  
  
G/SPS/GEN/1740/Rev.1  
21 October  2019 
(19-6894) Page: 1/1 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original:  Spanish  
 
  
SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS - EUROPEAN UNION MRLS FOR BUPROFEZIN, 
DIFLUBENZURON, CHLOROTHALONIL, ETHOXYSULFURON, GLUFOSINATE,  
IMAZALIL, IOXYNIL, IPRODIONE, MOLINATE, PICOXYSTROBIN  
AND TEPRALOXYDIM (NO. 448)  
COMMUNICATION FROM COLOMBIA, COSTA RICA, CÔTE D'IVOIRE, ECUADOR AND GUATEMALA  
Revision  
The following communication, dated 1 6 October  2019, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Ecuador  and Guatemala . 
 
_______________  
 
Colombia, Costa Ri ca, Côte d'Ivoire, Ecuador  and Guatemala would like to ask the European Union 
the following questions related to  specific trade concern No. 448 and MRL amendments.  
EUROPEAN UNION AMENDMENTS OF MRLS FOR IMAZALIL (G/SPS/N/EU/319)  
1.  What is the scientific justi fication for establishing an  MRL of 0.01 mg/kg for imazalil in bananas 
and depart ing from the relevant international standard (Codex Alimentarius ), which sets an MRL of 
2.0 mg/kg?  
2.  Is the MRL of 0.01 mg/kg based on scientific principles ? In particular, is i t based on an 
assessment, as appropriate to the circumstances, of the risks to human life or health, taking into 
account risk assessment techniques developed by the relevant international organizations?  
3.  Could you share how, in the assessment of risks, the following were taken into account : available 
scientific evidence ; relevant processes and production methods ; relevant inspection, sampling and 
testing methods ; prevalence of specific diseases or pests ; existence of pest - or disease -free areas ; 
relevant ecological and environmental conditions ; and quarantine or other treatment?  
4.  Could you share how, in assessing the risk and determining the measure to be applied for 
achieving the appropriate level of protection from such risk, the following were ta ken into account 
as relevant economic factors : the potential damage in terms of loss of production or sales in the 
event of the entry, establishment or spread of a pest or disease ; the costs of control or eradication 
in the territory of the importing Membe r; and the relative cost -effectiveness of alternative 
approaches to limiting risks?  
5.  How was the objective of minimizing the negative effects on trade taken into account when 
determining that the MRL for imazalil in bananas should be reduced from 2.0 to 0.0 1 mg/kg, which 
in practice implies prohibiting imports of bananas for which this substance has been used?  
6.  How is reducing the MRL for imazalil in bananas to 0.01 mg/kg justified when the MRLs for other 
products posing a similar risk are maintained or reduc ed slightly?  
7.  If it is considered that there is insufficient relevant scientific evidence demonstrating  the safety 
of the MRL  set out by the Codex Alimentarius, why was the measure not notified as provisional while 
the EU seeks to obtain the additional information necessary for a more objective assessment of risk 
and reviews the MRL accordingly within a reasonable period of time ? 
__________  