Application For Renewal Of Authorisation Research Articles

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lacticaseibacillus paracaseiATCC PTA-6135 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei ATCC PTA-6135 as a technological additive (functional group: silage additive) for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing terms of the of authorisation. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the active agent L. paracasei ATCC PTA-6135 remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment. Regarding user safety, the panel concluded that owing to the nature of the additive, L. paracasei ATCC PTA-6135 should be considered a potential skin and respiratory sensitiser, and any exposure through the skin and respiratory tract is considered a risk. In the absence of data, no conclusion could be drawn on the eye irritation potential of the additive. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of sodium bisulphate for all animal species except aquatic animals (Grillo Werke AG & Jones-Hamilton Co.).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of sodium bisulphate (SBS) as a feed additive for all terrestrial animal species (category: technological additive; functional group: preservative), and for all terrestrial animal species other than cats, mink, pets and other non-food-producing animals (category: technological additive; functional group: acidity regulator). EFSA has also been asked to assess the new use of the product as an acidity regulator and flavouring compound in all pets and other non-food-producing animals except aquatic animals. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all terrestrial animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. The FEEDAP Panel considers that the proposed new use would not introduce risks not already considered in the previous assessment and therefore the same conclusions on all terrestrial animal species, consumers of products from animals fed the additive and the environment would apply. Regarding user safety, the additive is irritant to the skin, eyes and the respiratory tract, and should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There is no need to assess the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation. The Panel considers that the additive has the potential to be efficacious as an acidity regulator and sensory additive (flavouring compound) in feed for pet and non-food-producing animals (except aquatic animals).

Assessment of the application for renewal of the authorisation of a feed additive consisting of sodium hydroxide for dogs, cats and ornamental fish (Brenntag Holding GmbH and Electroquímica de Hernani, S.A.).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of sodium hydroxide as a technological additive (acidity regulator) for dogs, cats and ornamental fish. The applicants have provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety, the additive is corrosive and therefore the provision of the authorisation that 'breathing protection, eye protection, gloves and protective clothing shall be used during handling' should be confirmed. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (previously Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 19457 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Biomin GmbH)

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (previously Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 19457 as a technological additive for use in forage for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence to lead the FEEDAP Panelto reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panelconcluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety, the additive is not irritant to skin or eyes but owing to its proteinaceous nature, it should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. In the absence of data, no conclusions could be drawn on the skin sensitisation potential of the additive. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Safety and efficacy of the feed additive consisting of ammonium chloride (Ammonium Chloride AF) for all ruminants, dogs and cats for the renewal of its authorisation (BASF SE).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of the feed additive consisting of ammonium chloride (tradename: Ammonium chloride AF) as a zootechnical additive for ruminants, cats and dogs. In 2012, the FEEDAP Panel delivered an opinion on the safety and efficacy of the additive and subsequently the additive was authorised in the EU. The additive is authorised as ‘ammonium chloride with a content of ammonium chloride ≥ 99% and sodium chloride ≤ 0.5% in the active substance’ for ruminants, cats and dogs under the category ‘zootechnical additives’ and functional group ‘other zootechnical additives’. The evidence provided by the applicant indicates that the additive currently in the market complies with the conditions of authorisation. No new evidence was found that would make the FEEDAP Panel reconsider its previous conclusions on the safety for target species, consumers and environment. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that ammonium chloride is considered an eye and skin irritant and a potential respiratory sensitiser, but is not a dermal sensitiser. The present application for renewal of the authorisation does not include a proposal for amending or supplementing the conditions of the original authorisation that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of potassium diformate for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Addcon GmbH).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of potassium diformate for all animal species. The additive was initially evaluated in 2004 and re‐evaluated by the Panel in 2012, with the conclusion that the additive (i) was safe for the target species, the consumer and the environment when used under the proposed conditions; (ii) was an eye irritant and (iii) had the potential to increase the storage time of raw fish and fish by‐products for feed use in a dose‐dependent manner at low temperature. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use of potassium diformate under the approved conditions of use remains safe for consumers and the environment, and that it is an eye irritant. Due to the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the potential of the additive to be a skin irritant or a respiratory or dermal sensitiser. Regarding the safety for the target species, the FEEDAP Panel considered that the mixture of different sources of potassium diformate remains safe for use in sows’ feed under the approved conditions of use (12,000 mg/kg complete feed). However, based on a tolerance trial, the Panel concluded that the maximum safe level of potassium diformate in weaned piglets should be reduced to 6,000 mg/kg complete feed and the same conclusion was extended to pigs for fattening. Owing to the lack of information provided, the Panel could not conclude on the safety of the additive for species other than pigs under the approved conditions. The present application does not include a proposal for amending or supplementing the conditions of the original authorisation that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lentilactobacillus buchneri (formerly Lactobacillus buchneri) DSM 12856 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lentilactobacillus buchneri (formerly Lactobacillus buchneri) DSM 12856 as a technological additive for use in forage for all animal species. The additive aims at improving the production of silage and is authorised for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence to lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concludes that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety L. buchneri DSM 12856 is not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lactococcus lactis NCIMB 30160 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lactococcus lactis NCIMB 30160 as a technological additive for all animal species. The additive aims to improve the production of silage and is authorised for all animal species. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There was no new evidence to lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety, Lactococcus lactis NCIMB 30160 is not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of a feed additive consisting of all-rac-alpha-tocopheryl acetate (vitamin E) for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Jilin Beisha Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd).

