and evaluation of pesticide residues data for the estimation of Maximum Residue Levels in food and feed. Pesticide Residues. 2nd Ed. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper 197, 264 pp. France, 2015. Evaluation report prepared under on review Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Authorised uses to be considered for the review of the existing EU MRLs for aluminium phosphide and magnesium phosphide, April 2015. Revised in July 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2007a. Draft assessment report on the active substance aluminium phosphide prepared by the rapporteur Member State Germany in the framework of Council Directive 91/414/EEC, June 2007. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2007b. Draft assessment report on the active substance calcium phosphide prepared by the rapporteur Member State Germany in the framework of Council Directive 91/414/EEC, June 2007. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2007c. Draft assessment report on the active substance magnesium phosphide prepared by the rapporteur Member State Germany in the framework of Council Directive 91/414/EEC, June 2007. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2007d. Draft assessment report on the active substance zinc phosphide prepared by the rapporteur Member State Germany in the framework of Council Directive 91/414/EEC, November 2007. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2008a. Final addendum to the draft assessment report on the active substance aluminium phosphide, compiled by EFSA, August 2008. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2008b. Final addendum to the draft assessment report on the active substance calcium phosphide, compiled by EFSA, August 2008. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2008c. Final addendum to the draft assessment report on the active substance magnesium phosphide, compiled by EFSA, August 2008. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2009a. Evaluation report prepared under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Review of the existing EU MRLs for aluminium phosphide, August 2009. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 18 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Germany, 2009b. Evaluation report prepared under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Review of the existing EU MRLs for magnesium phosphide, August 2009. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2009c. Revised Draft assessment report on the active substance zinc phosphide prepared by the rapporteur Member State Germany in the framework of Council Directive 91/414/EEC, October 2009. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2009d. Additional report to the draft assessment report on the active substance zinc phosphide prepared by the rapporteur Member State Germany in the framework of Commission Regulation (EC) No 33/2008, October 2009. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2010a. Draft assessment report on the active substance phosphane prepared by the rapporteur Member State Germany in the framework of Commission Regulation (EU) No 188/2011, January 2010. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2010b. Final addendum to the draft assessment report and additional report on the active substance zinc phosphide, compiled by EFSA, April 2010. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2011a. Evaluation report prepared under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Review of the existing EU MRLs for calcium phosphide, September 2011. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2011b. Final addendum to the draft assessment report on the active substance phosphane, compiled by EFSA, December 2011. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2013. Evaluation report prepared under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Review of the existing EU MRLs for zinc phosphide, January 2013. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2014. Evaluation report prepared under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Review of the existing EU MRLs for phosphane, July 2014. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2015a. Evaluation report prepared under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Authorised uses to be considered for the review of the existing EU MRLs for aluminium phosphide, May 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu Germany, 2015b. Evaluation report prepared under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Authorised uses to be considered for the review of the existing EU MRLs for magnesium phosphide, May 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), 2011. OECD MRL calculator: spreadsheet for single data set and spreadsheet for multiple data set, 2 March 2011. In: Pesticide Publications/Publications on Pesticide Residues. Available online: http://www.oecd.org United Kingdom, 2015. Evaluation report prepared under on review Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Authorised uses to be considered for the review of the existing EU MRLs for aluminium phosphide and magnesium phosphide, May 2015. Available online: www.efsa.europa.eu

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 19 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Abbreviations a.s. active substance ADI acceptable daily intake AR applied radioactivity ARfD acute reference dose BBCH growth stages of mono- and dicotyledonous plants BVL Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit, Germany bw body weight CAC Codex Alimentarius Commission CAS Chemical Abstract Service CCPR Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues CEN European Committee for Standardization (Comité Européen de Normalisation) CF conversion factor for enforcement residue definition to risk assessment residue definition CIRCA (EU) Communication & Information Resource Centre Administrator CIPAC Collaborative International Pesticide Analytical Council CS capsule suspension CV coefficient of variation (RSD) CXL codex maximum residue limit d day DAR Draft Assessment Report (prepared under Council Directive 91/414/EEC) DAT days after treatment DB dietary burden DM dry matter DP dustable powder

DT90 period required for 90 percent dissipation (define method of estimation) DTU Danish Technical University dw dry weight EC European Commission EC emulsifiable concentrate EDI estimated daily intake EMA European Medicines Agency (former EMEA) eq residue expressed as a.s. equivalent EURLs EU Reference Laboratories (former CRLs) FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations GAP good agricultural practice GC-ECD gas chromatography with electron capture detector GC-FID gas chromatography with flame ionisation detector GC-FPD gas chromatography with flame photometric detector GC-MS gas chromatography with mass spectrometry GC-MS/MS gas chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry GC-NPD gas chromatography with nitrogen/phosphorous detector GLP Good Laboratory Practice GR granule GS growth stage HPLC-MS high performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry HPLC-MS/MS high performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 20 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

HPLC-UVD high performance liquid chromatography with ultra-violet detector ILV independent laboratory validation IPCS International Programme of Chemical Science ISO International Organisation for Standardization IUPAC International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry JMPR Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues

Koc organic carbon adsorption coefficient LC liquid chromatography LOAEL lowest observed adverse effect level LOD limit of detection LOQ limit of quantification MRL maximum residue level MS Member States nAChR nicotinic acetylcholine receptors NEU northern European Union NOAEL no observed adverse effect level OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development PAFF Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed PF processing factor PHI pre-harvest interval ppm parts per million (10-6)

Pow partition coefficientn-octanol/water PRIMo (EFSA) Pesticide Residues Intake Model PROFile (EFSA) Pesticide Residues Overview File

Rber statistical calculation of the MRL by using a non-parametric method

Rmax statistical calculation of the MRL by using a parametric method RA risk assessment RAC raw agricultural commodity RD residue definition RMS rapporteur Member State RSD relative standard deviation SBI sterol biosynthesis inhibitors SC suspension concentrate SEU southern European Union SG water soluble granule SL soluble concentrate SP water soluble powder TAR total applied radioactivity TMDI theoretical maximum daily intake TRR total radioactive residue tMRL temporary MRL WG water dispersible granule WHO World Health Organization wks weeks WP wettable powder yr year

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 21 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Appendix A – Summary of authorised uses considered for the review of MRLs

