Evaluation of data concerning the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl as a herbicide to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means, including non‐chemical methods

Abstract

EFSA was requested by the European Commission to provide scientific assistance under Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 regarding the evaluation of data concerning the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl as a herbicide to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means including non‐chemical methods, in accordance with Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. In this context, EFSA organised a commenting phase with Member States in order to collect and validate the data submitted by the applicant. The current scientific report summarises the outcome of the evaluation of eight different uses (crops) in seven Member States. The evaluation demonstrated that in general a wide range of alternative herbicide active substances to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl are available for chemical weed control; however, for some uses, no sufficient chemical alternatives are available. The evaluation included an assessment of non‐chemical alternatives for the presented uses. A wide range of non‐chemical methods are available; however, often these methods do not have the same efficacy as chemical methods or have economic limitations. A combination of both chemical and non‐chemical methods seems often possible.

Summary

Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl was included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC on 1 July 2001 by Commission Directive 2001/49/EC and has been deemed to be approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, in accordance with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011, with the name DPX KE 459 (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl). The applicant, DuPont de Nemours (Deutschland) GmbH, applied for renewal of approval in line with the provisions of Commission Regulation (EU) No 1141/2010.

Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is a herbicide active substance (a.s.) and it is used for pre‐emergence and/or post‐emergence control of both annual broadleaf and annual grass weeds, particularly black‐grass, (ALOMY) and loose silky‐bent (APESV), in winter cereal crops, linseed and seed production of forage grasses.

In 2014, during the peer review, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) proposed to classify flupyrsulfuron‐methyl as carcinogenic category 2 (C2) and toxic for reproduction category 2 (R2), leading to a critical area of concern with regard to the approval criteria of Annex II, Point 3.6.5 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 interim provisions for active substances that shall be considered to have endocrine disrupting properties.

The applicant DuPont de Nemours (Deutschland) GmbH requested derogation under Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, submitting evidence regarding the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl to control a serious danger to plant health. In January 2016, the European Commission requested EFSA to provide scientific assistance as regards the consideration of evidence that the application of an active substance is necessary to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means including non‐chemical methods. In order to address this request, EFSA set up a working group (WG) to develop a specific methodology for the assessment of herbicide a.s.. The protocol on the methodology was published on 2 August 2016 (EFSA, 2016a).

Subsequently, the applicant was requested by the European Commission to re‐submit the data following the methodology developed by EFSA. In September 2016, the European Commission forwarded to EFSA the new submission provided by the applicant, consisting of a data collection set and a report (DuPont, 2016). The applicant, included claims that the use of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is considered essential in accordance with Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in relation to the uses authorised in 10 Member States (MS).

As following step, EFSA launched a commenting phase in October–November 2016 asking all MS to confirm that the uses for which the applicant requested Article 4(7) derogation are authorised, and if the use of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is considered essential to control a serious danger to plant health, giving clear justification for each use that is considered as essential. In addition, all MS were invited to submit information related to respective national authorisations for different crops or non‐agricultural uses, evidence on resistance risk and uses that were not covered by applicant's submission (e.g. minor uses).

Overall, eight different uses (winter wheat, winter barley, winter rye, oats, triticale, spelt, linseed and Dactylis glomerata (minor use)) in seven MS (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom) were evaluated to assess the applicant's claims or information provided by MS (Austria, Denmark for minor use in D. glomerata and spelt) on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl to control a serious danger to plant health. It can be concluded that generally a wide range, of chemical alternative herbicide a.s. are available in MS for weed control in winter wheat (except for Austria and Sweden), winter rye (except for Austria and Sweden) and triticale (except for Austria and Sweden). However, there are insufficient chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for weed control in spelt (except for Belgium), oats, linseed and D. glomerata. For winter barley, there are insufficient chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for weed control in Denmark, an intermediate situation in Austria and sufficient chemical alternatives are available in the United Kingdom.

Non‐chemical alternatives were also evaluated for these different uses and a wide range of methods are available; however, these methods often do not have the same efficacy as chemical methods or have economic limitations. A combination of both chemical and non‐chemical methods seems often possible.

When evaluating individually the herbicide chemical alternatives according to the criteria: ‘time of application’ and ‘weed spectrum’ one by one with the other a.s. less alternatives seem to be present among the shortlisted herbicide a.s. However, many a.s. are useful in integrated pest management (IPM), meaning that the system as a whole may be able to function without the substance under consideration. It is noted that some MS applied the protocol more strictly, while other MS such as Belgium and the Netherlands were in favour of a more flexible approach. To ensure consistency, EFSA rigorously followed the methodology of the protocol (EFSA, 2016a), but further discussions with MS on the subject might be useful.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and Terms of Reference as provided by the requestor

Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl was included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC1 on 1 July 2001 by Commission Directive 2001/49/EC2 and has been deemed to be approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/20093, in accordance with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/20114, with the name DPX KE 459 (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl). The applicant, DuPont de Nemours (Deutschland) GmbH, applied for renewal of approval in line with the provisions of Commission Regulation (EU) No 1141/20105. Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl was evaluated by France as rapporteur Member State (RMS). The RMS delivered its initial evaluation of the dossier in the Renewal Assessment Report (RAR), which was received by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 27 September 2013 (France, 2013). In accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1141/2010, EFSA finalised the conclusion on the peer review for flupyrsulfuron‐methyl on 22 October 2014 (EFSA, 2014).

EFSA proposed to classify flupyrsulfuron‐methyl as carcinogenic category 2 (C2) and toxic for reproduction category 2 (R2), leading to a critical area of concern with regard to the approval criteria of Annex II, Point 3.6.5 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 interim provisions for active substances (a.s.) that shall be considered to have endocrine disrupting properties.

The applicant DuPont de Nemours (Deutschland) GmbH requested derogation in accordance with the provisions of Article 4(7) of Regulation (EU) 1107/2009, submitting evidence regarding the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means. In January 2016, the European Commission requested by a general mandate to EFSA to provide scientific assistance as regards the consideration of evidence that the application of an active substance is necessary to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means including non‐chemical methods. In order to address this request, EFSA set up a working group (WG) to develop a specific methodology for the assessment of herbicide a.s.. The protocol on the methodology was published on 2 August 2016 (EFSA, 2016a).

Subsequently, applicant was requested by the European Commission to re‐submit the data following the methodology developed by EFSA. On 19 September 2016, the European Commission forwarded to EFSA the new submission provided by the applicant, consisting in a data collection set and a report (Du Pont, 2016). The applicant included claims that the use of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is considered essential in accordance with Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in the following Member States (MS): Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

On 11 October 2016, EFSA launched a 6 weeks commenting phase asking all MS to confirm that the uses for which the applicant requests Article 4(7) derogation are authorised and if the use of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is considered essential to control the serious danger to plant health, giving clear justification for each use that is considered as critical. In addition, all MS were invited to supplement the information provided by the applicant with information from their own MS uses also considering other uses not presented by the applicant (e.g. minor uses). During the commenting phase, Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom validated the information provided by applicant and Austria submitted new information in relation to the uses in cereals.

As a follow up, EFSA ensured that the methodology was consistently applied by MS and summarised the evaluation of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (See Appendices A and B) in the current scientific report. A final consultation process on the draft scientific report with MS was launched in February 2017.

The legal deadline to finalise the current scientific report is 19 March 2017.

2. Data and methodologies

2.1. Methodologies

The assessment was conducted in line with the methodology for the evaluation of data concerning the necessity of the application of herbicide a.s. to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means, including non‐chemical methods, published on 2 August 2016 (EFSA, 2016a). The submission provided by the applicant in the form of a collection data set and a report, was also in line with the EFSA methodology (EFSA, 2016a).

The role of EFSA is to act as the co‐ordinator of the process, ensuring that the methodology is applied consistently and providing a scientific report on the evaluation of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl. EFSA considered the information provided by Member States such as the full list of authorised herbicide a.s., the shortlisted a.s. and the non‐chemical methods as reliable and no further research was conducted to validate these data. Thus, Member States had the full responsibility for the accuracy and correctness of the data provided to EFSA to perform the assessment.

2.2. Data and information

This report presents the information contained in the applicant report on flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (DuPont, 2016), and additional information and data provided by MS after the commenting phase launched by EFSA in October–November 2016. Table 1 provides an overview of authorised uses of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (DPX KE 459) to control both annual broadleaf and annual grass weeds, particularly black‐grass (ALOMY) and loose silky‐bent (APESV) in Europe. A total of four formulated products6 containing flupyrsulfuron‐methyl are registered in Europe and details, except for Austria, are provided in Appendix 1 of the applicant report (DuPont, 2016).

