COMMISSION REGULATION(EC)No1881/2006of19December2006setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs(Text with EEA relevance)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation(EEC)No315/93of8 February1993laying down Community procedures for contaminants in food(1),and in particular Article2(3)thereof,Whereas:(1)Commission Regulation(EC)No466/2001of8March2001setting maximum levels for certain contaminants infoodstuffs(2)has been amended substantially manytimes.It is necessary to amend again maximum levelsfor certain contaminants to take into account new infor-mation and developments in Codex Alimentarius.At thesame time,the text should,where appropriate,beclarified.Regulation(EC)No466/2001should thereforebe replaced.(2)It is essential,in order to protect public health,to keepcontaminants at levels which are toxicologicallyacceptable.(3)In view of disparities between the laws of Member Statesand the consequent risk of distortion of competition,forsome contaminants Community measures are necessaryin order to ensure market unity while abiding by theprinciple of proportionality.(4)Maximum levels should be set at a strict level which isreasonably achievable by following good agricultural,fishery and manufacturing practices and taking intoaccount the risk related to the consumption of thefood.In the case of contaminants which are consideredto be genotoxic carcinogens or in cases where currentexposure of the population or of vulnerable groups inthe population is close to or exceeds the tolerable intake,maximum levels should be set at a level which is as lowas reasonably achievable(ALARA).Such approachesensure that food business operators apply measures toprevent and reduce the contamination as far as possiblein order to protect public health.It is furthermore appro-priate for the health protection of infants and youngchildren,a vulnerable group,to establish the lowestmaximum levels,which are achievable through a strictselection of the raw materials used for the manufacturingof foods for infants and young children.This strictselection of the raw materials is also appropriate forthe production of some specific foodstuffs such as branfor direct human consumption.(5)To allow maximum levels to be applied to dried,diluted,processed and compound foodstuffs,where no specificCommunity maximum levels have been established,foodbusiness operators should provide the specific concen-tration and dilution factors accompanied by the appro-priate experimental data justifying the factor proposed.(6)To ensure an efficient protection of public health,products containing contaminants exceeding themaximum levels should not be placed on the marketeither as such,after mixture with other foodstuffs orused as an ingredient in other foods.(7)It is recognised that sorting or other physical treatmentsmake it possible to reduce the aflatoxin content ofconsignments of groundnuts,nuts,dried fruit andmaize.In order to minimise the effects on trade,it isappropriate to allow higher aflatoxin contents for thoseproducts which are not intended for direct humanconsumption or as an ingredient in foodstuffs.In thesecases,the maximum levels for aflatoxins should be fixedtaking into consideration the effectiveness of the above-mentioned treatments to reduce the aflatoxin content ingroundnuts,nuts,dried fruit and maize to levels belowthe maximum limits fixed for those products intendedfor direct human consumption or use as an ingredient infoodstuffs.(8)To enable effective enforcement of the maximum levelsfor certain contaminants in certain foodstuffs,it is appro-priate to provide for suitable labelling provisions forthese cases.(1)OJ L37,13.2.1993,p.1.Regulation as amended by Regulation(EC)No1882/2003of the European Parliament and of the Council(OJ L284,31.10.2003,p.1).(2)OJ L77,16.3.2001,p.1.Regulation as last amended by Regulation(EC)No199/2006(OJ L32,4.2.2006,p.32).(9)Because of the climatic conditions in some MemberStates,it is difficult to ensure that the maximum levelsare not exceeded for fresh lettuce and fresh spinach.These Member States should be allowed for atemporary period to continue to authorise themarketing of fresh lettuce and fresh spinach grown andintended for consumption in their territory with nitratecontents exceeding the maximum levels.Lettuce andspinach producers established in the Member Stateswhich have given the aforementioned authorisationsshould progressively modify their farming methods byapplying the good agricultural practices recommendedat national level.(10)Certain fish species originating from the Baltic regionmay contain high levels of dioxins and dioxin-likePCBs.A significant proportion of these fish speciesfrom the Baltic region will not comply with themaximum levels and would therefore be excluded fromthe diet.There are indications that the exclusion of fishfrom the diet may have a negative health impact in theBaltic region.