Annual EU Wide Pesticide Residues MR 2001

EUROPEAN COMMISSIONHEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERALDirectorate F - Food and Veterinary OfficeUnit 4 - Food of plant origin, plant health; processing and distributionIn cooperation with JRC IRMM, Food & Feed Unit and DG SANCO E1

SANCO/20/03 final

Monitoring of Pesticide Residues

in Products of Plant Origin

in the European Union, Norway, Iceland andLiechtenstein

2001 Report

This report "Monitoring of Pesticide Residues in Products of Plant Origin in the European Union,Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein - Report 2001 - was forwarded to the "Standing Committee onthe Food Chain and Animal Health - section plant protection products - pesticide residues workinggroup" for agreement on publication on 11 March 2003. The Standing Committee agreed thatpublication was desirable and noted that this was also the view of Norway, Iceland andLiechtenstein.

March 2003

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 4

2. LEGAL BASE............................................................................................................. 4

3. MAXIMUM RESIDUE LEVELS (MRL), ACCEPTABLE DAILY INTAKES (ADI)AND ACUTE REFERENCE DOSES (ACUTE RFD)............................................... 5

4. NATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMMES......................................................... 6

4.1. Monitoring results for 2001............................................................................... 6

4.2. Results of the 2001 national monitoring programmes compared to the previousyears................................................................................................................. 15

4.3. Samples with multiple residues....................................................................... 16

4.4. Most frequently found pesticides .................................................................... 18

5. THE EU CO-ORDINATED MONITORING EXERCISE ....................................... 20

5.1. Sampling design applied in the 2001 EU co-ordinated monitoring programme20

5.2. Evaluation by pesticide.................................................................................... 26

5.3. Evaluation by commodity................................................................................ 36

5.4. Evaluation by country...................................................................................... 38

5.5. Homogeneity exercise ..................................................................................... 40

5.6. Exposure assessment ....................................................................................... 40

6. SAMPLING............................................................................................................... 45

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE......................................................................................... 49

8. RAPID ALERT SYSTEM ........................................................................................ 54

9. SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. 56

9.1. National Monitoring programmes ................................................................... 56

9.2. EU co-ordinated monitoring programme ........................................................ 57

3

9.3. Quality assurance and sampling ...................................................................... 58

4

1. INTRODUCTION

This report covers the national situations with regard to pesticide residues monitoring for thecalendar year 2001 in the 15 EU Member States and the three EFTA States who have signedthe EEA agreement1 (Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). This document can only give anoverall view on monitoring of pesticide residues. Each Member State and the EEA States havebeen invited to contribute a short national statement (in English) for inclusion in thisdocument (Annex 1). More detailed information about the situation in individual countries isavailable from the respective national monitoring authorities and may be requested from them.Pesticide residues in foodstuffs of animal origin, as regulated in Council Directive86/363/EEC2, are not covered by this report.

2. LEGAL BASE

In Council Directives 86/362/EEC3 and 90/642/EEC4, as amended, maximum levels are fixedfor pesticide residues in and on products of plant origin. Member States are asked to checkregularly the compliance of foodstuffs with these levels. Inspections and monitoring should becarried out in accordance with the provisions of Council Directive 89/397/EEC5 on the officialcontrol of foodstuffs, and Council Directive 93/99/EC6 on additional measures concerning theofficial control of foodstuffs. For the year 2001 Commission Directive 79/700/EEC7.onsampling was still applicable.8

Besides national monitoring programmes, the Commission services recommended (viaCommission Recommendation 2001/42/EC9, in the case of 2001) the participation of eachMember State in a specific EU co-ordinated monitoring programme. These programmesbegan in 1996. Their aim is to work towards a system that makes it possible to estimate actualdietary pesticide exposure throughout Europe. The monitoring programme is designed as arolling programme, which covers all major pesticide-commodity combinations in a series of5-year cycles. The first cycle was completed in 2000. This 2001 report is the first report of thesecond cycle, which is designed as 3-year cycle. The time span was reduced to 3 years in orderto have a complete picture of the dietary intake situation after a shorter period of time. Thechoice of commodities includes major components of the Standard European Diet of theWorld Health Organisation.

Article 7 of Council Directive 86/362/EEC and Article 4 of Council Directive 90/642/EEC, asamended by Council Directive 97/41/EC10, require Member States to report to theCommission the results of the monitoring programme for pesticide residues carried out both

1 Agreement on the European Economic Area2 Official Journal No L 221, 07/08/1986 p. 0043 - 00473 Official Journal No L 221, 07/08/1986 p. 0037 - 00424 Official Journal No L 350, 14/12/1990 p. 0071 - 00795 Official Journal No L 186, 30/06/1989 p. 0023 - 00266 Official Journal No L 290, 24/11/1993 p. 0014 - 00177 Official Journal No L 207, 15/08/1979 p. 0026 - 00288 From 1.1.2003 Commission Directive 79/700/EEC will be repealed by Commission Directive 2002/63/EC.9 Official Journal No L 11, 16/01/2001 p. 0040 - 004510 Official Journal No L 184, 12/07/1997 p. 0033 - 0049

5

under their national programme and under the EU co-ordinated programme. A format for thereports on the Community programme was agreed (document SANCO/4811/2001). TheCommission is required to compile and collate this information annually.

Since 1 April 2000 Commission Regulation (EC) No 645/200011 is in force, which providesfor detailed implementing rules for the monitoring provisions of Directives 86/362/EEC and90/642/EEC.

3. MAXIMUM RESIDUE L EVELS (MRL), A CCEPTABLE DAILY I NTAKES (ADI) AND ACUTE

REFERENCE DOSES(ACUTE RFD)

Pesticide residue levels in foodstuffs are regulated in order to:

• minimise the exposure of consumers to the harmful or unnecessary intake of pesticides;

• control the correct use of pesticides in terms of the authorisations or registrations granted(application rates and pre-harvest intervals);

• permit the free circulation of products treated with pesticides as long as they comply withthe MRLs fixed.

A maximum residue level (MRL) for pesticide residues is the maximum concentration of apesticide residue (expressed in mg/kg) legally permitted in or on food commodities andanimal feed. MRLs are based on Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) data. Food derived fromcommodities that comply with the respective MRLs are intended to be toxicologicallyacceptable. Exceeded MRLs are indicators of violations of Good Agricultural Practice. IfMRLs are exceeded, comparison of the exposure with ADIs and/or acute RfDs will thenindicate whether or not there are possible chronic or acute health risks, respectively.

The acceptable daily intake (ADI) is the estimate of the amount of a substance in food,expressed on a body-weight basis, that can be ingested daily over a lifetime withoutappreciable health risk to the consumer. The ADI is based on the no observed adverse effectlevels (NOAEL) in animal testing. A safety factor (usually 100) that takes into considerationthe type of effect, the severity or reversibility of the effect, and the inter- and intra-speciesvariability is applied to the NOAEL. The ADI therefore reflects chronic toxicity.

The acute Reference Dose (acute RfD) is the estimate of the amount of a substance in food,expressed on a body-weight basis, that can be ingested over a short period of time, usuallyduring one meal or one day, without appreciable health risk to the consumer. It thereforereflects the acute toxicity. At present, acute Reference Doses have been fixed for a limitednumber of pesticides.

11 Commission Regulation (EC) No 645/2000 of 28 March 2000, Official Journal No. L 78, 29/03/2000, p. 0007 - 0009

6

4. NATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMMES

4.1. Monitoring results for 2001

Summary

The results of the 18 national monitoring programmes are shown in Tables 1 - 6. In total, forthe EU and EEA as a whole, about 46,000 samples were analysed for - on average - 145different pesticides. Analysis is usually performed by multi-methods capable of detecting upto 100 or more pesticides. This means that at least an estimated 4.6 million individualdeterminations were carried out. 60 % of the samples contained no detectable pesticideresidues. Detectable residues at or below the MRL were found in 37 % of the samples. In3.6 % of the samples, the residues exceeded MRLs (both national or EC-MRLs). It wasconfirmed12 that EC-MRLs were exceeded in 3.0 % of all samples13.

The results varied significantly between the different countries. It is important to note,however, that differences in the monitoring programmes, as such, are very likely toaccount for an important part of the variation between countries in the actual presenceof pesticide residues.

Several factors can cause these differences in the monitoring programmes:

• The choice of pesticides investigated

• Sampling, e.g. more random or more targeted; the proportion of domestic and importedfoodstuffs; the choice of crops

• Methods used, e.g. the use of single methods to detect specific, often problematicpesticides

• Analytical capabilities of the laboratories (differences in reporting levels)

• Definition of exceeded levels (e.g. including or excluding analytical uncertainties)

• Differences in national MRLs, leading to differences in exceeded levels reported.

Table 1A and 1B give a general overview of surveillance and follow-up enforcement samplingand the numbers of samples taken for fresh (incl. frozen)14 and processed products,respectively.

12 The definition of confirmed exceedances varies between Member States, this includes for example cases where theanalytical laboratory has certified an exceedance when applying its quality assurance system, cases where officialwarnings have been issued or where legal or administrative consequences have followed.

13 This paragraph relates to the total number of samples (sum of fresh (incl. frozen) and processed products).14 In this reportfresh fruit and vegetables always comprisefrozen fruit and vegetables, although this is not explicitly

mentioned everywhere in the text.

7

In Tables 2 - 6 the detailed results by country are shown. Table 2 gives a summary of allsamples taken (fruit, vegetables and cereals, including both surveillance and follow-upenforcement samples). Tables 3 and 4 relate to surveillance sampling only - for fruit andvegetables and for cereals, respectively. Table 5 shows follow-up enforcement samples takenfor fruit and vegetables only, since no follow-up enforcement samples were taken for cereals.Table 6 relates to processed products (surveillance sampling only, since no follow upenforcement samples were analysed). In Tables 2 and 3 the total sample numbers includingprocessed products are given in the last row of the tables.

Surveillance sampling versus follow-up enforcement sampling

Surveillance and follow-up enforcement sampling are distinguished, since a differentsampling strategy (more or less targeted) can lead to considerably different results, due to themore targeted nature of the follow-up enforcement sampling.

In the guidance document (SANCO/4811/2001) for reporting the results of the 2001 nationaland Community monitoring programmes to the European Commission, surveillance andfollow-up enforcement sampling were defined as follows:

Surveillance sampling means that samples are collected without any particular suspiciontowards a particular producer, consignment, etc.. Surveillance sampling may also includemore targeted samples, which are directed to a special problem, e.g. methamidophos inpeppers or chlormequat in pears from countries where previously problems were found.Samples directed to a special producer or consignment, however, fall within the categoryfollow-up enforcement sampling.

Follow-up enforcement samplingmeans that samples are taken in case of suspicion as afollow-up for previously found violations. Follow-up enforcement sampling is directed to aspecific grower/producer or to a specific consignment. Samples directed to a specific problem,but not to a specific producer/consignment fall within the category surveillance sampling.

Table 1A: Overview of the samples analysed in the EU and EEA States - Breakdown bysurveillanceandfollow-up enforcementsamples

Total number ofsamples analysed in EUand EEA 46149

Surveillance samples 45810 99.3%

Follow-up enforcementsamples

339 0.7%

Table 1A shows that 99.3 % of the samples were surveillance samples and 0.7 % were follow-up enforcement samples. The number of follow-up enforcement samples in 2001 wasconsiderably lower than in 2000 (2,582 in 2000, representing 5.7 % of the total).

As Tables 3 and 5 for fruit and vegetables show, the more targeted nature of the follow-upenforcement sampling leads to both a higher percentage of pesticide findings at or belowMRL (52 % of samples compared to 38 % in the surveillance sampling) and of MRL

8

exceedances (17 % compared to 3.9 % in the surveillance sampling). Consequently, thepercentage of samples without residues is lower for follow-up enforcement samples (31 %compared to 58 % for surveillance samples).

Surveillance sampling of fresh fruit/vegetables versus surveillance sampling of cereals

For cereals, 2337 samples were analysed (Table 4), compared to 40,375 samples for fruit andvegetables (Table 3). Fewer pesticides (81) were analysed in cereals than in fruit andvegetables (145) and the percentage of pesticides found as share of those sought was lower(7.2 %, compared to 44 % for fruit and vegetables). Details of the pesticides most often foundin both product groups are given in Table 8 (page 18/19).

The percentage of samples without residues was considerably higher in cereals (81 %) than infresh fruit and vegetables (58 %). Consequently the percentage of samples with residues at orbelow the MRL and exceeding the MRL was lower in cereals - 27 % and 1.0 %, respectively -compared to 38 % and 3.9 %, respectively, in fruit and vegetables.

Fresh versus processed products

Table 1B: Overview of the samples analysed in the EU and EEA States - Breakdown byfresh (incl. frozen) andprocessedproducts

Total number ofsamples analysed in EUand EEA

46149

Fresh fruit andvegetables 40714 88%

Cereals 2337 5%

Processed products 3098 7%

As indicated in Table 1B, 93 % of the samples taken in the EU and the EEA States were fresh(incl. frozen) fruit, vegetables and cereals. 7 % of the samples were processed products.

Out of 18 countries, 11 took samples of processed products (fruit and vegetables), and about athird of these were taken by the UK (36 %) (Table 6, page 14).

Comparing processed products of fruit and vegetables (Table 6) with fresh products (Table3)15 the percentage of surveillance samples with residues at or below the MRL (national orEC-MRL) and with residues exceeding the MRL (national or EC-MRL) is significantly lowerin processed products. Residues at or below the MRL were found in 29 % of the samples,compared to 38 % in fresh products; residues exceeding the MRL were found in 0.3 % of thesamples (from two countries), compared to 3.9 % in fresh products. As a consequence, thepercentage of samples without residues is significantly higher in processed products (71 %compared to 58 % in fresh products). The low rate of MRL exceedances in processed products

15 In both tables surveillance sampling only

9

is due to the fact that no specific harmonised EC-MRLs for processed products have yet beenset at the EU level. However, Directives 86/362/EEC and 90/642/EEC contain generalprovisions for dried, processed and composite products, which specify that, in the absence of aspecific MRL, the MRL for the fresh product shall be applied, taking into accountconcentration or dilution factors caused by processing. Specific MRLs for processed productsmay or may not have been set at the national level and the general provisions of Directives86/362/EEC and 90/642/EEC are applied differently by Member States.

Since the number of surveillance samples of processed products was low (3,098 samples)compared to fresh products (40,375 samples) the statistics do not change much whenprocessed products are included in the overall table, Table 2, (last row) and in Table 3 (lastrow) for fruit and vegetables.

10

Table 2: Results of the eighteen national monitoring programmes16 for pesticide residues onfresh (incl. frozen) fruit, vegetables and cereals, sum of surveillance and follow upenforcementsamples. The resultsincluding processed productsare shown in thelastrow of the table.

No. ofsamplesanalysed

No. ofpesticidesanalysed

for

No. ofdifferentpesticides

found

%foundfrom

sought

No. ofsampleswithoutdetec-tableresi-dues

% No. ofsamples

withresiduesbelow orat MRL(national or ECMRLs)

% No. ofsamples

withresiduesaboveMRL

(nationalor ECMRLs)

% No. ofsamples

withconfir-

medresiduesaboveEC-

MRLs

%

B 927 150 43 29 479 52 411 44 37 4.0 29 3.1

DK 3250 130 90 69 1978 61 1131 35 141 4.3 136 4.2

D 6340 90 55 61 3442 54 2675 42 223 3.5 216 3.4

EL 1374 207 42 20 931 68 394 29 49 3.6 46 3.3

E 3341 175 79 45 2050 61 1152 34 139 4.2 133 4.0

F 4108 223 99 44 2081 51 1777 43 250 6.1 172 4.2

IRL 331 75 36 48 181 55 140 42 10 3.0 10 3.0

I 9365 n/a n/a n/a 6460 69 2782 30 123 1.3 123 1.3

L 167 52 29 56 105 63 52 31 10 6.0 7 4.2

NL 2879 314 122 39 1193 41 1423 49 263 9.1 128 4.4

A 962 149 74 50 540 56 352 37 70 7.3 55 5.7

P 496 116 45 39 297 60 170 34 29 5.8 24 4.8

FIN 2164 173 89 51 1130 52 909 42 125 5.8 101 4.7

S 2493 218 100 46 1438 58 987 40 68 2.7 57 2.3

UK 2017 182 88 48 1248 62 742 37 27 1.3 27 1.3

Norway 2466 145 64 44 1578 64 797 32 91 3.7 90 3.6

Iceland 308 40 24 60 187 61 107 35 14 4.5 14 4.5

Liech-tenstein

63 32 7 22 46 73 15 24 2 3.2 2 3.2

Total 43051 145(Average)

64(Average)

44 25364 59 16016 37 1671 3.9 1370 3.2

Totalincl.

proces-sed

products

46149 145(Average)

64(Average)

44 27560 60 16909 37 1680 3.6 1373 3.0

n/a: not available

16 See the explanation about the differences in monitoring results by country under chapter 4.1, p. 6

11

Table 3: Results of the eighteen national monitoring programmes for pesticide residues onfresh(incl. frozen) fruit and vegetables, surveillance sampling only.The results includingprocessed productsare shown in thelast row of the table.


No. ofpesticides

analysed for


found

%foundfrom

sought

No. ofsampleswithoutdetec-table

residues

% No. ofsamples

withresiduesbelow orat MRL(national

or ECMRLs)

% No. of sampleswith residuesabove MRL(national orEC MRLs)

% No. ofsamples

withconfir-

medresiduesaboveEC-

MRLs

%

B 892 150 43 29 474 53 381 43 37 4.1 29 3.3

DK 3039 130 90 69 1787 59 1112 37 140 4.6 135 4.4

D 6023 90 55 61 3228 54 2576 43 219 3.6 212 3.5

EL 1369 207 42 20 926 68 394 29 49 3.6 46 3.4

E 3098 175 79 45 1827 59 1134 37 137 4.4 131 4.2

F 3645 223 99 44 1879 52 1540 42 226 6.2 153 4.2

IRL 296 75 36 48 148 50 138 47 10 3.4 10 3.4

I 8857 n/a n/a n/a 6038 68 2706 31 113 1.3 113 1.3

L 157 52 29 56 95 61 52 33 10 6.4 7 4.5

NL 2657 314 122 39 1122 42 1277 48 258 9.7 126 4.7

A 962 149 74 50 540 56 352 37 70 7.3 55 5.7

P 431 116 45 39 245 57 158 37 28 6.5 23 5.3

FIN 2097 173 89 51 1095 52 879 42 123 5.9 99 4.7

S 2204 213 97 46 1204 55 944 43 56 2.5 48 2.2

UK 1963 182 88 48 1241 63 695 35 27 1.4 27 1.4

Norway 2326 145 64 44 1507 65 742 32 77 3.3 76 3.3

Iceland 300 40 24 60 187 62 105 35 8 2.7 8 2.7

Liechten-stein

59 32 7 22 42 71 15 25 2 3.4 2 3.4


64(Average)

44 23585 58 15200 38 1590 3.9 1300 3.2

Totalincl.

processedproducts

43473 145(Average)

64(Average)

44 25781 59 16093 37 1599 3.7 1303 3.0

n/a: not available

12

Table 4: Results of the eighteen national monitoring programmes for pesticide residues oncereals, surveillance sampling only.(No follow up enforcement samples or processedproducts on cereal basis were analysed).


No. ofpesticidesanalysed

for


found

%foundfrom

sought


residues

% No. ofsamples

withresidues

below or atMRL

(national orEC MRLs)

% No. ofsamples

withresidues

above MRL(national orEC MRLs)

% No. ofsamples

withconfir-

medresiduesaboveEC-

MRLs

%

B 35 11 4 36 5 14 30 86 0 0 0 0

DK 211 80 10 13 191 91 19 9.0 1 0.5 1 0.5

D 298 71 19 27 201 67 93 31 4 1.3 4 1.3

EL 5 3 0 0 5 100 0 0 0 0 0 0

E 243 80 8 10 223 92 18 7.4 2 0.8 2 0.8

F 271 136 7 5.1 149 55 120 44 2 0.7 2 0.7

IRL 30 75 1 1.3 29 97 1 3.3 0 0 0 0

I 508 n/a n/a n/a 422 83 76 15 10 2.0 10 2.0

L 10 52 0 0 10 100 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL 204 315 12 3.8 69 34 135 66 0 0 0 0

A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

P 62 96 5 5.2 49 79 12 19 1 1.6 1 1.6

FIN 67 159 5 3.1 35 52 30 45 2 3.0 2 3.0

S 237 46 7 15 215 91 21 8.9 1 0.4 1 0.4

UK 47 21 4 19 7 15 40 85 0 0 0 0

Norway 105 42 6 14 61 58 44 42 0 0 0 0

Iceland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Liech-ten-stein

4 32 0 0 4 100 0 0 0 0 0 0


6(Average)

7.2 1675 72 639 27 23 1.0 23 1.0

n/a: not available

13

Table 5: Results of the eighteen national monitoring programmes for pesticide residues onfresh(incl. frozen) fruit and vegetables, enforcement sampling only.



residues

% No. ofsamples


or ECMRLs)

% No. ofsamples with

residuesabove MRL(national orEC MRLs)

% No. ofsamples

withconfir-

medresiduesaboveEC-

MRLs

%

B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

DK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

D 19 13 68 6 32 0 0 0 0

EL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

F 192 53 28 117 61 22 11 17 8.9

IRL 5 4 80 1 20 0 0 0 0

I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL 18 2 11 11 61 5 28 2 11

A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

P 3 3 100 0 0 0 0 0 0

FIN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S 52 19 37 22 42 11 21 8 15

UK 7 0 0 7 100 0 0 0 0

Nor-way

35 10 29 11 31 14 40 14 40

Iceland 8 0 0 2 25 6 75 6 75

Liech-ten-stein

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 339 104 31 177 52 58 17 47 14

14

Table 6: Results of eleven national monitoring programmes for pesticide residues inprocessedproducts, surveillance sampling only



residues

% No. ofsamples


or ECMRLs)

% No. ofsamples with

residuesabove MRL(national orEC MRLs)

% No. ofsamples

withconfir-

medresiduesaboveEC-

MRLs

%

B 102 93 91 8 7.8 1 1.0 1 1.0

DK 231 223 97 8 3.5 0 0 0 0

D* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

EL 365 110 30 249 68 6 1.6 0 0

E* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

F 261 57 22 204 78 0 0 0 0

IRL* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

I* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

L 4 4 100 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL 17 16 94 1 5.9 0 0 0 0

A* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

P 108 88 81 20 19 0 0 0 0

FIN 275 218 79 55 20 2 0.7 2 0.7

S 456 410 90 46 10 0 0 0 0

UK 1127** 834 74 293 26 0 0 0 0

Nor-way

152 143 94 9 5.9 0 0 0 0

Ice-land*

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Liech-ten-

stein*

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 3098 2196 71 893 29 9 0.3 3 0.1

* no processed products were analysed** This figure includes 96 tea samples.

15

4.2. Results of the 2001 national monitoring programmes compared to the previousyears

Sum of fruit vegetables and cereals

60

3

61

3.4

61

3.3

64

4.3

61

4.5

59

3.9

37 36 3632

35 37

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Samples with nodetectable residues

Samples with residuesbelow or at MRL (national

or EC-MRL)

Samples with residuesabove MRL (national or

EC-MRL)

%sa

mpl

esof

tota

lsam

ples

199619971998199920002001

Figure 1: National monitoring results 1996 - 2001 for fruit, vegetables and cereals (sum of surveillance andfollow-up enforcement sampling, fresh (incl. frozen) products only) collected in 18 participating countries

Figure 1 gives an overview of the residue situation of 2001 compared to previous years. Onlythe results for fresh (incl. frozen) fruit, vegetables and cereals are shown, since only thesewere reported in all previous years. The chart shows that there is no clear trend in theoccurrence of residues over the last 6 years. The percentage of samples with no detectableresidues has slightly decreased compared to previous years, whereas the percentage of sampleswith residues at or below MRL has increased compared to the years 1999 and 2000, bringingthe levels back to that found during 1996 - 1998. The percentage of exceedances hasdecreased compared with data of the last two years, but is higher than that found during 1996 -1998.

