Following a request from the European Commission, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) evaluated the documentation, mainly consisting of the scientific report by Pascher et al. (2016), provided by Austria to support the prolongation of the safeguard clause measure prohibiting the placing on the market of genetically modified oilseed rape GT73 for food and feed uses in Austria. EFSA assessed whether the submitted documentation comprised new scientific information that would change or invalidate the conclusions of its previous risk assessments on oilseed rape GT73.

In their study, Pascher et al. (2016) measured the occurrence and frequency of feral oilseed rape plants at the same sites during 2014 and 2015 throughout Austria. The occurrence of feral oilseed rape plants was observed at 44 of the 60 surveyed sites, and was attributed to accidental spillage of viable seeds during transportation and handling/loading activities. Most of the populations observed in 2014 were still present in 2015. Genetic analyses revealed that genetic diversity was the highest in feral oilseed rape plants sampled at oil mills and ports, and the lowest in those sampled at railway stations and along transportation roads.

EFSA considers that the information on the ferality of oilseed rape in Austria reported by Pascher et al. (2016) confirms and complements reports from other countries as described in the scientific literature. EFSA is therefore of the opinion that the findings by Pascher et al. (2016) do not provide novel information on the feral characteristics of oilseed rape.

The title of the scientific report by Pascher et al. (2016) refers to “risk of seed spillage of imported oilseed rape along transport routes” and “the assessment of potential medium-term to long-term effects associated with seed spillage of imported oilseed rape along transport routes”. However, such risks and effects were not investigated empirically, nor addressed in the report. In their report, the authors characterised an exposure to feral oilseed rape plants without demonstrating whether this exposure is environmentally hazardous. The report did not link hazard to exposure, and in effect does not adequately distinguish exposure from environmental risk. Moreover, the data reported by Pascher et al. (2016) relate to conventional oilseed rape instead of oilseed rape GT73. Therefore, EFSA considers that the data only provide baseline information about the parent organism.

EFSA took note of the authors’ recommendations on how to monitor GM herbicide tolerant oilseed rape. However, as the environmental risk assessment did not identify potential adverse environmental effects for the intended uses of oilseed rape GT73, no case-specific monitoring was previously required by the EFSA GMO Panel.

In the documentation provided by Austria, EFSA could not identify new scientific evidence that indicates that the intended uses of oilseed rape GT73 in the EU will pose a significant and imminent risk to the environment, and that would invalidate its previous risk assessments of oilseed rape GT73. Based on the documentation supplied by Austria, EFSA concludes that there is no specific scientific evidence in terms of risk to the environment that would support the notification of a safeguard clause measure under Article 23 of Directive 2001/18/EC, nor its prolongation.