A.1 Aluminium phosphide

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Almonds Prunus dulcis NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 Duration of treatment tre a UK: 14 days. at . Duration of m s treatment en . FR: 5 days. t - / Duration of ga m ventilation: ssi ³ until ng concentration PH3 < 0.01 ppm. Brazil nuts Bertholletia NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. excel tre a sa at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 22 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Cashew Anacardium NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. n occid tre a ut ental at . s e m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Chestnuts Castanea sativa NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Coconuts Cocos nucifera NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 23 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Hazelnuts Corylus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. avella tre a na at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Macadamia Macadamia NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. ternif tre a olia at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Pecans Carya NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. illinoe tre a nsis at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 24 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Pine nuts Pinus pinea NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Pistachios Pistachia vera NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 35 See almonds. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Walnuts Juglans regia NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 25 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Chervil Anthriscus NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: ceref tre a 5 days. olium at . Duration of m s ventilation: en . until t - / concentration ga m PH3 < 0.01 ssi ³ ppm. ng Chives Allium NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. schoe tre a nopra at . sum m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Celery Apium NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. le grave tre a a olens at . v var. m s e seccal en . s inum t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 26 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Parsley Petroselinum NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. crispu tre a m at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Sage Salvia NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. officin tre a alis at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Rosemary Rosmarinus NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. officin tre a alis at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 27 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Thyme Thymus spp. NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Basil Ocimum NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. basili tre a cum at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Bay leaves Laurus nobilis NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. (l tre a a at . u m s re en . l) t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 28 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Tarragon Artemisia NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. dracu tre a nculu at . s m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Beans (dry) Phaseolus NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: vulga tre a 5 days. ris at . Duration of m s ventilation: en . until t - / concentration ga m PH3 < 0.01 ssi ³ ppm. ng Lentils Lens culinaris NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See dry beans. ( syn. tre a d L. at . ry escul m s ) enta en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 29 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Peas (dry) Pisum sativum NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See dry beans. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Lupins Lupinus spp. NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See dry beans. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Linseed Linum NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment usitati tre a UK: 14 days. ssimu at . Duration of m m s treatment en . FR: 5 days. t - / Duration of ga m ventilation: ssi ³ until ng concentration PH3 < 0.01 ppm.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 30 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Peanuts Arachis NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. hypo tre a gaea at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Poppy seed Papaver NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. somni tre a ferum at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Sesame Sesamum NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. s indicu tre a e m at . e syn. m s d S. en . orient t - / ale ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 31 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Sunflower Helianthus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. s annu tre a e us at . e m s d en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Rape seed Brassica napus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Soya bean Glycine max NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 32 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Mustard Brassica nigra NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. s tre a e at . e m s d en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Cotton Gossypium NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. s spp. tre a e at . e m s d en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Pumpkin Cucurbita pepo NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. s var. tre a e oleife at . e ra m s d en . s t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 33 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Safflower Carthamus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. tincto tre a rius at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Borage Borago NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. officin tre a alis at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Gold of Camelina sativa NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. pl tre a e at . a m s s en . u t - / re ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 34 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Hempseed Cannabis sativa NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Castor Ricinus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. b com tre a e munis at . a m s n en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Barley Hordeum spp. NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 Duration of treatment: tre a 14 days. at . Duration of m s ventilation: en . until t - / concentration ga m PH3 < 0.01 ssi ³ ppm. ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 35 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Buckwheat Fagopyrum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 See barley. escul tre a entu at . m m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Maize Zea mays NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 See barley. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Millet Panicum spp. NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 See barley. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 36 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Oats Avena fatua NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 See barley. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Rice Oryza sativa NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 See barley. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Rye Secale cereale NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 See barley. tre a at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 37 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Sorghum Sorghum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 See barley. bicolo tre a r at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Wheat Triticum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 22.40 g 0 See barley. aestiv tre a um at . m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Tea Camellia NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment sinen tre a UK: 14 days. sis at . Duration of m s treatment en . FR: 5 days. t - / Duration of ga m ventilation: ssi ³ until ng concentration PH3 < 0.01 ppm.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 38 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Coffee Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: tre a 5 days. at . Duration of m s ventilation: en . until t - / concentration ga m PH3 < 0.01 ssi ³ ppm. ng Herbal Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See tea. in tre a fu at . si m s o en . n t - / s ga m (f ssi ³ lo ng w er s) Herbal Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See tea. in tre a fu at . si m s o en . n t - / s ga m (l ssi ³ e ng a v e s)

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 39 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Herbal Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See tea. in tre a fu at . si m s o en . n t - / s ga m (r ssi ³ o ng ot s) Cocoa Theobroma NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 17.10 g 21 Duration of treatment: cacao tre a 5 days. at . Duration of m s ventilation: en . until t - / concentration ga m PH3 < 0.01 ssi ³ ppm. ng Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: (s tre a 5 days. e at . Duration of e m s ventilation: d en . until s) t - / concentration ga m PH3 < 0.01 ssi ³ ppm. ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 40 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 41 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). (r tre a o at . ot m s s en . a t - / n ga m d ssi ³ r ng hi z o m e ) Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). ( tre a b at . u m s d en . s) t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). (f tre a lo at . w m s er en . st t - / ig ga m m ssi ³ a ng )

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 42 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). ( tre a ar at . il) m s en . t - / ga m ssi ³ ng Dried fruits Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.00 g 14 Duration of treatment: tre a 10 days. at . Duration of m s ventilation: en . until t - / concentration ga m PH3 < 0.01 ssi ³ ppm. ng Dried Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 10.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: v tre a 7 days. e at . Duration of g m s ventilation: et en . until a t - / concentration bl ga m PH3 < 0.01 e ssi ³ ppm. s ng

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 43 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