The fact that the data vary from year to year is not necessarily due to a real change in theresidue situation. As outlined previously in chapter 4.1, the national monitoring programmesdiffer considerably from year to year. In most countries, priorities for the monitoringprogrammes are set annually at the national level and are often targeted to specific problems.Other factors which contribute to this variation include changes in the legislative situation,e.g. changes of MRLs, as well as the constantly improving quality of the analyticallaboratories, which are able to detect and quantify lower amounts and a higher number ofdifferent pesticides. Furthermore, comparability of the 1996 - 2001 data is somewhat limited,since the number of countries included in the reports was not the same during all the six years.

16

4.3. Samples with multiple residues

Table 7 summarises samples in which more than one pesticide residue was found. Residues ofmore than one pesticide were found in about 18 % of the analysed samples. As the Italian dataprovided only the sum of samples with multiple residues, not broken down by category, noconclusion can be drawn with regard to the results for the different categories.

Table 7: Samples with residues of more than one pesticide in fresh (incl. frozen) fruit,vegetables and cereals, sum of surveillance and follow-up enforcement sampling


2 3 4 5 6 7 8 andmore

No. ofsamples

withmultipleresidues

%

B 927 80 29 17 6 1 0 0 133 14.3

DK 3250 356 150 72 34 12 4 1 629 19.4

D 6340 662 347 117 47 20 11 2 1206 19.0

EL 1374 96 15 9 3 0 0 0 123 9.0

E 3341 194 104 46 10 3 0 0 357 10.7

F 4108 600 323 140 88 22 12 5 1190 29.0

IRL 331 40 21 2 3 0 0 0 66 19.9

I * 9365 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1067 11.4

L 167 15 4 2 0 0 0 0 21 12.6

NL 2879 418 268 145 55 29 16 8 939 32.6

A 962 99 43 21 4 4 4 3 178 18.5

P 496 50 16 4 2 0 0 0 72 14.5

FIN 2164 236 118 46 18 2 2 1 423 19.5

S 2493 237 141 56 22 4 1 0 461 18.5

UK 2017 252 130 32 21 10 2 1 448 22.2

Norway 2466 248 94 27 12 3 4 0 388 15.7

Iceland 308 29 12 13 6 2 1 0 63 20.5

Liechtenstein 63 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3.2

Total 43051 (3614) (1815) (749) (331) (112) (57) (21) 7766

% (8.4)* (4.2)* (1.7)* (0.77)* (0.26)* (0.13)* (0.049)* 18.0

* Only the total number of samples with multiple residues was provided for Italy, therefore the results for each categorydo not include Italy and the sample numbers do not add up to the total of 7,766.

17

Samples with multiple residues in the years 1996 - 2001

Samples with multiple residues

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sum ofsamples with

multipleresidues

2 differentresidues

3 differentresidues

4 differentresidues

5 differentresidues

6 differentresidues

7 differentresidues

8and moredifferentresidues

%sa

mpl

esof

tota

lsam

ples

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Figure 2: Samples with multiple residues - Comparison of the years 1996 - 2001, fresh (incl. frozen) fruit,vegetables and cereals only, sum of surveillance and enforcement sampling

For Italy, only the total number of samples with multiple residues was provided.

Figure 2 gives an overview of the distribution of samples with multiple residues in the years1996 to 2001. To facilitate comparison with previous years, only fresh fruit, vegetables andcereals have been shown.

In 2001, the percentage of samples containing multiple residues has significantly increasedcompared to the 4 previous years. Only the 1996 data showed higher levels, but the 1996 datashould be treated with caution, since only 11 countries delivered data17.

Since Italy did not provide data for the different categories (samples with 2, 3, etc. residues)only the sum of samples with multiple residues can be given for 2001 and no conclusion canbe drawn on the distribution over the different categories.

17 In 1997 and 1998 fifteen countries out of sixteen delivered data for this overview, in 1999 sixteen countries out ofseventeen and in 2000 and 2001 all eighteen countries delivered data.

18

4.4. Most frequently found pesticides

The pesticides that have been most frequently found in the national monitoring programmesare shown in Table 8. In 2001, a separation between the pesticides found in fruit andvegetables and in cereals was made, since the findings can be very different for both productgroups. Member States, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein were asked to prepare a list of theten most frequently found pesticides in decreasing order of frequency. The list was establishedby calculating the percentages of the findings of each pesticide in relation to the total numberof samples analysed for this specific pesticide. The data received have been included asreported by the respective country.

Table 8: Pesticides found most often in the national (incl. co-ordinated) monitoring programmesin the European Union, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein fora) fruit and vegetablesandb) cereals, as reported

Country Pesticides found most often. The last row lists the pesticides mentioned mostoften from all Member States and Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein

Fruit and vegetables Cereals

B Chlormequat, propamocarb, bromide,imazalil, prochloraz, chlorpropham, manebgroup, iprodione, thiabendazol, andbenomyl group

Bromide, dichlorvos, malathion andpirimiphos-methyl

DK Chlormequat, imazalil, chlorpyriphos,maneb group, endosulfan, procymidone,malathion, iprodione, methidathion andortho-phenylphenol

Chlormequat, glyphosate, pirimiphos-methyl, deltamethrin, malathion,chlorpyriphos, fenitrothion, chlorpyriphos-methyl, methoxychlor and permethrin

D Chlormequat, maneb group, benomylgroup, brompropylate, chlorpyriphos,procymidone, captan/folpet (sum),iprodione, endosulfan and thiabendazol

Bromide, pirimiphos-methyl, chlormequat,chlorothalonil, thiabendazol, malathion,dichlorvos, carbosulfan, imazalil and HCH(sum ofα andβ)

EL Maneb group, benomyl group,chlorpyriphos, phosalone, endosulfan,myclobutanil, bifenthrin, bromopropylate,procymidone and tetradifon

None found

E Chlorpyriphos, procymidone, maneb group,imazalil, dicofol, methidathion, endosulfan,dimethoate, malathion and captan

Malathion, chlorfenvinphos, pirimiphos-methyl, diazinon, bromopropylate,tetradifon and thiabendazol

F Maleic-hydrazide, thiabendazol, benomylgroup, maneb group, iprodione, imazalil,oxadixyl, procymidone, bromide andchlorpyriphos

Pirimiphos-methyl, malathion,deltamethrine, chlorpyriphos-methyl,dichlorvos, chlorpyriphos andγ HCH

IRL Thiabendazol, benomyl group, captan,chlorpyriphos, iprodione, dimethoate,dicofol, vinclozolin, chlorothalonil andchlorfenvinphos

Pirimiphos-methyl

19

Country Pesticides found most often. The last row lists the pesticides mentioned mostoften from all Member States and Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein

Fruit and vegetables Cereals

I No data provided.L Pyrimethanil, iprodione, procymidone,

folpet, metalaxyl, captan, tolclofos-methyl,tolylfluanid, phosalone and methidathion

None found

NL Chlormequat, imidacloprid, benomyl group,imazalil, maneb group, thiabendazol,iprodione, captan, tolylfluanid, andchlorpyriphos

Chlormequat, trinexapac-ethyl, bromide,pirimiphos-methyl, chlorpyriphos-methyl,dichlorvos, malathion, maneb group,piperonyl-butoxide and benomyl group

A Imazalil, procymidone, endosulfan,iprodione, chlorpyriphos, dimethoate,thiabendazol, methidathion, metalaxyl andtoloclofos-methyl

No data provided.

P Maneb group, benomyl group, captan,phosalone, phosmet, procymidone,dimethoate, iprodione, diphenylamine andchlorpyriphos

Malathion, pirimiphos-methyl,chlorpyriphos-methyl, diazinon anddichlorvos

FIN Maleic-hydrazide, dithianon, hydrogenphosphide, bromide, chlormequat, diquat,maneb group, thiabendazol, imazalil andendosulfan

Chlormequat, hydrogen phosphide,bromide, pirimiphos-methyl and malathion

S Chlormequat, bromide, diquat, imazalil,maneb group, thiabendazol, maleic-hydrazide, ethoxyquin, fenbutatinoxide andcyhexatine

Bromide, glyphosate, hydrogen phosphide,chlorpyriphos-methyl, deltamethrin,pirimiphos-methyl, and dichlorvos

UK 2,4-D, chlormequat, ortho-phenylphenol,fenhexamid, glyphosate, chlorpropham,bromide, imazalil, dodine and DDT

Chlormequat, glyphosate, pirimiphos-methyl and etrimfos

Norway Chlormequat, ortho-phenylphenol, manebgroup, iprodione, imazalil, thiabendazolbenomyl group, propargite, cyprodinil andtolylfluanid

Chlormequat, glyphosate, pirimiphos-methyl, AMPA, malathion anddeltamethrin

Iceland Imazalil, thiabendazol, ortho-phenylphenol,chlorpyriphos, dicofol, methidathion,tolylfluanid, chlorothalonil, iprodione andprocymidone

No data provided.

Liechtenstein

Folpet, azinphosmethyl, maneb group,benomyl group, dimethoate, thiabendazoland diazinon

None found.

EU,NOR,

ICE andLIE

Maneb group, chlormequat, imazalil,benomyl group, thiabendazol,chlorpyriphos, iprodione, procymidone,bromide and endosulfan

Pirimiphos-methyl, malathion,chlormequat, bromide, glyphosate,dichlorvos, chlorpyriphos-methyl,deltamethrin, hydrogen phosphide anddiazinon

The table shows that the most frequently found pesticides on fruit and vegetables were mainlyfungicides, as in previous years. On cereals, the pesticides found were mainly insecticides. In

20

the year 2001, the 10 most frequently found pesticides were almost identical to the ones foundin 2000, and the majority was identical to those found in previous years.

In 2000, the reporting procedure changed. In 1996 - 1999 theabsolutenumber of findings wasreported whereas, from 2000 onwards, therelative frequency of pesticides' occurrences werereported. This situation limits the comparability of the data collected during 1996 - 1999 withthose collected in 2000 and 2001.

5. THE EU CO-ORDINATED MONITORING EXERCISE

As an EU co-ordinated monitoring exercise, the Commission recommended in 2001 viaCommission Recommendation 2001/42/EC that five commodities should be tested (apples,tomatoes, lettuce, strawberries and table grapes) for 36 pesticides (acephate, azinphos-methyl,azoxystrobin, benomyl group18, captan, chlorothalonil, chlorpyriphos, chlorpyriphos-methyl,deltamethrin, diazinon, dichlofluanid, dicofol, dimethoate, disulfotone, endosulfan, folpet,imazalil, iprodione, lambda-cyhalothrin, malathion, maneb group19, mecarbam, metalaxyl,methamidophos, methidathion, omethoate, oxydemeton-methyl, permethrin, phorate,pirimiphos-methyl, procymidone, propyzamide, thiabendazole, triazophos, thiometon andvinclozolin). This list has been extended substantially compared to previous years andcomprises the 20 pesticides analysed in 1998 to 2000 plus 16 additional ones. It also includesall the pesticides analysed in 1996 and 1997, apart from one20.

All Member States and EEA States participated in the EU co-ordinated programme. Overall,around 9,868 samples were analysed (2,641 apple samples, 2,016 tomato samples, 1,838lettuce samples, 1,652 strawberry samples and 1,721 grape samples). This is about twice thenumber of samples as in previous years. However, not all of the samples were analysed for all36 pesticides.

5.1. Sampling design applied in the 2001 EU co-ordinated monitoring programme

5.1.1. Description of the sampling design

In order to achieve reliable information concerning the concentration of pesticides in fruit,vegetables and cereals on the European market a suitable sampling plan is required.According to Commission Recommendation 2001/42/EC, each Member State should take theminimum number of samples specified in the Annex (cf. Table 9).

The sampling design of the co-ordinated programme is based on a statistical method proposedby Codex Alimentarius21.. Based on a binomial probability distribution, it can be calculatedthat examination of a total sample number of 459 gives a 99 % confidence of detecting onesample containing pesticides above a specific level if it is anticipated that 1 % of products of

18 The benomyl-group comprises three different compounds (benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl), which areanalysed with the same analytical method and determined as sum, expressed as carbendazim.

19 The maneb group, by legal definition, comprises five different dithiocarbamates, which are determined as sum,expressed as CS2.

20 DDT was only analysed in 1997 and is not included in the list of the 36 pesticides.21 Codex Alimentarius, Pesticide Residues in Foodstuffs, Rome 1994, ISBN 92-5-20372271-1; Vol. 2, p. 372

21

plant origin will contain residues above this specific level. This level could be the reportinglevel22 or the MRL.

The minimum numbers of samples to be taken of each commodity were fixed at a differentlevel for each country, according to their population and consumer numbers, since adjustingthe sample size to the size of the national markets improves the precision of the samplingdesign. The required number of samples varied between 12 and 93, resulting in a total of 460samples for all Member States and 496 samples for all participating countries (incl. EEAStates). This procedure was the same as in the exercises 1998 - 2000. In 2001, therecommended number of samples was taken in most cases and in many cases more sampleswere taken than recommended. However, Iceland and Liechtenstein did not take the requiredsample numbers for most of the commodities and Ireland took the required sample numbersonly for 2 out of 5 commodities. Most samples were taken for apples, followed by tomatoes,lettuce, table grapes and strawberries. Table 9 shows the required number of samples byMember State compared to the number of samples actually taken.

22 The reporting level is the routinely achievable limit of quantification (lowest level at which residues will be reportedas absolute numbers) for the monitoring laboratories and normally corresponds to the lowest calibrated level.

22

Table 9: Numbers of samples taken by Member State for each commodity

Number of samples taken by commodityCountryRecommen-ded numberof samples(for each

commodity)Apples Tomatoes Lettuce Strawberries Table

GrapesB 12 44 39 76 23 33

DK 12 139 129 89 46 140

D 93 558 489 325 389 593

EL 12 55 77 45 47 81

E 45 45 45 45 45 35

F 66 308 272 379 141 61

IRL 12 40 10 37 5 4

I 65 525 318 149 235 144

L 12 21 15 20 17 14

NL 17 129 109 134 128 180

A 12 12 12 12 12 12

P 12 50 66 85 21 88

FIN 12 116 78 83 145 68

S 12 202 105 75 68 105

UK 66 252 144 180 179 72

Total EU 460 2496 1908 1734 1501 1630

Norway 12 115 86 93 141 72

Iceland 12 20 11 4 8 9

Liechten-stein

12 10 11 7 2 10

Total EUand EEA

496 2641 2016 1838 1652 1721

23

5.1.2. Statistical evaluation of the results of the co-ordinated exercise

As described in section 5.1.1. the statistical approach of Codex Alimentarius requires that atleast one sample of the whole number of samples must contain a specific concentration of acertain pesticide (e.g. above the reporting level or above the MRL) in order to assess thelowest portion of food items containing pesticides above this specific level in the wholepopulation. In the following section, this lowest portion is estimated on a 95% confidencelevel for each of the 35 pesticides23.

The portion of samples with residues below or at the MRL (grey columns) or exceeding theMRL (white columns) of the respective pesticide are shown in Figures 3, 4, 5 and 6. Theresults are presented in a logarithmic scale in order to accommodate a broad range of data inthe figures. In addition, the corresponding confidence interval on the 95 % level is shown,reflecting the sampling error. The sampling error, in this context, reflects the variability of thedata due to the different numbers of samples taken for the determination of the respectivepesticide. Other error sources, such as how and when the samples were taken are not includedin this estimation.

The impact of the sampling error on the final result is illustrated using the reportedconcentrations of the benomyl group in the food items. 5,433 samples have been analysed and447 of them showed residues below or at the MRL. The number of 5,433 samples representsonly a part of the whole European market, therefore the calculated fraction of samples withresidues below or at the MRL (447/5433 = 8.23 %) is only an estimate for the true butunknown value. The variability of this value can be calculated and is expressed in terms of %samples, shown as error bars in the above mentioned Figures. For the example of the benomylgroup, this means that the true value of the number of samples with residues at or below theMRL would vary between 407 and 489 samples, which corresponds to a range of 7.5 to 9.0 %.

The relative sampling error increases with decreasing numbers of samples of a certaincategory. For cases where no samples with exceeding MRLs have been found, those error barsreflect the actual percentage of the specific commodity in the whole population that could stillcontain residues above the MRL. For example, no sample with residues exceeding the MRLfor disulfotone was found in the co-ordinated monitoring exercise, but the upper limit of theerror range is 0.16 %, which means that still 0.16 % of the specific commodities in the wholepopulation (European market) could have exceeding MRLs for disulfotone. This upper limitof the error range for the other pesticides for which no residues exceeding the MRL have beenfound (e.g. azinphosmethyl, mecarbam, oxymethon-methyl, permethrin), varied from 0.05 to0.27 - depending on the number of samples included (ranging from 1430 to 8866 for theindividual pesticides) - and was considered as very low. This ensures sufficient precision ofthe results and allows for subsequent risk analysis calculations to be carried out.

23 36 pesticides were analysed, but the results for captan and folpet were combined, because the MRL relates to the sumof captan and folpet.

24

Statistical evaluation of the results of the co-ordinated exercise:Percentage of samples with residues at or below MRL (national or EC-MRL) or exceeding theMRL (national or EC-MRL) for a specific pesticide with the respective error bars in alogarithmic scale

Figure 3: Results of the monitoring programme (I)

Figure 4:Results of the monitoring programme (II)

Results from the EU co-ordinatedmonitoring programme 2001 (I)

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Acephat

e

Azinpho

smethyl

Azoxys

trobin

Benom

ylgro

up

Chloroth

alonil

Chlorpyrip

hos

Chlorpyr

iphos-meth

yl

Deltam

ethrin

Diazin

on

Dichloflu

anid

%S

ampl

es

%Samples with residues below or at the MRL

Samples with residues above the MRL

Results from the EU co-ordinatedmonitoring programme 2001 (II)

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Dicofol

Dimeth

oate

Disulfoto

ne

Endosulf

an

Captan+

Folpet (S

um)

Imaza

lil

Ipro

dione

Lambda-c

yhaloth

rin

Mala

thion

Man

eb-gro

up

%S

ampl

es



25

Figure 5:Results of the monitoring programme (III)

Figure 6:Results of the monitoring programme (IV)

Results from the EU co-ordinatedmonitoring programme 2001 ( III)

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Mecar

bam

Met

alaxy

l

Met

hamidophos

Meth

idathio

n

Omet

hoate

Oxydemeth

on-m

ethyl

Perm

ethrin

Phorate

Pirimiphos-

meth

yl

Procym

idone

%S

ampl

es%Samples with residues below or at the MRL


Results from the EU co-ordinatedmonitoring programme 2001 (IV)

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Propyzamide Thiabendazol Triazophos Thiomethon Vinclozolin

%S

ampl

es



26

5.2. Evaluation by pesticide

The summarised results are given in Table 10 for all 35 pesticides24. The table also givesinformation on the highest residue of a particular pesticide found in a composite sample inthis monitoring exercise. Table 11 shows a selection of the most important pesticide-commodity combinations. More details can be found in Annex 2, where the complete resultsfor all reporting countries and all commodities are given.

The results vary among the 35 different pesticides investigated. In the EU co-ordinatedmonitoring programmes, residues of the maneb group were found most often (16.0 %* of allsamples), followed by iprodione (10.5 %*), procymidone (10.4 %*), benomyl group (8.7 %),captan/folpet (sum) (8.5 %), chlorpyriphos (5.3 %), endosulfan (4.2 %), vinclozolin (3.4 %),thiabendazol (3.0 %), dichlofluanid (2.5 %), dimethoate (2.2 %) and chlorothalonil (2.1 %).Seven further pesticides were found in amounts between 1 and 2 %, the remainder below 1 %.Disulfotone, oxydemeton-methyl and thiometon were not detected, but the number of samplesanalysed for these three pesticides was low (< 3,000) compared to the sample numbersanalysed for the other pesticides (up to 9,000) and they were only analysed by 6-8 countries.Azoxystrobin, a relatively new fungicide for which MRLs have been set in recent years, wasanalysed by 13 countries (about 5,000 samples). It was detected at or below the MRL in 1.9 %of the samples and exceeded in 0.04 % of the samples.

The maneb group was found mainly in lettuce and table grapes, but also to a large extent intomatoes and apples. About 24 %* of all lettuce and grape samples and about 11 %* of alltomato and apple samples contained residues of the maneb group.

Residues of iprodione were found most often in lettuce (22 %* of all lettuce samples), tablegrapes (17%*) and strawberries (12 %*). Residues of procymidone were found most often ingrapes (18 %*), but also in tomatoes (13 %*), lettuce (12 %*) and strawberries (12 %*).Residues of the benomyl group and captan/folpet were found most often in apples (15 %* and21 %* of all apple samples, respectively). More details about the occurrence of furtherpesticides in specific commodities are shown in Table 11.

Residues of the maneb group exceeded MRLs most often (0.61 % of all samples), followed bythe benomyl group (0.44 %), endosulfan (0.32 %), dicofol and methamidophos (0.28 % each).

The MRL for the maneb group was exceeded most often in lettuce (2.5 % of all lettucesamples). The residues of the benomyl group exceeded the MRL most often on strawberries(2.2 % of all strawberry samples). Residues of endosulfan, dicofol and methamidophosexceeded the MRL most often on strawberries (0.69 %, 0.65 % and 0.54 %, respectively of allstrawberry samples). Endosulfan was also exceeded on lettuce (0.58 % of all lettuce samples).

The maneb group was the pesticide both most often found and for which MRLs (national orEC-MRLs) was most often exceeded.

Figures 7 and 8 illustrate the findings with regard to the 35 different pesticides in decreasingorder of percentages.

24 36 pesticides were analysed but the results for Captan + Folpet were combined, see footnote 23.

27

The highest residues found were 31 mg/kg maneb group, 29.9 mg/kg captan/folpet, 29 mg/kgiprodione, 14.8 mg/kg chlorothalonil, 13 mg/kg dichlofluanid, 14.8 mg/kg vinclozolin and10.8 mg/kg procymidone, all of them on lettuce. This corresponds with the 1996 results,where the highest residues were also found mainly on lettuce.

