us default mrls limits of determination or limits of quantification on basmati rice in october 2011 india stated that in august 2011 the us food and drug administration fda issued an import alert because of the presence of the fungicide tricyclazole in a shipment of basmati rice. the shipment was detained without informing either the indian government or the exporter and all subsequent consignments of basmati rice by that exporter were detained without physical examination. the us tolerance was at the limit of quantification and consignments were being rejected for tricyclazole residues exceeding 0.01 ppm. these detentions and the imposition of testing charges had resulted in huge losses to the exporter. tricyclazole was a fungicide used for treatment of blast in rice. the us tolerance limits conflicted with article 5.4 of the sps agreement which required members to take into account the objective of minimizing negative trade effects as tricyclazole was widely used in india china japan and thailand for treatment of blast. further article 5.5 was not respected as the fda permitted mrls of tricyclazole in rice bran rice hulls and rice polishings of u to 30 ppm. no risk assessment as mandated by articles 2.2 and 5.1 seems to have been undertaken while setting the tolerance limit for tricyclazole. india argued that the practice of setting default limits was contrary to the core principles of the sps agreement as there appeared to be no scientific justification and it seemed to be contrary to the principle of harmonization of article 3. the united states replied that under the us food drug and cosmetic act a food was deemed adulterated if it contained a pesticide for which there was no environmental protection agency epa -established tolerance or exemption and food that is adulterated is not admitted into the united states. several firms and products had been added to fdas import alert 99-08 detention without physical examination of processed foods due to illegal pesticide residues products including persimmon and rice flour as well as basmati rice from three countries had been subject to an import alert due to detection of tricyclazole. the government of india and the exporter were notified about the detention. when a shipment was detained the importer had the opportunity to demonstrate that the shipment did not contain the residue and fda usually accepted private laboratory analysis as evidence that there were no residues. no tolerances for the use of tricyclazole as a pesticide in rice had been established by epa. the epa had established tolerances for rice for three alternative fungicides namely azoxystrobin propiconazole and trifloxystrobin. india could use one of the alternative fungicides to combat rice blast or work with epa to establish a tolerance for tricyclazole in the united states. the codex had not established a maximum tolerance level for tricyclazole in any food. the united states encouraged india to work with epa and fda to address the concerns. in march 2012 india reiterated its concerns regarding us rejections of basmati rice due to the presence of tricyclazole. india recalled the us response at the october meeting and argued that under article 5.1 of the sps agreement scientific justification should be provided for fixing any mrl for pesticides and that a limit of detection requirement must be justified. tricyclazole was registered and used in the european union china and japan for rice with mrls of 1 ppm 2 ppm and 3 ppm respectively. according to article 5.7 members could adopt the standards of other countries when there was no relevant international standard. india urged the committee to invite the codex alimentarius commission to examine the scientific basis of the us measure under article 12.6. us authorities had agreed to bilateral discussions and india urged the united states to allow imports based on the domestic standard of the exporting country until both countries were able to finalize the mrl based on scientific justification. the united s