A.2 Magnesium phosphide

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Almonds Prunus dulcis NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 Duration of treatment trea a UK: 14 days. tme . Duration of nt - s treatment gass . FR: 5 days. ing / Duration of m ventilation: ³ until concentratio n PH3 < 0.01 ppm. Brazil nuts Bertholletia NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. excel trea a sa tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Cashew Anacardium NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. nu occid trea a ts ental tme . e nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 44 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Chestnuts Castanea sativa NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Coconuts Cocos nucifera NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Hazelnuts Corylus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. avella trea a na tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Macadamia Macadamia NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. ternif trea a olia tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 45 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Pecans Carya NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. illinoe trea a nsis tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Pine nuts Pinus pinea NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Pistachios Pistachia vera NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 35 See almonds. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Walnuts Juglans regia NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 21 See almonds. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 46 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Chervil Anthriscus NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: ceref trea a 5 days. olium tme . Duration of nt - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentratio m n PH3 < ³ 0.01 ppm. Chives Allium NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. schoe trea a nopra tme . sum nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Celery Apium NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. le grave trea a av olens tme . es var. nt - s seccal gass . inum ing / m ³ Parsley Petroselinum NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. crispu trea a m tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 47 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Sage Salvia NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. officin trea a alis tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Rosemary Rosmarinus NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. officin trea a alis tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Thyme Thymus spp. NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Basil Ocimum NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. basili trea a cum tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 48 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Bay leaves Laurus nobilis NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. (l trea a au tme . rel nt - s ) gass . ing / m ³ Tarragon Artemisia NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See chervil. dracu trea a nculu tme . s nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Beans (dry) Phaseolus NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: vulga trea a 5 days. ris tme . Duration of nt - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentratio m n PH3 < ³ 0.01 ppm. Lentils (dry) Lens culinaris NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See beans. syn. trea a L. tme . escul nt - s enta gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 49 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Peas (dry) Pisum sativum NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See beans. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Lupins Lupinus spp. NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See beans. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Linseed Linum NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment usitati trea a UK: 14 days. ssimu tme . Duration of m nt - s treatment gass . FR: 5 days. ing / Duration of m ventilation: ³ until concentratio n PH3 < 0.01 ppm.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 50 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Peanuts Arachis NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. hypo trea a gaea tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Poppy seed Papaver NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. somni trea a ferum tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Sesame Sesamum NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. se indicu trea a ed m tme . syn. nt - s S. gass . orient ing / ale m ³ Sunflower Helianthus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. se annu trea a ed us tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 51 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Rape seed Brassica napus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Soya bean Glycine max NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Mustard Brassica nigra NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. se trea a ed tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Cotton seed Gossypium NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. spp. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 52 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Pumpkin Cucurbita pepo NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. se var. trea a ed oleife tme . s ra nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Safflower Carthamus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. tincto trea a rius tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Borage Borago NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. officin trea a alis tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Gold of Camelina sativa NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. pl trea a ea tme . su nt - s re gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 53 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Hempseed Cannabis sativa NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Castor bean Ricinus NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See linseed. com trea a munis tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Barley Hordeum spp. NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 Duration of treatment: trea a 2.5 days. tme . Duration of nt - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentratio m n PH3 <0.01 ³ ppm. Buckwheat Fagopyrum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 See barley. escul trea a entu tme . m nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 54 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Maize Zea mays NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 See barley. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Millet Panicum spp. NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 See barley. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Oats Avena fatua NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 See barley. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Rice Oryza sativa NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 See barley. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 55 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Rye Secale cereale NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 See barley. trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Sorghum Sorghum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 See barley. bicolo trea a r tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Wheat Triticum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 See barley. aestiv trea a um tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Tea Camellia NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 3 Duration of treatment: sinen trea a 2.5 days. sis tme . Duration of nt - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentratio m n PH3 <0.01 ³ ppm.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 56 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Coffee Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: trea a 5 days. tme . Duration of nt - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentratio m n PH3 < ³ 0.01 ppm. Herbal Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment inf trea a UK: 14 days. us tme . Duration of io nt - s treatment ns gass . FR: 5 days. (fl ing / Duration of o m ventilation: w ³ until er concentratio s) n PH3 < 0.01 ppm. Herbal Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See herbal infusions inf trea a (flowers). us tme . io nt - s ns gass . (l ing / ea m ve ³ s)

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 57 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Herbal Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR, UK Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See herbal infusions inf trea a (flowers). us tme . io nt - s ns gass . (r ing / oo m ts ³ ) Cocoa Theobroma NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 7 Duration of treatment: cacao trea a 2.5 days. tme . Duration of nt - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentratio m n PH3 <0.01 ³ ppm. Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 Duration of treatment: (s trea a 5 days. ee tme . Duration of ds nt - s ventilation: ) gass . until ing / concentratio m n PH3 < ³ 0.01 ppm.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 58 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). (fr trea a ui tme . ts nt - s an gass . d ing / be m rri ³ es ) Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). (b trea a ar tme . k) nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). (r trea a oo tme . ts nt - s an gass . d ing / rh m iz ³ o m e)

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 59 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name nam country sta (days) period charachters) e ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). (b trea a ud tme . s) nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Spices Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). (fl trea a o tme . w nt - s er gass . sti ing / g m m ³ a) Spices (aril) Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor FR Insects GE 570.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.00 11.00 g 7 See spices (seeds). trea a tme . nt - s gass . ing / m ³ Dried fruits Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GE 560.0 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 5.50 g 0 Duration of treatment: trea a 2.5 days. tme . Duration of nt - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentratio m n PH3 <0.01 ³ ppm.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 60 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 61 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

A.3 Phosphane

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Almonds Prunus dulcis NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 Duration of treatment: treat a 2-4 days. men . Duration of t - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentration m PH3 < 0.01 ³ ppm. Brazil nuts Bertholletia NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. exc treat a elsa men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Cashew Anacardium NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. nu occi treat a ts den men . tale t - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 62 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Chestnuts Castanea NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. sati treat a va men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Coconuts Cocos NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. nuc treat a ifer men . a t - s gass . ing / m ³ Hazelnuts Corylus NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. ave treat a llan men . a t - s gass . ing / m ³ Macadamia Macadamia NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. ter treat a nifo men . lia t - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 63 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Pecans Carya NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. illin treat a oen men . sis t - s gass . ing / m ³ Pine nuts Pinus pinea NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. treat a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Pistachios Pistachia NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. ver treat a a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Walnuts Juglans regia NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See almonds. treat a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 64 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Linseed Linum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 Duration of treatment: usit treat a 2-4 days. atis men . Duration of sim t - s ventilation: um gass . until ing / concentration m PH3 < 0.01 ³ ppm. Peanuts Arachis NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. hyp treat a oga men . ea t - s gass . ing / m ³ Poppy seed Papaver NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. so treat a mni men . feru t - s m gass . ing / m ³ Sesame Sesamum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. se indi treat a ed cu men . m t - s syn gass . . S. ing / orie m ntal ³ e