* Percentages include sum of samples with residues at or below the MRL and exceeding the MRL

28

Table 10: Results from the EU co-ordinated monitoring programme for pesticide residues foreach pesticide analysed for in apples, tomatoes, lettuce, strawberries and table grapes

Pesticide TotalNo. of

samples

No. ofsampleswithoutresidues

No. ofsamples

withresiduesbelow orat MRL

% No. ofsamples


% Maximum residuefound in mg/kg(commodity inwhich it was

found and the EC-MRL in mg/kg)

Acephate 7550 7482 55 0.73 13 0.17 3.58 (lettuceEC-MRL: 1)

Azinphosmethyl 8604 8470 134 1.56 0 0.00 0.97 (table grapesEC-MRL: 1)

Azoxystrobin 4852 4757 93 1.92 2 0.04 1.70 (lettuceEC-MRL: 0.05)

Benomyl group 5433 4962 447 8.23 24 0.44 3.65 (table grapesEC-MRL: 2.0)

Chlorothalonil 8586 8408 172 2.00 6 0.07 14.80 (lettuceEC-MRL: 0.01)

Chlorpyriphos 8789 8325 456 5.19 8 0.09 1.20 (table grapesEC-MRL: 0.50)

Chlorpyriphos-methyl

8743 8612 127 1.45 4 0.05 0.35 (table grapesEC-MRL: 0.20)

Deltamethrin 8167 8084 81 0.99 2 0.02 0.40 (table grapesEC-MRL: 0.10)

Diazinon 8575 8553 19 0.22 3 0.03 0.34 (strawberriesEC-MRL:0.5/0.02*)

Dichlofluanid 8464 8253 210 2.48 1 0.01 13.00 (lettuceEC-MRL: 10.00)

Dicofol 7971 7891 58 0.73 22 0.28 0.80 (applesEC-MRL:1.0/0.02*)

Dimethoate 8556 8371 183 2.14 2 0.02 1.90 (lettuceEC-MRL: 1.0)

Disulfotone 2471 2471 0 0.00 0 0.00 Not detected.

Endosulfan 8478 8125 326 3.85 27 0.32 3.50 (lettuceEC-MRL:1.0/0.05*)

Captan+ Folpet(Sum)

7965 7289 665 8.35 11 0.14 29.9 (lettuceEC-MRL: 2.00

* applicable from 1 July 2001

29

Pesticide TotalNo. of

samples

No. ofsampleswithoutresidues

No. ofsamples

withresiduesbelow orat MRL

% No. ofsamples


% Maximum residuefound in mg/kg(commodity inwhich it was

found and the EC-MRL in mg/kg)

Imazalil 7594 7559 34 0.45 1 0.01 0.92 (applesEC-MRL: 5.00

Iprodione 8626 7722 902 10.46 2 0.02 29.00 (lettuceEC-MRL: 10.00

Lambda-cyhalothrin

7713 7638 71 0.92 4 0.05 0.33 (table grapesEC-MRL: 0.20

Malathion 8611 8580 29 0.34 2 0.02 1.66 (strawberriesEC-MRL: 0.50

Maneb-group 5274 4430 812 15.40 32 0.61 31.00 (lettuceEC-MRL: 5.00

Mecarbam 7308 7307 1 0.01 0 0.00 0.007 (table grapesEC-MRL: 0.05

Metalaxyl 7974 7821 150 1.88 3 0.04 2.56 (strawberriesEC-MRL: 0.50

Methamidophos 7617 7558 38 0.50 21 0.28 1.12 (strawberriesEC-MRL: 0.01

Methidathion 8684 8676 8 0.09 0 0.00 0.16 (table grapesEC-MRL: 0.50)

Omethoate 7500 7419 80 1.07 1 0.01 4.47 (lettuceEC-MRL: 0.20)

Oxydemethon-methyl

1430 1430 0 0.00 0 0.00 Not detected

Permethrin 7822 7806 16 0.20 0 0.00 0.5 (lettuceEC-MRL: 2.00

Phorate 3655 3654 1 0.03 0 0.00 0.03 (lettuceEC-MRL: 0.05*)

Pirimiphos-methyl

8495 8491 3 0.04 1 0.01 0.18 (table grapesEC-MRL: 0.05*)

Procymidone 8866 7940 913 10.30 13 0.15 10.80 (lettuceEC-MRL: 5.00)

Propyzamide 6960 6938 20 0.29 2 0.03 2.50 (lettuceEC-MRL: 1.00*)

Thiabendazol 7009 6799 204 2.91 6 0.09 3.00 (applesEC-MRL: 5.00)

Triazophos 6590 6589 1 0.02 0 0.00 0.021 (applesEC-MRL: 0.02*)

Thiomethon 2599 2599 0 0.00 0 0.00 Not detected

Vinclozolin 8828 8531 285 3.23 12 0.14 14.8 (lettuceEC-MRL: 5.00)


30

Results of the 2001 co-ordinated exercise by pesticide:

Fig. 7: Percentage of samples at or below MRL (national or EC) andFig. 8: Percentage of samples exceeding the MRL (national or EC)

Percentage of samples with residues at or below the MRL

0123456789

10111213141516

Maneb-group

Iprodione

Procymidone

Captan+ Folpet (Sum)

Benomyl group

Chlorpyriphos

Endosulfan

Vinclozolin

Thiabendazol

Dichlofluanid

Dimethoate

Chlorothalonil

Azoxystrobin

Metalaxyl

Azinphosmethyl


Omethoate

Deltamethrin

Lambda-cyhalothrin

Acephate

Dicofol

Metham

idophos

Imazalil

Malathion

Propyzamide

Diazinon

Permethrin

Methidathion

Pirimiphos-m

ethyl

Phorate

Triazophos

Mecarbam

Disulfotone

Oxydemethonmethyl

Thiomethon

Pesticides

%

Figure 7: Samples with residues at or below MRL (national or EC-MRL)

Percentage of samples with residues exceeding the MRL

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.55

0.60

0.65

Maneb-group

Benomyl group

Endosulfan

Dicofol

Metham

idophos

Acephate

Procymidone

Captan+Folpet(Sum)

Vinclozolin

Chlorpyriphos

Thiabendazol

Chlorothalonil

Lambda-cyhalothrin


Azoxystrobin

Metalaxyl

Diazinon

Propyzamide

Deltamethrin

Dimethoate

Malathion

Iprodione

Omethoate

Imazalil

Dichlofluanid

Pirimiphos-m

ethyl

Azinphosmethyl

Disulfotone

Mecarbam

Methidathion

Oxydemethonmethyl

Permethrin

Phorate

Triazophos

Thiomethon

Pesticides

%

Figure 8: Samples with residues exceeding the MRL (national or EC-MRL)

31

Table 11: Presentation of the most important pesticide-commodity combinations where residueswere found (in alphabetical order)

Pesticides Detected most often in25 MRL exceeded most often in

Acephate Lettuce(3.07% of all lettuce samples; equal to0.56% of all samples)

Tomatoes(0.32% of all tomato samples;equal to 0.07% of all samples)

Azinphosmethyl Apples(5.47% of all apple samples, equal to1.45% of all samples)

No exceedances.

Azoxystrobin Table grapes(7.70% of all table grape samples;equal to 1.69% of all samples)

Lettuce(0.23% of all lettuce samples;equal to 0.04% of all samples)

Benomyl group Apples(15.26% of all apple samples; equal to4.33% of all samples)

Table grapes(8.42% of all table grape samples;equal to 1.62% of all samples)

Strawberries(2.20% of all strawberry samples;equal to 0.31% of all samples)

Chlorothalonil Tomatoes(6.50% of all tomato samples; equal to1.34% of all samples)

Lettuce(0.38% of all lettuce samples;equal to0.07% of all samples)

Chlorpyriphos Apples(10.94% of all apple samples; equal to2.84% of all samples)


Table grapes(0.31% of all table grape samples;equal to0.06% of all samples)




Deltamethrin Lettuce(3.78% of all lettuce samples; equal to0.70% of all samples)


Diazinon Apples(0.59% of all apple samples; equal to0.15% of all samples)


Dichlofluanid Strawberries(6.08% of all strawberry samples;equal to 1.03% of all samples)


25 Percentages in this column include samples at or below the MRL and exceeding the MRL

32


Dicofol Table grapes(1.48% of all table grape samples;equal to 0.28% of all samples)


Dimethoate Table grapes(4.87% of all table grape samples;equal to 0.86% of all samples)


Disulfotone Not detected.

Endosulfan Tomatoes(9.29% of all tomato samples; equal to1.88% of all samples)


Captan+ Folpet(Sum)

Apples(20.66% of all apple samples; equal to5.47% of all samples)

Table grapes(8.79% of all table grape samples;equal to 1.64% of al samples)


Imazalil Apples(1.10% of all apple samples; equal to0.30% of all samples)

Table grapes(0.07% of table grape samples;equal to 0.01% of all samples)

Iprodione Lettuce(21.77% of all lettuce samples; equalto 4.19% of all samples)




Lambda-cyhalothrin


Table grapes(0.14% of table grape samples;equal to 0.03% of all samples)

Malathion Strawberries(1.60% of all strawberry samples;equal to 0.28% of all samples)


33


Maneb-group Lettuce(24.63% of all lettuce samples; equalto 5.35% of all samples)


Tomatoes(11.75% of all tomato samples; equalto 2.75% of all samples)

Apples(11.40% of all apple samples; equal to2.31% of all samples)


Mecarbam Only 1 detection. No exceedances

Metalaxyl Lettuce(4.43% of all lettuce samples; equal to0.82% of all samples)


Methamidophos Lettuce(2.18% of all lettuce samples; equal to0.39% of all samples)


Methidathion Only 8 detections;5 on apples

No exceedances

Omethoate Table grapes(3.01% of all table grape samples;equal to 0.57% of all samples)


Oxydemethonmeth Not detectedPermethrin Lettuce

(0.55% of all lettuce samples; equal to0.10% of all samples)

No exceedances

Phorate Only 1 detection, on lettuce No exceedances

Pirimiphos-methyl Only 4 detections; 2 on table grapes 1 exceedance, on table grapes

34


Procymidone Table grapes(17.63% of all table grape samples;equal to 3.18% of all samples)

Tomatoes(12.91% of all tomato samples; equalto 2.63% of all samples)

Lettuce(11.98% of all lettuce samples; equalto 2.27% of all samples)


Apples(0.49% of all apple samples; equalto 0.12% of all samples)

Propyzamide Lettuce(1.52% of all lettuce samples; equal to0.30% of all samples)



Thiabendazol Apples(9.47% of all apple samples; equal to2.57% of all samples)

Strawberries(0.34% of all strawberry samples;equal to0.06% of all samples)

Triazophos Only 1 detection, on apples No exceedances

Thiomethon No detections

Vinclozolin Lettuce(8.63% of all lettuce samples; equal to1.59% of all samples)

Tomatoes(0.39% of all tomato samples;equal to 0.08% of all samples)

The most important pesticide-commodity combination where detectable residues were found(incl. those at or below the MRL and exceeding the MRL) was maneb group/lettuce, manebgroup/table grapes, iprodione/lettuce and captan/folpet (sum)/apples.

With regard to MRL exceedances the most important pesticide-commodity combinations weremaneb group/lettuce and benomyl group/strawberries.

35

Table 12: Comparative overview of the nine pesticides that were analysed in both 1996 and 2001on the same five commodities.

'96 '01 '96 '01 '96 '01 '96 '01 '96 '01Acephate 1.40 0.36 0.48 0.52 2.99 2.85 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.07Benomyl group 16.12 15.26 1.60 5.08 5.95 3.80 5.55 4.39 7.54 8.04Chlorothalonil 0.13 0.45 4.35 6.50 0.71 0.19 1.95 2.82 0.07 0.25Chlorpyriphos 6.13 10.94 0.10 1.11 0.26 0.19 0.49 0.81 6.88 10.71Chlorpyriphos-methyl 1.81 1.78 0.15 0.28 0.13 0.06 1.03 1.28 0.39 3.88Iprodione 1.41 1.66 1.67 3.82 27.37 21.65 14.82 12.00 16.42 16.60Maneb-group 6.58 11.40 7.10 11.75 26.29 22.18 12.57 5.06 18.17 23.89Methamidophos 0.04 0.05 1.30 0.51 1.67 2.03 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.00Procymidone 0.59 0.45 9.11 12.91 7.97 11.92 17.58 12.27 16.85 17.56

'96 '01 '96 '01 '96 '01 '96 '01 '96 '01Acephate 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.36 0.22 0.00 0.16 1.18 0.21Benomyl group 0.21 0.00 0.13 0.25 1.70 0.00 2.50 2.20 2.09 0.38Chlorothalonil 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.38 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00Chlorpyriphos 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.31Chlorpyriphos-methyl 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.12 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.13Iprodione 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Maneb-group 0.09 0.00 0.61 0.00 5.36 2.45 0.36 0.00 0.71 0.38Methamidophos 0.04 0.10 0.06 0.44 0.39 0.15 0.31 0.54 0.93 0.21Procymidone 0.69 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.06

% of samples with residues AT OR BELOW the MRL

% of samples with residues ABOVE the MRLApples Tomatoes Lettuce Strawberries Table Grapes

Table GrapesApples Tomatoes Lettuce Strawberries

In 2001 the same five commodities were analysed as in 1996. Table 12 shows a comparativeoverview of the nine pesticides which were analysed in both 1996 and 2001.

As the table shows, there is no clear trend in the residue findings. Overall, there is a tendencytowards higher percentage of findings below or at the MRL in 2001 than in 1996; at the sametime there is a lower rate of exceeding MRLs in 2001. However, the comparison is difficult asthe MRLs may have changed from 1996 to 2001.

For tomatoes, the results suggest that the situation with regard to residues at or below theMRL has worsened for almost all pesticides (apart from methamidophos). For apples, lettuce,strawberries and table grapes the percentage of positive findings for some pesticides increased(e.g. chlorpyriphos, maneb group and chlorothalonil on apples and table grapes, procymidoneon lettuce and chlorpyriphos-methyl on table grapes), others decreased (benomyl group,iprodione and maneb group on lettuce and strawberries, acephate on apples and table grapes,chlorothalonil on lettuce).

For lettuce and strawberries, the iprodione and maneb group findings below or at the MRLhave somewhat improved compared to 1996, although they still remain at a very high level.

For the majority of pesticides, the percentages of MRL exceedings decreased or remained atthe same level in 2001. However, significant increases were seen for some pesticides(acephate on tomatoes and strawberries, methamidophos on apples, tomatoes and strawberriesand chlorpyriphos on lettuce).

36

5.3. Evaluation by commodity

Tables 13 and 14 give an overview of the findings in the different commodities. With regardto all five commodities investigated, about 47 % of the samples contained residues ofpesticides at or below the MRL (national or EC-MRL) and 2.2 % above the MRL (Table 13).Residues at or below the MRL were found most often in table grapes (60 %), followed bystrawberries (51 %), lettuce (49 %), apples (47%) and tomatoes (33 %). MRLs (includingnational or EC-MRLs) were exceeded most often in lettuce (3.9 %), followed by strawberries(3.3 %), table grapes (1.8 %), tomatoes (1,5 %) and apples (1.1 %).

In these results, no differentiation is made with regard to findings of several pesticides in thesame sample, which means that a sample where two different pesticides were found would becounted just as one finding with detectable residues in Table 13.

Supplementary to that the information in Table 13, Table 14 shows the residues found inindividual determinations, which means the findings with regard to every single pesticide. Inthis table, a sample where two different pesticides were found would be counted as twofindings with detectable residues. Here, the order of findings is different from Table 13.Residues of a specific pesticide at or below the MRL (national or EC-MRL) were found mostoften in table grapes (3.7 %), followed by apples (3.1 %), lettuce (2.9 %), strawberries (2.2 %)and tomatoes (1.7 %). Pesticide residues exceeding the MRL were found most often in lettuce(0.15 %), followed by strawberries (0.12 %), table grapes (0.07 %), tomatoes (0.06 %) andapples (0.04 %). This corresponds with the results in Table 13.

It can be concluded that table grapes were the commodity on which residues were most oftenfound at or below the MRL, but that exceedances occurred most often on lettuce.

Table 13: Residues found in the five commodities analysed in the EU co-ordinated monitoringprogramme

Number ofsamplesanalysed

Withoutdetectableresidues

% With residuesbelow or at

MRL (nationalor EC-MRL)

% With residuesabove MRL(national orEC-MRL)

%

Apples 2641 1372 52 1241 47 28 1.1

Tomatoes 2016 1320 65 665 33 31 1.5

Lettuce 1838 866 47 901 49 71 3.9

Strawberries 1652 762 46 836 51 54 3.3

Table grapes 1721 665 39 1025 60 31 1.8

SUM 9868 4985 51 4668 47 215 2.2

37

Table 14: Residues found in individual determinations (ind. det.) in the five commoditiesanalysed in the EU co-ordinated monitoring programme

Total numberof ind. det.

Number ofind. det.withoutresidues

Number of ind.det. with

residues belowor at MRL

(national or EC)

% Number of ind.det. where a

residue exceededthe MRL

(national or EC)

%

Apples 68074 65924 2121 3.1 29 0.04

Tomatoes 55538 54578 927 1.7 33 0.06

Lettuce 49827 48329 1422 2.9 76 0.15

Strawberries 45071 44027 988 2.2 56 0.12

Table grapes 49483 47629 1821 3.7 33 0.07

SUM 267993 260487 7279 2.7 227 0.08

It appears from Table 15 that on all five commodities analysed in 2001, plant protectionproducts have been more frequently applied than on other commodities analysed in previousyears. The commodities in 2001 show, on average, a higher percentage of positive findings ator below the MRL than the commodities analysed in the years 1997 - 2000 (Table 15), whilethe average rate of MRL exceedances is not generally higher.

Comparison with 1996 (same five commodities as in 2001) is impossible, as the data availabledo not allow such comparison.

Table 15: Overall results of the 4 - 5 commodities analysed during 1997 - 2001

Commoditiesanalysed in

year





% With residuesabove MRL(national orEC-MRL)

%

1996 n/a n/a n/a n/a

1997 6021 3932 65 2023 34 66 1.1

1998 3836 2524 66 1235 32 77 2.0

1999 4707 3227 69 1043 22 411 8.7

2000 3737 2998 80 638 17 101 2.7

2001 9868 4985 51 4668 47 215 2.2

n/a: not available

38

5.4. Evaluation by country

With regard to the 36 pesticides and the five commodities of the co-ordinated programme,residues at or below the MRL (national or EC-MRL) were found in 47 % of the samples. In2.2 % of the samples, these residues exceeded MRLs (national or EC-MRLs). Differencesbetween countries can result e.g. from different sampling approaches (whether surveillancesampling or follow-up enforcement sampling), amounts of samples analysed for pesticidesthat are most likely to be found, and reporting levels (cf. chapter 4.1). Table 16 summarisesthe results sorted by country and Figure 9 illustrates those results.

Table 16: Residues of pesticides in the five commodities as analysed in the EU Member Statesand EEA States





% With residuesabove MRL

(national or EC-MRL)

%

B 215 126 59 87 40 2 0.9

DK 543 354 65 179 33 10 1.8

D 2354 987 42 1299 55 68 2.9

EL 305 77 25 208 68 20 6.6

E 215 102 47 104 48 9 4.2

F 1161 522 45 587 51 52 4.5

IRL 96 44 46 49 51 3 3.1

I 1371 855 62 501 37 15 1.1

L 87 53 61 30 34 4 4.6

NL 680 183 27 491 72 6 0.9

A 60 27 45 31 52 2 3.3

P 310 185 60 115 37 10 3.2

FIN 490 258 53 230 47 2 0.4

S 555 354 64 198 36 3 0.5

UK 827 524 63 299 36 4 0.5

Norway 507 262 52 242 48 3 0.6

Iceland 52 44 85 7 13 1 1.9

Liech-tenstein

40 28 70 11 28 1 2.5

Total 9868 4985 51 4668 47 215 2.2

39

Evaluation of the results of the 2001 co-ordinated exercise by country:Percentage of samples without detectable residues, with residues at or below MRL (national or EC-MRL) and with residues exceeding the MRL (national or EC-MRL)

Evaluation by country

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Belgium

Denmark

Germany

Greece

Spain

France

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

The Netherlands

Austria

Portugal

Finland

Sweden

United Kingdom

Norway

Iceland

Liechtenstein

Cou

ntry

% samples

% samples without detectable residues% samples with residues at or below the MRL% samples with residues > MRL

Figure 9: Percentage of samples without residues, with residues at or below the MRL and with residuesexceeding the MRL sorted by country

40

5.5. Homogeneity exercise

In 2001, only one country (Luxembourg) provided data for the homogeneity exercise.However, all four composite apple samples analysed for methidathion were below thereporting limit and therefore the single items (units) were not analysed.

5.6. Exposure assessment

5.6.1. Chronic risk

To estimate the chronic risk to the consumer of consuming the commodities investigated inthe EU co-ordinated programme, calculations can be done based on consumption figures fromthe World Health Organisation (Standard European Diet). A realistic exposure assessment forthose pesticides representing a chronic risk should not be carried out with the highest residuesfound, but more correctly with the average residues or, to consider worst case conditions, onthe basis of the 90th percentile26. The 90th percentile of the amount of residues found in themonitoring exercise is the value below which 90% of the values are situated, including thosesamples with no detectable residues (see calculation example in the footnote)27. The riskassessment was carried out for an adult with an average bodyweight of 60 kg. The intake of aspecific pesticide via a specific commodity was calculated and compared with the ADI. Theresults (as a percentage of ADI) are given in Table 17.

26 WHO/FSF/FOS/97.7, p. 1427 Example: the 90th percentile for the content of residues of the maneb group in head cabbage is determined thus: 564

samples were analysed in total in the EU and EEA States, out of which 328 samples contained no detectableresidues. 159 samples showed different residue contents, categorised in 7 categories (cat.1: up to 0.01 mg/kg, cat. 2:0.011-0.020 mg/kg, cat. 3: 0.021-0.050 mg/kg, cat. 4: 0.051-0.1 mg/kg, cat. 5: 0.11-0.2 mg/kg, cat. 6: 0.21-0.5mg/kg). 40 further samples showed contents between 0.51 and 1.0 mg/kg (cat. 7). 90 % of all values wouldcomprise 564*0.9=507.6 samples. Since 328 samples are without residues and 159 samples have residue contentsbetween the reporting limit and 0.5 mg/kg, the 507th /508th sample falls within the 40 samples of category 7 (0.51-1.0 mg/kg). Because of the categorised reporting format the exact 90th percentile value cannot be given, but the 90th

percentile can be given as≤ 1.0 mg/kg as the upper limit of category 7 is 1.0 mg/kg.