(11)Sweden and Finland have a system in place which hasthe capacity to ensure that consumers are fully informedof the dietary recommendations concerning restrictionson consumption of fish from the Baltic region by ident-ified vulnerable groups of the population in order toavoid potential health risks.Therefore,it is appropriateto grant a derogation to Finland and Sweden to place onthe market for a temporary period certain fish speciesoriginating in the Baltic region and intended forconsumption in their territory with levels of dioxinsand dioxin-like PCBs higher than those set in this Regu-lation.The necessary measures must be implemented toensure that fish and fish products not complying withthe maximum levels are not marketed in other MemberStates.Finland and Sweden report every year to theCommission the results of their monitoring of thelevels of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs in fish from theBaltic region and the measures to reduce humanexposure to dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs from theBaltic region.(12)To ensure that the maximum levels are enforced in auniform way,the same sampling criteria and the sameanalysis performance criteria should be applied by thecompetent authorities throughout the Community.It isfurthermore important that analytical results are reportedand interpreted in a uniform way.The measures asregards sampling and analysis specified in this Regulationprovide for uniform rules on reporting and interpret-ation.(13)For certain contaminants,Member States and interestedparties should monitor and report levels,as well reporton the progress with regard to application of pre-ventative measures,to allow the Commission to assessthe need to modify existing measures or to adopt addi-tional measures.(14)Any maximum level adopted at Community level can besubject to a review to take account of the advance ofscientific and technical knowledge and improvements ingood agricultural,fishery and manufacturing practices.(15)Bran and germ can be marketed for direct humanconsumption and it is therefore appropriate to establisha maximum level for deoxynivalenol and zearalenone inthese commodities.(16)Codex Alimentarius has recently set a maximum level forlead in fish which the Community accepted.It istherefore appropriate to modify the current provisionfor lead in fish accordingly.(17)Regulation(EC)No853/2004of the EuropeanParliament and Council of29April2004laying downspecific hygiene rules for food of animal origin(3)definesfoodstuffs of animal origin,and consequently the entriesas regards foodstuffs of animal origin should be amendedin some cases according to the terminology used in thatRegulation.(18)It is necessary to provide that the maximum levels forcontaminants do not apply to the foodstuffs which havebeen lawfully placed on the Community market beforethe date of application of these maximum levels.(19)As regards nitrate,vegetables are the major source for thehuman intake of nitrate.The Scientific Committee onFood(SCF)stated in its opinion of22September1995(4)that the total intake of nitrate is normally wellbelow the acceptable daily intake(ADI)of3,65mg/kgbody weight(bw).It recommended,however,con-tinuation of efforts to reduce exposure to nitrate viafood and water.(20)Since climatic conditions have a major influence on thelevels of nitrate in certain vegetables such as lettuce andspinach,different maximum nitrate levels shouldtherefore be fixed depending on the season.(3)OJ L139,30.4.2004,p.55,as corrected by OJ L226,25.6.2004,p.22.Regulation as last amended by Regulation(EC)No 1662/2006(OJ L320,18.11.2006,p.1).(4)Reports of the Scientific Committee for Food,38th series,Opinionof the Scientific Committee for Food on nitrates and nitrite,p.1, http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/reports/scf_reports_38.pdf(21)As regards aflatoxins,the SCF expressed in its opinion of23September1994that aflatoxins are genotoxic car-cinogens(5).Based on that opinion,it is appropriate tolimit the total aflatoxin content of food(sum of afla-toxins B1,B2,G1and G2)as well as the aflatoxin B1content alone,aflatoxin B1being by far the most toxiccompound.For aflatoxin M1in foods for infants andyoung children,a possible reduction of the currentmaximum level should be considered in the light ofdevelopments in analytical procedures.(22)As regards ochratoxin A(OTA),the SCF adopted ascientific opinion on17September1998(6).Anassessment of the dietary intake of OTA by the popu-lation of the Community has been performed(7)in theframework of Council Directive93/5/EEC of25February1993on assistance to the Commission and cooperationby the Member States in the scientific examination ofquestions relating to food(8)(SCOOP).The EuropeanFood Safety Authority(EFSA)has,on a request fromthe Commission,adopted an updated scientific opinionrelating to ochratoxin A in food on4April2006(9),taking into account new scientific information andderived a tolerable weekly intake(TWI)of120ng/kg bw.(23)Based on these opinions,it is appropriate to setmaximum levels for cereals,cereal products,dried vinefruit,roasted coffee,wine,grape juice and foods forinfants and young children,all of which contributesignificantly to general human exposure to OTA or tothe exposure of vulnerable groups of consumers such aschildren.