Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance prohexadione (considered variant prohexadione-calcium)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 737/20073 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulation') lays down the procedure for the renewal of the inclusion of a first group of active substances in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and establishes the list of those substances. Prohexadione is one of the first group of active substances listed in the Regulation. In accordance with Article 6 of the Regulation, the notifier BASF SE submitted a dossier on prohexadione to France and Slovakia, being the designated rapporteur Member State (RMS), and corapporteur Member State (co-RMS), respectively. In accordance with Article 10 of the Regulation, France prepared an Assessment Report in consultation with Slovakia, which was submitted to the EFSA and the Commission of the European Communities (hereafter referred to as 'the Commission'). The Assessment Report was received by the EFSA on 5 June 2009. In accordance with Article 11 of the Regulation, the EFSA distributed the Assessment Report to Member States and the notifier for comments on 10 June 2009. The EFSA collated and forwarded all comments received to the Commission on 13 July 2009. In accordance with Article 12 of the Regulation, following consideration of the Assessment Report and the comments received, the Commission requested the EFSA to arrange an expert consultation on the Assessment Report as appropriate and to deliver its conclusions on prohexadione. The conclusions presented in this report were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of prohexadione as a plant growth regulator on cereals and apples, as proposed by the notifier. Full details of the representative uses can be found in Appendix A to this report. No areas of concern or data gaps were identified in the physical and chemical properties section. No areas of concern or data gaps were identified in the mammalian toxicology section. Operator and worker exposure is below the AOEL even without the use of personal protective equipment. Bystander exposure is also below the AOEL. No areas of concern or data gaps were identified in the residue section. Intakes were less than 0.9% of the ADI.