41

Table 17: Exposure assessment for chronic risk from the dietary intake of pesticide residues(based on the 90th percentile), calculated for an adult (60 kg bodyweight), in thosecommodities of the co-ordinated programme in which the highest residues of the respectivepesticides were found, and where the 90th percentile was above 0.01 mg/kg

Compound Food item 90thpercentile(mg pesticide /kg commodity)

ADI 28

(mgpesticide /kg bodyweight

Averageconsump-

tion(kg commodity /

day)29

Intake viaspecific

commodity(mg pesticide /day / kg body

weight)30

Intakein % ofthe ADI

Acephate Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.03 -- -- --

Azinphosmethyl Table grapes ≤ 0.01 0.005 -- -- --

Azoxystrobin Lettuce ≤ 0.01 -- -- -- --

Benomyl group Table grapes ≤ 0.01 0.0331 -- -- --

Captan Apples < 0.20 0.1 0.040 0.000133 0.13

Chlorothalonil Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.03 -- -- --

Chlorpyriphos Table grapes ≤ 0.02 0.01 0.0138 0.0000046 0.046


Table grapes ≤ 0.01 0.01 -- -- --

Deltamethrin Table grapes ≤ 0.01 0.01 -- -- --

Diazinon Strawberries ≤ 0.01 0.002 -- -- --

Dichlofluanid Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.3 -- -- --

Dicofol Apples ≤ 0.01 0.002 -- -- --

Dimethoate Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.002 -- -- --

Disulfotone Not detected -- -- -- --- --

Endosulfan Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.006 -- -- --

Folpet Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.1 -- -- --

Imazalil Apples ≤ 0.01 0.03 -- -- --

Iprodione Lettuce ≤ 1.0 0.06 -- -- --

Lambda-cyhalothrin

Table grapes ≤ 0.01 -- -- -- --

Malathion Strawberries ≤ 0.01 0.3 -- -- --

Maneb-group Lettuce ≤ 2.0 0.03/0.00732

0.0225 0.00075 2.5/11

28 WHO/PCS/2000.129 Standard European Diet of the World Health Organization30 Calculated only if the 90th percentile is above the general reporting limit of 0.01 mg/kg of the agreed format31 ADI of carbendazim, as this pesticide has the lowest ADI of the three pesticides (carbenazim, benomyl, thiophanate-

methyl) detected as carbendazim32 Group ADI for maneb, mancozeb, metiram, zineb: 0.03; ADI for propineb: 0.007

42

Compound Food item 90thpercentile(mg pesticide /kg commodity)

ADI 28

(mgpesticide /kg bodyweight

Averageconsump-

tion(kg commodity /

day)29

Intake viaspecific


weight)30

Intakein % ofthe ADI

Mecarbam Table grapes ≤ 0.01 0.002 -- -- --

Metalaxyl Strawberries ≤ 0.01 0.03 -- -- --

Methamidophos Strawberries ≤ 0.01 0.004 -- -- --

Methidathion Table grapes ≤ 0.01 0.001 -- -- --

Omethoate Lettuce ≤ 0.01 -- -- -- --

Oxydemeton-methyl

Not detected -- -- -- -- --

Permethrin Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.05 -- -- --

Phorate Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.0005 -- -- --

Pirimiphos-methyl

Table grapes ≤ 0.01 0.03 -- -- --

Propyzamide Lettuce ≤ 0.01 -- -- -- --

Thiabendazol Apples ≤ 0.01 0.1 -- -- --

Triazophos Apples ≤ 0.01 -- -- -- --

Thiomethon Not detected -- -- -- -- --

Vinclozolin Lettuce ≤ 0.01 0.01 -- -- --

As shown by the results in Table 17, the intake of pesticide residues does not exceed the ADIin any case. It is below a percentage of 11 % of the ADI for all pesticides. The exposureranges from 0.046 % of the ADI for chlorpyriphos on table grapes, to 11 % of the ADI for themaneb group on lettuce (calculated with the ADI 0.007 for propineb).

5.6.2. Acute risk

Currently, there is no universally accepted methodology for evaluating risks from acuteexposure. However, as an example, the acute risk can be evaluated by using the UK ConsumerExposure Model, where an exposure assessment is carried out based on the 97.5th percentileof consumption33. That means, in order to include consumers with a high consumption ofspecific commodities, a large portion value is used. The 97.5th percentile is the value belowwhich the consumption of 97.5 % of all consumers is situated. For the 2001 co-ordinatedprogramme, the evaluation of the acute risk was carried out for those pesticides which haveacute toxicity and where acute Reference Doses (acute RfDs) have been set. The highestresidue found in a composite sample was used in this calculation. In order to consider worstcase conditions, a default variability factor of seven34, taking into account unit-to-unitvariability of single units, was used for apples as a medium-sized crop with a unit weight≤ 250 g. For lettuce (unit weight > 250 g) and table grapes, which can show large variations

33 UK 1998, Technical Policy on the Estimation of Acute Dietary Intakes of Pesticide Residues, AAHL/3/1998, 13January 1998, PSD, York

34 2000 Joint FAO/WHO meeting on Pesticide Residues, Geneva 20-29 September 2000, p.15

43

between the different grape bunches, a default variability factor of five has been used. On thebasis of those data, an exposure assessment for an adult of 70.1 kg and a toddler of 14.5 kghave been carried out and the intake of the specific pesticide via a specific commodity wascompared with the acute Reference Dose (acute RfD). The results are shown in Table 18.

Table 18: Exposure assessment for acute risk from the pesticides investigated in the 2001 co-ordinated programme for the products with the highest residues found in a composite samplein the European Union. The calculation was performed with the UK Consumer ExposureModel for an adult (70.1 kg) and a toddler (14.5 kg) and only those pesticides which haveacute toxicity and where an acute Reference Dose has been set.

Compound Fooditem

Maximumresidue

found in acomposite

sample(mg pesticide / kg

commodity

acuteReference

Dose(mg pesticide /kg body weight

97.5th

percentile ofconsumption

(kg commodity /

day)35

Homo-geneityfactor

Intake viaspecific


weight)

Intake in% of the

acuteReference

Dose

0.0163(adult)

16 %(adult)

Chlorpyri-phos

Tablegrapes

1.2

EC-MRL:0.50

0.1 0.190 (adult)/0.158(toddler)

5

0.0654(toddler)

65 %(toddler)

0.0054(adult)

11 %(adult)

Deltamethrin Tablegrapes

0.40

EC-MRL:0.10

0.05 0.190(adult)/0.158

(toddler)

5

0.0218(toddler)

44 %(toddler)

0.000984(adult)

3.3(adult)

Diazinon Straw-berries

0.34

EC-MRL:0.5/0.02*

0.03 0.203(adult)/0.111

(toddler)

1

0.00260(toddler)

8.7(toddler)

0.0232(adult)

116 %(adult)

Endosulfan36 Lettuce 3.5

EC-MRL:1.0/0.05*

0.02 0.093(adult)/0.025

(toddler)

5

0.0302(toddler)

151 %(toddler)


35 Consumer Exposure Model, UK36 No Rapid Alert has been notified by France where this residue has been detected

44

Compound Fooditem

Maximumresidue

found in acomposite

sample(mg pesticide / kg

commodity

acuteReference

Dose(mg pesticide /kg body weight

97.5th

percentile ofconsumption

(kg commodity /

day)37

Homo-geneityfactor

Intake viaspecific


weight)

Intake in% of the

acuteReference

Dose

0.00324(adult)

32 %(adult)

Methamido-phos

Straw-berries

1.12

EC-MRL:0.01

0.01 0.203(adult)/0.111

(toddler)

1

0.00857(toddler)

86 %(toddler)

Methidathion Tablegrapes

0.16

EC-MRL:0.50

0.01 0.190 (adult)/0.158

(toddler)

5 0.00217(adult)

22 %(adult)

0.00872(toddler)

87 %(toddler)

Permethrin Lettuce 0.5

EC-MRL:2.0

1.5 0.093(adult)/0.025

(toddler)

5 0.00331(adult)

0.2 %(adult)

0.00431(toddler)

0.3 %(toddler)

Triazophos Apples 0.021

EC-MRL:0.02

0.001 0.308(adult)/0.199

(toddler)

7 0.000294(adult)

29 %(adult)

0.00126(toddler)

126 %(toddler)

As Table 18 shows, the intakes for the highest residues in a composite sample for most of thepesticides analysed are below the acute RfD. However, for endosulfan in lettuce the acute RfDis exceeded for both adults and toddlers. For triazophos in apples the acute RfD is exceeded fortoddlers, but not for adults. These results give some reason for concern as they indicate that ahealth risk cannot be excluded. This concerns mainly toddlers when consuming large amountsof apples or lettuce.

In the case of endosulfan on lettuce, where the MRL was significantly exceeded, no RapidAlert had been notified by the country who has detected the exceedance (France).

37 Consumer Exposure Model, UK

45

6. SAMPLING

Commission Directive 79/700/EEC established sampling methods for the official control ofpesticide residues in and on fruit and vegetables. Member States are required to use thesemethods for their pesticide residue monitoring. Table 19 shows the information given onsampling in the summaries of the national monitoring reports of the Member States and EEAStates. In most cases, sampling followed national plans that were often established taking intoconsideration consumption, production, imported and exported products and risks (e.g. resultsfrom previous years).

Table 20 shows the distribution of domestic/imported samples and the relationship of thenumber of samples taken to the population size. The relationship of domestic and importedsamples should reflect the situation in the respective Member State. In total (EU and EEAStates), about 39 % of the samples were domestic samples, 39 % were imported samples (incl.those from other EU Member States) and 21 % were of unknown origin. This was mainly dueto the fact that Italy did not distinguish imported from domestic. More detailed informationcan be found in the summaries of the national monitoring reports in Annex 1.

Samples were taken at different points, such as wholesalers and retailers, local and centralmarkets, points of entry (for imported products), and processing industries.

Table 19: Summary on sampling by the national authorities (information taken from theone-page summaries)

Country Summary on sampling

B Sampling was carried out mostly according to Commission Directive 79/700/EEC,at auctions, importers, wholesalers, processors and, exceptionally, in retail. Thesampling plan took account of average consumption, production figures, results ofprevious years, analytical and budgetary possibilities and other useful information.

DK The sampling plan took account of dietary consumption, production, import dataand monitoring results from previous years. The samples were taken mainly atwholesalers and importers, domestic samples also at producers and shops,processed food at shops.

D Samples were taken at the level of producers, manufacturers, wholesalers, retailersand restaurants, according to a national sampling protocol published as officiallegal regulations.

EL Samples were randomly taken from points of entry, wholesalers, retailers and farmgates.

E Samples were taken from domestic crops at production and wholesalers level,following Directive 79/700/EEC. Samples were taken proportional to production,taking into account the EU co-ordinated programme and specific actions withregard to certain crops.

46


F Crops and processed foods are sampled by surveillance inspectors, following thesampling procedure requirements, at growers, wholesalers and retailers. Thegeneral sampling programme is drawn up by the central authority and takesaccount of national and European priorities. This programme takes account of thedietary proportion of plant products, the EU co-ordinated programme, previousresults and targeted inspection on certain fruits and vegetables (peppers andsalads).

IRL Samples are taken in accordance with an annual monitoring programme which isagreed between the Pesticide Control Service and the Food Safety Authority ofIreland. This programme takes account of the consumption patterns of Irish adults,historical results from previous years, the EU co-ordinated monitoring programmeand the extent to which some foods are consumed in a raw unprocessed manner.Samples are taken primarily at wholesale level by officers of the Pesticide ControlService.

I Not provided.

L Samples were taken according to an annual sampling plan. Imported products weresampled at wholesaler distribution points, local products were sampled at retailersat the central market in the City of Luxembourg. Only routine sampling (no follow-up enforcement sampling) was done. As far as practicable, sampling was doneaccording to Directive 79/700/EEC.

NL The samples are taken without prior information about the presence of pesticidesand, therefore, represent the situation on the market for the product at that time.But sampling is directed relatively more to products where previous resultsindicated MRL violations. As required by EU-directive 90/642/EU, a monitoringplan is made. Directive 79/700/EEC (as transposed into national law) wasrespected. The monitoring program is primarily directed to major products in theconsumption pattern, but some capacity is reserved for minor products. In themonitoring program special attention was given to chlormequat on pears, becauseof the high level of exceedances in 1999.

A Sampling was based on a nation-wide sampling plan, taking into account dataconcerning dietary consumption, production and import of fruit and vegetables, theco-ordinated exercise, results of former measurements as well as analytical andbudgetary capacities.

P The national programme for fruits and vegetables was based on the EU co-ordinated programme, complemented selections based on consumption and resultsof previous years. Less important crops were sampled as part of a rollingprogramme. The numbers of samples and pesticides analysed were plannedaccording to the analytical capabilities and available resources in the participatinglaboratories. Samples were taken mostly at wholesale commerce and wholesalers’warehouses. Cereals were often sampled from milling plants and a small fractionof samples were collected at farm gate and at retail level.

47


FIN The national and EC co-ordinated pesticide residues monitoring was carried outaccording to an annual program. Domestic samples were collected from farms orretail shops. The majority of imported food samples were taken by Customsinspectors, from wholesalers. The sampling procedure of directive 79/700/EECwas followed as far as practicable.

S The target number of samples to be collected of each food is roughly proportionalto the food's consumption rate and takes into account both the amount of domesticproduction and the amount of imports from EU countries and third countries.However, the number is also based on the importance of the foodstuff in the dietsof infants and young children as well as residues found in prior samples.

UK The sampling plan was based on a main commodity rolling programme, takinginto account levels of consumption, information on possible levels of residues andthe need to ensure that a wide range of commodities is included. CodexAlimentarius guidelines were followed where practicable. Data from other sourcesare considered as well in determining the surveillance programme.

Norway Samples were taken mainly from wholesaler’s warehouses but also at retail outletsand farm gates. The number of surveillance samples of each commodity roughlyreflects their share of the market, but more samples were taken of commoditiessuspected to contain residues. For samples exceeding MRLs compliance sampleswere taken as a follow up.

Iceland Samples are taken, according to an official monitoring program, at wholesaler'swarehouses. Sampling is focused on imported products mainly since fruits forcommercial purposes are not grown in Iceland and a great part of vegetables areimported.

Liech-tenstein

The annual sampling plan is based on domestic production and the ESA38 co-ordinated programme. The programme started in the second half of 2001. Samplesof fresh fruits, vegetables and cereals were collected mostly from retailers, but alsofrom farms and food processing plants, mostly in accordance with Directive79/700/EEC.

38 EFTA Surveillance Authority

48

Table 20: Number and origin of the samples taken by country (sum of surveillance andfollow-up enforcement samples, sum of fresh (incl. frozen) fruit, vegetables,cereals andprocessedproducts

Coun-try

Totalnum-ber ofsamp-

lestaken

Number ofinhabitants

percountry39

Samp-les

takenper

100 000inhabi-tants

No. ofdomes-

ticsamp-

lestaken

% fromtotal

samplenum-ber

No. ofimpor-

tedsamplestaken40

%fromtotal

samplenum-ber

No. ofsamples

withunknown

origin

% fromtotal

samplenumber

B 1029 10,263,414 10 313 30 175 17 541 53

DK 3481 5,349,212 65 1175 34 2306 66 0 0

D 6340 82,259,540 8 2822 45 3518 55 0 0

EL 1739 10,542,808 16 1413 81 326 19 0 0

E 3341 40,121,673 8 3341 100 0 0 0 0

F 4369 59,037,225 7 3051 70 1318 30 0 0

IRL 331 3,826,159 9 109 33 222 67 0 0

I 9365 57,844,017 16 0 0 0 0 9365 100

L 171 441,300 39 30 18 141 82 0 0

NL 2896 15,987,075 18 1280 44 1616 56 0 0

A 962 8,121,345 12 350 36 612 64 0 0

P 604 10,262,877 6 445 74 159 26 0 0

FIN 2439 5,181,115 47 496 20 1943 80 0 0

S 2949 8,882,792 33 866 29 2083 71 0 0

UK 3144 59,862,820 5 1400 45 1744 55 0 0

Norway 2618 4,503,436 58 1003 38 1615 62 0 0

Iceland 308 283,361 109 58 19 250 81 0 0

Liech-tenstein

63 32,863 192 36 57 27 43 0 0

Total 46149 382,803,032 12 18188 39 18055 39 9906 21

* No data were provided by Italy

39 Eurostat, New Cronos database, Population figures for 1 January 200140 Including samples from other EU Member States

49

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE

Council Directive 90/642/EEC, as amended by Council Directive 97/41/EC, requires MemberStates to control maximum residue levels according to Council Directives 89/397/EEC and93/99/EEC. This also means that laboratories have to comply with the European Standard EN4500141 and that Member States are requested to assess the laboratories by applying thecriteria as laid down in European Standard EN 45002. Member States shall also applyproficiency testing schemes where appropriate.

Commission Recommendation 2001/42/EC lays down that Member States should provideinformation about the details of accreditation of the monitoring laboratories (incl.accreditation certificates), about the application of the EU Quality Control Procedures andabout their participation in proficiency or ring tests. Workshops on Analytical Quality Control(WAQC) are regularly held in order to review the Quality Control Procedures. Proficiencytests, supported by the European Commission, are regularly organised (the last was carried outin 2002).

The European Commission's Monitoring Regulation No. 645/2000 (cf. chapter 2), in forcesince April 2000, ensures the financial contribution of the European Commission to theorganisation of proficiency tests and Analytical Quality Control workshops. It also confirmsand further specifies the requirements for accreditation of monitoring laboratories and theirparticipation in proficiency tests. This Regulation was fully applicable for 2001.

Table 21 and Figures 10 - 12 give an overview of the situation regarding accreditation ofmonitoring laboratories and participation in proficiency tests. Table 21 is a summary of theinformation provided by all participating countries in their short written summaries (cf. Annex1 for further details) and in Table G of the guidance document SANCO 4811/2001.

The laboratory situation has not further improved compared to 2000 (Figures 10 - 12). Thereare still 4 countries out of 18 (22 %) who have not accredited any of their laboratories and afurther 3 (17 %) have accredited only some of their laboratories. Only 61 % of the countries(11 out of 18) have accredited all their laboratories. When comparing the data with previousyears it has to be considered that the total number of participating countries has risen from 16in 1997 to 17 in 1999 and 18 in 2000 and 2001.

In the EU and EEA States in total 46,149 samples (sum of fresh and processed products) wereanalysed. 33,491 samples (72.6 %) were analysed by laboratories accredited for the mostimportant pesticide-commodity combinations, 1,311 samples (2.8 %) by laboratoriesaccredited for only some pesticide-commodity combinations and 11,347 (24.6 %) bylaboratories which are not accredited. This is illustrated in Figure 11.

In conclusion, around 70 % of the samples were analysed by laboratories which wereaccredited for the most important pesticide-commodity combinations, whereas around 30 %were analysed by laboratories either accredited only for some pesticide-commoditycombinations or not accredited at all.

The breakdown of the samples analysed by accredited/not accredited laboratories by country isshown in Figure 12.

41 Now ISO 17025

50

Status of laboratory accreditation: Percentage of countries with accreditation of all, ofsome or of none of the monitoring laboratories in 2001 compared to previous years:

11 11

3 3

54 4

84

7

45

5

46

02468

101214161820

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Year

Num

ber

ofco

untr

ies

Unknown

None of the laboratories isaccredited

Only some of thelaboratories are accreditedfor the most importantpesticide-commoditycombinationsAll of the laboratories areaccredited for the mostimportant pesticide-commodity combinations

Figure 10: Number of countries with accreditation of all monitoring laboratories, of some monitoringlaboratories and of none of the monitoring laboratories

51

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

Total EU and EEA

Num

ber

ofsa

mpl

esSamples analysed byunaccreditedlaboratories

Samples analysed bylaboratories accreditedfor some pesticide-commodity combinations

Samples analysed bylaboratories accreditedfor the most importantpesticide-commoditycombinations

Figure 11: Numbers of samples analysed by laboratories accredited for the most important pesticide-commoditycombinations, accredited for only some pesticide-commodity combinations or by not accredited laboratories inthe EU and EEA States in the year 2001*.* For Italy, the 2000 data on accreditation was used.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

B DK D EL E FIR

L I L NL A PFIN S UK

NORIC

ELIE

Samples analysed by unaccredited laboratories

Samples analysed by laboratories accredited for some pesticide-commodity combinations

Samples analysed by laboratories accredited for the most important pesticide-commodity combinations

Figure 12: Numbers of samples analysed by laboratories accredited for the most important pesticide-commoditycombinations, accredited for only some pesticide-commodity combinations or by not accredited laboratories bycountry in the year 2001*.* For Italy, the 2000 data on accreditation was used.

52

Apart from the information on accreditation of laboratories, Table 21 also gives an overviewof other laboratory quality issues, such as the implementation of the EU QC procedures andthe participation in proficiency tests. 14 out of 18 countries reported on this issue, while 4countries did not give any specific information. According to this information, 10 out of the14 reporting countries have fully implemented at least 70 % of the EU QC procedures. Theremainder of the QC procedures is partly implemented in most of the countries.

13 out of the 14 reporting countries also took part in proficiency tests in 200142. Since no EUproficiency test was organised in 2001 the most often used proficiency test scheme wasFAPAS43 (11 countries took part in some of the FAPAS rounds in 2001). Some countries alsotook part in other, nationally organised, proficiency tests.

Table 21: Accreditation, participation in proficiency tests and implementation of the EU QualityControl Procedures of the pesticide residue laboratories

* not applicable, because not yet accredited

Coun-try

No. oflabora-tories

Accreditation Accredi-tationcertifi-cates

provided

Participation inproficiency

tests

Implementation ofEU Quality Control

Procedures (QCprocedures)

B 3 Accredited byBELTEST

Yes 2 laboratoriestook part in achlormequatproficiency testand 1 in FAPAS

All three laboratorieshave implemented atleast 70 % of the QCprocedures

DK 2 (1 mainlabperforming 95 % ofallanalyses)

Accredited byDANAK

Yes FAPAS, GCmulti-residuemethod,imazalil,thiabendazol

In both laboratories atleast 70 % of the QCprocedures areimplemented

D 49 Accredited No No information No information

EL 6 In preparatoryphase

--* No information No information

E 14 3 ENAC accreditedlaboratories (doingapprox. 33 % ofthe analyses).

Yes No information No information

F 6 2 laboratories,which performed

Yes All laboratorieswere involved in

At least 80 % of theQC procedures are

42 No information on proficiency tests is available for Austria43 Food analysis performance assessment scheme, a proficiency testing scheme organised by the UK

53

Coun-try

No. oflabora-tories


provided


tests



around 44 % of theanalyses, are fullyaccredited byCOFRAC, onelaboratory,performing approx.30 % of theanaylses is partlyaccredited, theothers are notaccredited

some proficiencytests withBIPEA (4rounds per year).

implemented

IRL 1 Accredited byNAB Ireland

Yes FAPAS forpesticides infruit andvegetables

40 % of the QCprocedures are fullyimplemented, 60 % arepartly implemented

I (datafrom2000report asno newdataprovi-ded)

60 17 laboratories outof 60 areaccredited,performing approx.45 % of theanalyses

No No information No information

L 1 In preparatoryphase foraccreditation

--* FAPAS 10 % of QC proceduresfully implemented, 90partly implemented

NL 1 Accredited by RvA Yes FAPAS Approx. 80 % of QCprocedures fullyimplemented, 20 %partly implemented

A 4 Accredited Yes No info At least 80 % of QCproceduresimplemented

P 3 None of thelaboratoriesaccredited yet

--* Two of the labsparticipated inFAPAS

Different status of theQC procedureimplementation in the4 laboratories, between10 % and 70 % of theQC procedures arefully implemented.

54

Coun-try

No. oflabora-tories


provided


tests



FIN 2 Accredited byFINAS

Yes Main laboratorytook part inFAPAS

At least 60 % of theQC proceudres arefully implemented,40 % are partlyimplemented

S 1contractedlaboratory

Accredited bySWEDAC for allmethods used

Yes FAPAS andFinnish customslaboratory(bromide, manebgroup)

At least 70 % of theQC procedures arefully implemented,30 % are partlyimplemented

UK 2 Accredited byUKAS

Yes FAPAS for bothlabs plusNAMAS for oneof them

Fully implemented

Nor-way

1 Accredited by NA Yes FAPAS andNordicintercalibrationfor maneb groupand chlormequat

Approx. 80 % of theQC procedures fullyimplemented, 20 %partly implemented

Ice-land

1 In preparatoryphase

--* FAPAS Approx. 80%implemented, 20 % notimplemented

Liech-ten-stein

1 Accredited byDACH

Yes Chemical andchemo-physicalanalyses

Approx. 90 % of QCproceduresimplemented

8. RAPID ALERT SYSTEM

The Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) was established by Council Directive92/59/EEC44on General Product Safety45.

Products entailing a serious and immediate risk to the health and safety of the consumer areclassified as ALERT notifications according to Article 8 of Directive 92/59/EEC. Thenotifying Member State informs the Commission, which then notifies this to the contact

44 Official Journal No. L 228, 11/08/1992 p. 0024 - 003245 This Directive will be repealed by Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3

December 2001 on General Product Safety from 15 January 2004

55

points in all Member States. After receiving an ALERT notification, Member States shouldtake appropriate action.