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 65 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Sunflower Helianthus NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. se ann treat a ed uus men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Rape seed Brassica NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. nap treat a us men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Soya bean Glycine max NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. treat a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Mustard Brassica NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. se nigr treat a ed a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 66 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Cotton seed Gossypium NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. spp treat a . men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Pumpkin Cucurbita NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. se pep treat a ed o men . s var. t - s olei gass . fera ing / m ³ Safflower Carthamus NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. tinc treat a tori men . us t - s gass . ing / m ³ Borage Borago NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. offi treat a cin men . alis t - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 67 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Gold of Camelina NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. pl sati treat a ea va men . su t - s re gass . ing / m ³ Hempseed Cannabis NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. sati treat a va men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Castor bean Ricinus NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 21 See linseed. co treat a mm men . uni t - s s gass . ing / m ³ Barley Hordeum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 Duration of treatment: spp treat a 7-10 days. . men . Duration of t - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentration m PH3 < 0.01 ³ ppm.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 68 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Buckwheat Fagopyrum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 See barley. esc treat a ule men . ntu t - s m gass . ing / m ³ Maize Zea mays NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 See barley. treat a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Millet Panicum spp. NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 See barley. treat a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Oats Avena fatua NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 See barley. treat a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 69 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Rice Oryza sativa NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 See barley. treat a men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Rye Secale NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 See barley. cer treat a eal men . e t - s gass . ing / m ³ Sorghum Sorghum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 See barley. bic treat a olor men . t - s gass . ing / m ³ Wheat Triticum NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 0 See barley. aes treat a tivu men . m t - s gass . ing / m ³

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 70 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Critical Indoor GAPs for Northern and Southern Europe (incl. post-harvest treatments) Crop Region Outdoor/ Member Pest Formulation Application PHI or Comments Common Scientific Indoor state or controlled Type Content Method Growth Number Interval Rate waiting (max. 250 name na country sta (days) period charachters) me ge (days) Conc. Unit From Until Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Unit B B B B C C H H Coffee Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 14 Duration of treatment: treat a 2-4 days. men . Duration of t - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentration m PH3 < 0.01 ³ ppm. Cocoa Theobroma NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 14 Duration of treatment: cac treat a 2-4 days. ao men . Duration of t - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentration m PH3 < 0.01 ³ ppm. Dried fruits Not specified NEU/SEU Indoor DE Insects GA 20.7 g/kg Post-harvest 99 1 3.70 g 14 Duration of treatment: treat a 2-4 days. men . Duration of t - s ventilation: gass . until ing / concentration m PH3 < 0.01 ³ ppm.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 71 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Appendix B – List of end points

B.1. Residues in plants

B.1.1. Nature of residues and methods of analysis in plants

B.1.1.1. Metabolism studies, methods of analysis and residue definitions in plants

Primary crops Crop groups Crop(s) Application(s) Sampling (available studies) (DAT) Not available and not required because relevant residues other than phosphane or its salts are not expected in plant commodities.

Rotational crops Crop groups Crop(s) Application(s) PBI (available studies) (DAT)

Not available and not required. When fumigating underground tunnels and burrows (rodenticide use), residues may be re-adsorbed onto soil but significant uptake of phosphane by plants is not expected.

Processed commodities Conditions Investigated? (hydrolysis study) Pasteurisation (20 min, 90°C, pH 4) No Baking, brewing and boiling (60 min, 100°C, pH 5) No Sterilisation (20 min, 120°C, pH 6) No Not available and not required because relevant residues other than phosphane or its salts are not expected in processed commodities.

Can a general residue definition be proposed for Yes primary crops?

Rotational crop and primary crop metabolism Yes similar?

Residue pattern in processed commodities similar to Yes residue pattern in raw commodities?

Plant residue definition for monitoring (RD-Mo) Sum of phosphane and phosphane generators (relevant phosphide salts), determined and expressed as phosphane

Plant residue definition for risk assessment (RD-RA) Sum of phosphane and phosphane generators (relevant phosphide salts), determined and expressed as phosphane

Conversion factor (monitoring to risk assessment) Not applicable

Methods of analysis for monitoring of residues Acidic, dry, high water content and coffee beans: (analytical technique, crop groups, LOQs)  GC-NPD, 0.01 mg/kg (EFSA, 2012a)  ILV and confirmatory method available

High oil content:  GC-NPD, 0.01 mg/kg (EFSA, 2008)  ILV and confirmatory method not available

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 72 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

B.1.1.2. Stability of residues in plants

Plant products Category Commodity T (°C) Stability (available studies) (Months/years) Not available and not required, provided that samples are analysed within 24 hours of sampling or stored under liquid nitrogen for few days.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 73 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