Table 1.

Authorised uses of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (DPX KE 459) in Europe

Country	Use/stage of applicationa
Austria	Winter wheat/BBCH 12‐25 (post‐emergence)
	Winter barley/autumn from BBCH 12 (post‐emergence)
	Winter rye/spring BBCH 13‐25 (post‐emergence), autumn from BBCH 12 (post‐emergence)
	Spelt/spring BBCH 13‐25 (post‐emergence), autumn from BBCH 12 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/spring BBCH 13‐25 (post‐emergence), autumn from BBCH 12 (post‐emergence)
	Linseed b , c/post‐emergence of the crop, 2–10 cm height
Belgium	Winter wheat/spring BBCH 21‐29 (post‐emergence)
	Spelt/spring BBCH 21‐29 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/spring BBCH 21‐29 (post‐emergence)
	Oats/spring BBCH 21‐29(post‐emergence)
	Linseed c/spring 3–12 cm height (post‐emergence)
Czech Republic	Winter wheat/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Winter rye/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
Denmark	Winter wheat/autumn BBCH 13‐23 (post‐emergence) or spring BBCH 23‐30 (post‐emergence) or autumn + spring (split application)
	Winter barley/autumn BBCH 13‐23 (post‐emergence)
	Winter rye/autumn BBCH 13‐23 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/autumn BBCH 13‐23 (post‐emergence)
	Spelt/autumn BBCH 13‐23 (post‐emergence) or spring BBCH 23‐30 (post‐emergence) or autumn + spring (split application)
	Dactylis glomerata/autumn BBCH 20‐26 (post‐emergence), minor use
France	Winter wheat/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Winter barley/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Spelt/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Oats/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Forage grass/BBCH > 25 (post‐emergence)
Germany	Winter wheat/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Winter rye/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Oats/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Spelt/autumn and spring BBCH 13‐29 (post‐emergence)
Netherlands	Winter wheat/BBCH 12‐25 (post‐emergence), BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐ and early post‐emergence) to control ALOMY and APESV
Poland	Winter wheat/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Winter rye/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
Slovakia	Winter wheat/autumn and spring BBCH 11‐29 (post‐emergence)
	Winter rye/autumn and spring BBCH 11‐29 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/autumn and spring BBCH 11‐29 (post‐emergence)
Sweden	Winter wheat/BBCH 11‐29 (post‐emergence)
	Winter rye/BBCH 11‐29 (post‐emergence)
	Triticale/BBCH 11‐29 (post‐emergence)
United Kingdom	Winter wheat/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence), autumn and spring BBCH 11‐31 (post‐emergence)
	Winter rye/BBCH 12 – 31 December (post‐emergence) autumn
	Winter barley/BBCH 00‐09 (pre‐emergence) (pre‐emergence) autumn
	Triticale/BBCH 12–31 December (post‐emergence) autumn
	Oats/BBCH 12–31 December (post‐emergence) autumn

BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants.

^aThe uses proposed in the following table correspond to the list provided by the applicant in the excel files (DuPont, 2016) as validated by MS, except for the information provided by MS for Austria, and on Dactylis glomerata and spelt for DK.

^bFor Linum usitatissimum, the terminology ‘linseed’ is used throughout this document in line with the European terminology (Plant variety database – European Commission).

^cThe approved plant protection product contains two a.s: flupyrsulfuron methyl and metsulfuron.

EFSA provides the collection data set as validated by MS (i.e. complete list/s of authorised a.s. in the relevant Member States) and evaluated by EFSA, as an Appendix to this scientific report (Appendix A). Also, an overview of the shortlisting process and a summary of the final shortlisted herbicide active substances for each use (crop) and MS is provided as an Appendix to this report (Appendix B).

In addition, key supporting documents to this scientific report are:

• the applicant submission in the form of a Report (DuPont, 2016) and collection data set;

• the comments received on the Applicant Report (EFSA, 2016b);

• the comments received on the draft scientific report (EFSA, 2016c).

The applicant submitted the information in relation to 10 Member States (Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Sweden, and the United Kingdom); six MS (Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom) verified the information submitted by the applicant. Germany was not able to validate the information provided by the applicant as it was not possible to adjust the received information with the one available in the national database and therefore an accurate mapping was not possible. Furthermore, three MS (the Czech Republic, France and Poland) did not verify the information. Austria submitted information in relation to the uses in cereals.

3. Evaluation and assessment

3.1. Evaluation of chemical alternatives

3.1.1. Winter wheat

Table 2 summarises the number of authorised herbicide a.s. and potential chemical alternatives (shortlisted herbicide a.s.) that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for use in winter wheat in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

Table 2.

Number of authorised and shortlisted herbicide a.s. to control weeds (annual broadleaf and grass weeds (e.g. ALOMY and APESV)) in winter wheat in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, Slovakia and the United Kingdom

Use	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.
Winter wheat	AT	> 20	1
Winter wheat	BE	> 20	7
Winter wheat	DK	> 20	3
Winter wheat	NL	> 20	3
Winter wheat	SE	> 20	1
Winter wheat	SK	> 20	6
Winter wheat	UK	> 20	4

a.s.: active substance.

The information provided by Austria on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter wheat to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in herbicide resistance (HR) strategy score of 2.7 This means that with one shortlisted herbicide a.s. chlorotoluron (C2) and one mode of action (MoA) insufficient chemical alternatives are available in Austria.

Following the approach proposed by EFSA protocol (2016a), according to which, ‘if a registered product consists of two or more a.s. (a mixture8), the information should be provided for each a.s. in the mixture separately’ and the assessment is conducted for each a.s. individually; EFSA initially proposed to shortlist also the a.s. mesosulfuron methyl (only authorised in Austria in co formulation with other a.s). However, as the weed spectrum is not comparable with the weed spectrum of the a.s. under consideration, Austria proposed not to consider mesosulfuron methyl as a chemical alternative (details are provided in Appendices A and B, Table B.1). In addition, in Austria, there is one authorised plant protection product (PPP) which contains two herbicide a.s. (florasulam (B)9 and pinoxaden (A)9) only available in co‐formulation. The PPP has the same time of application (BBCH 13‐25) and controls the same weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds and annual grass weeds (ALOMY and APESV)) as the substance under consideration (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.1). According to the protocol (EFSA, 2016a), only a.s. that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as the substance under consideration should be retained on the shortlist. This is not the case when considering the two a.s individually (pinoxaden controls only annual grass weeds and florasulam controls only annual broadleaf weeds), therefore, these two a.s. have not been shortlisted.

Table B.1.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter wheat in Austria

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	BBCH 00‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV, POAAN)
	Mesosulfuron methyl*	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	AT: Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s. and should be shortlisted according to EFSA protocol (2016). However, as the weed spectrum is not comparable with the weed spectrum of the a.s. under consideration AT proposed not to shortlist this a.s.
	Iodosulfuron methyl*	B	BBCH 13‐32	Annual broadleaf & grass (APERA, Poa annua, Lolpe)	EFSA: Not included because it has no control over ALOMY
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 13‐25 in spring; from BBCH 12 in autumn	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

*Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

The information provided by the applicant on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter wheat to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in Belgium, resulted in the following shortlisted herbicide a.s: chlorotoluron (C2), flufenacet (K3), mesosulfuron methyl (B), pendimethalin (K1), prosulfocarb (N), pyroxsulam (B), and sulfosulfuron (B). Three of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (mesosulfuron methyl, pyroxsulam and sulfosulfuron) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl). The EFSA protocol (EFSA 2016a) states that ‘if one of the shortlisted a.s. has the same MoA [and site of action] as the a.s. under consideration, withdrawal of the a.s. under consideration has no implications for herbicide resistance management. Consequently, justifying derogation based on a reduced number of MoAs no longer holds’. This leads to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives for winter wheat available in Belgium and there is no need to calculate a HR score (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.2). A similar situation occurred for Denmark and Slovakia.