Notifications which do not fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 8 of Council Directive92/59/EEC on General Product Safety, but which are nevertheless regarded as importantinformation, are forwarded by the Commission to the contact points in the Member States asinformation notifications (NON-ALERTS).

In 200113 ALERTS and61 NON-ALERTS were notified in relation to pesticide residues.Eight of the ALERTS related to products from Member States, 5 related to products fromthird countries (3 of them candidate countries). With regard to the NON-ALERTS, 21 relatedto products from Member States and 40 to products from third countries.

Seven ALERTS and 25 NON-ALERTS related to herbs and spices. The countries of originwere mainly the UK (5 ALERTS and 8 NON-ALERTS), India (9 NON-ALERTS) and Egypt(7 NON-ALERTS).

Five ALERTS and 24 NON-ALERTS related to fresh fruit and vegetables. Grapes fromGreece and Cyprus as well as peppers from Thailand were the commodities/countries mostoften involved.

12 NON-ALERTS related to tea from China.

The pesticides involved in the ALERTS were Ethion in Chilli powder from the UK (3),cypermethrin in chilli powder from the UK (2), parathion-methyl (2), monocrotophos ingrapes from Cyprus (2), penconazole (1), procymidone (1), prochloraz (1), chlormequat inpear juice (baby food) (1).

The number of both ALERTS and NON-ALERTS has increased significantly compared to2000, where seven ALERTS and 27 NON-ALERTS were issued. This does not necessarilymean that the residue situation has worsened, but could be due to an increased awarenesswithin Member States with regard to the use of the Rapid Alert System. This could be a firstresult of the Commission's efforts to harmonise the widely varying notification criteria with aguidance document "Proposal on how to notify pesticide residues in foodstuffs in the RapidAlert System for Foodstuffs" (document SANCO/3346/2001). However, the guidancedocument is still being used on a voluntary basis and is currently not being used by allMember States.

The rapid dissemination of information via the RASFF plays an important role in the MemberStates' planning of monitoring programmes, since it allows the identification at an early stageof specific problems and the adaptation of the sampling programmes accordingly, if necessary.

56

9. SUMMARY

9.1. National Monitoring programmes

All fifteen Member States and the EFTA States, who signed the EEA agreement46 (Norway,Iceland and Liechtenstein), monitored pesticide residues in foodstuffs of plant origin. Overall,some 46,000 samples were analysed for, on average, 145 different pesticides. About 93 % ofthe samples analysed were fresh (incl. frozen) fruit, vegetables and cereals, about 7 % wereprocessed products.

In 37 % of the fruit, vegetable and cereal samples and processed products, residues ofpesticides at or below the MRL (national or EC-MRL) were detected. In 3.6 % of all samples,residues above the MRL (national or EC-MRL) were found. 60 % of the samples contained nopesticide residues47. When only fresh products are considered the percentage of MRLexceedances increases to 3.9 % instead of 3.6 % and the percentage of samples withoutresidues is 59 %.

There is no clear overall trend in the occurrence of residues in the last 6 years. The percentageof samples with no detectable residues has slightly decreased compared to previous years,whereas the percentage of samples with residues at or below MRL has increased compared tothe years 1999 and 2000, bringing the levels back to that found during 1996 - 1998. Thepercentage of exceedances has decreased compared with data of the last two years, but ishigher than that found during 1996 - 1998.

In 2001, the percentage of samples containing multiple residues has significantly increasedcompared to the 4 previous years. Only the 1996 data showed higher levels, but the 1996 datashould be treated with caution, since only 11 countries delivered data48.

In 2001, only the total number of samples with multiple residues can be considered andcompared to previous years, but not the distribution in the different categories (samples with2, 3, 4, etc. residues), since data from one country, which analysed a significant amount ofsamples, were incomplete.

It is important to note that, when comparing the results of the years 1996 to 2001 somecaution is necessary. It has to be taken into account that the data have not been collected underexactly the same conditions. Differences existed in a number of factors, e.g. in the number ofparticipating countries, which rose from 16 to 18, in the design and priorities set for thenational programmes (the sampling may have been more or less targeted towards specificproblems), in the total number of samples taken, in the legislation (more harmonised EU-MRLs have been set over the years, national MRLs may have changed), as well as in theenhanced analytical possibilities of the laboratories.

The most frequently found pesticides have been reported separately for fruit and vegetablesand for cereals in 2001. Like in previous years, mainly fungicides were found on fruit and

46 Agreement on the European Economic Area47 This paragraph relates to the total of samples analysed, including processed products48 In 1997 and 1998 fifteen countries out of sixteen delivered data for this overview, in 1999 sixteen countries out of

seventeen and in 2000 and 2001 all eighteen countries delivered data.

57

vegetables whereas, on cereals, the pesticides found were mainly insecticides. The 10 mostfrequently found pesticides found in 2001 were almost identical with those found in 2000 andthe majority corresponded also to those found during 1996 - 1999. However, as explained inthe 2000 report this was mainly a result of a changed reporting procedure in 2000, where forthe first time the relative frequency of pesticides' occurrence was reported instead of thefrequency of absolute numbers of findings. This leads to a tendency for prevalence of residuesdetected by single residue methods (i.e. chlormequat, inorganic bromide).

9.2. EU co-ordinated monitoring programme

In a special co-ordinated programme, about 9,800 samples of five commodities (apples,tomatoes, lettuce, strawberries, and table grapes) were analysed for 36 different pesticides.Compared to previous years, the programme has been substantially extended, especially by thenumber of different pesticides sought, but also by the number of commodities included.Although the total number of samples required in the co-ordinated programme in the EU isconstant (496 samples49 every year), in 2001 about twice the number of samples of previousyears were analysed. The five commodities were the same as in 1996 and the nine pesticidesanalysed in 1996 were included in the 36 analysed during 2001.

It appears from the results that the commodities analysed in 2001 were all commodities onwhich plant protection products are frequently applied, which is in line with the findings ofthe year 1996 on the same commodities. In 47 % of the samples, residues of one of the 3550

pesticides were found below or at the MRL (national or EC-MRL) and in 2.2 % of thesamples MRLs (national or EC-MRLs) were exceeded. Only 51 % of the samples containedno detectable residues.

In this co-ordinated programme, residues of one of the 35 pesticides at or below the MRLwere found most often in table grapes (60 %), followed by strawberries (51 %), lettuce(49 %), apples (47 %) and tomatoes (33 %). Residues exceeding the MRL were found mostoften in lettuce (3.9 %), followed by strawberries (3.3 %), table grapes (1.8 %), tomatoes(1.5 %) and apples (1.1 %).

Of the 35 pesticides under the co-ordinated programme, residues of the maneb group werefound most often (16 %), followed by iprodione (10.5 %), procymidone (10.4 %), benomylgroup (8.7 %), captan/folpet (sum) (8.5 %), chlorpyriphos (5.3 %), endosulfan (4.2 %),vinclozolin (3.4 %) and thiabendazole (3.0 %)51. The remainder of the pesticides were foundin percentages below 3 %.

Residues of the maneb group exceeded MRLs most often (0.61 %), followed by the benomylgroup (0.44 %), endosulfan (0.32 %), dicofol and methamidophos (0.28 % each).

The highest residues found in a composite sample in this co-ordinated programme were31 mg/kg maneb group, 29.9 mg/kg captan/folpet (sum), 14.8 mg/kg chlorothalonil, 13 mg/kgdichlofluanid, 14.8 mg/kg vinclozolin and 10.8 mg/kg procymidone. These extremely highvalues were all found on lettuce.

49 including EU Member States and Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein50 36 pesticides were analysed, but for the comparison with the MRL captan and folpet were combined since the MRL

relates to the sum of captan and folpet.51 Percentages in this paragraph include sum of samples with residues at or below the MRL and exceeding the MRL

58

The most important pesticide-commodity combinations where detectable residues have beenfound at or below the MRL and above the MRL were maneb group/lettuce, maneb group/tablegrapes, iprodione/lettuce and benomyl group/strawberries. With regard to MRL exceedances,the most important pesticide-commodity combinations were maneb group/lettuce andbenomyl group/strawberries.

In comparison with the 1996 data, the results for the nine pesticides analysed in both yearsshow no clear overall trend. There is a tendency towards higher percentages of findingsat/below the MRL in 2001 compared to 1996; at the same time there is a lower rate ofexceeding MRLs in 2001. However, the latter also depends on the actual level of the MRLs,which may have changed between 1996 and 2001.

Chronic exposure assessments demonstrate that ADI52 values were not exceeded for thesepesticide/commodity combinations. However, for the assessment of acute risk, the data showthat the ARfD53 was exceeded for endosulfan/lettuce (adults and toddlers) and fortriazophos/apples (toddlers). This means that there is some reason for concern as a health riskcannot be excluded. In particular, this concerns toddlers who eat large amounts of thesecommodities.

9.3. Quality assurance and sampling

Samples for the national and the EU co-ordinated programmes were taken at different pointssuch as retailers, wholesalers, markets, points of entry and processing industries. Nationalsampling plans exist in most countries, taking into consideration e.g. consumption data,production figures, imported/domestic shares and risks (e.g. results from previous years).

Accreditation of laboratories has not improved compared to 2000. Accreditation has beencompleted in only 11 out of 18 countries (about 60 %). In the remaining 7 countries (40 %),accreditation was either achieved only for a part of the laboratories or for none of them.

With regard to the monitoring samples (national and EU programmes) taken in the EU andEEA States, about 70 % were analysed by laboratories which were accredited for the mostimportant pesticide-commodity combinations, whereas about 30 % were analysed bylaboratories which were either accredited for only some pesticide-commodity combinations ornot accredited at all. However, the majority of the participating countries reported that at least70 % of the EU QC procedures had been fully implemented, the remaining 30 % had beenpartly implemented in most of the countries.

13 countries reported that they took part in proficiency tests in 2001. No information isavailable for the remaining 5 countries. Since in 2001 no EU proficiency test was organised,most countries took part in schemes such as FAPAS54 or in nationally organised proficiencytests.

52 Acceptable Daily Intake53 Acute Reference Dose54 Food analysis performance assessment scheme, a proficiency testing scheme organised by the UK

EUROPEAN COMMISSIONHEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERALDirectorate F - Food and Veterinary OfficeUnit 4 - Food of plant origin, plant health; processing and distributionIn cooperation with JRC IRMM, Food & Feed Unit and DG SANCO E1

Annex to SANCO/20/03 final

ANNEX

to

Monitoring of Pesticide Residues

in Products of Plant Origin

in the European Union, Norway, Iceland andLiechtenstein

2001 Report

March 2003

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. NATIONAL AUTHORITIES AND CONTACT POINTS FOR PESTICIDE RESIDUEMONITORING ........................................................................................................... 3

2. COUNTRY COMMENTS.......................................................................................... 7

Belgium ....................................................................................................................... 7

Denmark .................................................................................................................... 11

germany..................................................................................................................... 16

Greece........................................................................................................................ 17

Spain 21

France ........................................................................................................................ 23

Ireland........................................................................................................................30

Italy 32

Luxembourg .............................................................................................................. 33

Netherlands................................................................................................................ 34

Austria ....................................................................................................................... 39

Portugal ..................................................................................................................... 43

Finland....................................................................................................................... 46

Sweden ...................................................................................................................... 47

United Kingdom........................................................................................................ 49

Norway...................................................................................................................... 51

Iceland ....................................................................................................................... 52

Liechtenstein ............................................................................................................. 53

3

1. NATIONAL AUTHORITIES AND CONTACT POINTS FOR PESTICIDE RESIDUE MONITORING

Authority Contact person Contact point

Belgium:

Federal Agency for the Safety of the FoodChainWTC IIISimon Bolivarlaan 301000 Brussel

Alain Lacroix Tel.: +32 2 208.38.75Fax: +32 2 208.38.66e-mail :mailto:[email protected]

Denmark

The Danish Veterinary and FoodAdministrationInstitute of Food Safety and NutritionDiv. of Chemical ContaminantsMørkhøj Bygade 19DK2860 SøborgDenmark

A. Büchert Tel.: +45 33 95 64 61Fax: +45 33 95 60 01e-mail:[email protected]

Germany:

Bundesministerium für Verbraucherschutz,Ernährung und Landwirtschaft (BMVEL)Rochusstraße 1D-53123 Bonn

Dr. W. Töpner Tel.: +49 1888-529-4659Or: +49 1888-529-4661Fax: +49 1888-529-4943e-mail:[email protected]

Greece:

Ministry of Agriculture, Plant ProtectionDirectorate3-5 Hippokratous str.EL-10164, Athens, Greece

Pesticide Residue Laboratory1, S. Venizelou str.EL-14123, LycovrissiGreece

Director Mr.Ev. Arvanitakis

Dr. Ch. Lentza-Rizos

Tel.: +30 21 0361 5394Fax: +30 21 0361 7103

Tel.: + 30 21 02819019Fax: +30 21 02818735e-mail:[email protected]

Spain:Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca yAlimentaciónDirección General de AgriculturaSubdirección General de Medios deProducciónAgricolasAvda. Ciudad de Barcelona, 118-12028007 Madrid

Mr. A. Yague Tel.: +34 91 3478273/75Fax: +34 91 3478316e-mail:[email protected]

4

France:

Laboratoire Interregional de la Repressiondes Fraudes de Paris-Massy25 Avenue de la RepubliqueF-91744 Massy Cedex

and:DGCCRF-bureau C2 télédoc 05159, boulevard Vincent Auriol75703 Paris Cedex 13

Mr B. Declercq Tel.: +33 1 6953 8750Fax: +33 1 6953 8725Fax: +33 1 6953 8766e-mail: [email protected]@dgccrf.finances.gouv.fr

Tel: +33 1 4497 2379Fax: +33 1 4497 2486e-mail:mailto:[email protected]

Ireland:

The Pesticide Control ServiceDepartment of Agriculture, Food and RuralDevelopmentAbbotstownCastleknockDublin 15

Dr. D. O'Sullivan Tel.: +353 1 6072614Fax: +353 1 8204260e-mail:[email protected]

Italy:

Ministero della saluteD.G.S.P.V.A.N. Ufficio XIVPiazza Marconi 2500144 Roma

E. Cecere Tel.: +39 06 5994 6566Fax.: +39 36 5994 6627e-mail:[email protected]

Luxembourg:

Laboratoire National de SantéBP. 1102, L-1011 Luxembourg

Dr. CaroleDauberschmidt

Tel. :+352 491191-394Fax: +352 494 258e-mail:[email protected]

Netherlands:

Keuringsdienst van Waren(Inspectorate for Health Protection)Hoogte Kadijk 401NL-1018 BK Amsterdam

H. A. van der Schee Tel.: + 31205244600Fax: +31 20 5244700e-mail:[email protected]

Austria:

Bundesministerium für Soziale Sicherheitund Generationen, Abteilung VII/13Radetzkystraße 2A-1031 Wien

Dr. SylviaFrischenschlager

Dr. RolandGrossgut,Risikobewertung,ÖsterreichischeAgentur fürGesundheit undErährungssicherheitGmbH, Spargelfeld-strasse 191,

Tel.: +43/1/71100-4628Fax.: +43/1/71100-4681e-mail:[email protected]

Tel.: +43 1 73216 4150Fax.: +43 1 73216 2108e-mail: [email protected]

5

A-1226 WienPortugal:

Direcςãao-Geral de Protecςão das CulturasQuinta do MarquesPT-2780 Oeiras

J. R. Santos Tel: +351 1 44 64000Or +351 1 44 64078

Fax: +351 1 44 20616e-mail:[email protected]

Finland :

Senior InspectorNational Food AgencyP.O. Box 28, FIN-00581 Helsinki

Arja Kaiponen Tel. +358 9 3931 529Fax: +358 9 3931 592e-mail:[email protected]

Sweden:

National Food AdministrationBox 622, S-751 26, Uppsala

A. Andersson Tel.: +46 18 17 56 41Fax: +46 18 17 53 53E-mail:[email protected]

United Kingdom:

Pesticides Safety DirectorateMallard House, Kings Pool3 Peaseholme GreenYork YO1 7PX

Jane Simcock Tel.: +44 1904 455 756Fax: +44 1904 455 733e-mail:

mailto:[email protected]

Norway:

Statens naeringsmiddeltilsynPostboks 8187 Dep0034 OsloNorway

M. Tomtum Tel.:+47 23 21 70 00Fax: +47 23 21 70 01e-mail:[email protected]

Iceland:

The Environment and Food Agency ofIcelandSuðurlandsbraut 24,108 ReykjavíkIceland

Sesselja MaríaSveinsdóttir

Tel.: +354 591 2000Fax: +354 591 2020e-mail:[email protected]

Liechtenstein:

Amt für Lebensmittelkontrolle undVeterinärwesenPostplatz 2Postfach 37FL- 9494 Schaan

Dr. P. Malin Tel.: +423 236 7311Fax: + 423 236 7310e-mail:[email protected]

European CommissionDG SANCO, FVO/F4Grange, DunsanyCounty MeathIreland

A. Bitterhof Tel.: +353 46 61 856Fax: +353 46 61 864e-mail:[email protected]

6

European Commission

DG SANCO/ E1200, rue de la Loi (L86/1/8)B-1049 Bruxelles

B. Drukker Tel.: +32 2 2965779Fax: +32 2 2965963e-mail:[email protected]

European Commission

DG Joint Research CentreInstitute for Reference Materials andMeasurementsFood & Feed UnitTP 260I-21020 Ispra, Italy

Dr. Christoph vonHolst

Tel.: ++ 39 0332 785288Fax: ++39 0332 786267e-mail:[email protected]

7

2. COUNTRY COMMENTS

BELGIUM

Pesticide Residue Monitoring in Fruit, Vegetables and Cereals in Belgium - 2001

SummaryThis report shows the results of pesticide residue monitoring on fresh and frozen fruits andvegetables, cereals, and processed foods on the Belgian market in 2001. These are domestic as wellas imported foods. Foodstuffs of animal origin are not included in this report.

The samples were taken by trained officials from the Food Inspection Service from the Ministry ofSocial Affairs, Public Health and the Environment (955 samples), or from the Service for PlantQuality and Plant Protection from the Ministry of Middle Class and Agriculture (74 samples). Bothservices are now part of the Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain, under theresponsability of the Minister of Health. Sampling was done mostly according to directive79/700/EEC, at auctions, importers, wholesalers, processors and exceptionally in retail.

In selecting the commodities, the methods of analysis and the number of samples, several factorswere taken into account : the average consumption, the Belgian production, the rate of exceedancesand findings of previous years, the analytical and budgetary possibilities and all other usefulinformation. For less important commodities, a rolling programme is preferred. The differentgroups of fruits and vegetables were included as much as possible. The co-ordinated programme ofthe European Commission was of course included in the national programme. In total 11 differentsorts of fruit, 16 different sorts of vegetables (not including the different fresh herbs), potatoes,wheat, and processed foodstuffs (babyfood, concentrated tomato products, cereal products andpotato products) were analysed. It needs to be stressed that the programme is meant to enforce thelegislation and does not provide for a total random analysis, as more samples are taken of fooditems expected to contain pesticides or to exceed MRLs. For example, pears were still followedclosely, due to chlormequat problems in the past. Similarly, lettuce continues to be surveilledclosely, although less than in the past as the situation has improved, probably due to preharvestmonitoring, which is not included in this report.

A GC-multiresidue method was performed on most samples, except for almonds (in which onlybromide ion was sought), potatoes and potato products (in which only chlorpropham was sought),and for those samples for which only chlormequat was sought (concentrated tomato products andbabyfood with fruit). In cereal products, only chlormequat and mepiquat were sought. Chlormequatwas also sought in apples, pears and carrots. Chlorpropham was also sought in babyfood withvegetables. Dithiocarbamates analysis was carried out on apples, peaches, nectarines, table grapes,strawberries, tomatoes, sweet peppers, eggplant, cucumber, broccoli, head cabbage, lamb’s lettuce,lettuce, fresh herbs, spinach, peas, beans, celery and leek. It should be mentioned that it can not beexcluded that ‘dithiocarbamates’ found in head cabbage or broccoli up to a certain level can resultfrom natural levels of sulphur containing compounds, but this possibility has been taken intoaccount when setting the MRL, so that exceedances of this MRL cannot be explained by thepresence of natural compounds. Propamocarb analysis was performed on lettuce, lamb’s lettuce,fresh herbs, celery and babyfood with vegetables. GC-analysis after extraction for the more polarpesticide residues such as methamidophos, was carried out on the foodstuffs for the EU coordinatedprogramme (apples, strawberries, lettuce, tables grapes, and tomatoes) as well as on peaches andnectarines, sweet peppers, eggplant, and babyfood with vegetables. Benzimidazoles (carbendazimand thiabendazole) were sought in the foodstuffs of the EU coordinated programme and also ingrapefruit, pears, bananas, avocados, mangos, broccoli, head cabbage, celery, and babyfood with

8

vegetables. Imazalil (typically used postharvest to prevent rotting of fruit) was analysed for ingrapefruit, apples, table grapes, strawberries, bananas, avocados, mangos and also in tomatoes andlettuce because of the coordinated EU programme. Bromide ion was sought in commodities that arefrequently grown in greenhouses (radish, tomatoes, sweet peppers, eggplant, cucumber, lettuce,lamb’s lettuce, and celery) and in dry products which could have been desinfected withmethylbromide (almonds, wheat) and babyfood with vegetables. A separate analysis for pyrethroidswas carried out on some of the samples of apples, strawberries and lettuce. N-methylcarbamateswere looked for in lettuce, leek, and fresh herbs. Ethephon analysis was carried out on apples andprochloraz analysis on avocados and mangos.

Samples were refrigerated and analysed within 2-10 days. Three officially recognized laboratorieswere involved. The two major officially recognized laboratories involved in the monitoringprogramme were accredited for the most important analytical methods and commodities, andaccreditation was gradually extended. The certificates of accreditation of the « WetenschappelijkInstituut Volksgezondheid-Louis Pasteur (Afdeling Voedingswaren)» and the « Fytolab » can befound on the website of the accreditation body BELTEST (http://beltest.fgov.be/). Both laboratorieshad participated in the European Commission’s Proficiency Tests and in the Workshops on Co-ordinated Analytical Quality Control. The laboratories to a large extent take into account annex II ofCommission Recommendation 1999/333/EC. The Dr. L. Willems-Institute is only accredited forchlormequat and has, as to be expected, not taken part in an EU proficiency test.

Out of a list of 150 different pesticide residues sought in fruit and vegetables, a total of 43 werefound at least once during this random monitoring programme. This means that, compared toprevious years, again more pesticide residues were sought but again less were found. For fruits andvegetables, the ten most frequently found pesticide residues, in decreasing order of frequency(found/sought) are: chlormequat, propamocarb, bromide ion, imazalil, prochloraz, chlorpropham,dithiocarbamates, iprodione, thiabendazole carbendazim. Most of these are found by single residuemethods, which are only executed when the presence of residues is expected. When counted onabsolute number of findings, the ten most frequently found pesticide residues, in decreasing order ofnumber of findings, are: chlormequat, iprodione, dithiocarbamates, bromide ion, tolylfluanid,imazalil, propamocarb, thiabendazole, carbendazim, tolclofosmethyl.In cereals, out of 11 pesticide residues sought, the following pesticide residues were found at leastonce : bromide ion, dichlorvos, malathion and pirimiphos-methyl.In processed products, only chlormequat and chlorpropham were detected.

A total of 1029 samples were analysed : 352 fresh fruit, 502 fresh or frozen vegetable, 38 potato, 35raw cereal and 102 processed food samples were counted. Fruit and vegetables were fresh exceptfor peas for which frozen products were sampled and for broccoli and beans for which fresh andfrozen samples were included.