B.1.2. Magnitude of residues in plants

B.1.2.1. Summary of residues data from the supervised residue trials

Crop Region/ Residue levels observed in the Recommendations/comments MRL HR STMR Indoor supervised residue trials relevant (OECD calculations) proposals (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (a) to the supported GAPs (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (b) (c) Tree nuts Indoor 0.013; 0.014; 0.018; 0.019 Trials on hazelnuts compliant with GAP (Germany, 2014; 0.09 (e) 0.050 0.016 (except pistachios) (Al, Mg) (France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015) France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015); extrapolation to (tentative) other tree nuts is possible (except pistachios, different <0.004(d); 0.05(d) GAP). (Germany, 2014) Rber = 0.054 Rmax = 0.078 MRLOECD = 0.083 Indoor <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; Trials on hazelnuts (4), walnuts (3), almonds (3) and 0.01* (e) 0.010 0.010 (Ph) <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; pistachios (1), all without shells, performed with WHP of (tentative) 0.012 6-7 instead of 21 days, other parameters compliant with GAP (Germany, 2014). Although trials were performed on kernels without shells (underestimation expected) and storage conditions of the samples were not reported, GAP reported for aluminium and magnesium phosphide is expected to be more critical. Pistachios Indoor 11 g a.s./ha, WHP 21 days: 4 trials on pistachios with a WHP of 21 instead of 35 0.1 (e, f) 0.050 0.010 (Al, Mg) <0.005; <0.005; 0.005; 0.006 days (France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015), but 4 (tentative) underdosed trials indicate the need for a higher MRL 5.5 g a.s./ha, WHP 35 days: (Germany, 2014). 0.014; 0.038; 0.042; 0.050 Rber = 0.08 Rmax = 0.08 MRLOECD = 0.1 Indoor <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; Trials on hazelnuts (4), walnuts (3), almonds (3) and 0.01* (e) 0.010 0.010 (Ph) <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; pistachios (1) performed with WHP of 6-7 instead of 21 (tentative) 0.012 days, other parameters compliant with GAP (Germany, 2014). Although trials were performed on kernels without shells (underestimation expected) and storage conditions of the samples were not reported, GAP reported for aluminium and magnesium phosphide is expected to be more critical.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 74 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Crop Region/ Residue levels observed in the Recommendations/comments MRL HR STMR Indoor supervised residue trials relevant (OECD calculations) proposals (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (a) to the supported GAPs (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (b) (c) Herbs Indoor Laurel: Trials on laurel, coriander and marjoram compliant with 0.015 0.008 0.006 (Al, Mg) <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005 GAP (France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015); extrapolation to all herbs is possible. Coriander: Rber = 0.014 0.006; 0.007; 0.008; 0.008 Rmax = 0.009 MRLOECD = 0.013 Marjoram: <0.005; 0.005; 0.006; 0.007

Pulses Indoor Lentils: 8 trials on lentils (France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015), 0.01* 0.010 0.005 (Al, Mg) <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; and 2 trials on peas and 1 trial on beans (Germany, <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005 2009a, 2014), all compliant with GAP; extrapolation to all pulses possible. Peas: <0.003(d); <0.006(d)

Beans: <0.01(d)

Oilseeds Indoor Linseed: 8 trials on linseed compliant with GAP (France, 2015; 0.05 (e, g) 0.032 0.005 (Al, Mg) <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; United Kingdom, 2015) but 4 trials on sunflower seed (tentative) <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005 with 5.5 instead of 11 g a.s./m3 indicate need for higher MRL (Germany, 2014); extrapolation to other oilseeds Sunflower seed: is tentative only. 0.018; 0.020; 0.025; 0.032 Rber = 0.039 Rmax = 0.038 MRLOECD = 0.050 Indoor - No adequate trials compliant with GAP. - - - (Ph)

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 75 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Crop Region/ Residue levels observed in the Recommendations/comments MRL HR STMR Indoor supervised residue trials relevant (OECD calculations) proposals (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (a) to the supported GAPs (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (b) (c) Barley grain Indoor - Trials on wheat, barley, rye, oat and maize were - - - Oats grain (Al) reported (Germany, 2009a) but study reports did not Rice grain allow for retrieval of all essential parameters such as the Rye grain duration of ventilation (essential parameter when a Wheat grain WHP of 0 days is supported). Indoor 0.010; 0.016; 0.021; 0.023 Trials on wheat compliant with GAP (Germany, 2009b, 0.05 (g, h) 0.023 0.019 (Mg) 2014); extrapolation to small grain cereals possible. (tentative) Rber = 0.045 Rmax = 0.047 MRLOECD = 0.053 Indoor - Trials on wheat, maize, rice, barley and rye were - - - (Ph) reported (Germany, 2014) but study reports did not allow for retrieval of all essential parameters such as the duration of ventilation (essential parameter when a WHP of 0 days is supported). Maize grain Indoor - Trials on wheat, barley, rye, oat and maize were - - - Millet grain (Al) reported (Germany, 2009a) but study reports did not Sorghum grain allow for retrieval of all essential parameters such as the Buckwheat grain duration of ventilation (essential parameter when a WHP of 0 days is supported). Indoor 0.15; 0.22; 0.27; 0.33 Trials on maize compliant with GAP and a WHP of 0 0.7 (g, h) 0.330 0.245 (Mg) days (Germany, 2009b, 2014); extrapolation to millet, (tentative) sorghum and buckwheat is possible. Rber = 0.63 Rmax = 0.64 MRLOECD = 0.73 Indoor 0.030; 0.038; 0.040; 0.057 Trials on maize compliant with GAP and a WHP of 3 0.15 (g) 0.057 0.039 (Mg) days (Germany, 2009b, 2014); extrapolation to millet, (tentative) (fall-back) sorghum and buckwheat is possible. Rber = 0.106 Rmax = 0.100 MRLOECD = 0.124 Indoor - Trials on wheat, maize, rice, barley and rye were - - - (Ph) reported (Germany, 2014) but study reports did not allow for retrieval of all essential parameters such as the duration of ventilation (essential parameter when a WHP of 0 days is supported).

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 76 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Crop Region/ Residue levels observed in the Recommendations/comments MRL HR STMR Indoor supervised residue trials relevant (OECD calculations) proposals (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (a) to the supported GAPs (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (b) (c) Tea Indoor <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; <0.01 Trials on tea compliant with GAP (France, 2015; United 0.01* 0.010 0.010 (Al) Kingdom, 2015). Indoor 0.006; 0.008; 0.008; 0.009 Trials on dried black tea leaves compliant with GAP 0.02 (h) 0.009 0.008 (Mg) (Germany, 2009b, 2014). Rber = 0.018 Rmax = 0.014 MRLOECD = 0.023 Coffee beans Indoor 0.012; 0.016; 0.035; 0.036 Trials on coffee beans compliant with GAP (Germany, 0.15 0.080 0.028 (Al, Mg) (France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015) 2009a, 2009b, 2014; France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015). (d) (d) 0.02 ; 0.08 Rber = 0.09 (Germany, 2009a, 2009b, 2014) Rmax = 0.13 MRLOECD = 0.13 Indoor <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; 0.012 Trials on coffee beans with WHP of 6-7 days instead of 0.01* 0.010 0.010 (Ph) 14 days, other parameters compliant with GAP (Germany, 2014). Although storage conditions of the samples were not reported, GAP reported for aluminium and magnesium phosphide is expected to be more critical. Herbal infusions Indoor Chamomile: Trials on chamomile and liquorice (France, 2015; United 0.02 0.012 0.008 Spices (Al, Mg) <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005 Kingdom, 2015) and 2 additional trials on pepper (Germany, 2014), all compliant with GAP; extrapolation Liquorice: to all herbal infusions and spices is possible. 0.008; 0.008; 0.008; 0.012 Rber = 0.015 Rmax = 0.020 Pepper: MRLOECD = 0.018 <0.01(d); <0.01(d)