Table B.2.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter wheat in Belgium

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
	2,4D/2,4DB	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Amidosulfuron	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring, useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Beflubutamid	F1	BBCH 01‐30	Annual broadleaf	BE: Not registered against grasses but useful to control broadleaved weeds in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Bifenox	E	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Carfentrazone	E	BBCH 21‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	BBCH 01‐08/BBCH 25‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Clopyralid	O	BBCH 29‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring Control CENCY and MATCH. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Dichlorprop	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Diflufenican	F1	BBCH 01‐29	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 13‐31	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY, APESV only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Florasulam	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Flufenacet	K3	BBCH 11‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM
	Flumioxazin	E	BBCH 00‐14	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Not registered in cereals in BE. EFSA: Thus cannot be on the shortlist
	Fluroxypyr	O	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flurtamone	F1	BBCH 01‐29	Annual broadleaf & annual grass (APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: No control of ALOMY compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Glyphosate	G		Broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & (APESV)	BE: Not registered in pre‐emergence but useful in IPM, e.g. in intercrop. EFSA: Glyphosate is applied at pre‐harvest (BBCH 89), compared to the substance under consideration (post‐EM BBCH 12‐29). Thus quite a different growth stage, hence it is proposed not to shortlist this a.s.
	Iodosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf & grass (APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: No control of ALOMY compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Ixosaben	L	BBCH 01‐13	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	MCPA	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	MCPP	O	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Only MCPP‐p is registered. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
3	Mesosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. Not to be shortlisted
	Metsulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf weeds	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
4	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 11‐12/BBCH 21‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Not registered in pre‐emergence. BBCH autumn/spring. Useful in IPM
	Picolinafen	F1	BBCH 21‐25	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Pinoxaden	A	BBCH 13‐31	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Propoxycarbazone	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
5	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM EFSA: Application BBCH 00‐13 compared to the substance under consideration (spring at BBCH 21‐29). However, a.s. could be considered as early post‐EM, thus proposed to be shortlisted
6	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM
7	Sulfosulfuron	B	BBCH 13‐32	Annual broadleaf & annual grass	BE: Useful in IPM
	Thifensulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tribenuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐40	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tritosulfuron	B	BBCH 21‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Penoxsulam	B	BBCH 11‐23	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass (APESV)	BE: Not registered in cereals in BE. EFSA: Thus cannot be on the shortlist
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	Spring at BBCH 21‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

In Denmark, the evaluation resulted in following shortlisted herbicide a.s.: mesosulfuron methyl (B), pyroxsulam (B) and prosulfocarb (N). Two of the shortlisted herbicide a.s (mesosulfuron methyl and pyroxsulam) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (B)), leading to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives available for winter wheat in Denmark, and there is no need to calculate a HR score (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.3). One of the a.s. mesosulfuron methyl (B) is registered in co‐formulation with other a.s.

Table B.3.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter wheat in Denmark

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
1	Mesosulfuron methyl *	B	BBCH 13‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: In Denmark, mesosulfuron is used in mixture with iodosulfuron and/or diflufenican and the gap for this mixture is in control of GERSS, PAPRH and MYOAR
	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐12	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: The max dose is 455 g a.i./ha in DK. At this dose, the control of grasses (ALOMY and APESV) is insufficient. Gap in efficacy on MATIN, BRNSS, CENCY. High tax. EFSA: Following MS proposal as regards efficacy, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00‐21	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: Gap in efficacy on MATIN, PAPRH. High tax. EFSA: a.s. fulfils the main criteria ‘application time’ and ‘weed spectrum’ (broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & APERA)), thus, it is proposed to consider this a.s. on the shortlist
3	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 23‐39	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & APERA)
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 11‐23/BBCH 23‐30	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BBCH autumn/spring

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

*Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

In Slovakia, the evaluation resulted in following shortlisted herbicide a.s.: chlorotoluron (C2), flufenacet (K3), flumioxazin (E), mesosulfuron methyl (B), pendimethalin (K1) and pyroxsulam (B). Two of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (mesosulfuron methyl and pyroxsulam) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (B)), leading to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives available for winter wheat in Slovakia and there is no need to calculate a HR score (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.5).

Table B.5.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter wheat in Slovakia

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	Up to BBCH 29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
2	Flufenacet	K3	BBCH 00‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
3	Flumioxazin	E	BBCH 00‐14	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
4	Mesosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
5	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Penoxsulam	B	BBCH 11‐23	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass (APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (only APESV) compared to the substance under consideration. Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
6	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 12‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 1129	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

The evaluation of applicant's claim on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter wheat to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in HR strategy scores of 9, 3 and 127 for the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom, respectively.

In the Netherlands, it is assumed that considering the herbicide a.s. flufenacet (K3), pendimethalin (K1) and prosulfocarb (N) and three MoAs, sufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

In Sweden, it is assumed that considering the herbicide a.s. prosulfocarb (N) and one MoA insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

In addition, Sweden claimed that flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is essential for use in winter wheat for the very good efficiency against spill rape seed, and there is no other alternative available. Spill rape seed needs to be controlled already in autumn, to avoid amplifying the fungus disease club rot, for the control of corn flower and scentless mayweed. Furthermore, flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is one of the three remaining a.s. that may be used for control of black‐grass. Black‐grass is a very difficult weed that easily becomes resistant to herbicides. In those parts of Sweden where black‐grass is a major problem, the PPP has an important role in a resistance strategy, where the growers need to combine different a.s.

In the United Kingdom, it is assumed that considering the herbicide a.s. flufenacet (K3), flumioxazin (E), prosulfocarb (N) and pendimethalin (K1) and four MoAs sufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

For further details on the evaluation, see Appendices A and B.

3.1.2. Winter barley

Table 3 summarises the number of authorised herbicide a.s. and potential chemical alternatives (shortlisted herbicide a.s.) that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for use in winter barley in the Austria, Denmark and the United Kingdom.

Table 3.

Number of authorised and shortlisted herbicide a.s. to control weeds (annual broadleaf and grass weeds (e.g. ALOMY and APESV)) in winter barley in Austria, Denmark and United Kingdom

Use	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.
Winter barley	AT	> 20	3
Winter barley	DK	> 20	1
Winter barley	UK	> 20	3

a.s.: active substance.

The information provided by Austria on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter barley to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl, resulted in a HR score of 7.7 This means that in Austria, it is assumed that considering the herbicide a.s. chlorotoluron (C2), halauxifen‐methyl (O) and prosulfocarb (N) and three MoAs this represents an intermediate situation.

Austria also highlighted that there are three authorised PPP containing more than one a.s. (co‐formulations, details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.8) which have similar characteristics (time of application and weed spectrum) as the a.s. under consideration.

Table B.8.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter barley in Austria

	Active substancea	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	BBCH 00‐29/BBCH 13‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV, POAAN)
2	Halauxifen‐methyl	O	BBCH 13‐29, for Galap BBCH 30‐45	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds
3	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00‐21	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	Autumn from BBCH 12	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

The evaluation of applicant's claim on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter barley to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in a HR score of 37 for Denmark. This means that in Denmark it is assumed that considering the a.s. prosulfocarb (N) and one MoA insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

The evaluation of applicant's claim on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter barley to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in a HR score of 97 for the United Kingdom. This means that in the United Kingdom, considering the herbicide a.s. flufenacet (K3), pendimethalin (K1), prosulfocarb (N) and three MoAs, sufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

For further details on the evaluation, see Appendices A and B.

3.1.3. Winter rye

Table 4 summarises the number of authorised herbicide a.s. and potential chemical alternatives (shortlisted herbicide a.s.) that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for use in winter rye in Austria, Denmark, Sweden, Slovakia and the United Kingdom.

Table 4.

Number of authorised and shortlisted herbicide a.s. to control weeds (annual broadleaf and grass weeds (e.g. ALOMY and APESV)) in winter rye in Austria, Denmark, Sweden, Slovakia and the United Kingdom

Use	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.
Winter rye	AT	> 20	1
Winter rye	DK	> 20	3
Winter rye	SE	> 20	1
Winter rye	SK	> 20	5
Winter rye	UK	> 20	5

a.s.: active substance.

