different treatments. An example of a temperature and fumigant combination treatment is fumigation with methyl bromide followed by a cold treatment. 450 74 Concurrent combinations of a single Argentina The TPG supported the second and fumigant with other fumigants or For consistency changes proposed by Argentina, treatments may be superior in Category : TECHNICAL and suggested two additional increase efficacy, commodity changes: tolerance, economics or logistics compared to treatment with a combinations of a “Concurrent single fumigant treatment alone. fumigant with other fumigants or treatments may increase be superior in efficacyeffectiveness, commodity tolerance, economics or logistics compared to treatment with a single fumigant alone.” 458 74 Concurrent combinations of a Sri Lanka The TPG finds the word “concurrent” fumigant with fumigants or By the word "concurrent" may be misleading as a to be clear and the intended meaning treatments may be superior in cocktail of treatments. i.e. mixing of few chemicals is as interpreted by Sri Lanka. The efficacy, commodity tolerance, together and application. This type of applications further technical issue is outside of economics or logistics to treatment needs to be studied further since the impact TPG mandate. with a single fumigant alone. (health and environmental) is unknown. Therefore, the text needs to be more focussed on what is meant by "concurrent"). If the treatments are applied separately, there may be always a sequence of application. In that sense, we feel that 4.2 can be removed and 4.2.1 could be renumbered as 4.2 Category : SUBSTANTIVE 467 75 4.23.2.1 Fumigation Peru The TPG supported the change, treatment underFumigant and For consistency with of section 4.2.2.2. except should be used “fumigation” modified Numbering of section modified as a consequential instead of treatment” (see “fumigation change according comments in paragraph 74. comment 72).
different treatments. An example of a temperature and fumigant combination treatment is fumigation with methyl bromide followed by a cold treatment. 450 74 Concurrent combinations of a single fumigant with other fumigants or treatments may be superior in increase efficacy, commodity tolerance, economics or logistics compared to treatment with a single fumigant treatment alone. Argentina For consistency Category : TECHNICAL The TPG supported the second and changes proposed by Argentina, and suggested two additional changes: “Concurrent combinations of a fumigant with other fumigants or treatments may increase be superior in efficacyeffectiveness, commodity tolerance, economics or logistics compared to treatment with a single fumigant alone.” 458 74 Concurrent combinations of a fumigant with fumigants or treatments may be superior in efficacy, commodity tolerance, economics or logistics to treatment with a single fumigant alone. Sri Lanka By the word "concurrent" may be misleading as a cocktail of treatments. i.e. mixing of few chemicals together and application. This type of applications needs to be studied further since the impact (health and environmental) is unknown. Therefore, the text needs to be more focussed on what is meant by "concurrent"). If the treatments are applied separately, there may be always a sequence of application. In that sense, we feel that 4.2 can be removed and 4.2.1 could be renumbered as 4.2 Category : SUBSTANTIVE The TPG finds the word “concurrent” to be clear and the intended meaning is as interpreted by Sri Lanka. The further technical issue is outside of TPG mandate. 467 75 4.23.2.1 Fumigation treatment underFumigant and modified Peru For consistency with of section 4.2.2.2. Numbering of section modified as a consequential change according comments in paragraph 74. The TPG supported the change, except “fumigation” should be used instead of “fumigation treatment” (see comment 72).
TPG_Recommendations_2014-004_CompiledComments_DraftISPM_RequirementsFumigation_2018-01-02_oK0EVMO.docx