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 77 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Crop Region/ Residue levels observed in the Recommendations/comments MRL HR STMR Indoor supervised residue trials relevant (OECD calculations) proposals (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (a) to the supported GAPs (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (b) (c) Cocoa Indoor - No adequate trials compliant with GAP. - - - (fermented beans) (Al) Indoor <0.005; <0.005; 0.005; 0.011 Trials on cocoa beans compliant with GAP (Germany, 0.02 0.011 0.005 (Mg) 2009b, 2014). Rber = 0.019 Rmax = 0.022 MRLOECD = 0.019 Indoor 3.7-4.4 g a.s./ha, WHP 6-7 days: Trials on cacao beans with WHP of 6-7 days instead of 0.01* 0.010 0.010 (Ph) <0.01; <0.01; <0.01; 0.011; 0.011 14 days, other parameters compliant with GAP or application rate even higher (Germany, 2014). 5.5 g a.s./ha, WHP 7 days: Although storage conditions of the samples were not <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; 0.011 reported, GAP reported for aluminium and magnesium phosphide is expected to be more critical. Dried fruits Indoor - No adequate trials compliant with GAP, but GAP MRLs are not established for dried (Al) reported for magnesium phosphide is more critical. fruits and vegetables. Available data Indoor <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; Trials on raisins (Germany, 2009b, 2014) and dried are considered sufficient to (Mg) <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005 apricots (France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015), all demonstrate that measurable compliant with GAP. residues (exceeding the LOQ for Indoor - No adequate trials compliant with GAP, but GAP monitoring of 0.01 mg/kg) are not (Ph) reported for magnesium phosphide is more critical. expected and that exposure through Dried vegetables Indoor <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; Trials on dried leek compliant with GAP (France, 2015; these commodities is negligible. (Al) <0.005; <0.005; <0.005; <0.005 United Kingdom, 2015). Indoor 0.006; 0.008; <0.005; <0.005; Trials on dried mushrooms (Germany, 2009b, 2014) and (Mg) <0.005; <0.005 dried leek (France, 2015; United Kingdom, 2015), all compliant with GAP. * Indicates that the MRL is proposed at the limit of quantification. (a): Indoor: indoor EU trials performed with either aluminium phosphide, magnesium phosphide or phosphane but GAPs for the different substances were assessed separately; Al: GAP was reported for aluminium phosphide; Mg: GAP was reported for magnesium phosphide; Ph: GAP was reported for phosphane (b): Highest residue. (c): Supervised trials median residue. (d): Although trial samples were stored for 2-4 days under normal freezer conditions (-18° C instead of liquid nitrogen), trial results were considered acceptable because they are in the same range as other trials results. (e): MRL is tentative because further validation of the analytical method for monitoring is still required. (f): MRL is tentative because further clarification on the discrepancies observed in the residue trial results is still required. (g): MRL is tentative because further residue trials are still required. (h): Considering the increased uncertainty due to the low number of trial results and considering that after fumigation a low variability in residue levels is expected, the result of the OECD MRL calculator was rounded down instead of being rounded up.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 78 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

B.1.2.2. Residues in succeeding crops

Confined rotational crop study Not available and not required. When fumigating (quantitative aspect) underground tunnels and burrows (rodenticide use), residues may be re-adsorbed onto soil but significant uptake of phosphane by plants is not expected.

Field rotational crop study Not available and not required.

B.1.2.3. Processing factors

Processed commodity Number Processing Factor (PF) of Individual values Median PF studies Not available and not required.

B.2. Residues in livestock

Median Maximum Highest Max dietary Trigger dietary burden dietary burden contributing burden exceeded (mg/kg bw per d) (mg/kg bw per d) commodity(a) (mg/kg DM) (Y/N) Assuming a with-holding period of 0 days for maize grain Dairy ruminants 0.0033 0.0047 Maize grain 0.13 Y Meat ruminants 0.0039 0.0055 Maize grain 0.13 Y Poultry 0.0127 0.0173 Maize grain 0.28 Y Pigs 0.0047 0.0066 Maize grain 0.17 Y Assuming a with-holding period of 3 days for maize grain Dairy ruminants 0.0014 0.0017 Wheat bran 0.05 N Meat ruminants 0.0016 0.0020 Wheat bran 0.05 N Poultry 0.0021 0.0033 Maize grain 0.05 N Pigs 0.0015 0.0018 Wheat bran 0.05 N (a): Calculated for the maximum dietary burden

B.2.1. Nature of residues and methods of analysis in livestock

B.2.1.1. Metabolism studies, methods of analysis and residue definitions in livestock

Livestock Animal Dose Duration N rate/comment (available studies) (mg/kg bw/d) (days) Not available. Relevant residues are not expected in animal commodities but further information to confirm the absence of phosphane and certain oxidation products (i.e. phosphonic acid) would be required if the WHP of 0 days is maintained in maize grain.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 79 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Time needed to reach a plateau concentration in milk Not applicable (tentative outcome). and eggs (days) Metabolism in rat and ruminant similar (Yes/No) Not applicable (tentative outcome).

Animal residue definition for monitoring (RD-Mo) Not required (tentative outcome).

Animal residue definition for risk assessment (RD-RA) Not required (tentative outcome).

Conversion factor (monitoring to risk assessment) Not applicable (tentative outcome).

Fat soluble residues (Yes/No) Not applicable (tentative outcome).

Methods of analysis for monitoring of residues Not required (tentative outcome). (analytical technique, crop groups, LOQs)

B.2.1.2. Stability of residues in livestock

Animal products Animal Commodity T (°C) Stability (available studies) (Months/years) Not available and not required (tentative outcome).