The information provided by Austria and the evaluation of applicant's claims for the other MS on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter rye to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl, resulted in HR strategy scores of 2 and 37 for Austria and Sweden, respectively. This means that in Austria, considering the herbicide a.s. halauxifen‐methyl (O) and one MoA, insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available. In Sweden, it is assumed that considering the herbicide a.s. prosulfocarb (N) and one MoA insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

In Austria, two herbicide a.s. (florasulam (B)9 ^, 10 and pinoxaden (A)9) are only available in combination as PPP. The product has the same time of application (BBCH 13‐25) and controls the same weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds and annual grass weeds (ALOMY and APESV)) as the substance under consideration. According to the protocol (EFSA, 2016a), only a.s. that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as the substance under consideration should be retained on the shortlist. This is not the case when considering the two a.s individually (pinoxaden controls annual grass weeds and florasulam controls annual broadleaf weeds); therefore, it is proposed not to shortlist these two a.s. In addition, the protocol (EFSA 2016a) states that ‘if an a.s. has the same MoA and site of action (which is the case for florasulam) of the substance under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl), withdrawal of the a.s. under consideration has no implications for herbicide resistance management. Consequently, justifying derogation based on a reduced number of MoAs no longer holds’; leading to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives available. In this particular case, such a conclusion might not be justified as the weed spectrum of florasulam is not comparable to that of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl. In addition, exploring possible combinations of different a.s. having the same characteristics (weed spectrum and time of application) compared to the substance under consideration, not taking into account whether combinations of more than one a.s. are authorised as PPPs in Austria, would be a possible option to refine the list of chemical alternatives. However, such an approach would go beyond the scope of the current methodology.

In addition, Sweden claimed that flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is essential for use in winter rye for the very good efficiency against spill rape seed, and there is no other alternative available. Spill rape seed needs to be controlled already in autumn, to avoid amplifying the fungus disease club rot, for the control of corn flower and scentless mayweed. Furthermore, flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is one of the three remaining a.s. that may be used for control of black‐grass. Black‐grass is a very difficult weed that easily becomes resistant to herbicides. In those parts of Sweden where black‐grass is a major problem, the PPP has an important role in a resistance strategy, where the growers need to combine different a.s.

The information provided by the applicant on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter rye to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl, resulted in the following shortlisted herbicide a.s in the United Kingdom: mesosulfuron methyl (B), pyroxsulam (B), flufenacet (K3), pendimethalin (K1) and prosulfocarb (N). Two of the shortlisted herbicide a.s., (mesosulfuron methyl and pyroxsulam) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl). The protocol (EFSA 2016a) states: ‘if one of the shortlisted a.s. has the same MoA [and site of action] as the a.s. under consideration, withdrawal of the a.s. under consideration has no implications for herbicide resistance management. Consequently, justifying derogation based on a reduced number of MoAs no longer holds’. This leads to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives available for winter rye in the United Kingdom and there is no need to calculate a HR score (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.15) A similar situation occurred in Denmark and Slovakia.

Table B.15.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter rye in the United Kingdom

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Flufenacet	K3	BBCH 00‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
2	Mesosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
3	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Pinoxaden	A	BBCH 11‐39	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Propoxycarbazone	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	UK: Authorised in the UK. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
4	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00/BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
5	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 12‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Triallate	N	BBCH 00‐30	Annual grass (ALOMY)	UK: For grass weeds is considered to be an alternative. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 12–31 December	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

In Denmark, the evaluation resulted in following shortlisted herbicide a.s.: mesosulfuron methyl (B), and prosulfocarb (N) and pyroxsulam (B). Two of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (mesosulfuron methyl (B) and pyroxsulam (B)) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (B)). This leads to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives available for winter rye in Denmark, and there is no need to calculate a HR score.

In Slovakia the evaluation resulted in following shortlisted herbicide a.s.: chlorotoluron (C2), flufenacet (K3), flumioxazin (E), pendimethalin (K1) and pyroxsulam (B). Two of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (mesosulfuron methyl (B) and pyroxsulam (B)) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (B)). This leads to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives available for winter rye in Slovakia and there is no need to calculate a HR score.

For further details on the evaluation, see Appendices A and B.

3.1.4. Oats

Table 5 summarises the number of authorised herbicide a.s. and potential chemical alternatives (shortlisted herbicide a.s.) that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for use in oats in Belgium and the United Kingdom.

Table 5.

Number of authorised and shortlisted herbicide a.s. to control weeds (annual broadleaf and grass weeds (e.g. ALOMY and APESV)) in oats in Belgium and the United Kingdom

Use	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.
Oats	BE	> 20	0
Oats	UK	> 20	0

a.s.: active substance.

The evaluation of applicant's claims on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in oats to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in HR strategy scores of 0 and 07 for Belgium and the United Kingdom, respectively. This means that in Belgium and the United Kingdom there are no other alternative chemical substances available.

In Belgium, some herbicide a.s. such as prosulfocarb are not authorised in PPP as in other MS, thus were not considered in the evaluation. In addition, Belgium flagged many a.s. that are useful in IPM, however when comparing flupyrsulfuron‐methyl according to the criteria ‘time of application’ and ‘weed spectrum’ one by one with the other a.s. less alternatives seem to be present on the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.16). Some MS applied the protocol in the strict sense; other MS such as Belgium were in favour of more flexibility. To ensure consistency EFSA rigorously followed the methodology of the protocol (EFSA, 2016a), but further discussions with MS on this point would be useful.

Table B.16.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for oats in Belgium

	Herbicide authorised(a)	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
	2,4D	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Amidosulfuron	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Bifenox	E	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Carfentrazone	E	BBCH 21‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Clopyralid	O	BBCH 29‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Control CENCY and MATCH. EFSA: Different and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Dichlorprop	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Only broadleaved weeds. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)) Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Diflufenican	F1	BBCH 21‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Only in spring application in winter oats. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Florasulam	B	BBCH 14‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Fluroxypyr	O	BBCH 13‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Glyphosate	G		Broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & (APESV)	BE: Not registered in pre‐emergence but useful in IPM, e.g. in intercrop. EFSA: Glyphosate is applied at pre‐harvest (BBCH 89), compared to the substance under consideration (post‐EM BBCH 12‐29). Thus, quite a different growth stage; hence, it is proposed not to shortlist this a.s.
	Linuron	C2	BBCH 01‐08	Broadleaf & grass	Different time of application, thus not shortlisted
	MCPA	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	MCPP	O	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Only MCPP‐p is registered. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Metsulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf weeds	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Thifensulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tribenuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐40	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tritosulfuron	B	BBCH 21‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 21‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

For further details on the evaluation, see Appendices A and B.

3.1.5. Triticale

Table 6 summarises the number of authorised herbicide a.s. and potential chemical alternatives (shortlisted herbicide a.s.) that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for use in winter triticale in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Slovakia and the United Kingdom.

Table 6.

Number of authorised and shortlisted herbicide a.s. to control weeds (annual broadleaf and grass weeds (e.g. ALOMY and APESV)) in winter triticale in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Slovakia and the United Kingdom

Use	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.
Triticale	AT	> 20	2
Triticale	BE	> 20	5
Triticale	DK	> 20	3
Triticale	SE	> 20	1
Triticale	SK	> 20	5
Triticale	UK	> 20	5

a.s.: active substance.

The information provided by Austria on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter triticale to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in HR strategy scores of 4.7 This means that in Austria, it is assumed that considering the herbicide a.s. chlorotoluron (C2), halauxifen‐methyl (O) and two MoAs, insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

In Austria, there is one PPP authorised which contains two herbicide a.s. (florasulam (B)9 and pinoxaden (A)9), only available in co‐formulation. The PPP has the same time of application (BBCH 13‐25) and controls the same weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds and annual grass weeds (ALOMY and APESV)) as the substance under consideration (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.1). According to the EFSA protocol (EFSA, 2016a), only a.s. that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as the substance under consideration should be retained on the shortlist. This is not the case when considering the two a.s individually (pinoxaden controls only annual grass weeds and florasulam controls only annual broadleaf weeds), therefore, these two a.s. have not been shortlisted.

The information provided by the applicant on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter triticale to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in Sweden resulted in resulted in HR strategy scores of 3.7 This means that in Sweden, it is assumed that considering the herbicide a.s prosulfocarb (N) and one MoA, insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

In addition, Sweden claimed that flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is essential for use in winter triticale for the very good efficiency against spill rape seed, and there is no other alternative available. Spill rape seed needs to be controlled already in the autumn, to avoid amplifying the fungus disease club rot, for the control of corn flower and scentless mayweed. Furthermore, flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is one of the three remaining a.s. that may be used for control of black‐grass. Black‐grass is a very difficult weed that easily becomes resistant to herbicides. In those parts of Sweden where black‐grass is a major problem, the PPP has an important role in a resistance strategy, where the growers need to combine different a.s.