(24)The appropriateness of setting a maximum level for OTAin foodstuffs such as dried fruit other than dried vinefruit,cocoa and cocoa products,spices,meat products,green coffee,beer and liquorice,as well as a review of theexisting maximum levels,in particular for OTA in driedvine fruit and grape juice,will be considered in the lightof the recent EFSA scientific opinion.(25)As regards patulin,the SCF endorsed in its meeting on8March2000the provisional maximum tolerable dailyintake(PMTDI)of0,4μg/kg bw for patulin(10).(26)In2001,a SCOOP-task‘Assessment of the dietary intakeof patulin by the population of EU Member States’in theframework of Directive93/5/EEC was performed(11).(27)Based on that assessment and taking into account thePMTDI,maximum levels should be set for patulin incertain foodstuffs to protect consumers from un-acceptable contamination.These maximum levelsshould be reviewed and,if necessary,reduced takinginto account the progress in scientific and technologicalknowledge and the implementation of CommissionRecommendation2003/598/EC of11August2003onthe prevention and reduction of patulin contamination inapple juice and apple juice ingredients in otherbeverages(12).(28)As regards Fusarium toxins,the SCF has adopted severalopinions evaluating deoxynivalenol in December1999(13)establishing a tolerable daily intake(TDI)of1μg/kg bw,zearalenone in June2000(14)establishing atemporary TDI of0,2μg/kg bw,fumonisins in October2000(15)(updated in April2003)(16)establishing a TDIof2μg/kg bw,nivalenol in October2000(17)estab-lishing a temporary TDI of0,7μg/kg bw,T-2andHT-2toxin in May2001(18)establishing a combinedtemporary TDI of0,06μg/kg bw and the trichothecenesas group in February2002(19).(5)Reports of the Scientific Committee for Food,35th series,Opinionof the Scientific Committee for Food on aflatoxins,ochratoxin A and patulin,p.45,http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/reports/scf_reports_35.pdf(6)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Ochratoxin A(expressed on17September1998)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out14_en.html(7)Reports on tasks for scientific cooperation,Task3.2.7‘Assessmentof dietary intake of Ochratoxin A by the population of EU Member States’.http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/task_3-2-7_en.pdf(8)OJ L52,4.3.1993,p.18.(9)Opinion of the Scientific Panel on contaminants in the Food Chainof the EFSA on a request from the Commission related to ochratoxin A in food.http://www.efsa.europa.eu/etc/medialib/efsa/ science/contam/contam_opinions/1521.Par.0001.File.dat/contam_op _ej365_ochratoxin_a_food_en1.pdf (10)Minutes of the120th Meeting of the Scientific Committee on Foodheld on8and9March2000in Brussels,Minute statement on patulin.http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out55_en.pdf(11)Reports on tasks for scientific cooperation,Task3.2.8,‘Assessmentof dietary intake of Patulin by the population of EU Member States’.http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/3.2.8_en.pdf(12)OJ L203,12.8.2003,p.34.(13)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Fusarium-toxinsPart1:Deoxynivalenol(DON),(expressed on2December1999) http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out44_en.pdf(14)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Fusarium-toxinsPart2:Zearalenone(ZEA),(expressed on22June2000)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out65_en.pdf(15)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Fusarium-toxinsPart3:Fumonisin B1(FB1)(expressed on17October2000) http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out73_en.pdf(16)Updated opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food onFumonisin B1,B2and B3(expressed on4April2003)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out185_en.pdf(17)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Fusarium-toxinsPart4:Nivalenol(expressed on19October2000)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out74_en.pdf(18)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Fusarium-toxinsPart5:T-2toxin and HT-2toxin(adopted on30May2001) http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out88_en.pdf(19)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Fusarium-toxinsPart6:Group evaluation of T-2toxin,HT-2toxin,nivalenol and deoxynivalenol.(adopted on26February2002)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out123_en.pdf(29)In the framework of Directive93/5/EEC the SCOOP-task‘Collection of occurrence data on Fusarium toxins in foodand assessment of dietary intake by the population of EUMember States’was performed and finalised inSeptember2003(20).(30)Based on the scientific opinions and the assessment ofthe dietary intake,it is appropriate to set maximum levelsfor deoxynivalenol,zearalenone and fumonisins.Asregards fumonisins,monitoring control results of therecent harvests indicate that maize and maize productscan be very highly contaminated by fumonisins and it isappropriate that measures are taken to avoid such unac-ceptably highly contaminated maize and maize productscan enter the food chain.