B.2.2. Magnitude of residues in livestock

B.2.2.1. Summary of the residue data from livestock feeding studies

Ruminants Commodity Residues at closest Estimated value MRL feeding level at 1N (mg/kg) Not available and not Mean Highest STMR HR required (tentative (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) outcome). Muscle n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Fat n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Liver n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Kidney n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Milk n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Poultry Commodity Residues at closest Estimated value MRL feeding level at 1N (mg/kg) Not available and not Mean Highest STMR HR required (tentative (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) outcome). Muscle n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Fat n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Liver n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Kidney n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Eggs n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Pig(e) Commodity Residues at closest Estimated value MRL feeding level at 1N (mg/kg) Not available and not Mean Highest STMR HR required (tentative (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) outcome). Muscle n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Fat n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Liver n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Kidney n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. not applicable

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 80 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

B.3. Consumer risk assessment

B.3.1. Consumer risk assessment without consideration of the existing CXLs

ADI 0.011 mg/kg bw per day (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010, 2012a) Highest IEDI, according to EFSA PRIMo 7.3 % ADI (WHO Cluster Diet B) Assumptions made for the calculations The calculation is based on the median residue levels in the raw agricultural commodities. The contributions of commodities where no GAP was reported in the framework of this review, were not included in the calculation. The calculations for large grain cereals were based on a WHP of 0 days, assuming that no residues will occur in commodities of animal origin (to be confirmed by data). In case the WHP for large grain cereals is prolonged to 3 days, the chronic exposure will be further reduced.

ARfD 0.019 mg/kg bw (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010, 2012a) Highest IESTI, according to EFSA PRIMo 12 % ARfD (Maize) Assumptions made for the calculations The calculation is based on the highest residue levels in the raw agricultural commodities. The calculations for large grain cereals were based on a WHP of 0 days, assuming that no residues will occur in commodities of animal origin (to be confirmed by data). In case the WHP for large grain cereals is prolonged to 3 days, the chronic exposure will be further reduced.

B.3.2. Consumer risk assessment with consideration of the existing CXLs

ADI 0.011 mg/kg bw per day (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010, 2012a) Highest IEDI, according to EFSA PRIMo Not applicable Assumptions made for the calculations The CXLs for small cereal grains (0.1 mg/kg) is higher than the MRL derived in the framework of this assessment (0.05 mg/kg). All other CXLs are covered by the EU MRL proposals. Considering however that the CXL of 0.1 mg/kg in cereals grains may lead to significant intake by livestock, that this CXL was assessed by JMPR in 1967-1971 and that supporting data (in plants and livestock) could not be retrieved by EFSA, this CXL could not be included in the EU risk assessment.

ARfD 0.019 mg/kg bw (EFSA, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010, 2012a) Highest IESTI, according to EFSA PRIMo Not applicable Assumptions made for the calculations See considerations made for the chronic risk assessment.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 81 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

B.4. Proposed MRLs

Code Commodity Existing Existing Outcome of the review number EU MRL CXL MRL Comment (a) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Enforcement residue definition (existing): phosphines and phosphides - sum of aluminium phosphide, aluminium phosphine, magnesium phosphide, magnesium phosphine, zinc phosphide and zinc phosphine Enforcement residue definition (proposed): sum of phosphane and phosphane generators (relevant phosphide salts), determined and expressed as phosphane 120010 Almonds 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120020 Brazil nuts 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120030 Cashew nuts 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120040 Chestnuts 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120050 Coconuts 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120060 Hazelnuts 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120070 Macadamia 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120080 Pecans 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120090 Pine nuts 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 120100 Pistachios 0.05* 0.01* 0.1 Further consideration needed(b) 120110 Walnuts 0.05* 0.01* 0.09 Further consideration needed(b) 256000 Herbs 0.05* - 0.015 Recommended(c) 300010 Beans (dry) 0.05* - 0.01* Recommended(c) 300020 Lentils (dry) 0.05* - 0.01* Recommended(c) 300030 Peas (dry) 0.1 - 0.01* Recommended(c) 300040 Lupins (dry) 0.05* - 0.01* Recommended(c) 401010 Linseed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401020 Peanuts 0.05* 0.01* 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401030 Poppy seed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401040 Sesame seed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401050 Sunflower seed 0.1 - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401060 Rape seed 0.1 - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401070 Soya bean 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401080 Mustard seed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401090 Cotton seed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401100 Pumpkin seeds 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401110 Safflower 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401120 Borage 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401130 Gold of pleasure 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401140 Hempseed 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 401150 Castor bean 0.05* - 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500010 Barley grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500020 Buckwheat grain 0.1 0.1 0.7 Further consideration needed(b) 500030 Maize grain 0.1 0.1 0.7 Further consideration needed(b)

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 82 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Code Commodity Existing Existing Outcome of the review number EU MRL CXL MRL Comment (a) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) 500040 Millet grain 0.1 0.1 0.7 Further consideration needed(b) 500050 Oats grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500060 Rice grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500070 Rye grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 500080 Sorghum grain 0.1 0.1 0.7 Further consideration needed(b) 500090 Wheat grain 0.1 0.1 0.05 Further consideration needed(b) 610000 Tea 0.05* - 0.02 Recommended(c) 620000 Coffee beans 0.05* - 0.15 Recommended(c) 630000 Herbal infusions 0.05* - 0.02 Recommended(c) 640000 Cocoa (fermented beans) 0.05* 0.01* 0.02 Recommended(c) 800000 Spices 0.05* 0.01* 0.02 Recommended(c) - Other products of plant and - - Further consideration needed(d) animal origin * Indicates that the MRL is set/proposed at the limit of quantification. (a): Commodity code number, as listed in Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 (b): Tentative MRL is derived from a GAP evaluated at EU level, which is not fully supported by data but for which no risk to consumers was identified; CXL (if available) is not supported by data and cannot be considered within the EU assessment (combination E-I in Appendix D). (c): MRL is derived from a GAP evaluated at EU level, which is fully supported by data and for which no risk to consumers is identified; CXL (if available) is not supported by data and cannot be considered within the EU assessment (combination G-I in Appendix D). (d): There are no relevant authorisations or import tolerances reported at EU level; no CXL is available. Either a specific LOQ or the default MRL of 0.01 mg/kg may be considered (combination A-I in Appendix D).

