G/TBT/W/455  
 
10 November 2017  
(17-6112) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  Original: English  
 
 EUROPEAN UNION — REVISED PROPOSAL FOR  THE CATEGORIZATION O F COMPOUNDS 
AS ENDOCRINE DISRUPT ORS OF 19 FEBRUARY 2 013 BY DG ENVIRONMEN T 
STATEMENT BY AUSTRALIA  TO THE TBT COMMITTEE , 8-9 NOVEMBER 2017  
The following communication, dated 8 November 2017, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Australia . 
 
_______________  
 
 
1.  We note the 4 July 2017 SCoPAFF vote to approve the hazard based criteria  for identifying 
Endocrine Disruptors for pla nt protection products; and also note the rejection of this same 
package on 4 October by the European Parliament. We understand that members of the European 
Parliament, in their rejection of the SCoPAFF hazard based criteria, have determined that the 
Europ ean Commission has exceeded its delegated regulatory powers by (in summary) excluding 
from the criteria chemicals that are intentionally designed to target hormonal systems. The specific 
exclusion of this class of chemicals in the criteria is seen by the E uropean Parliament as a 
significant departure from the European Union's precautionary principle based approach to 
chemical regulation. We further note that the Parliament has called on the Commission to revert 
with an expanded legislative package as soon a s possible.  
2.   While Australia notes the Commission's comments that it needs time to reflect on the future of 
the endocrine disruptor package, we are concerned that any expansion of the criteria (to meet the 
concerns of the European Parliament) will result in even more restrictive, and unscientifically 
supported criteria being put in place, leading to many more substances being classed as endocrine 
disruptors and unnecessarily banned in the EU.  
3.   We have concerns that the revised package, like the previous on e, may proceed through the 
Parliamentary scrutiny process without the risk -based derogation elements.  
4.   Australia encourages the EU to retain the risk -based elements of the derogations in the draft 
regulations, as a concurrent consideration with the criteri a components of this proposal. 
Preventing the safe use of agricultural chemicals without verifiable and scientifically proven 
reasons for doing so would result in a significant number of critical crop protection products being 
unnecessarily banned. The ris k-based elements of the derogation align with the scientific, risk -
based regulatory approach of Australia and other key trading partners. This will ensure that safe 
chemical use can continue as part of modern, sustainable agricultural practice, and trade i s not 
unnecessarily restricted.  
5.   Australia is also concerned about how MRLs would be set in the EU for any substance banned 
as a result of the EU endocrine disruptor policy.  Australia notes the draft position paper circulated 
by the Commission in July 2017 , suggesting that EU legislation will preclude the establishment of 
MRLs for substances banned.   
6.   As an exporter of a number of agricultural products Australia is concerned that we will no 
longer be able to export products to the EU if MRLs for banned subs tances are set at default levels 
and no import tolerances are set. This would not only adversely affect exporter and consumers but 
also EU food importers and manufacturers who source ingredients from outside the EU.  G/TBT/W/455  
 
- 2 - 
 
  7.   In light of the trade concerns outlined  by Australia in previous correspondence with the 
Executive of the European Commission, we would appreciate an update on the anticipated next 
steps.  
__________