(31)Intake estimates indicate that the presence of T-2andHT-2toxin can be of concern for public health.Therefore,the development of a reliable and sensitivemethod,collection of more occurrence data and moreinvestigations/research in the factors involved in thepresence of T-2and HT-2toxin in cereals and cerealproducts,in particular in oats and oat products,isnecessary and of high priority.(32)It is not necessary due to co-occurrence to considerspecific measures for3-acetyl deoxynivalenol,15-acetyldeoxynivalenol and fumonisin B3,as measures withregard to in particular deoxynivalenol and fumonisin B1and B2would also protect the human population froman unacceptable exposure from3-acetyl deoxynivalenol,15-acetyl deoxynivalenol and fumonisin B3.The sameapplies to nivalenol for which to a certain degree co-occurrence with deoxynivalenol can be observed.Furthermore,human exposure to nivalenol is estimatedto be significantly below the t-TDI.As regards othertrichothecenes considered in the abovementionedSCOOP-task,such as3-acetyldeoxynivalenol,15-acetyl-deoxynivalenol,fusarenon-X,T2-triol,diacetoxyscirpenol,neosolaniol,monoacetoxyscirpenol and verrucol,thelimited information available indicates that they do notoccur widely and the levels found are generally low.(33)Climatic conditions during the growth,in particular atflowering,have a major influence on the Fusarium toxincontent.However,good agricultural practices,wherebythe risk factors are reduced to a minimum,can preventto a certain degree the contamination by Fusarium fungi.Commission Recommendation2006/583/EC of17August2006on the prevention and reduction ofFusarium toxins in cereals and cereal products(21)contains general principles for the prevention andreduction of Fusarium toxin contamination(zearalenone,fumonisins and trichothecenes)in cereals to be im-plemented by the development of national codes ofpractice based on these principles.(34)Maximum levels of Fusarium toxins should be set forunprocessed cereals placed on the market for first-stageprocessing.Cleaning,sorting and drying procedures arenot considered as first-stage processing insofar as nophysical action is exerted on the grain kernel itself.Scouring is to be considered as first-stage processing.(35)Since the degree to which Fusarium toxins in unpro-cessed cereals are removed by cleaning and processingmay vary,it is appropriate to set maximum levels forfinal consumer cereal products as well as for major foodingredients derived from cereals to have enforceable legis-lation in the interest of ensuring public health protection.(36)For maize,not all factors involved in the formation ofFusarium toxins,in particular zearalenone and fumo-nisins B1and B2,are yet precisely known.Therefore,atime period is granted to enable food business operatorsin the cereal chain to perform investigations on thesources of the formation of these mycotoxins and onthe identification of the management measures to betaken to prevent their presence as far as reasonablypossible.Maximum levels based on currently availableoccurrence data are proposed to apply from2007incase no specific maximum levels based on new infor-mation on occurrence and formation are set beforethat time.(37)Given the low contamination levels of Fusarium toxinsfound in rice,no maximum levels are proposed for riceor rice products.(38)A review of the maximum levels for deoxynivalenol,zearalenone,fumonisin B1and B2as well as the appro-priateness of setting a maximum level for T-2and HT-2toxin in cereals and cereal products should be consideredby1July2008,taking into account the progress inscientific and technological knowledge on these toxinsin food.(39)As regards lead,the SCF adopted an opinion on19June1992(22)endorsing the provisional tolerable weeklyintake(PTWI)of25μg/kg bw proposed by the WHOin1986.The SCF concluded in its opinion that the meanlevel in foodstuffs does not seem to be a cause ofimmediate concern.(20)Reports on tasks for scientific cooperation,Task3.2.10‘Collectionof occurrence data of Fusarium toxins in food and assessment of dietary intake by the population of EU Member States’.http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/scoop/task3210.pdf(21)OJ L234,29.8.2006,p.35.(22)Reports of the Scientific Committee for Food,32nd series,Opinionof the Scientific Committee for Food on‘The potential risk to health presented by lead in food and drink’,p.7,http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/reports/scf_reports_32.pdf(40)In the framework of Directive93/5/EEC2004theSCOOP-task3.2.11‘Assessment of the dietary exposureto arsenic,cadmium,lead and mercury of the populationof the EU Member States’was performed in2004(23).Inview of this assessment and the opinion delivered by theSCF,it is appropriate to take measures to reduce thepresence of lead in food as much as possible(41)As regards cadmium,the SCF endorsed in its opinion of2June1995(24)the PTWI of7μg/kg bw and rec-ommended greater efforts to reduce dietary exposure tocadmium since foodstuffs are the main source of humanintake of cadmium.A dietary exposure assessment wasperformed in the SCOOP-task3.2.11.In view of thisassessment and the opinion delivered by the SCF,it isappropriate to take measures to reduce the presence ofcadmium in food as much as possible.