The information provided by the applicant on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in winter triticale to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in the following shortlisted herbicide a.s for Belgium: chlorotoluron (C2), mesosulfuron methyl (B), pendimethalin (K1), prosulfocarb (N) and pyroxsulam (B). Two of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (mesosulfuron methyl, and pyroxsulam) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (B)). The protocol (EFSA 2016a) states that ‘if one of the shortlisted a.s. has the same MoA [and site of action] as the a.s. under consideration, withdrawal of the a.s. under consideration has no implications for herbicide resistance management. Consequently, justifying derogation based on a reduced number of MoAs no longer holds’. This leads to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives available for winter triticale in Belgium and there is no need to calculate a HR score (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.19). A similar situation occurred for Denmark, Slovakia and the United Kingdom.

Table B.19.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for triticale in Belgium

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
	2,4D/2,4DB	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Amidosulfuron	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring, useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Beflubutamid	F1	BBCH 01‐30	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Carfentrazone	E	BBCH 21‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	BBCH 01‐08/BBCH 25‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM
	Clodinafop propargyl		BBCH 11‐30	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Not registered in BE. EFSA: Thus cannot be on the shortlisted
	Clopyralid	O	BBCH 29‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring Control CENCY and MATCH. EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Diflufenican	F1	BBCH 01‐29	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 13‐31	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY, APESV only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Florasulam	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flufenacet	K3	BBCH 11‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Not registered in BE. EFSA: Thus cannot be on the shortlist
	Flumioxazin	E	BBCH 00‐14	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Not registered in cereals in BE. EFSA: Thus cannot be on the shortlist
	Fluroxypyr	O	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flurtamone	F1	BBCH 01‐29	Annual broadleaf & annual grass (APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: No control of ALOMY compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Glyphosate	G		Broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & (APESV))	BE: Not registered in pre‐emergence but useful in IPM, e.g. in intercrop. EFSA: Glyphosate is applied at pre‐harvest (BBCH 89), compared to the substance under consideration (post‐EM BBCH 12‐29). Thus, quite a different growth stage; hence, it is proposed not to shortlist this a.s.
	Iodosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf & grass (APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: No control of ALOMY compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Ixosaben	L	BBCH 01‐13	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	MCPA	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Mesosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM
	Metsulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf weeds	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
3	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 11‐12/ BBCH 21‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM
	Picolinafen	F1	BBCH 12‐21/BBCH 21‐25	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Pinoxaden	A	BBCH 13‐31	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Propoxycarbazone	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	BE: Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
4	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM EFSA: Application BBCH 00‐13 compared to the substance under consideration (spring at BBCH 21‐29). However, a.s. could be considered as early post‐EM thus proposed to be shortlisted
5	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM
	Thifensulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tribenuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐40	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tritosulfuron	B	BBCH 21‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Penoxsulam	B	BBCH 11‐23	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass (APESV)	BE: Not registered in cereals in BE. EFSA: Thus cannot be on the shortlist
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 21‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

In Denmark, the evaluation resulted in following shortlisted herbicide a.s.: mesosulfuron methyl (B), pyroxsulam (B) and prosulfocarb (N). Two of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (mesosulfuron methyl and pyroxsulam) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl), leading to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives for winter triticale available in Denmark, and there is no need to calculate a HR score. One of the a.s. mesosulfuron methyl (B) is registered in co‐formulation with other a.s (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.20).

Table B.20.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for triticale in Denmark

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
	Clodinafop propargyl	A	BBCH 11‐39	Grass (ALOMY & APERA)	DK: With 40 g a.i./ha, it is considered efficient for control of most grasses in spring, incl. APERA and ALOMY. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY, APESV only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 11‐30	Annual grass (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY, APESV only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Mesosulfuron methyl *	B	BBCH 13‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: In Denmark, mesosulfuron is used in mixture with iodosulfuron and/or diflufenican and the gap for this mixture is in control of GERSS, PAPRH and MYOAR
	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐12	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: The max dose is 480 g a.i./ha in DK. At this dose the control of grasses (ALOMY and APESV) is insufficient. Gap in efficacy on MATIN, BRNSS, CENCY. High tax. EFSA: Following MS proposal as regards efficacy, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00‐21	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: Gap in efficacy on MATIN, PAPRH. High tax. EFSA: a.s. fulfils the main criteria ‘application time’ and ‘weed spectrum’ (broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & APERA)), thus, it is proposed to consider this a.s. on the shortlist
3	Pyroxsulam *	B	BBCH 23‐39	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: Only authorised in mixture with other a.i. Gap in control of GERSS, CENCY
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 13‐23	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

*Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

In the Slovakia, the evaluation resulted in following shortlisted herbicide a.s.: chlorotoluron (C2), flufenacet (K3), flumioxazin (E), pendimethalin (K1) and pyroxsulam (B). One of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (pyroxsulam) has the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl), leading to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives for winter triticale available in Slovakia and there is no need to calculate a HR score.

In the United Kingdom, the evaluation resulted in following shortlisted herbicide a.s.: mesosulfuron methyl (B), pyroxsulam (B), flufenacet (K3), pendimethalin (K1) and prosulfocarb (N). Two of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (mesosulfuron methyl and pyroxsulam) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl), leading to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives for winter triticale available in the United Kingdom and there is no need to calculate a HR score.

For further details on the evaluation, see Appendices A and B.

3.1.6. Spelt

Table 7 summarises the number of authorised herbicide a.s. and potential chemical alternatives (shortlisted herbicide a.s.) that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for use in spelt in Austria, Belgium and Denmark (minor use).

Table 7.

Number of authorised and shortlisted herbicide a.s. to control weeds (annual broadleaf and grass weeds (e.g. ALOMY and APESV)) in spelt in Austria, Belgium and Denmark

Use	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.
Spelt	AT	> 20	1
Spelt	BE	> 20	6
Spelt	DK	> 20	0

a.s.: active substance.

The information provided by Austria on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in spelt in Austria to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl, resulted in HR strategy scores of 2. This means that in Austria it is assumed that considering the herbicide a.s. halauxifen‐methyl (O) and one MoA insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

The evaluation of applicant's claims on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in spelt to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in the following shortlisted herbicide a.s for Belgium: chlorotoluron (C2), mesosulfuron methyl (B), pendimethalin (K1), prosulfocarb (N), pyroxsulam (B) and sulfosulfuron (B). Three of the shortlisted herbicide a.s. (mesosulfuron methyl, pyroxsulam, and sulfosulfuron) have the same MoA as the a.s. under consideration (flupyrsulfuron‐methyl (B)). The protocol (EFSA 2016a) states that ‘if one of the shortlisted a.s. has the same MoA [and site of action] as the a.s. under consideration, withdrawal of the a.s. under consideration has no implications for herbicide resistance management. Consequently, justifying derogation based on a reduced number of MoAs no longer holds’. This leads to the conclusion that there are sufficient chemical alternatives available for spelt in Belgium, and there is no need to calculate a HR score (details are provided in Appendix B, Table B.25).

Table B.25.

Shortlisted herbicide active substance with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for spelt in Belgium

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC Group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
	2,4D	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Amidosulfuron	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Spring, useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Beflubutamid	F1	BBCH 01‐30	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Bifenox	E	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Carfentrazone	E	BBCH 21‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	BBCH 01‐08/BBCH 25‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Clopyralid	O	BBCH 29‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Dichlorprop	O	BBCH 29‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Dichlorprop‐P only acting on broadleaved. Spring. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Diflufenican	F1	BBCH 01‐29	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Florasulam	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Fluroxypyr	O	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flurtamone	F1	BBCH 01‐29	Annual broadleaf & annual grass (APESV)	BE: Registered against APERA. Useful in IPM. EFSA: No control of ALOMY compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Glyphosate	G		Broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & (APESV)	BE: Not registered in pre‐emergence but useful in IPM, e.g. in intercrop. EFSA: Glyphosate is applied at pre‐harvest (BBCH 89), compared to the substance under consideration (post‐EM BBCH 12‐29). Thus quite a different growth stage, hence it is proposed not to shortlist this a.s.
	Iodosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf & grass (APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: No control of ALOMY compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Isoproturon	C2	BBCH 13‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Not approved anymore? Red fill in applicant file. EFSA: a.s. received non‐approval of renewal in 2016 . http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/eupesticides-database/public/?event=activesubstance.detail&language=EN&selectedID=1495 Grace period 17 September 2017. Thus, a.s. cannot be on the shortlist
	Ixosaben	L	BBCH 01‐13	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	MCPA	O	BBCH 29‐32	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	MCPP	O	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf	BE: Only MCPP‐p is registered. Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Mesosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM
	Metsulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf weeds	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
3	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 11‐12/ BBCH 21‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Not registered in pre‐emergence. BBCH autumn/spring. Useful in IPM
	Picolinafen	F1	BBCH 21‐25	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Pinoxaden	A	BBCH 13‐31	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
4	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM EFSA: EFSA: Application BBCH 00‐13 compared to the substance under consideration (spring at BBCH 21‐29). However, a.s. could be considered as early post‐EM thus proposed to be shortlisted
5	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 21‐31	Annual Broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	BE: Useful in IPM
6	Sulfosulfuron	B	BBCH 13‐32	Annual broadleaf & annual grass	BE: Useful in IPM
	Thifensulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tribenuron methyl	B	BBCH 13‐40	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tritosulfuron	B	BBCH 21‐39	Annual broadleaf	BE: Useful in IPM. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl		BBCH 21‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