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of all‐rac‐alpha‐tocopheryl acetate (vitamin E) as a feed additive for all animal species. The applicant provided data demonstrating that the additive currently in the market complies with the conditions of authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel confirms that the use of all‐rac‐alpha‐tocopheryl acetate under the current authorised conditions of use is safe for the target species, the consumers and the environment. No concern for user safety is expected from the use of the active substance; however, due to the lack of information, the FEEDAP Panel is not able to conclude on its skin sensitisation potential. To draw conclusions on the safety for the user of the final formulated additives, specific studies would be required. There is no need to assess the efficacy of all‐rac‐alpha‐tocopheryl acetate in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Levilactobacillus brevis (formerly Lactobacillus brevis) DSM 12835 EU for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Levilactobacillus brevis (formerly Lactobacillus brevis) DSM 12835 as a technological additive for all animal species. The additive aims to improve the production of silage and is authorised without a minimum inclusion level. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There was no new evidence to lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety, L. brevis DSM 12835 is not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei (formerly Lactobacillus paracasei)DSM 16245 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei (formerly Lactobacillus paracasei) DSM 16245 as a technological additive for all animal species. The additive aims to improve the production of silage and is currently authorised at a proposed application rate of 1 × 108 colony forming units (CFU)/kg fresh material. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There was no new evidence to lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety L. paracasei DSM 16245 is not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Pediococcus acidilacticiDSM 16243 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co.KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Pediococcus acidilactici DSM 16243 as a technological additive for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concludes that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety Pediococcus acidilactici DSM 16243 is not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lentilactobacillus buchneri (formerly Lactobacillus buchneri) DSM 16774 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co.KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lentilactobacillus buchneri (formerly Lactobacillus buchneri) DSM 16774 as a technological additive to improve ensiling of forage for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concludes that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety Lentilactobacillus buchneri DSM 16774 is not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (formerly Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 12837 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (formerly Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 12837 as a technological additive for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There was no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. The additive was not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The present application for renewal of the authorisation did not include a proposal for amending or supplementing the conditions of the original authorisation that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive. Therefore, there was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (formerly Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 12836 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (formerly Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 12836, as a technological additive for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There was no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. The additive was not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The present application for renewal of the authorisation did not include a proposal for amending or supplementing the conditions of the original authorisation that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive. Therefore, there was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of a feed additive consisting of vitamin B6 (pyridoxine hydrochloride) for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Kaesler Nutrition GmbH).