(42)As regards mercury EFSA adopted on24February2004an opinion related to mercury and methylmercury infood(25)and endorsed the provisional tolerable weeklyintake of1,6μg/kg bw.Methylmercury is the chemicalform of most concern and can make up more than90%of the total mercury in fish and seafood.Taking intoaccount the outcome of the SCOOP-task3.2.11,EFSAconcluded that the levels of mercury found in foods,other than fish and seafood,were of lower concern.The forms of mercury present in these other foods aremainly not methylmercury and they are thereforeconsidered to be of lower risk.(43)In addition to the setting of maximum levels,targetedconsumer advice is an appropriate approach in the caseof methylmercury for protecting vulnerable groups of thepopulation.An information note on methylmercury infish and fishery products responding to this need hastherefore been made available on the website of theHealth and Consumer Protection Directorate-General ofthe European Commission(26).Several Member Stateshave also issued advice on this issue that is relevant totheir population.(44)As regards inorganic tin,the SCF concluded in itsopinion of12December2001(27)that levels ofinorganic tin of150mg/kg in canned beverages and250mg/kg in other canned foods may cause gastricirritation in some individuals.(45)To protect public health from this health risk it isnecessary to set maximum levels for inorganic tin incanned foods and canned beverages.Until databecomes available on the sensitivity of infants andyoung children to inorganic tin in foods,it is necessaryon a precautionary basis to protect the health of thisvulnerable population group and to establish lowermaximum levels.(46)As regards3-monochloropropane-1,2-diol(3-MCPD)theSCF adopted on30May2001a scientific opinion asregards3-MCPD in food(28),updating its opinion of16December1994(29)on the basis of new scientificinformation and established a tolerable daily intake(TDI)of2μg/kg bw for3-MCPD.(47)In the framework of Directive93/5/EEC the SCOOP-task‘Collection and collation of data on levels of3-MCPDand related substances in foodstuffs’was performed andfinalised in June2004(30).The main contributors of3-MCPD to dietary intake were soy sauce and soy-saucebased products.Some other foods eaten in large quan-tities,such as bread and noodles,also contributed sig-nificantly to intake in some countries because of highconsumption rather than high levels of3-MCPDpresent in these foods.(48)Accordingly maximum levels should be set for3-MCPDin hydrolysed vegetable protein(HVP)and soy saucetaking into account the risk related to the consumptionof these foods.Member States are requested to examineother foodstuffs for the occurrence of3-MCPD in orderto consider the need to set maximum levels for ad-ditional foodstuffs.(23)Reports on tasks for scientific co-operation,Task 3.2.11‘Assessment of dietary exposure to arsenic,cadmium,lead and mercury of the population of the EU Member States’.http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/scoop_ 3-2-11_heavy_metals_report_en.pdf(24)Reports of the Scientific Committee for Food,36th series,Opinionof the Scientific Committee for Food on cadmium,p.67,http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/reports/scf_reports_36.pdf (25)Opinion of the Scientific Panel on contaminants in the Food Chainof the European Food Safety Authority(EFSA)on a request from the Commission related to mercury and methylmercury in food (adopted on24February2004)http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/contam/contam_opinions/259/opinion_contam_01_en1.pdf(26)http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/information_note_mercury-fish_12-05-04.pdf (27)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on acute risks posedby tin in canned foods(adopted on12December2001)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out110_en.pdf(28)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on3-monochloro-propane-1,2-diol(3-MCPD)updating the SCF opinion of1994 (adopted on30May2001)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out91_en.pdf(29)Reports of the Scientific Committee for Food,36th series,Opinionof the Scientific Committee for Food on3-monochloro-propane-1,2-diol3-MCPD),p.31,http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/reports/scf_reports_36.pdf (30)Reports on tasks for scientific cooperation,Task3.2.9‘Collectionand collation of data on levels of3-monochloropropanediol(3-MCPD)and related substances in foodstuffs’.http://ec.europa.eu/ food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/scoop_3-2-9_final_report_ chloropropanols_en.pdf(49)As regards dioxins and PCBs,the SCF adopted on30May2001an opinion on dioxins and dioxin-like PCBsin food(31),updating its opinion of22November2000(32)fixing a tolerable weekly intake(TWI)of14pg World Health Organisation toxic equivalent(WHO-TEQ)/kg bw for dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs.(50)Dioxins as referred to in this Regulation cover a group of75polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin(PCDD)congenersand135polychlorinated dibenzofuran(PCDF)congeners,of which17are of toxicological concern.Polychlorinated biphenyls(PCBs)are a group of209different congeners which can be divided into twogroups according to their toxicological properties:12congeners exhibit toxicological properties similar todioxins and are therefore often termed dioxin-likePCBs.The other PCBs do not exhibit dioxin-liketoxicity but have a different toxicological profile.(51)Each congener of dioxins or dioxin-like PCBs exhibits adifferent level of toxicity.In order to be able to sum upthe toxicity of these different congeners,the concept oftoxic equivalency factors(TEFs)has been introduced tofacilitate risk assessment and regulatory control.Thismeans that the analytical results relating to all the indi-vidual dioxin and dioxin-like PCB congeners of toxico-logical concern are expressed in terms of a quantifiableunit,namely the TCDD toxic equivalent(TEQ).(52)Exposure estimates taking into account the SCOOP-task‘Assessment of dietary intake of dioxins and related PCBsby the population of EU Member States’finalised in June2000(33)indicate that a considerable proportion of theCommunity population has a dietary intake in excess ofthe TWI.(53)From a toxicological point of view,any level set shouldapply to both dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs,but in2001maximum levels were set on Community level only fordioxins and not for dioxin-like PCBs,given the verylimited data available at that time on the prevalence ofdioxin-like PCBs.Since2001,however,more data on thepresence of dioxin-like PCBs have become available,therefore,maximum levels for the sum of dioxins anddioxin-like PCBs have been set in2006as this is themost appropriate approach from a toxicological pointof view.In order to ensure a smooth transition,thelevels for dioxins should continue to apply for a transi-tional period in addition to the levels for the sum ofdioxins and dioxin-like PCBs.Foodstuffs must complyduring that transitional period with the maximumlevels for dioxins and with the maximum levels for thesum of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs.Consideration willbe given by31December2008to dispensing with theseparate maximum levels for dioxins.(54)In order to encourage a proactive approach to reducingthe dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs present in food andfeed,action levels were set by Commission Recommen-dation2006/88/EC of6February2006on the reductionof the presence of dioxins,furans and PCBs in feeding-stuffs and foodstuffs(34).These action levels are a tool forcompetent authorities and operators to highlight thosecases where it is appropriate to identify a source ofcontamination and to take measures to reduce oreliminate it.Since the sources of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs are different,separate action levels aredetermined for dioxins on the one hand and fordioxin-like PCBs on the other hand.This proactiveapproach to actively reduce the dioxins and dioxin-likePCBs in feed and food and consequently,the maximumlevels applicable should be reviewed within a definedperiod of time with the objective to set lower levels.Therefore,consideration will be given by31December2008to significantly reducing the maximum levels forthe sum of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs.(55)Operators need to make efforts to step up their capacityto remove dioxins,furans and dioxin-like PCBs frommarine oil.The significant lower level,to which con-sideration shall be given by31December2008,shallbe based on the technical possibilities of the mosteffective decontamination procedure.(56)As regards the establishment of maximum levels forother foodstuffs by31December2008,particularattention shall be paid to the need to set specific lowermaximum levels for dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs infoods for infants and young children in the light of themonitoring data obtained through the2005,2006and2007programmes for monitoring dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs in foods for infants and young children.(31)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on the riskassessment of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs in food.Update basedon new scientific information available since the adoption of theSCF opinion of22nd November2000(adopted on30May2001)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out90_en.pdf(32)Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on the riskassessment of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs in food.(adopted on22November2000)http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out78_en.pdf(33)Reports on tasks for scientific cooperation,Task3.2.5‘Assessmentof dietary intake of dioxins and related PCBs by the population ofEU Member States’.http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer/library/pub/pub08_en.pdf(34)OJ L42,14.2.2006,p.26.。