In 54% of the samples of fruit and vegetables, no residues were found, similar to the result ofprevious years. No residues were found in 40% of the fruit samples, 64% of the vegetable samples,37% of the potato samples, 14% of the cereal samples and 91% of the samples of processed food.All these samples were from conventional produce (not organic), except some of the samples ofbabyfood. No samples with pesticides were found for avocado, radish, spinach, several fresh herbs,cereal products and babyfood. Pesticides were found most often in grapefruit (96%), lettuce grownin greenhouses (89%), bananas (86%), lamb’s lettuce (73%), and pears (72%). It should be notedthat these grapefruits and bananas are analysed including the peel, and that removing the peel canremove most of the pesticide residues. A maximum of 6 different pesticide residues could be foundin one sample (lettuce).

Significantly less exceedances of MRLs (MRL= maximum residue level) were counted than inprevious years. No exceedances at all were found for babyfood, cereals and cereal products,

9

potatoes and potato products, grapefruit, almond, apple, tablegrapes, strawberries, avocado, banana,radish, tomato, egg plant, cucumber, broccoli, spinach, peas, beans, leek.In 38 samples or 3.7% of the total number of samples, the MRL was exceeded : in 4.2% of the fruitsamples, 4.4% of the vegetable samples, and in one sample of processed food. Note thatexceedances were counted in this reportnot taking into account the uncertainty on the analyticalresult. More exceedances related to EC MRLs than to national MRLs, reflecting the progress inharmonisation compared to previous years. A lot of exceedances are related to MRLs at the limit ofdetermination. Relatively high percentages (>10%) of exceedances were found for peach, mango,lamb’s lettuce, fresh herbs as a group and celery. Two exceedances related to the EU coordinatedprogramme (both samples were lettuce). A remarkable decrease in exceedances compared to theyear 2000 was noted for concentrated tomato products, apples, table grapes, cucumbers, headcabbage, spinach, peas and babyfood. The situation for carrots, lamb’s lettuce, lettuce grown ingreenhouses, and celery was also better in 2001 than in 2000. On the other hand, for pears, moreexceedances were found in 2001 compared to 2000, which can be related to the lowering of themaximum residue level for chlormequat on 1 July 2001.For a good understanding, it is important to know that exceedances are only exceptionally apossible health threat. MRLs are based on good agricultural practices and checked to be sure thatthe acceptable daily intake or acute reference dose are not exceeded. A big survey in the past hasdemonstrated that acceptable daily intakes or not exceeded in practice, as chronic exposure is to belooked at. On the other hand, one exceedance found this year for chlormequat in pears could haveresulted in an exceedance of the acute reference dose in toddlers if eaten fresh in a large quantity onone day and without pealing. A similar conclusion can be raised for one exceedance formethamidophos in peaches using the temporary acute reference dose. Although no final conclusionon the acute reference dose of omethoate is reached, the current knowledge in 2002 indicates thatthe one exceedance found for omethoate in lettuce might also have resulted in a possible health risk,for all age groups.

No methidathion was found in apples, so that we could not participate in this special excercice forhomogeneity factors of recommendation 2001/42/EC.

Contact :E-mail : [email protected] : +32 2 210 48 43; Fax : +32 2 210 48 16Mail-address : Pachecolaan 19/5, B-1010 Brussels

10

Presentation of the results

The results are presented in Tables A to G, in the format recommended by the Commission. Thefollowing tables of the format are not included in this report, as they remained empty : table A1-PartII, table D3 and D4, table F. Table A1 gives data on the number and origin of samples, and resultsrelated to the MRL. For the results of this year 2001, unfortunately some information on country oforigin was lost from the database. Table A2 is a list of pesticides which were included in analyticalmethods used during this monitoring programme. It gives the number of samples in which thepesticide is sought, the number of findings and the reporting level. Not only the pesticidesmentioned in EC-directives are included, but all pesticides. The reporting level is the limit ofdetermination of the laboratory, even in those cases where this limit is lower than the legallyrequired limit of determination. This results for some samples in the reporting of levels which arelegally absent. This is a change of the way of reporting compared to previous years and is due to anagreement on the EU level. When laboratories had a higher limit of determination than that in thelegislation, this higher level is the reporting level. For instance the reporting levels are higher fordithiocarbamates, iprodione, and imazalil. Table B gives the detailed results of the co-ordinatedprogramme. Table C contains the detailed results of the national programme, including the co-ordinated programme. Only pesticides which were found at least once, are listed, although muchmore were sought. In tables C, fruits and vegetables are listed according to their listing in annex I ofdirective 90/642/EEC, starting with citrus fruits. Please note that the exceedances counted in TableB and C are mathematical exceedances, not taking into account the uncertainty of the analyticalresult. Table D1 gives a list of exceedances of EC harmonised MRLs, which were higher than 1.5 xMRL. Similarly, table D2 lists exceedances of national MRLs. Table E gives information onmultiple residues in single samples. Table G comments on laboratories.Please note that processed products are not included in tables D and A2, in accordance with the EUguidelines. You can find the details on those products at the end of tables C.

Background of MRL legislation

Pesticide residue levels in foodstuffs cannot be higher than the analytical limit of determinationunless another maximum residue level (MRL) is fixed after an evaluation of the safety andnecessity of the use.Pesticides or plant protection products are applied in order to protect plants against diseases such asthose caused by fungi (fungicides are used then), against attacks by insects (protection withinsecticides), etc. Also growth regulators are covered by the same legislation on plant protectionproducts. Plant protection products are not only used before harvest, but in some cases also postharvest to prevent rotting (e.g. citrus fruit), to prevent sprouting of potatoes, or to protect againstinsects (e.g. raw cereals).MRLs are set as low as possible, in accordance with the good agricultural practice (not higher thannecessary for plant protection), but never higher than what is safe (an authorisation for use will notbe given if the proposed MRL is evaluated as unsafe). As a consequence, most exceedances ofMRLs do not result in a safety problem.Not all MRLs higher than the limit of determination should be interpreted as an authorisation foruse in Belgium, as MRLs might also be based on authorised uses in other European countries orthird countries : MRLs are harmonised to ensure free trade after a safety evaluation. Theharmonisation process is still ongoing, explaining differences in legislation in different countries.On the other hand, an MRL at the limit of determination can be linked to an authorised use whichdoes not normally result in residues on the food after harvest.

11

DENMARK

Pesticide Residue Monitoring of Fruits, Vegetables and Cereals in Denmark – 2001

IntroductionThis report to the Commission of the European Communities includes national and co-ordinatedmonitoring results from the Danish pesticide monitoring programme 2001 of fruit, vegetables andcereals (including samples of processed food and infant food).Results from the monitoring of samples of animal origin are reported elsewhere.

SummaryA total of 3481 samples were analysed at two laboratories, both accredited to pesticide analysis.The number of samples has increased considerable compared to 2000 where the pesticidemonitoring system had a reduced capacity due to restructuring of the laboratory organisation.Danish grown as well as commodities grown in other EU member states and in third countries wereincluded in the monitoring.Pesticide residues were found in 68% of the fruit samples, 21% of the vegetable samples and in 9%of the cereal samples. Residues exceeding the maximum residue limits (MRLs) were found in 4%of the conventionally grown samples.The toxicological evaluation concluded that in general the detected residues did not constitute ahealth hazard to the consumer although for a few samples residues were toxicologicallyproblematic.

OrganisationThe Danish pesticide monitoring system is organised by the Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition,the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration under the Ministry of Food, Agriculture andFisheries with participation of regional food control authorities and the Food Control Laboratory inCopenhagen.

SamplingThe Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition designed the sampling plans. They were based on thedietary consumption pattern, production and import data, and monitoring results from previousyears.Samples where taken by authorised personnel from the 11 Danish Regional Veterinary and FoodControl Authorities mainly at wholesalers and importers. 11% of the Danish grown samples weretaken at primary producers and 4% at shops. Samples of processed food (including infant food)were taken at shops.44% of the samples were fresh or frozen fruit, 43% were fresh or frozen vegetables, 6% werecereals and 7% were processed products. 34% were of domestic origin, 41% were grown in otherEU member states and 25% from third countries. Sampling included 4% commercially frozenproduce and 5% organically grown samples.Analysis and quality assuranceThe analytical methods are developed and validated by the Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition.The laboratory at the Regional Food Control Authority in Copenhagen performed the majority ofthe analyses. The Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition performed confirmational analysis forresidues exceeding 75% of the MRL. Both laboratories are accredited for pesticide analysis incompliance with EN45001 by the Danish body of accreditation, DANAK (certificate numbers 315and 350). Thelaboratories participate in the relevant FAPAS performance verification scheme."Guidelines concerning Quality Control Procedures for Pesticide Residue Analysis" has beenapplied for all methods. Mass selective confirmation was performed for part of the GCmultimethods and for the LC/MS methods for cereals.

12

The fruit and vegetables were analysed for 130 pesticides using a GC multi method based onextraction with acetone/cyclohexane/ethyl acetate, a HPLC method for fungicides (benomyl-group,thiabendazole, biphenyl and orto-phenylphenol) and a spectrophotometric method for the sum ofdithiocarbamates (maneb-group). The cereals were analysed for 80 pesticides using a GC multimethod and two LC-MS/MS methods (glyphosate, chlormequat and mepiquat).In 2001, no authorisation for the use of disulfotone, oxydemeton-methyl, phorate and thiometonexisted in Denmark. Oxydemeton-methyl, phorate and thiometon were included in the monitoringprogramme.In the analytical methods 1-2 spiked samples were included in each analytical batch. The GC multimethods included spiked samples containing 8-50 pesticides at 2 concentration levels alternatingbetween all pesticides. Bracketed calibration was performed with matrix-matched standards or puresolvent standards. The reporting levels entered in Table A are the lowest calibration levels (LCL)achieved in at least 90% of the analytical series. Results below the general LCL have only beenreported, if they exceeded the LCL of that specific analytical series. Samples with pesticide residuesexceeding the MRL were confirmed by analyses at the Institute of Food Safety and Nutrition exceptfindings of dithiocarbamates. Due to the methodology applied it is not possible to distinguishbetween dithiocarbamates included in the MRL definition and other dithiocarbamates for which noMRL has been fixed. Thus it is not possible to report confirmed exceedances for the maneb-group.

ResultsPesticide residues were found in 68% of the fruit samples, 21% of the vegetable samples and in 9%of the cereal samples (excluding organically grown samples and findings of glyphosate,chlormequat and mepiquat).Fiftyone samples of cereal samples were analysed for glyphosate, chlormequat and mepiquat.Residues were found in 51% of the 41 conventional grown samples.Samples of organically grown fruit, vegetables and cereals were analysed (148 samples of fruit andvegetables, 41 samples of cereals). Pesticide residues found are shown below.

Residues found in samples declared as organically grownCommodity Residue found Country of origin

Apple Diphenylamin 0.05 mg/kg ItalyCarrot Hexachlorobenzene

Quinotozene0.01 mg/kg0.01 mg/kg

Denmark

Carrot Quinotozene 0.01 mg/kg DenmarkOrange Dicofol 0.35 mg/kg Italy

Strawberry jam Procymidon 0.04 mg/kg DenmarkMaize, dried Pirimiphos-methyl 0.34 mg/kg Italy

Rye Pirimiphos-methyl 0.01 mg/kg DenmarkRye Chlorpyrifos 0.01 mg/kg Denmark

Wheat Chlorpyrifos 0.03 mg/kg Denmark

Residues exceeding the maximum residue limits (MRLs) were found in 118 samples correspondingto 4% of the conventionally grown samples.More that one pesticide was found in 22% of the conventionally grown samples.Substances have been reported according to their residue definition. Due to the methodologyapplied results for the maneb-group may include dithiocarbamates not included in the MRL-definition.

13

ND70%

> MRL1%

? MRL29%

ND21%

> MRL8%

? MRL71%

ND31%

> MRL8%

? MRL61%

Danish grownGrown in other

EU member statesGrown in countries

outside the EU

For processed foods MRLs were calculated using estimated factors for concentration or dilutionduring processing.Some of the MRLs changed during 2001. Tables B, C and D do not reflect this fact as only oneMRL are shown in the tables. The table below lists the combinations of commodity and pesticidewhere more than one MRL were used when evaluating detected residues. Detected residues were inevery case compared to the MRL that were in use at the time of sampling.

ND93% > MRL

1%

? MRL6%

ND65%

> MRL3%

? MRL32%

ND70%

> MRL3%

? MRL27%

Danish grownGrown in other

EU membe r statesGrown in countries

outside the EU

Figure 1: Residues in conventionally grown fruits (Danish Pesticide Monitoringprogramme 2001). ND: Not detected

Figure 2: Residues in conventionally grown vegetables (Danish Pesticide Monitoringprogramme 2001). ND: Not detected

14

Commodity/pesticide combinations where more than one MRL were used whenevaluating detected residues in samples from 2001

Commodity Pesticide MRL (old) 1)

(mg/kg)MRL (new) 1)

(mg/kg)Banana Thiabendazole 3 E 5 E

Cherry Diazinon 0.02 N 1 E

Cucumber Carbendazim 0.5 E 1 E

Cucumber Metalaxyl W 0.5 E

Grape Diazinon 0.5 N 0.02 E

Grapefruit Dicofol 0.02 E 2 E

Kiwi Quinalphos W 0.05 E

Lemon Dicofol 0.02 E 2 E

Lemon Quinalphos W 0.05 E

Lettuce Metalaxyl W 1 E

Mandarin, clementine Dicofol 0.02 E 2 E

Mandarin, clementine Thiabendazole 6 E 5 E

Melon Endosulfan 0.05 N 0.3 E

Melon Pyrazophos 0.2 N 0.05 E

Orange Dicofol 0.02 E 2 E

Orange Endosulfan 0.05 N 0.5 E

Orange Thiabendazole 6 E 5 E

Pear Chlormequat 0.05 N 0.5 E

Pear Endosulfan 0.05 N 0.3 E

Pepper,sweet Pirimiphos-methyl W 1 E

Raspberry Metalaxyl W 0.05 E

Strawberry Benomyl-group W 0,1 E

Tomato Endosulfan 0.05 N 0.5 E

1) E: EU-MRL; N: National MRL; W: No MRL

Toxicological evaluationA toxicological evaluation was performed for samples with residues exceeding the MRL, multipleresidues and residues where no MRL was set. The evaluation concluded that in general the detectedresidues did not constitute a health hazard to the consumer. However, findings of chlorinatedpesticides such as hexachlorbenzene and dieldrin are undesirable, due to accumulation in theorganism. One sample of carrot with 0.11 mg dieldrin/kg wasestimated to constitute a toxicologicalproblem if consumed by small children. One sample of orange with multiple residues (chlorpyrifos,dicofol, fenitrothion, fenthion, imazalil, methidathion) and one sample of fresh ginger (HCH,lindane) could constitute toxicological problems. Twelve samples had residues that might exceedthe Acute Reference Dose. ARfD (dimethoate and omethoate in lettuce (0.68, resp. 0.09 mg/kg), ingrape (0.04, resp. 0.03 mg/kg) and in kaki/sharon (0.08, resp. 0.07 mg/kg); omethoat in kaki/sharon(0.04 mg/kg); methidathion in orange (0.21 mg/kg), in lemon (four samples) (0.33 – 0.62 mg/kg)and in kumquat (0.50 mg/kg); profenphos in grape (0.25 mg/kg); fenthion in clementine (0.40mg/kg). The residues were judged to be toxicologically acceptable.

Regulatory actionsFor reporting purpose the analytical result is compared directly with the MRL. The analyticaluncertainty is taken into consideration before regulatory actions are taken.The following up of violations lies with the Regional Veterinary and Food Control Authorities.Most frequently the action for confirmed exceedances was to order the companies to update theirown-check procedures in combination with warnings.

15

Annexes:Table A 1 - Part I: Table A 1 - Part I: Summary of numbers of samples, sample origins

and results (surveillance sampling)

Table A 1 - PartII:

Table A 1 - Part I: Summary of numbers of samples, sample originsand results (follow-up enforcement sampling)

Table A 2 - Part I: Summary table of pesticides sought and found (surveillancesampling)

Table A 2 - PartII:

Summary table of pesticides sought and found (follow-upenforcement sampling)

Table B: Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) tothe European Commission

Table C: Notifications of the results of Check Sampling and Monitoring ofthe National Programme to the European Commission

Table D1: Details of Residues Exceeding EC-MRLs (surveillance sampling)

Table D2: Details of Residues Exceeding non-harmonised MRLs, includingnational MRLs in Open positions) (surveillance sampling)

Table E: Details of Samples with Multiple Residues (>=2) in Single Samples

Table G: Laboratories

Not included

(no data):

Table D3, D4, F

16

GERMANY

Summary of the Results from the Federal Republic of Germany

The report contains the results of the tests carried out in fresh and frozen fruit, vegetables andcereals during the 2001 survey period. It includes all of the data transmitted by 45 accreditedlaboratories of the official food control laboratories of the 16 Laender to the ‘Federal Institute forHealth Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine, BgVV’.

In Germany there is a difference between Monitoring Programme and official food control. Parts ofthe data generated in both programmes correspond with the provisions of Directives 86/362/EEC ,90/642/EEC and the Commission Recommendation of 22 December 2000 (2001/42/EC)concerning a coordinated Community monitoring programme. Therefore, the report includes therespective data from both programmes:

- Monitoring programme 1414 samples- official food control 4926 samples.

Samples were taken on the level of producers, manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers, andrestaurants according to a national sampling protocol published as official legal regulations. Theactive ingredients tested for were ingredients which had already been included in the Annexes toDirectives 86/362/EEC or 90/642/EEC.

In the course of the 2001 survey period, a total of 6340 samples were tested for pesticide residuesin the Federal Republic of Germany. In 3442 (54.3 %) samples residues of pesticides were notdetected and in 2675 (42.2 %) samples, residues of pesticides were determineted in compliancewith official, national and EU MRLs. Only 223 (3.5 %) samples contained residues of pesticidesexceeding MRLs.

Table 1 shows the number of samples divided into domestic production and imports and takes intoaccount the three Directives. The overview given in this table indicates that residues of importedsamples exceeded MRLs more frequently than those of domestic foods. The reason could surely beseen in the fact that parts of the imported foods originated from countries with other climaticconditions which require an increased use of pesticides.

Table 1 Overview of the results of the tests performed on domestic and foreign produce.

Domestic samples Import samples

Food item totalamount

withoutresidue

s

residuesup toMRL

residuesaboveMRL

totalamoun

t

withoutresidues

residuesup toMRL

residuesaboveMRL

Cereals 282 195 83 4 16 6 10 0

Fruit/vegetable

2540 1667 796 77 3502 1574 1786 142

Total 2822 1862 879 81 3518 1580 1796 142

The food samples were analysed for a total of 95 different pesticides from which 60 were detectedat least in one sample. Residues of 44 individual pesticides exceeded MRLs.

17

GREECE

SUMMARY OF PESTICIDE RESIDUE MONITORING RESULTS OF HELLAS FOR

THE YEAR 2001

A total number of 1739 samples were examined by 6 laboratories, including 1369

samples of fresh and frozen fruit and vegetables, 5 samples of cereals and 365

samples of processed products.

� fresh and frozen fruit and vegetables

1043 were domestic samples (76.2% of the total number of samples), while 326

samples (23.8%) were imported ones:

• 926 samples (67.6%) contained not detectable residues of the pesticides sought.

• 394 samples (28.8%) contained detectable residues at or below the MRL.

• In 49 samples (3.6%) residues of one or more pesticides at concentrations

exceeding the EU or national MRLs were detected (46 exceeded the EU and 3 the

national MRL).

From the above 1369 samples analysed, 305 samples were also examined for the

pesticides specified in the 2001/42/EC Commission Recommendation. No authorised

uses of disulfutone, oxydemethon methyl, phorate and thiomethon in strawberries

and grapes exist in Hellas. There is also no authorised use of phorate in lettuce, or

phorate and disulfutone in apples.

� Cereals

5 samples of rice were analysed, all of them without detectable residues of the

pesticides sought.

� processed products

365 samples of virgin olive oil – all samples were domestic ones- were analysed:

• 110 samples (30.1%) contained not detectable residues of the pesticides sought.

• 249 samples (68.2%) contained detectable residues at or below the MRL.

• In 6 samples (1.6%) residues of one or more pesticides at concentrations exceeding

the national MRLs were detected.

Samples were randomly taken from points of entry, wholesalers, retailers and

farmgates.

The total number of pesticides analyzed for was 207. The 10 most frequently

pesticides found were: maneb group (53.4% of samples analysed), benomyl group

(23%), chlorpyrifos (8.9%), phosalone (8.7%), endosulfan (5.7%), myclobutanil (4.8%),

bifenthrin (4.4%), bromopropylate (4.3%), procymidone (4.1%), tetradifon (3.2%).

The reporting levels are generally those routinely achieved in the laboratories.

18

In Table F, no results of the homogeneity exercise 2001 are reported, since all

samples analysed, contained not detectable residues of phorate in potatoes and/or

methidathion in apples.

QUALITY ASSURANCE

The EU guidelines are followed as close as possible. The screening of samples by GLC

involves the use of matrix-matched standard mixtures containing the most commonly

encountered pesticides, including at least two pesticides with a poor or variable GC

response or recovery. Bracketing calibration is used. Although most quantitations are

carried out using calibration curves with 3-5 levels covering a limited concentration

range, a single calibration point is sometimes used, for example for confirmation of a

residue, which has already been quantified on a different GC system.

Routine recovery checks and blanks are carried out approximately every 20 samples

rather than on the basis of batches, because of the uneven flow of samples to the

laboratory.

None of the laboratories is yet accredited.

Results are summarised in the following tables and figures.

19

Table 1. Overview of the results from the Hellenic pesticide monitoring programme

2001.fresh and frozen

fruit and

vegetablesCereals Processed foods

Number%

TotalNumber

%

TotalNumber

%

Total

Total samples

analysed1369 100 5 100 365 100

Samples with

non detectable

residues

926 67.6 5 100 110 30.1

Samples with

detectable

residues at or

below the MRL

414 28.8 0 0 249 68.2

49 0 6

EU

MRLs

National

MRLsEU

MRLs

National

MRLs

EU

MRLs

National

MRLs

Samples with

detectable

residues of one

or more

pesticides

exceeding the

EU or national

MRLs

46 3

3.60 0

0

0 6

1.6

20

Figure 1. Results from the Hellenic National monitoring programme 2001 – fresh and

frozen fruits and vegetables.

Total number of samples: 1369 Fig. 1

ND67,6

>3,6

<28,8

Figure 2. Results from the Hellenic National monitoring programme 2000 – cereals.


ND100,0%

Figure 3. Results from the Hellenic National monitoring programme 2000 – processed

products.


ND30,1%

> MRL1,6%

< MRL68,2%

21

SPAIN

SPANISH PESTICIDE MONITORIN Results –2001

The Spanish pesticide monitoring programme for pesticide residues in food was carried out by theAutonomies Communities coordinated by the Spanish Ministry ofAgriculture, Fish and Food.

The objectives of the programme were to assume that:

The pesticide was used accordingly with the Good Agriculture Practice.The health of consumer was protected.

The vegetables were collected by the inspectors following the requirements of the directive 79/700at the productions and wholesalers level because more that 95% of the Spanish food is produced inSpain a very few are imported food. Then they are sent to the laboratories. The monitoringprogramme has been coordinated by Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food and included theEuropean and national action.

This programme takes into account:

Proportion of the crops accordingly with the production.Requirements from EU coordinated programmeSome special actions concerning problems with certain crop.