The information provided by Denmark on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in spelt (minor use) resulted in no shortlisted herbicide a.s. This leads to the conclusion that there are insufficient chemical alternatives for spelt available in Denmark.

For details of the evaluation, see Appendices A and B.

3.1.7. Linseed

Table 8 summarises the number of authorised herbicide a.s. and potential chemical alternatives (shortlisted herbicide a.s.) that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for use in linseed (Linum usitatissimum) in Austria and Belgium.

Table 8.

Number of authorised and shortlisted herbicide a.s. to control weeds (annual broadleaf and grass weeds (e.g. ALOMY and APESV)) in linseed in Austria, and Belgium

Use	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.
Linseed	AT	> 20	0a
Linseed	BE	19	0a

a.s.: active substance.

^aFlupyrsulfuron‐methyl is only authorised in co‐formulation with metsulfuron methyl as plant protection product.

The information provided by Austria and the evaluation of applicant's claims for Belgium on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in linseed to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in HR strategy scores of 07 for Austria and Belgium, respectively. This means that for Austria and Belgium no chemical alternative a.s. are available, leading to insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management.

In Belgium the a.s. flufenacet is not authorised in a PPP. In addition, Belgium flagged many a.s. that are useful in IPM, however when comparing flupyrsulfuron‐methyl according to the criteria ‘time of application’ and ‘weed spectrum’ one by one with the other a.s. less alternatives seem to be present on the shortlisted herbicide a.s. For example, there are herbicide a.s. which control the same weed spectrum as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl but which were excluded from the shortlist due to different application time (e.g. sulcotrione pre‐emergence herbicide and diquat, glyphosate as a post‐emergence herbicides but only in a very late stage (BBCH 89) compared to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl. If the criteria ‘application time’ was not applied the HR score would be 77 concluding that there is an intermediate situation. Some MS applied the protocol in the strict sense, while others such as Belgium were in favour of more flexibility. To ensure consistency EFSA rigorously followed the methodology of the protocol (EFSA, 2016a), but further discussions with MS on this point might be useful.

For details of the evaluation, see Appendices A and B.

3.1.8. Dactylis glomerata

Table 9 summarises the number of authorised herbicide a.s. and potential chemical alternatives (shortlisted herbicide a.s.) that have the same spectrum of weed control and time of application as flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for use in Dactylis glomerata in Denmark.

Table 9.

Number of authorised and shortlisted herbicide a.s. to control weeds (annual broadleaf and grass weeds (e.g. ALOMY & APESV)) in Dactylis glomerata (minor use) in Denmark

Use	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.
Dactylis glomerata	DK	> 20	0

a.s.: active substance.

The information provided by Denmark on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl in Dactylis glomerata (minor use) in Denmark to control a serious danger to plant health based on remaining chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl resulted in no active substances being shortlisted. Denmark noted that fenoxaprop is authorised, but it cannot be considered an alternative due to resistance in ALOMY. This means that in Denmark it is assumed that insufficient chemical alternatives for sustainable HR management are available.

For further details on the evaluation, see Appendices A and B.

3.2. Evaluation of non‐chemical alternatives

Differently to what is requested in the protocol (EFSA, 2016a), the applicant provided only one evaluation for non‐chemical alternatives for winter wheat, winter barley, winter rye, oats, triticale, spelt, linseed and Dactylis glomerata. EFSA and MS considered that in this particular case a grouping of crops in the category ‘cereals and other herbaceous non‐row crops’ would be acceptable.

In all seven MS, up to 11 non‐chemical methods are available. In Austria, seven preventive methods are available. Methods such as ploughing, late sowing dates, crop rotation are practised (10–50% acreage), available and effective (e.g. crop rotation between 78–96%) but these methods are not always reliable. For example, ploughing has considerable benefits but these depend on many variables, like weather, machinery, soil moisture, etc. which may have an important impact on the final results. Crop rotation is effective, but challenging, e.g. on heavy soil to control black‐grass (ALOMY) and loose silky‐bent (APESV) in rotational crops. Preventive methods, such as increased crop competitiveness, are practised (10–50% acreage) but have only marginal effects. Other methods such as fallow/grass ley breaks or higher seeding rates vary in their efficacy and do not reduce high black‐grass infestations to acceptable levels. In Austria, two curative methods (mechanical weeding and hand weeding) are available. Mechanical weeding is practiced up to 10% acreage but as limitation regarding efficacy, which depends on a precise set of conditions, it takes significant time and damages or destroys a certain proportion of plants in the crop. Hand weeding has economic limitations.

In Belgium, five preventive methods, such as ploughing, late sowing dates, crop rotation, false seed beds and higher seeding rates are practised, available and effective (e.g. ploughing is very useful and common, intercrop cultivation of stubble and false seed beds are useful and effective, sowing date up to December are common in Belgium and rotation of crop is also a common practice). In Belgium, two curative methods (mechanical weeding and hand weeding) are technically possible, but cannot be considered as an alternative.

In Denmark, Sweden, and Slovakia, six preventive methods (primary tillage, late sowing dates, increased crop competitiveness, crop rotation, fallow/grass ley breaks and higher seed rates) are available. Regarding crop rotation, Denmark pointed out that inclusion of more spring cereals would reduce the problem with ALOMY and APESV but yield is considerable lower. The only other option for alternative crops is oilseed rape which can only be grown every fourth year. In Denmark, the same curative methods as mentioned for Austria are available. In addition related to biological weed control, it was mentioned that there are limited applications in weed control due to their target specificity. Overall, Sweden concluded that there are no mechanical alternative methods available.

In the Netherlands, nine preventive methods are available. Methods such as ploughing, late sowing dates, crop rotation, false seed beds, fallow/grass ley and higher seeding rates were not considered to be an alternative as they lower the weed pressure but are not enough effective and already practised in weed control system in the Netherlands. In the Netherlands, two curative methods (mechanical weeding and hand weeding) are technically possible, but cannot be considered as an alternative.

In the United Kingdom, several preventive methods such as false seed beds, late sowing dates and crop rotation are practised (10–50% acreage) and available. For black‐grass control, the use of crop rotation, specifically planting of spring crops, can be highly/moderately effective as spring crops can give 88% control of black‐grass (AHDB, 2014). However, yields from spring crops can in some cases make them uneconomic; there are fewer herbicide options and some of these require high capital investment and they are less suited to the heavy soils of the United Kingdom. Delayed drilling and false seed beds can be used for moderate black‐grass control (31%) (AHDB, 2014). However, this is only applicable under conditions where, e.g. in the previous summer black‐grass seed were not dormant. In years where there is high black‐grass seed dormancy, this is not a highly effective option. Curative methods were not seen as an alternative.

4. Conclusions

The evaluation of applicant's claims that the use of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is considered essential in accordance with Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 for each authorised use in the considered MS was evaluated following the EFSA methodology (EFSA, 2016a).

Overall, eight different uses (winter wheat, winter barley, winter rye, oats, triticale, spelt (minor use in Denmark), linseed and Dactylis glomerata (minor use)) in seven MS (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom) were evaluated to assess the applicant's claims or information directly provided by MS (Austria, Denmark for minor use in Dactylis glomerata and spelt) on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl to control a serious danger to plant health.

