A risk assessment covering all registered crops considers whether PPP use could lead to an MRL exceedance; residues stay within the limits set by the legislation of the production and sales countries or by Codex. The assessment may conclude that no analysis is needed only if no PPPs were used during the season or postharvest, the customer carries out residue testing, and an independent third party or the customer has validated the assessment. When analysis is needed, the farm records how many samples are taken, of what type, where and how often. Production-country MRLs must be met whether or not product is exported; where a destination sets stricter MRLs, the farm documents how it meets them and bases export decisions on PPP use and test results; where brokers decide the destination, production-country MRLs are verified. The assessment and sampling may be handed to a third-party residue monitoring system that an approved certification body has assessed.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.