Laboratories

14 laboratories carried out the monitory programme but until now their report is not yetaccordingly with the European format that was make at Central Service.

All samples were analysed by multiresidues method and same of their by simple method.

For multiresidues methods the samples were extracted by solvent (acetone or ethil acetate)then partitioned by liquid-liquid. The purification for organo-halogenated and organo phosphatemolecules were performed by cartridge set-pack, florisil or GPC. The determination is conducted byECD, NPD, FPD or hall detector GC/MS is used as confirmation for samples above MRL's whenthe techniques is applicable.

Additional methods were used for determination of methyl carbamate, maneb groups,inorganic bromides, benomyl group and so on.

175 pesticides can be research and we have found 78. (approximatly 44%)

Four laboratories, Madrid, Valencia, Zaragoza and Barcelona were accredited by ENACand others are in very advance fase to obtain the accreditation. The accreditation can be occurredonly if methods was validated by collaborative study. The validation "in house" required a lot ofinvestigation. For the new molecules the accreditation seems difficult to obtained. The threelaboratories were assuming approximately 40% of the samples.

All laboratories were involved in some proficiency test with Almeria university and EUproficiency text.

22

Results

The total number of samples analysed in coordinated EC programme and Spanishprogramme were3.341, the 3.098 and the repartion were 1.362 (43,9%) fruits, 1.519 (49,03%)vegetables, and 217 (4,09%) other vegetables, the 243 (7,84%) cereals.

For cereals only 2 sample (0,8%), was above the MRL's. For vegetables and fruits and otersvegetables the samples that exceeded the MRL's were about 4,4%.

The pesticides that were found the most frequently were accordingly with the crop.

Citrus fruits / chlorpiryphos, dicofol, imazalil, methidathion, ortophenil-phenol, thiabendazol.Pomes fruits/ captan, chlortalonil, folpet, imazalil, phosalone.Stone fruit/ captan, chlorpiryphos, maneb-groupGrapes/chlorpiryphos, dicofol, maneb-group, procymidone.Banana /dimethoate, procymidoneTomato/ chlortalonil, endosulfan, maneb-group, procymidone.Pepper/ endosulfan, metamidophos, pirimiphos-methil, procynidone.Lettuce / cypermetrine, maneb-group, metalaxil, procymidone.

Productos Analizados SINRESIDUOS

CONRESIDUOS

< LMR > LMR > LMR EC > LMR N

Frutas 1362 542 820 762 58 53 5Hortalizas 1519 1080 439 362 77 76 1Cereales 243 223 20 18 2 2Otros p.vegetales

217 205 12 10 2 2

TOTAL 3341 2050 1291 1152 139 133 6

23

FRANCE

YEAR 2001 REPORT ON THE FRENCH MONITORING OF PESTICIDE RESIDUES INPLANT PRODUCTS

SUMMARY

In 2001, a total of 4177 samples of crops (fruits, vegetables, juices, cereal products) were taken andanalysed for 223 active substances of pesticides.MRLs were exceeded in 226 samples (6.2%). The majority of theseexceedances concernedCommunity regulatory provisions (4.2%).Half of the samples did not contain the sought pesticideresidues.The analytical methods used detect most plant health molecules from the level of 0.01mg/kg.Tomatoes, lettuces and similar, apples, strawberries and grapes were sampled as part of theEuropean Commission harmonised monitoring programme. The Community MRLs fordithiocarbamates (maneb group) were exceeded for lettuces and similar; for methamidophos,tomatoes are more specifically affected; and for the benomyl group, strawberries were moreaffected.Targeted surveillance was carried out on lettuces to search for dithiocarbamates anddicarboximides—the most frequent exceedances were indeed caused by the maneb group but alsoby acephate and methamidophos.According to the overall information (table C), it appears that the exceedances for fruits reach 5.6%.This percentage is mainly due to cherries and strawberries. For tropical produce, mangos andpineapples, the exceedances result from a lack of information on these crops on the part of pesticidesuppliers. However, this does not lead to a human health problem because the skin, whichconcentrates residues, is not ingested.As for vegetables, the situation is improving slowly but surely. Peppers are still the worst problemwith lettuces, celeries and carrots. For lettuces, the exceedances observed result from the search forbromides, which can distort statistics with respect to other countries.As in previous years, large samplings of lettuces and similar were taken. They are over-representedwith respect to their dietary consumption in France. In fact 250 samples would be more in relationwith the consumption levels but DGCCRF’s action is also to strengthen surveillance and sometimes"enforcement" in sensitive sectors.Lastly, as regards cereals, only post-harvest pesticides were identified and the exceedances wereinsignificant.

INTRODUCTION

The Community monitoring programme for pesticide residues in plant products is carried out by theDirection Générale de la Concurrence, de la Consommation et de la Répression des Fraudes—DGCCRF (General Directorate for Fair Trading, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control).The aims of this multi-year programme are to:

▪ monitor compliance with MRLs, and therefore compliance with approved usage ofpesticides in accordance with good agricultural practices.

▪ assess the real dietary exposure of consumers to pesticide residues.

Crops and processed foods are sampled by surveillance inspectors following the samplingprocedure requirements at growers, wholesalers, and retailers. The general sampling programme isdrawn up by the central authority and takes account of national and European priorities.This programme takes into account:

- the dietary proportion of plant products,

24

- the requirements of the EU coordinated programme,- the results of the 1999 monitoring programme,- the targeted inspection on certain fruits and vegetables (peppers and salads).

LABORATORIES

Six DGCCRF laboratories were involved in the monitoring programme and in the targetedsurveillance programme. The results were collected by the Massy laboratory which analysed them.The laboratories generally used multi-residue methods and sometimes specific adapted methods.Using multi-residue techniques, the samples were extracted by solvents (acetone or ethyl acetate),then partitioned by a liquid-liquid partition. Halogenated molecules were purified on adsorbents(Florisil or silica, SPE ) or by gel permeation. (bio beads) Determination and quantification wereperformed by GLC or HPLC with adapted detectors such as ECD, FPD, NPD, Hall, MS, UV,fluorimetry. GC/MS were used for confirmation most of the time.Specific methods were used for the determination of dithiocarbamates, inorganic bromides, maleichydrazide, chlormequat, and benzimidazoles.Several laboratories are accredited by COFRAC for these determinations. For instance, thelaboratory at Massy is accredited for determinations of organo-halogenated compounds,organophosphate compounds, benzimidazoles, dithiocarbamates, etc., and the laboratory inMontpellier for dithiocarbamates and benzimidazoles. (see table G)All the laboratories were involved in proficiency tests organised by BIPEA, FAPAS and/or CHECK

RESULTS

4177 samples were taken for the monitoring programme. Approximately 70% of them were fromnational production. 36% concerned fruits and 51% vegetables.

FRUITS

1505 samples were analysed. The results are presented below.

Breakdown of fruits

42%

52%

6%

sans résidu

avec résidu

dépassements

sans résidu = without residuesavec résidu = with residuesdépassements = exceedances

The situation is satisfactory for apples and bananas. Pears present a non-conformity rate of 5%.Chlormequat was detected in only two samples. The action undertaken over the past two years hastherefore led to a considerable improvement in imported pears.

25

Citrus fruits often contain chlorpyrifos-ethyl and some exceedances are due to post-harvesttreatments. The latter also appear in citrus fruits sold as ‘untreated’.

050

100150200250300350

citronorangem

andarinepom

me

poirepêchecerisefraiseavocatm

angues

EXAMPLES OF FRUITS

anomalies

nombre d'échantillons

anomalies = exceedancesnombre d’échantillons = number of samplesmangues = mangoes; avocat = avocado; fraise = strawberry; cerise = cherry; pêche =peach; poire = pear; pomme = apple; mandarine = mandarin; orange = orange; citron =lemon

VEGETABLES AND MISCELLANEOUS

2140 samples of vegetables were taken by the department. The results of the analyses are given inthe graphs below.

Residues situation in vegetables

58%

35%

7%

sans résidu

avec résidu

dépassements

sans résidu = without residues; avec résidu = with residues; dépassements = exceedances

26

310

29

272

6

78

11

516

53

18

3

33

7

33

5

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

légumesracines

poivrons herbes haricot

Examples of the situation of vegetables

dépassements

nombre d'échantillons

dépassements = exceedances; nombre d’échantillons = number of sampleslégumes racines = root vegetables; poivrons = peppers; herbes = herbs; haricot = beans516 samples are lettuces and similar

Peppers and celery contribute to a considerable extent to the percentage of MRL exceedances. Thissituation, compared with that of lettuces and similar, is more worrisome insofar as the number ofsamples is relatively less high than in the case of salads.For the remaining vegetables and miscellaneous, chicories, mushrooms and cabbages present fewexceedances.

CEREALS AND PROCESSED PRODUCTS

As in 2000, few MRL exceedances were observed in the 271 samples analysed. Two cases ofgamma-HCH presence were detected.

Raw cereals: contamination of 271 samples

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5

chlorpyriphos méthyle

dichlorvos

malathion

pyrimiphos méthyle

chlorpyriphos méthyle = chlorpyrifos-methyl; dichlorvos = dichlorvos; malathion = malathion;pyrmiphos méthyle = pyrimiphos-methyl

27

Raw cereals: contamination of 271 organo-halogenated samples

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5

deltaméthrine

gamma HCH

deltaméthrine = deltamethrin; gamma HCH = gamma-HCH

As can be seen, cereals contamination is very low. For gamma-HCH (lindane), the maximumcontamination is 0,4 mg/kg; two other samples contain far lower levels.For deltamethrin, the results are satisfactory: in effect the MRL is 1 mg/kgReferring to organophosphate compounds, it should be recalled that the MRLs are respectively 2,2.8 and 5 mg/kg for chlorpyrifos-methyl, dichlorvos, malathion and pyrimiphos-methyl.

Breakdown of the most often incriminatedsubstancesmanébe groupe

15%bénomyl groupe

14%

chlorprophame4% bromures

7%thiabendazole4%

chlorothalonil3%

captane3%

prochloraz5%

quintozéne4%

methamidophos3%

vinclozolinepyriméthanil

3%

procymidone5%

iprodione3%

cyprodinil

oxadixyl5%

dicofol4%

endosulfan9%

pyridabéne3%

acéphate3%

diéthion3%

manébe groupebénomyl groupecaptanechlorothaloniliprodioneprocymidonepyriméthanilvinclozolinecyprodiniloxadixylacéphatepyridabéneendosulfandiéthiondicofol

Main active substances in exceedances (crops)

manébe groupe = maneb group; bénomyl group = benomyl group; captane = captan; chlorothalonil= chlorothalonil; iprodione = iprodione; procymidone = procymidone; pyriméthanil = pyrimethanil;vinclozoline = vinclozolin; cyprodinil = cyprodinil; oxadixyl = oxadixyl; acéphate = acephate;pyridabéne = pyridaben; endosulfan = endosulfan; diéthion = ethion; dicofol = dicofol;methamidophos = methamidophos; quintozéne = quintozene; prochloraze = prochloraz;thiabendazole = thiabendazole; chlorprophame = chlorpropham; bromures = bromides

28

Breakdown of exceedances

France62%

South America7%

Spain15%

other European4%

Africa12%

amérique du sud

afrique

autres europe

Espagne

France

Compared with the year 2000, a decrease in methamidophos exceedances can be seen. Maneb andbenomyl groups are the main causes of exceedances.

Origin of samples with exceedances ( EC harmonised MRLs)

Amérique du sud = South America; Afrique = Africa; autres Europe = other European; Espagne =Spain; France = France

The proportion of exceedances for France should be related to the proportion of samples. Thesamples of nonconforming French products represent 62% of the total nonconforming products butFrench products account for two-thirds of the products sampled in the market. The situation ofFrench production is therefore no more critical than that of the other European countries in relationto the same means of surveillance.

Plurality of pesticides in the same sample

fréquence de plusieurs pesticides sur l'échantillon

2 pesticides51%

3 pesticides27%

4 pesticides12%

5 pesticides7%

6 pesticides2%

7 pesticides1%

10 pesticides0%

9 pesticides0%

8 pesticides0%

2 pesticides

3 pesticides

4 pesticides

5 pesticides

6 pesticides

7 pesticides

8 pesticides

9 pesticides

10 pesticides

Most samples contain one or two pesticides. The probability therefore of finding in the same sampletwo molecules of the same family appears quite low; on the other hand, a finer analysis would benecessary to ensure that the modes of action on all the results are not equivalent.

29

CONCLUSIONS

In 2001, there were fewer alerts than in previous years. Chlormequat in pears still requiressurveillance but the number of exceedances of the limits has decreased. Methamidophos is still anactive substance to be monitored but the situation has improved. Lettuces and similar are still asource of concern, particularly for dithiocarbamate exceedances. Initiatives are being taken by theFrench committee studying the impact of phytosanitary products (commission française destoxiques) to find a solution. The solution would consist in authorising, for salads, onlyphytosanitary formulations in which dithiocarbamates are combined with other molecules. This willhelp reduce the product dose applied per hectare, thereby reducing dithiocarbamate levels.

The situation of French laboratories regarding accreditation is improving since a third laboratorywas accredited in 2001 for pesticide analyses and in 2002 two other units obtained this status.Research should be developed mainly on widely used pesticides.

30

IRELAND

Irish Pesticide Monitoring Results for 2001.

The Irish pesticide monitoring programme for pesticide residues in food is undertaken bythe Pesticide Control Service of Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development as aservice contract to the Irish Food Safety Authority. The objectives of the programme are to ensurethat

- pesticides are correctly applied to foodand that

- consumers are not exposed to unacceptable pesticide residues in food.

In 2001 some 645 samples were analysed for pesticide residues of which 301 were fruit/vegetables,30 were cereals and the remainder were food of animal origin.

Fruit and vegetables:60 different types of fruit and vegetables were analysed as part of the monitoring

programme. 29.2% of the samples were of domestic origin and the remaining 70.8% were either ofimported or unknown origin. The samples were analysed for residues of up to 89 pesticides andtheir metabolites. 49.5% of samples were found to contain pesticide residues while 3.3% of the totalnumber of samples analysed contained residues in excess of the MRL.

Enforcement action is taken by Ireland only in respect to those pesticide MRL’s which are definedin the EU residue directives, 76/895, 86/362, 86/363, 90/642 and their amending directives.

Details of the pesticide residues detected are provided in the attached tables. In the fruit andvegetable samples analysed residues of 37 different pesticides were detected. MRL’s exist for 30 ofthese compounds and have yet to be established for the remaining 7.

The pesticides most commonly encountered in fruit and vegetables were Thiabendazole (13.5%),carbendazim (7.1 %), captan (6.9%), chlorpyriphos (5.1%), iprodione ( 5.0%), dimethoate (4.4%),dicofol (4.2%), vinclozolin (3.8%), chlorothalonil (3.5%) and chlorfenvinphos (3.4%) etc were theresidues most commonly detected in the pesticide residue monitoring programme.

The distribution of pesticides found in 2001 is consistent with the results of previous years.Thiabendazole is primarily detected in citrus, pome fruit and miscellaneous fruit.;Carbendazim was detected in a range of fruit;Captan was found in fruit generally but mainly in pome fruit. Only in the case of pears wereresidues of captan and folpet found together in the same sample. ;Chlorpyriphos was primarily detected in citrus fruit ;Iprodione was found in a range of fruit and vegetables, particularly the leafy vegetable groups.;Dimethoate was detected more often in 2001 than in previous years and while found in both fruitand vegetables it was present most often in apples and in lettuce.;Dicofol was, as in previous years, found predominantly in citrus fruit;Vinclozolin was found in a range of fruit and vegetables but was found most frequently in kiwifruit.;In all 40 samples (13.5%) contained residues of 2 pesticides, 21 samples (7.1%) contained residuesof 3 pesticides, 2 samples (0.7%) contained residues of 4 pesticides, 3 samples (1 %) containedresidues of 5 pesticides.

31

Cereals:Cereal samples, 18 barley and 12 wheat, were analysed for residues of 89 pesticides and theirmetabolites. The barley samples were all of domestic origin while 75% of the wheat was ofimported origin. A residue of Pirimiphos-methyl was detected in one wheat sample analysed. NoMRL exceedance was detected for the cereal samples analysed.

MRL violations:10 samples of fruit and vegetables were found to contain pesticide residues in excess of the

EU MRL’s. 2 of these samples were of domestic origin while the remainder were imported ( 5 EUproduction and 3 from outside the EU). 9 of the 10 exceedances related to MRL’s which were set atthe LOD which suggests that, at least within the EU, the pesticides were applied to crops illegally.An assessment of the risk associated with the dietary intake of the pesticide /crop combinations inthose cases where the MRL was exceeded did not indicate any risk to the consumer for all of the 10samples concerned.

Quality Control Practices in the laboratory:- The laboratory works to the ISO 17025 accreditation standard which was achieved in

December of 2000.- The laboratory participates in both EU proficiency (when available) and in a series of

annual FAPAS proficiency programmes for pesticide residues in fruit and vegetables.- The work of the laboratory takes into account the guidelines set out in the EU Quality

Control Criteria as agreed by the EU residue analysts in co-operation with the EUcommission.

32

ITALY

No data were provided by Italy

33

LUXEMBOURG

Pesticide residues monitoring in fruits and vegetables and cereals in Luxembourg in 2001

SummaryThis report comprises the results of the coordinated and the national pesticide monitoringprogramme in fruits, vegetables and cereals on the Luxembourgian market in 2001.

The samples were collected by a food inspector according to an annual sampling plan. Importedproducts were sampled at wholesaler distribution points, local products were sampled at retailers atthe central market in the City of Luxembourg. Only routine sampling (no follow-up enforcementsampling) was done. As far as practicable sampling was done according to directive 79/700/EEC.

The samples were analysed by the division of food control being part of the Laboratory of NationalHealth. All samples were analysed by a gas chromatographic multiresidue method with ECD, NPDand MSD (DFG S19, modified). A relative standard deviation of 30% for the analysis was takenwhen deciding whether a MRL was exceeded or not.

Of the pesticides recommended to monitor by the Commission, acephate, azoxystrobin, thiometon,the maneb-group and the benomyl-group were not determined in the 2001 exercise.Disulfoton and phorate are not authorized in Luxemburg in fruits and vegetables, thiometon has aMRL of 0.5 mg/kg for fruits and vegetables, oxydemeton-methyl one of 0.4 mg/kg (except carrots),respectively.

A total of 171 samples were analysed consisting of 157 samples of fruits and vegetables, 10 cerealsamples and 4 processed products. 17.5% of the products were of Luxembourgian origin. Sevensamples contained residue levels higher than EC MRL.

Table: Summary of the 2001 monitoring programme (co-ordinated (EC) and national programme)

Number of samplesanalysed

(fruits, vegetables andcereals)

No of sampleswithout residues

No of sampleswith residues at

or below theMRL

No of samplesexceeding EC-

MRL

No of samplesexceeding N-

MRL

171 109 52 7 3

Pyrimethanil, iprodione and procymidone were found most frequently (35 times), the MRLs wereexceeded only once by these fungicides, however. The fungicide metalaxyl was found in 5 samples,exceeding the MRL twice in strawberries. Methidathion was found 3 times in lemons, 2 times theMRL was exceeded by the insecticide. Of the commodities analysed, pesticides were mostfrequently detected in lettuce, grapes and strawberries.

As methidathion was below reporting limit in all four composite samples, the single units were notfurther analysed.

34

NETHERLANDS

SUMMARY

During 2001 about 2900 samples, both domestic and non-domestic products, were analysed in thenational and coordinated monitoring program. This number was slightly higher than the number ofsamples analysed in 2000 (ca. 2600). Domestic products made up 44 % of the samples, 27 % of thesamples came from other EU countries, 28 % from non-EU countries. Imported products in generalshow higher percentages of MRL-violations. Domestic products show residues above the reportinglimit in about 43 % of the samples, whereas non-domestic products contain residues in 68 % (EU)and 60 % (non EU) of the cases, respectively.In 2001 the violation rate was comparable with 2000. Dutch products contained residues above theMRL in 3,9 % of the cases, non-domestic products had violation rates of about 13 %.

INTRODUCTION

Pesticide residue control has been a task of the Dutch Inspectorate for Health Protection/FoodInspection Service for many years. Therefore, a suitable infrastructure is present for the EU-monitoring as required by directives 90/642/EEC (products of plant origin), 86/362/EEC (cereals)and Recommendation 2001/42/EU (the harmonised specific program 2001).After a strong decrease of sample numbers due to a reorganisation in 1998 the centralised pesticideresidue analysis unit came to full capacity in 2000. By further increasing efficiency more samplescould be analysed.Therefore, the number of samples has risen to 2900 in 2001, compared to 2600 in2000.

SAMPLING

The samples are taken without prior information about the presence of pesticides in the sample.Therefore, they represent the situation on the market for the product at that time. However,sampling is directed relatively more to products that need attention because of the violation rate inprevious years. Therefore, high violation rates can indicate both an efficient sampling strategy andproblems in the agricultural practice. As required by EU-directive 90/642/EU, a monitoring plan ismade accordingly.The monitoring program is primarily directed to major products in the consumption pattern, butsome capacity is reserved to minor products.In the monitoring program special attention was given to chlormequat on pears, because of the highlevel of exceedances in 1999.It was not possible to obtain suitable samples for the homogeneity exercise.The sampling procedure, i.e. the number of subsamples taken from a lot is regulated by the DutchFood and Commodity Law. This regulation is the implementation of the EC-directive 79/700/EEC.

ANALYSIS AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

The general strategy is detecting as many pesticides as possible in one analysis by using Multi-Residue-Methods (MRMs). The Dutch method consists of an acetone extraction and a partition stepof the residues into dichloromethane/petroleum ether followed by a chromatographic separation andselective detection of residues. The main detection method is gas chromatography (GC) followed byIon-Trap Mass Spectrometric Detection (ITD). Only for some analytes not detectable sensitivelyenough by ITD, a few additional methods are used:- GC with Electron Capture Detection (ECD)- GC with Nitrogen/Phosphorus (NPD) and Phosphorus/Sulphur detection (FPD)

35

For pesticides not amenable to GC, High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) MRMs areused- with UV-detection for the detection of fungicides thiabendazole and carbendazim- with post-column derivatisation and fluorimetric detection of N-methylcarbamates

Dithiocarbamates are analysed as CS2 using GC-ECD after decomposing with acidic tin-chloridesolution and extraction into iso-octane.All these MRMs together detect about 300 analytes of the 450 pesticides that have an MRL. In 2001the MRM of benzoylurea herbicides was not performed. The remaining pesticides must be analysedby Single-Residue-Methods (SRMs), which are not performed in routine but on a survey base. In2001 special surveys were conducted for imidacloprid and propamocarb, applying LC-MS.Table A2 gives information about the scope of the MRMs (6.1).The validity of the analytical results is governed by a quality assurance system complying withISO17025. The multi-residue methods are within the scope of the accreditation of the laboratory.The centralised laboratory implemented the EU Guideline on Quality Control (6.2). In order tocheck system performance and to avoid false negative results, reference pesticides standardmixtures containing 76 analytes are run in each batch of samples at the lowest calibration level(LCL), which corresponds to the reporting limit. For these mixtures, also 3-point calibration andrecovery checks are performed.

REGISTRATION AND COMPILATION OF DATA

The 5 Regional Inspectorates for Health Protection have a uniform database-system for the storageof sample data and analytical results. The applied MRMs and SRMs are recorded and the results arestored. Because of the registration of MRMs and the scope of the method, also the absence of aresidue can be established.In this report all results above the MRL increased with a default measurement uncertainty of 20 %are considered to be violating. This procedure has been applied in the 2000 report as well. For thecomparison with previous years results from those years have been reevaluated then in the sameway. In the past, the reporting has not been consistent in all cases,e.g.samples not taken accordingto the official procedure were not always indicated as non complying.