An overview of the outcome of chemical alternative substances to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl is provided (Table 10). It can be concluded that generally a wide range, of chemical alternative herbicide a.s. are available in MS for weed control in winter wheat (except for Austria and Sweden), winter rye (except for Austria and Sweden) and triticale (except for Austria and Sweden). However, there are insufficient chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for weed control in spelt (except for Belgium), oats, linseed and Dactylis glomerata. For winter barley, there are insufficient chemical alternatives to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl for weed control in Denmark, an intermediate situation in Austria and sufficient chemical alternatives are available in the United Kingdom.

Table 10.

Outcome of the evaluation of applicant's claims on the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl to control a serious danger to plant health according to Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 for eight different uses (crop) in seven Member States

Crop	Country	Authorised a.s.	Shortlisted a.s.	Score	Results
Winter wheat	AT	> 20	1	2	Insufficient
Winter wheat	BE	> 20	7	n.a.	Sufficient
Winter wheat	DK	> 20	3	n.a.	Sufficient
Winter wheat	NL	> 20	3	9	Sufficient
Winter wheat	SE	> 20	1	3	Insufficient
Winter wheat	SK	> 20	6	n.a	Sufficient
Winter wheat	UK	> 20	4	12	Sufficient
Winter barley	AT	> 20	3	7	Intermediate
Winter barley	DK	> 20	1	3	Insufficient
Winter barley	UK	> 20	3	9	Sufficient
Winter rye	AT	> 20	1	2	Insufficient
Winter rye	DK	> 20	3	n.a.	Sufficient
Winter rye	SE	> 20	1	3	Insufficient
Winter rye	SK	> 20	5	n.a.	Sufficient
Winter rye	UK	> 20	5	n.a.	Sufficient
Oats	BE	> 20	0	0	Insufficient
Oats	UK	> 20	0	0	Insufficient
Triticale	AT	> 20	2	4	Insufficient
Triticale	BE	> 20	5	n.a	Sufficient
Triticale	DK	> 20	3	n.a.	Sufficient
Triticale	SE	> 20	1	3	Insufficient
Triticale	SK	> 20	5	n.a	Sufficient
Triticale	UK	> 20	5	n.a.	Sufficient
Spelt	AT	> 20	1	2	Insufficient
Spelt	BE	> 20	6	n.a.	Sufficient
Spelt	DK	> 20	0	0	Insufficient
Linseed	AT	> 20	0a	0	Insufficient
Linseed	BE	19	0a	0	Insufficient
Dactylis glomerata	DK	> 20	0	0	Insufficient

a.s.: active substance.

^aFlupyrsulfuron‐methyl is only authorised in co‐formulation with metsulfuron methyl as plant protection product.

Non‐chemical alternatives were also evaluated for these different uses and generally a wide range of methods are available. However, often these methods do not have the same efficacy as chemical methods or have economic limitations. A combination of both chemical and non‐chemical methods seems often possible.

When evaluating individually the herbicide chemical alternatives according to the criteria ‘time of application’ and ‘weed spectrum’ one by one with the other a.s. less alternatives seem to be present among the shortlisted herbicide a.s. However, many a.s. are useful in IPM, meaning that the system as a whole may be able to function without the substance under consideration. It is noted that some MS applied the protocol more strictly, while other MS, such as Belgium and the Netherlands, were in favour of more flexible approach. To ensure consistency, EFSA rigorously followed the methodology of the protocol (EFSA, 2016a), but further discussions with MS on the subject would be useful.

5. Recommendation

A critical step in the evaluation is the development of the shortlisted alternative herbicide active substances based on the selection criteria ‘spectrum of weed control’ and ‘time of application’. A drop‐down list for these two selection criteria should be provided in the data collection form to facilitate a consistent assessment.

In situations where it seems that there are no or few alternative substances available, it would be useful to analyse a subset of data such as a.s. controlling ‘broad leaf’ and a.s. controlling ‘grass weeds’ to explore if a combination of different a.s. would be lead to the same characteristics of the a.s. under consideration. The same rationale applies to ‘time of application’. Such an evaluation would reflect better the situation (including non‐chemical methods). Further discussions on this point with MS would be needed.

Abbreviations

a.s.

active substance

BBCH

growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants

DAR

Draft Assessment Report

HR

herbicide resistance

HRAC

Herbicide Resistance Action Committee

IPM

integrated pest management

MoA

mode of actions

MS

Member State

PPP

plant protection product

RAR

Renewal Assessment Report

RMS

Rapporteur Member State

WG

Working Group

Appendix A – Collection data set

1.

Validated Excel files submitted by MS (Austria, 2016; Belgium, 2016; Denmark, 2016; Netherlands, 2016; Slovakia, 2016; Sweden, 2016 and United Kingdom, 2016) and evaluated by EFSA.

Appendix B – Shortlisted herbicide active substances

1.

Overview of the shortlisting process and final shortlisted herbicide active substances in relation to each use (crop) and Member State.

Table B.4.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter wheat in the Netherlands

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
	Amidosulfuron*	B	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Bentazon	C3	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds & patches of CYPES	NL: shortlisted = Y for annual weeds (e.g. BRSNN, MATSS) Sources: http://www.ctb.agro.nl/ctb_files/06034_10.html. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) and time of application (post‐EM) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV), pre‐and post‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Clodinafop‐propargyl*	A	Post‐emergence	Annual grass weeds & AVEFA	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and weed spectrum (annual grass weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Clopyralid*	O	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Carfentrazone‐ethyl	B	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Diflufenican	F1	Pre‐ and post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM) and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Flufenacet *	K3	Pre‐ and post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	NL: Only allowed in NL as combination (details for information below). EFSA: According to protocol (EFSA, 2016), ‘if a registered product consists of two or more a.s. (a mixture), the information should be provided for each a.s. in the mixture separately’
	Florasulam	B	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Fluroxypyr‐methyl*	O	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds	NL: shortlisted = Y for broadleaved weeds. Sources: http://www.ctb.agro.nl/ctb_files/150206_14706.PDF. EFSA: different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) and time of application (post‐EM) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV), pre‐and post‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Iodosulfuron methyl	B	Post–emergence	Annual broadleaf & grass (APESV)	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and no control of ALOMY compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Isoproturon*	C2	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: a.s. received non‐approval of renewal in 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/eu-pesticides-database/public/?event=activesubstance.detail&language=EN&selectedID=1495 Grace period 17 September 2017. Thus, a.s. cannot be on the shortlist
	Mesosulfuron methyl*	B	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	NL: Only allowed in NL as combination (details for information below). EFSA: According to protocol (EFSA, 2016), ‘if a registered product consists of two or more a.s. (a mixture), the information should be provided for each a.s. in the mixture separately’. NL: When the EFSA method is followed, mesosulfuron methyl should not be shortlisted due to different application timing
	Metsulfuron methyl	B	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Pendimethalin	K1	Pre‐ and post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	NL: Authorised herbicides in NL = Activus 40 WG, Activus 400 SC, Stomp 400 SC, Sharpen 33EC Weed spectrum = annual weeds (e.g. ALOMY and APESV), evidence/supporting data for non‐inclusion shortlist: not the place to mention control of specific weeds, should be mentioned in notes sources: http://www.ctb.agro.nl/ctb_files/10766_18.html
	Pinoxaden	A	Post‐emergence	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
3	Prosulfocarb	N	Pre‐ and post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	NL: authorised herbicides in NL = Boxer, Fidox 800 EC Weed spectrum = annual weeds (e.g. ALOMY, APESV, BRSNN, MATCH, GERSS and FUMOF) Crop stage should be BBCH 00‐12 Evidence/supporting data = not the place to mention control of specific weeds, should be mentioned in notes Sources: http://www.ctb.agro.nl/ctb_files/10701_17.html#_Toc366761351
	Pyroxsulam	B	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	NL: Authorised herbicides in NL = Capri Weed spectrum = annual weeds (e.g. ALOMY, APESV & GERSS) Exception = not for NL Evidence/supporting data = not the place to mention control of specific weeds, should be mentioned in notes Sources: http://www.ctb.agro.nl/ctb_files/150904_13898.PDF. EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tritosulfuron	B	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf weeds, CIRAR & CONAR	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and no control of annual grasses compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Tribenuron methyl	B	Post‐emergence	Annual broadleaf	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) and weed spectrum (annual broadleaf weeds only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM, and annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	Pre‐ and post‐emergence	Post‐emergence against broadleaved weeds, pre‐ and post‐emergence against ALOMY and APESV

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; MS: Member State.

*Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B:6.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter wheat in Sweden

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
	Mesosulfuron methyl*	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	SE: The a.s is authorised in several PPP. SE stated that this a.s. is not an alternative for the a.s. under consideration due to lack of efficacy against blackgrass and weed spill rape
1	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00/BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 11‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

*Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.7.

Shortlisted herbicide active substance with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter wheat in the United Kingdom

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Flufenacet	K3	BBCH 00‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
2	Flumioxazin	E	BBCH 00‐14	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	UK: Flumioxazin also subject to an application for derogation
	Mesosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
3	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
4	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00/BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 12‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ and post‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Triallate	N	BBCH 00‐30	Annual grass (ALOMY)	UK: For grass weeds is considered to be an alternative. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 00‐09, BBCH 11‐31	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.9.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter barley in Denmark

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 11‐39	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: Not included, DK_risk paper_1, DK_risk paper_2, DK_risk paper_4. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY, APESV only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐12	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: The max dose is 455 g a.i./ha in DK. At this dose, the control of grasses (ALOMY and APESV) is insufficient. Gap in efficacy on MATIN, BRNSS, CENCY. High tax. EFSA: Following MS proposal as regards efficacy, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00‐21	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: Gap in efficacy on MATIN, PAPRH. High tax. EFSA: a.s. fulfils the main criteria ‘application time’ and weed spectrum (broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & APERA), thus, it is proposed to consider this a.s. on the shortlist
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 13‐23	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.10.

Shortlisted herbicide active substance with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter barley in the United Kingdom

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 12‐32	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different application time (post‐EM only) compared to the substance under consideration (pre‐ EM). In addition, controls only grass weeds and not grass and broadleaved weeds. Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Flufenacet	K3	Up to BBCH 25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Isoproturon	C2	BBCH 13‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: a.s. received non‐approval of renewal in 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/eu-pesticides-database/public/?event=activesubstance.detail&language=EN&selectedID=1495 Grace period 17 September 2017. Thus, a.s. cannot be on the shortlist
2	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Pinoxaden	A	BBCH 11‐33	Annual grass (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) and time of application (post‐EM) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV), and pre‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
3	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00/BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Triallate	N	BBCH 00‐30	Annual grass (ALOMY)	UK: For grass weeds is considered to be an alternative. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 00‐09	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.11.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter rye in Austria

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Halauxifen‐methyl	O	BBCH 13‐29, BBCH 30‐45 for GALAP	Annual broadleaf weeds, grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV, Lolium)
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	Spring BBCH 13‐25, autumn from BBCH 12 onwards	Annual broadleaf weeds, grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV, Lolium)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.12.

Shortlisted herbicide active substance with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter rye in Denmark

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion from shortlist
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 11‐30	Annual grass (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY, APESV only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Mesosulfuron methyl *	B	BBCH 13‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: In Denmark, mesosulfuron is used in mixture with iodosulfuron and/or diflufenican and the gap for this mixture is in control of GERSS, PAPRH and MYOAR
	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐12	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: The max dose is 480 g a.i./ha in DK. At this dose, the control of grasses (ALOMY and APESV) is insufficient. Gap in efficacy on MATIN, BRNSS, CENCY. High tax. EFSA: Following MS proposal as regards efficacy, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00‐21	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: Gap in efficacy on MATIN, PAPRH. High tax. EFSA: a.s. fulfils the main criteria ‘application time’ and weed spectrum (broadleaf & grass (ALOMY & APERA), thus, it is proposed to consider this a.s. on the shortlist
3	Pyroxsulam *	B	BBCH 23‐39	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	DK: Only authorised in mixture with other a.i. Gap in control of GERSS, CENCY
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 11‐23	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

*Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted

Table B.13.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter rye in Sweden

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 12‐39	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Mesosulfuron methyl*	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	SE: The a.s is authorised in several PPP. SE stated that this a.s. is not an alternative for the a.s. under consideration due to lack of efficacy against blackgrass and weed spill rape
1	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00/BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 11‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

*Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.14.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for winter rye in Slovakia

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	Up to BBCH 29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 12‐39	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Flufenacet	K3	BBCH 00‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
3	Flumioxazin	E	BBCH 00‐14	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
4	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Penoxsulam	B	BBCH 11‐23	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass (APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (only APESV) compared to the substance under consideration. Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Propoxycarbazone	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) and time of application (post‐EM) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV), pre‐and post‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
5	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 12‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 11‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.17.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for oats in the United Kingdom

	Herbicide authorised(a)	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
	Flumioxazin	E	BBCH 00‐09	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	MS: Only authorised as pre‐emergence. EFSA: Different time of application (pre‐EM) compared to the substance under consideration (post‐EM). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be considered on the shortlist
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 12‐31 December	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

Table B.18.

Shortlisted herbicide active substances with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for triticale in the Austria

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	BBCH 13‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, grass weeds
2	Halauxifen‐methyl	O	BBCH 13‐29, BBCH 30‐45 for GALAP	Annual broadleaf weeds, grass weeds
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 13‐25 in spring, from BBCH 12 in autumn	Annual broadleaf weeds, grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV, Lolium)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.21.

Shortlisted herbicide active substance with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for triticale in Sweden

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 12‐39	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Mesosulfuron methyl*	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	SE: The a.s is authorised in several PPP. SE stated that this a.s. is not an alternative for the a.s. under consideration due to lack of efficacy against black‐grass and weed spill rape
1	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00/BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 11‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

*Active substance is only authorised in co‐formulation with other a.s.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.22.

Shortlisted herbicide active substance with information on MOA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for triticale in Slovakia

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Chlorotoluron	C2	Up to BBCH 29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 12‐39	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
2	Flufenacet	K3	BBCH 00‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
3	Flumioxazin	E	BBCH 00‐14	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
4	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Penoxsulam	B	BBCH 11‐14	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass (APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (only APESV) compared to substance under consideration. Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Propoxycarbazone	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual grass (ALOMY & APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only)) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
5	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 12‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 11‐29	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Table B.23.

Shortlisted herbicide active substance with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for triticale in the United Kingdom

	Herbicide authoriseda	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
	Clodinafop propargyl	A	BBCH 11‐39	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Fenoxaprop‐p‐ethyl	A	BBCH 12‐39	Annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
1	Flufenacet	K3	BBCH 00‐25	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
2	Mesosulfuron methyl	B	BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
3	Pendimethalin	K1	BBCH 00‐13	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Pinoxaden	A	BBCH 11‐39	Annual grass (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Propoxycarbazone	B	BBCH 10‐29	Annual grass (ALOMY, APESV)	EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grasses only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
4	Prosulfocarb	N	BBCH 00/BBCH 10‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
5	Pyroxsulam	B	BBCH 12‐32	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)
	Triallate	N	BBCH 00‐30	Annual grass (ALOMY)	UK: For grass weeds is considered to be an alternative. EFSA: Different weed spectrum (annual grass ALOMY only) compared to the substance under consideration (annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)). Thus, this a.s. is proposed not to be shortlisted
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 12‐31 December	Annual broadleaf weeds, annual grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted

Table B.24.

Shortlisted herbicide active substance with information on MoA according to HRAC, herbicide application time and targeted weed spectrum having similar characteristics to flupyrsulfuron‐methyl and authorised in plant protection products for spelt in Austria

	Active substancea	HRAC group	Application time (crop)	Weed spectrum	Justification by MS or EFSA for inclusion or non‐inclusion of a.s. on the shortlist
1	Halauxifen‐methyl	O	BBCH 13‐29, BBCH 30‐45 for GALAP	Annual broadleaf weeds, grass weeds
	Flupyrsulfuron‐methyl	B	BBCH 13‐25 spring, from BBCH 12 onwards in autumn	Annual broadleaf weeds, grass weeds (ALOMY, APESV, Lolium)

HRAC: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; BBCH: growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants; MS: Member State.

^aThe bold indicates the a.s. shortlisted.

Supporting information

Collection data set

Suggested citation: EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2017. Scientific report on the evaluation of data concerning the necessity of flupyrsulfuron‐methyl as a herbicide to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means, including non‐chemical methods. EFSA Journal 2017;15(4):4750, 53 pp. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4750