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of vitamin B6 (pyridoxine hydrochloride) produced by chemical synthesis as a feed additive for all animal species. The applicant has provided data demonstrating that the additive in the market complies with the conditions of the authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel confirms that the use of pyridoxine hydrochloride under the current authorised conditions of use is safe for the target species, the consumers and the environment. Pyridoxine hydrochloride is non‐irritant to skin and eyes. In the absence of data, no conclusion can be drawn on skin sensitisation potential. Pyridoxine hydrochloride may cause photosensitisation. Despite the lack of data on inhalation toxicity, the additive is not dusty and exposure through inhalation is unlikely. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (formerly Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 21762 for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Lactosan GmbH & Co KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (formerly Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 21762, as a technological additive for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There was no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. The additive was not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The present application for renewal of the authorisation did not include a proposal for amending or supplementing the conditions of the original authorisation that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive. Therefore, there was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of dimethylglycine sodium salt (Taminizer D) for chickens for fattening for the renewal of its authorisation (Taminco N.V.).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of the feed additive consisting of dimethylglycine sodium salt (trade name: Taminizer D) as a zootechnical additive for chickens for fattening. In 2011, the FEEDAP Panel delivered an opinion on the safety and efficacy of the additive, and subsequently, the additive was authorised in the EU. In 2018, a second scientific assessment was made based on a dossier submitted for the modification of the terms of authorisation of the additive. The additive is authorised as ‘dimethylglycine sodium salt with a purity of at least 97%’ for chickens for fattening under the category ‘zootechnical additives’ and functional group ‘other zootechnical additives (improvement of zootechnical parameters)’. The evidence provided by the applicant indicated that the additive currently in the market, produced by the two manufacturing routes, complies with the conditions of authorisation. No new evidence was found that would make the FEEDAP Panel reconsidering its previous conclusions in the safety for target species, consumers and environment. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that Taminizer D is not a skin irritant but may be an eye irritant and a skin sensitiser; although uncertainty remains on the presence of formaldehyde, exposure is considered extremely low. There is no need to assess the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of copper chelate of hydroxy analogue of methionine for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Novus Europe S.A./N.V.).

The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the application for renewal of authorisation of copper chelate of hydroxy analogue of methionine (Mintrex®Cu) for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel has delivered two opinions (in 2008 and 2009) on the safety and efficacy of the additive. The additive was authorised in 2010 as ‘Copper chelate of hydroxy analogue of methionine’ containing 18% copper, 79.5−81% (2‐hydroxy‐4‐methylthio)butanoic acid (DL‐methionine hydroxy analogue, HMTBa) and 1% mineral oil. Following some modifications in the manufacturing process, the additive does not contain mineral oil and the applicant proposes the following specifications: ≥ 16% copper and ≥ 78% HMTBa. The data provided indicate that the additive complies with the new specifications. No new evidence was found that would make the FEEDAP Panel reconsidering its previous conclusions on the safety for target species, consumers and environment. The applicant provided new studies on the effects of the additive on the respiratory tract and on skin and eyes. Data on the characterisation of the additive and the new studies on skin/eyes led the Panel to reconsider the safety for the user. Mintrex®Cu is considered as a skin and eye irritant and a skin sensitiser; the risk of respiratory sensitisation is considered low. The present application did not include a proposal for amending or supplementing the conditions of the original authorisation that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive; therefore, there was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Assessment of a feed additive consisting of all‐rac‐alpha‐tocopheryl acetate (vitamin E) for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (NHU Europe GmbH)

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of all‐rac‐alpha‐tocopheryl acetate (vitamin E) as a feed additive for all animal species. The applicant provided data demonstrating that the additive currently in the market complies with the conditions of authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel confirms that the use of all‐rac‐alpha‐tocopheryl acetate under the current authorised conditions of use is safe for the target species, the consumers and the environment. No concern for user safety is expected from the use of the active substance, however, due to the lack of information, the FEEDAP Panel is not able to conclude on its skin sensitisation potential. To draw conclusions on the safety for the user of the final formulated additives, specific studies would be required. There is no need to assess the efficacy of all‐rac‐alpha‐tocopheryl acetate in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.