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 83 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Appendix C – Input values for the exposure calculations

C.1. Livestock dietary burden calculations

Feed commodity Median dietary burden Maximum dietary burden Input Comment Input Comment value value (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Wheat grain 0.019 STMR 0.023 HR Barley grain 0.019 STMR 0.023 HR Rye grain 0.019 STMR 0.023 HR Oat grain 0.019 STMR 0.023 HR Maize grain 0.245 STMR 0.330 HR (WHP 0d) (WHP 0d) 0.039 STMR 0.057 HR (WHP 3d, fall-back) (WHP 3d, fall-back) Wheat bran 0.148 STMR x 8(a) 0.148 STMR x 8(a) Rye bran 0.148 STMR x 8(a) 0.148 STMR x 8(a) Peas (dry) 0.005* STMR 0.010* HR Beans(dry) 0.005* STMR 0.010* HR Lupins (dry) 0.005* STMR 0.010* HR Rape seed meal 0.010* STMR x 2(a) 0.010* STMR x 2(a) Cotton seed 0.005* STMR 0.032 HR Cotton seed meal 0.007* STMR x 1.3(a) 0.007* STMR x 1.3(a) Linseed meal 0.010* STMR x 2(a) 0.010* STMR x 2(a) Sunflower seed meal 0.010* STMR x 2(a) 0.010* STMR x 2(a) Soya bean 0.005* STMR 0.032 HR Soya bean meal 0.007* STMR x 1.3(a) 0.007* STMR x 1.3(a) Peanuts meal 0.010* STMR x 2(a) 0.010* STMR x 2(a) STMR: supervised trials median residue; HR: highest residue; WHP: withholding period * Indicates that the input value is proposed at the limit of quantification. (a): For cereal bran, meals of oilseeds with 50% oil content and meals of oilseeds with 20% oil content, in the absence of processing factors supported by data, default processing factors of 8, 2 and 1.3 were respectively included in the calculation in order to consider the potential concentration of residues in these commodities.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 84 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

C.2. Consumer risk assessment without consideration of the existing CXLs

Commodity Chronic risk assessment Acute risk assessment Input Comment Input Comment value value (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Tree nuts (except pistachios) 0.016 STMR (tentative) 0.050 HR (tentative) Pistachios 0.010 STMR (tentative) 0.050 HR (tentative) Herbs 0.006 STMR 0.008 HR Pulses 0.005* STMR 0.010* HR Oilseeds 0.005* STMR (tentative) 0.032 HR (tentative) Barley grain 0.019 STMR (tentative) 0.023 HR (tentative) Buckwheat grain 0.245 STMR (tentative) 0.330 HR (tentative) Maize grain 0.245 STMR (tentative) 0.330 HR (tentative) Millet grain 0.245 STMR (tentative) 0.330 HR (tentative) Oats grain 0.019 STMR (tentative) 0.023 HR (tentative) Rice grain 0.019 STMR (tentative) 0.023 HR (tentative) Rye grain 0.019 STMR (tentative) 0.023 HR (tentative) Sorghum grain 0.245 STMR (tentative) 0.330 HR (tentative) Wheat grain 0.019 STMR (tentative) 0.023 HR (tentative) Tea 0.008 STMR 0.009 HR Coffee beans 0.028 STMR 0.080 HR Herbal infusions 0.008 STMR 0.012 HR Cocoa (fermented beans) 0.005* STMR 0.011 HR Spices 0.008 STMR 0.012 HR * Indicates that the input value is proposed at the limit of quantification.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 85 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Appendix D – Decision tree for deriving MRL recommendations

Evaluation of the GAPs and available residues data at EU level

GAP or DB >0.1 mg/kg Yes DM in EU?

No MRL derived Yes in section 3? No

MRL fully supported by data? No Yes

Consumer risk assessment for GAPs evaluated at EU level - EU scenarios

Tentative median/ Median/highest Current EU MRL Not considered highest values are values are is included in the for the RA included in the included in the RA. RA. Yes RA.

Risk identified? Risk identified? Risk identified? Yes Yes

Fall-back MRL Fall-back MRL available? available? Yes No No No

No No

Recommendations resulting from EU authorisations and import tolerances

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) Specific LOQ or Specific LOQ or Maintain current Specific LOQ or Establish tentative Specific LOQ or MRL is default MRL? default MRL? EU MRL? default MRL? EU MRL? default MRL? recommended. Comparison with CXLs

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 86 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Result EU assessment Comparison of the EU recommendation with the existing CXL

CXL available? Yes

RD Yes comparable?

CXL higher? Yes No No No

Consumer risk assessment with consideration of the existing CXL

CXL No supported by Yes data?

Codex median/ Input values for Input values for Input values for CXL is included in highest residues the RA remain the RA remain the RA remain the RA. are included in the unchanged. unchanged. unchanged. RA.

Risk identified? Risk identified?

Yes No Yes No

Recommendations with consideration of the existing CXL

(I) (II) (III) (IV) (V) (VI) (VII) Maintain EU Maintain EU Maintain EU Maintain EU Maintain current Maintain EU CXL is recommendation recommendation recommendation recommendation; CXL or EU recommendation; recommended; EU indicating that no indicating CXL is indicating that higher CXL is not recommendation? higher CXL is not recommendation CXL is available. not compatible. CXL is covered. safe for consumer. safe for consumer. is covered as well.

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 87 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325

Review of the existing MRLs for phosphane and phosphide salts

Appendix E – Used compound code(s)

Code/trivial name Chemical name/SMILES notation(a) Structural formula(a) aluminium phosphide aluminium phosphide P Al

[Al]#P calcium phosphide calcium phosphide 2+ Ca 3- P [Ca+2].[Ca+2].[Ca+2].[PH6-3].[PH6-3] 2+ Ca 3- 2+ P Ca magnesium phosphide magnesium phosphide 2+ Mg 3- P [Mg+2].[Mg+2].[Mg+2].[PH6-3].[PH6-3] 2+ Mg 3- 2+ P Mg phosphane Phosphane PH 3 (previously phosphine) P zinc phosphide zinc phosphide 2+ Zn 3- P [Zn+2].[Zn+2].[Zn+2].[PH6-3].[PH6-3] 2+ Zn 3- 2+ P Zn phosphonic acid phosphonic acid OH (previously phosphorous HP O acid) O=P(O)O OH

(a): ACD/ChemSketch, Advanced Chemistry Development, Inc., ACD/Labs Release: 12.00 Product version: 12.00 (Build 29305, 25 Nov 2008).

www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 88 EFSA Journal 2015;13(12):4325