MONITORING RESULTS

During 2001 about 2900 samples, both Dutch and non-domestic products, were analysed in thenational and coordinated monitoring program. During the last 10 years the percentage of samples ofimported products has been increased and brought more in line with the consumption pattern(Figure 1). Imported products in general show higher percentages of MRL-violations (Figure 2).Dutch products show residues above the reporting limit in about 43 % of the samples, whereas non-domestic products contain residues in 68 % (EU) and 60 % (non EU) of the cases, respectively(Figure 3).As a follow up to the incident with chlormequat on pears in 1999 about 100 pear samples wereanalysed for this compound. Only 15% of the samples did not contain any detectable residue ofchlormequat. The results did not differ much from the 2000 data. No MRL violations were observedin Dutch pears. The majority of the samples were below 0,2 mg/kg, showing that the growers

36

strongly changed their agricultural practice compared with 1999 and earlier. However, an Italian lotwas tracked containing more than the EU-MRL of 0,5 mg/kg. The lot was destroyed.It was noted in 2000 that in the production of carrots-with-leaves chlormequat was used to obtain abetter (shorter) leaf structure. In 2001 no chlormequat was found in this product. Some other growthregulators, like trinexapac-ethyl and daminozide weren't present either.In 2001 the violation rate of the monitoring samples was comparable with 2000.Dutch products contained residues above the MRL in 3,6 % of the cases, non-domestic productshad violation rates of about 13,9 % (EU-products) and 12,2 % (non-EU products). Tables A.1 andA.2 show summarised statistical data on sampling and residues. Table 2 gives results on mainproducts in the year 2001.

A comparison is made with the results of previous years. For the main products in the nationalprogram considerably more violations were observed with spinach.Fewer violations were observed with:- pear, banana, sweet pepper, melon, carrot, lettuce.

Some other minor products, not within the national program show a considerable violation rate too:- celery, pineapple, grapefruit, raspberry.

Figure 3a. Residues in Dutch

No residue Res. <MRL Res. >MRL

Figure 3b. Residues in products from EU-countries


Figure 3c. Residues in products fromnon-EU-countries


Figure 1. Number of samples not includingincidents

0

2500

5000

7500

10000

12500

avg'87/90

avg'91/93

avg'94/96

'97 '98 '99 '00 '01

Num

ber

sam

ples

NL EU non-EU non-NL

Figure 2. Percentage of MRL violations notincluding incidents

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

avg'87/90

avg'91/93

avg'94/96

'97 '98 '99 '00 '01

%>

MR

L

NL EU non-EU non-NL

37

Some pesticide/product combinations contribute considerably to the overall violation rates of theproducts. Some of these combinations of products and analytes that exceed the MRLs most oftenare given in Table 1. It is remarkable that all these cases regard violations of MRLs at the LOD andimported products. In most cases a majority of the violations stemmed from one origin. Probablythese violations could have been avoided, if the registrant of the pesticide had requested an importtolerance in the Netherlands. Many of these cases regard MRLs not harmonised in the EU.

Several pesticides have been authorized in other countries, but have not only not an importtolerance in the Netherlands, but no MRL at all. These occurrences (about 120) of cyprodinil,fenazaquin, fenhexamid, flufenoxuron, mepanipyrim, quinoxyfen and trifloxystrobine would havegiven additional exceedances in case MRLs at the LOD had existed.

Table 1. Combinations of crops and pesticides that exceed the MRLs most frequently.

Product Pesticide number of % samples MRL main

samples >MRL country of origin

Cucumber oxadixyl 53 7,5 0,05 * Spain

Grape fludioxonil 180 10,6 0,05 * Italy

Grape penconazole 180 6,1 0,02 * Italy

Grape pyrimethanil 180 9,4 0,05 * Italy, South Africa

Grape tebuconazole 180 2,2 0,05 * Italy

Pepper cypermethrin 54 7,4 0,5 * Thailand

Pepper methamidophos 54 16,7 0,01 * Thailand

Pineapple triadimefon 22 27,3 0,05 * Costa Rica

Pineapple triadimenol 22 22,7 0,1 * Costa Rica

* MRL at LOD

LITERATURE

Analytical Methods for Pesticide Residues in Foodstuffs, Sixth Edition, Inspectorate for HealthProtection, Ministry of Public Health, The Hague/Rijswijk, 1996.Quality Control Procedures for Pesticide Residue Analysis, EU Document 3023/2000,http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/ph_ps/pest/qualcontrol_en.pdf

38

Table 2. Samples of crops taken in monitoring program 2001, with percentage MRL violations,comparing origin and previous years.

PRODUCT consumption(g/day)

year EU-coordinated

program

Dutchprogram

2001

samples2001

% samples> MRL

2001

% samples> MRL

2001 Dutch

% samples> MRL

2001 EU

% samples> MRL

2001 non-EU

samplesa year

1999-2000

% samples> MRL

1999-2000

samplesa year

1987-1998

% samples> MRL

1987-1998

Tangerines 13,4 97/02 100 83 4,8 6,5 2,8 46 8,8 159 6,2

Orange 93,7 98/02 150 119 6,7 8,5 4,3 88 10,8 324 4,7

Apple 74,4 96/01 100 131 0,8 0,0 3,0 0,0 91 1,6 601 0,7

Pear 10,8 97/02 50 112 2,7 0,0 13,6 0,0 325 20,5 145 1,7

Peach/nectarine 3,5 98/02 50 81 14,8 13,2 40,0 21 12,2 159 6,5

Grape 14,4 96/01 150 180 27,8 37,4 14,1 101 29,7 348 11,6

Straw berry 4,8 96/01 100 132 9,1 5,9 16,7 21,1 104 6,8 946 3,8

Banana 19,7 97/02 50 54 1,9 1,9 30 11,7 34 0,5

Carrot 13,6 98/02 100 64 3,1 1,9 9,1 0,0 52 11,5 204 5,6

Onion 14,5 04 50 24 4,2 0,0 50,0 0,0 5 0,0 32 0,4

Tomato 26,9 96/01 100 109 6,4 1,6 14,7 8,3 109 7,8 336 1,5

Sw eet pepper 4,2 99/03 100 54 5,6 0,0 4,8 28,6 264 40,3 403 5,9

Cucumber 7,9 00/03 50 53 13,2 0,0 26,9 0,0 69 8,8 270 1,9

Melon 3,3 99/03 50 70 7,1 3,6 9,5 42 33,7 55 3,5

Cauliflow er 14,9 99/03 50 53 0,0 0,0 0,0 47 0,0 145 0,7

Red Cabbage 4,2 00/03 50 17 0,0 0,0 8 0,0 35 0,0

White Cabbage 6,2 00/03 21 0,0 0,0 8 0,0 25 0,0

Lettuce 4,2 96/01 100 108 5,6 4,1 18,2 74 14,2 1073 3,8

Iceberg lettuce 3,3 96/01 31 3,2 8,3 0,0 0,0 32 1,6 156 3,5

Endive 7,3 100 75 9,3 7,0 50,0 43 10,5 549 5,7

Spinach 8,9 98/02 100 41 12,2 6,1 28,6 17 6,1 213 6,5

Beans (fresh) 3,2 97/02 100 96 7,3 4,0 0,0 10,5 55 9,2 272 1,7

Green peas (fresh) 12,6 00/03 50 27 7,4 0,0 0,0 9,1 0 5 0,8

Leek 12,3 04 50 44 9,1 9,8 0,0 34 7,5 173 1,1

Potato 172,6 97/02 100 61 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 36 1,4 302 3,0

Rice 10,1 00/03 50 38 0,0 0,0 0,0 22 0,0 35 3,5

Wheat 130,6 00/03 50 164 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 81 1,9 58 0,8

Products in program 695,4 2000 2042 7,2 2,6 14,2 7,6

Total 838,8 2500 2894 9,0 3,9 13,9 12,2 2254 15,0 10379 4,1

39

AUSTRIA

PESTICIDE RESIDUE MONITORING IN AUSTRIA, 2001

A total of 962 samples were analysed under the co-ordinated, national pesticide monitoring programand routine samples. Most of the samples were fresh fruits and vegetables. Beside that otherproducts like cereals were analyzed.

The national pesticide monitoring is done according to a nation-wide sampling plan designed by theInstitute of Applied Statistics and System Analysis (Joanneum Research, Graz) in co-operation withthe Federal Minister of Social Security and Generations. The plan was based on data concerningdietary consumption, production and import of fruits and vegetables and results of formermeasurements. The analytical and budgetary possibilities were taken into account, too.The co-ordinated programme of the European Commission was of course also done.

The samples were taken by trained officials from the local Food Inspection Service(„Lebensmittelaufsicht“).

The analysis of the co-ordinated programme, the national monitoring programme and routinesamples also were made by two federal laboratories for food control (Bundesanstalt fürLebensmitteluntersuchung und –forschung in Wien und Bundesanstalt fürLebensmitteluntersuchung in Innsbruck). Two federal laboratories for food control(Bundesanstalten für Lebensmitteluntersuchung in Graz and Linz) made the analyses of somesamples of the national monitoring programme and routine samples. The federal laboratories arepart of the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety since 1st june 2002.

The analytical methods were adopted from published methods of the Dutch federal laboratories(„Analytical Methods for Pesticide Residues in Foodstuffs“, 6th Ed., General Inspectorate for HealthProtection, Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sport, The Netherlands) and validated in thelaboratories. The fruits and vegetables were analysed up to a maximum of 149 pesticides. Themethods used were a GC multimethod with ECD-, NPD- and FPD-detection. GC/MS-methods areprimarily applied for confirmation purposes of the other GC methods, a HPLC-method forbenzimidazolfungicides and a spectrophotometric method for the sum of dithiocarbamates.

All laboratories involved in the co-ordinated programme and the national monitoring programmeincluding the routine samples got the accreditation in the year 1998.

Summary of results are shown in the following table and figures:

national programme(including routine samples)

co-ordinated programme

fruit and vegetables

number % number %samples analysed 902 60without residues 513 56,9 27 45with residues below MRL 321 35,6 31 51,7with residues above MRL 68 7,5 2 3,3

40

sum of all samples

samples withoutresidues56.1%

samples withresidues

exceeding theMRL7.3%

samples withresidues below

MRL36.6%

Coordinated programm

s am ples without

r es idues45,0%

samples wi th

residues belowMRL

51,7%

s am ples withresidues

exceeding theMRL

3,3%

national programm and routinesamples

s am ples without

res idues56,9%

s am ples withres idues below

MRL35,6%

s am ples with

residuesexceedin g the

MRL7,5%

The most frequently found residues were in the co-ordinated and national programme and routinesamples: Imazalil, Procymidone, Endosulfane, Iprodione, Chlorpyriphos, Dimethoate,Thiabendazole, Methidathion, Metalaxyl and Tolclophos-methyl

The figures below shall demonstrate the individual statistics of the different commodities analysedin the co-ordinated programm and of the six specific commodities analysed in the nationalmonitoring programme:

Co-ordinated programmeDue to the fact, that 12 samples per commodity has to been analysed, only one sample with residuesabove the MRL results in 8,3 % „samples with residues exceeding the MRL“. This has to be takeninto account if evaluating the austrian data isolated from other data.

Apples

sa m ples withoutresi dues

25,0%

sa mp les withre sidues below

MRL75,0%

samples wi th

res iduesexcee ding the

MRL0,0 %

Tomatoes

s am ples withoutres idues

58,3%


MRL41,7%

s am ples with

residuesexceeding the

MRL0,0%

41

Lettuce

samples wi thoutresidue s

50,0%


MRL41,7%

sa mp les wi thresid ues

exceeding th eMRL

8,3%

Strawberries

s am ples without

res idues66,7%


MRL33 ,3%

s am ples with

residuesexceeding the

MRL0 ,0%

Grapes

sample s with out

residues25 ,0%

s am ples with

res id ues b elowMRL

66,7%

s am ples with


MRL8 ,3%

42

National programmeDue to the fact, that there were commodities for the national programme isolated, of which higher risk forresidues was identified in the last years, these specific data are representative for the austrian market, but themonitoring has to be seen as „targeted monitoring“. It was the aim, to reflect to the results of the last yearsand to choose special commodities of interest for further examination. This type of monitoring is foreseen forthe next years. Additionally the amount of intake of commodity will be taken into account.

Broccoli

s am ple s with ou tres idu es

92 ,1%


MRL5 ,6%

samples wi th


MRL2,2 %

Lettuce (Bummerl/Eissalat)


64,9%

samples wi thre sidues below

MRL

25,7%

samples wi th

res iduesexceeding th e

MRL9,5%

Lettuce (Kopfsalat)

sam ples wi tho utresid ues

5 1,5%

samples wi thresid ue s below

MR L35,4%

s am ples with

resi duese xceed ing the

MRL13,1%

Orangessamples with

residues

exceeding theMR L

4,1%


MRL75,3%


20,6%

Grapessa mp les wi th

resid uesexceedi ng th e

MRL1 2,5%


MRL55,7%

sam ples wi tho utresid ues

3 1,8%

Zucchinisample s wi th

residue sexceeding th e

MRL3,3%

s am ples with

res idu es belowMRL

30,0%

s am pl es withoutres idues

6 6,7%

43

PORTUGAL

Pesticide residue monitoring in foodstuffs of vegetable originPortugal 2001

Throughout 2001, 496 samples of fruits, vegetables and cereals, and 108 samples of processedproducts were analysed. Nearly 69% of the sampling of fruits, vegetables and cereals were domesticproduction and the remainder products imported from other Member-states and third countries.Processed products, specially covering tomato concentrates and wines, were mostly domestic.

The national programme for fruits and vegetables was based on the EU co-ordinated monitoringprogramme and further complemented with crops selected according to the national averageconsumption and according to results or rates of infringements found in previous years. This latterone was specifically the reason for the inclusion of spinach, peppers and rice. Less important crops,such as sub-tropical fruits, were sampled as part of a rolling programme. The numbers of samplesand pesticides analysed were planned according to the analytical capabilities and availableresources in the participating laboratories.

The great majority of samples were taken by food inspectors of Directorate General of Food QualityControl and Inspection (DGFCQA) and by food inspectors of the homologous regional bodies.These samples were taken mostly at wholesale commerce and wholesalers warehouses. In theautonomic region of Madeira, sampling was carried out by the Regional Inspectorate of EconomicalActivities (IRAE), and samples were generally taken in retail due to the small number and smallsize of wholesalers in that region. Grain cereals were often sampled from milling plants and a smallfraction of samples were collected at farm gate by the regional phytosanitary services. Part of thespinach sampling was carried out by the Consumer Institute at retail commerce.

The following pesticide residue laboratories contributed to the 2001 national monitoringprogramme: Directorate General of Crop Protection, DGPC, (lab 1), Regional AgriculturalDirectorate of Madeira (lab 2) and Regional Agricultural Directorate of Entre Douro e Minho (lab3). A total of 114 individual pesticides plus 2 groups (maneb group and benomyl group) wereanalysed, although not all of them were sought in all the commodities or samples. Lab 1 covered111 pesticides and the 2 groups, lab 2 covered 61 pesticides and the maneb group, and lab 3 covered20 organophosphorous pesticides and the maneb group.

In labs 1 and 3 the GC multi-residue method (MRM) with selective detectors was based in ethylacetate extraction and GPC clean up; lab 2 used acetone, dichloromethane and petroleum ether asextracting solvents. Besides different columns, different selective detectors and/or GC-MS wereused in labs 1 and 2 for confirmation of results. For the determination of the dithiocarbamates thespectrophotometric method was used in labs 1 and 3, and the GC method in lab 2. The N-methylcarbamates were analysed in labs 1 and 2 by extraction with acetone, dichloromethane andpetroleum ether and determination by LC-FLD with on-line OPA derivatization. Besides usingdifferent elution systems for confirmation of results, LC-DAD was also used in lab 2. Thebenzimidazole carbamate group was determined (lab1) by LC-UV after ethyl acetate extraction andacid-base partition and/or ethyl acetate extraction with sodium hydroxide followed by GPC cleanup. This latter method was also used for the determination of pyrimethanil.

The insecticides dissulfoton and phorate are not registered in Portugal and have not been monitored.Oxydemeton-methyl is approved for use in apples, pears, tomatoes and strawberries; thiometon isonly approved for apples. In spite of that, oxydemeton-methyl was not monitored at all, andthiometon was only monitored in the samples analised by lab 2. Validation of the analytical methodwas initiated in lab 1 but it could not be concluded in time to include these compounds.

44

Nevertheless, it should be noted that thiometon (parent), thiometon sulphone, phorate (parent),phorate sulphone and the sulphone of oxydemeton-methyl showed a good performance in lab 1through the MRM, and therefore they would have been detected, if present.

As stated in Table G, none of the laboratories is accredited yet, the main reason being the lack ofadequate facilities, which is also hampering the full implementation of some of the quality controlprocedures. Re-installation of labs 1 and 3 into new facilities is expected to happen in the first halfof 2003 and accreditation in the second half. Accreditation of lab 2 is not foreseen before 2004.

In nearly 60% of the whole sampling of fruits, vegetables and cereals (57% fruits and vegetablesand 79% cereal grains) no residues of any pesticide sought were found. In the remainder samples offruits and vegetables, residues of 45 different pesticides were detected; the ten most frequent ones,by decreasing order, were: maneb (group), benomyl (group), captan, phosalone, phosmet,procymidone, dimethoate, iprodione, diphenylamine and chlorpyriphos. In the remainder samples ofcereals, only five different pesticides were found: malathion, pirimiphos-methyl, chlorpyriphos-methyl, diazinon and dichlorvos. Out of the total sampling of fruits, vegetables and cereals(surveillance and follow up enforcement sampling), 4,8% of the samples exceeded EC MRLs and5,8% exceeded national MRLs. The overall rate of 4,8% exceedances to EC MRLs corresponds toexceedance rates of 5,3% and 1,6% in fruits and vegetables and in cereals, respectively. The overallrate of 5,8% exceedances to national MRLs corresponds to exceedance rates of 6,4% and 1,6% infruits and vegetables and in cereals, respectively. Infringements were more frequent in spinach,lettuce and strawberries, the conclusion being that the control of these commodities must beincreased.

The majority of infringements found relate to both EC or national MRLs set at the limit ofdetermination. All exceedances detected are counted in this report as infringements, without takinginto account the uncertainty associated to the analytical result. However, administrative follow-upactions were generally taken by DGFCQA, IRAE and other regional inspection bodies only in thosecases where the levels found exceeded 1,4xMRL. For values up to 1,4xMRL action taken consistedof official warnings. For results of dithiocarbamates in lettuces and similar and in leafy brassicasadministrative follow-up actions are taken when 2xMRL is exceeded. As a result, a total of 12 caseswere instructed by the competent above mentioned bodies with a view to the levying of fines, andone case was sent to court due to questionable margin of safety. This same case was notified in theRapid Alert System.

Where violations to national MRLs in products originating from other Member-states have fallen inthe situation covered by Article 5º.A of directive 97/41/EC (tolclofos-methyl in peppers,tolylfluanid in apples and fenthion in grapes), the procedure foreseen was immediately initiatedwith a view to the possible adoption of the MRLs set for tolclofos-methyl and tolylfluanid in therespective Member-states of origin. However, the result of consumer risk assessment for fenthion ingrapes precluded acceptance of the MRL in force in the Member-state of origin.

Multiple pesticide residues have occurred in 72 samples of fruits, vegetables and cereals, whichrepresents 14,5% of the total sampling. The highest number of pesticide residues (5) was found inone sample of apples and one sample of lettuce.

With a view to the homogeneity exercise the combination apples/methidathion was selected andtherefore duplicate samples of apples were taken. However, as methidathion did not occur, thisreport contains no Tables F.

Monitoring of processed products included 108 samples, mostly tomato concentrates and wines. Forprocessed tomatoes only residues of the highly polar acephate and methamidophos were found in afraction of the samples. All the levels found were below the MRLs in force for fresh tomatoes and

45

far below the MRLs resulting from the application of the concentration factor (in average 5).Residues in wines were seldom found and, where occurring, levels were negligible in comparisonwith the respective MRLs set for grapes.

46

FINLAND

PESTICIDE RESIDUES MONITORING OF FRUIT, VEGETABLES AND CEREALS INFINLAND - 2001

SUMMARY

The national and EC co-ordinated pesticide residues monitoring was carried out according to theannual program of National Food Agency. Domestic samples were collected by local healthinspectors from farms or retail shops. The majority of import food samples were taken by Customsinspectors from wholesalers. The sampling procedure of directive 79/700/EEC was followed as faras practicable.

Total number of samples was 2439, including 2097 samples of fresh and frozen fruit andvegetables, 67 samples of cereals, and 275 samples of processed foods. For technical reasons theenforcement and surveillance sampling could not be separated in the report. However, in tables D1-4 the separation is made so that all cases where the lot was detained until the analysis was ready, areconsidered as enforcement samples. The enforcement samples have been taken as a follow-up ofviolation, but they are not necessarily from a specific farm or consignment.

Pesticide residues above the reporting limits were found in 47.8 % of the fruit, vegetable and cerealsamples but only in 20.7 % of processed products. The number of samples with residues exceedingthe MRL was 127 (5.2 %). Only cases, where a residue level above the MRL plus analyticaluncertainty was detected, were considered as confirmed residues exceeding the MRL. Six RASFFnotifications were sent during the year.

After each confirmed exceeding of MRL legal action was taken. In case of surveillance samples theholder of the product was ordered to withdraw the remaining parts (if any left) of the inspected lot.Follow up samples were taken from the next lots of the same origin. In case of enforcementsampling non-complying lot shall be destroyed or in some situations the lot may be processed tocomply with the MRL (e.g. aeration to decrease fumigant residues).

The analyses were carried out in two accredited laboratories; Finnish Customs Laboratory (87 % ofthe samples) and Environment Centre of the City of Helsinki (13 % of the samples). Most results ofthe report have been produced by the gas chromatographic multiresidue method, which method isaccredited in both laboratories. The number of pesticides monitored for in the two laboratories bythe multiresidue method was 160 and 89 respectively. In addition maneb and benomyl grouppesticides. inorganic bromide, hydrogen phosphide, maleic hydrazide, glyphosate, chlormequat anddiquat were analyzed in Customs Laboratory from selected samples. The quality control proceduresas described in Commission Recommendation 1999/333/EC have been implemented in bothlaboratories but some elements only partly. Customs Laboratory has participated in three FAPASproficiency tests in 2001 and organized a ring test of dithiocarbamate and bromide analysis amongsome Nordic laboratories.

The homogeneity studies could not be carried out as residues of phorate in potatoes and residues ofmethidathion in apples were not found.

47

SWEDEN

The Swedish Monitoring of Pesticide Residues in Foodof Plant Origin: 2001

Summary of results

In 2001, a total of 2 897 surveillance samples of fruits, vegetables, juices, fruit drinks, cereal grains,cereal products, vegetable oils, and oil seeds were analysed for residues of 224 pesticides (263analytes). National or EU harmonised Maximum Residue Limits (EC-MRLs) were exceeded by 57samples (2.0 %). One sample of domestically grown vegetables contained residues above theMRLs.Apples, strawberries, table grapes, lettuce and tomatoes, in all 555 samples, were analysed in the2001 EU co-ordinated programme. Three of these samples exceeded the EC-MRLs for thepesticides concerned.Detectable residues were found in 21 out of 74 samples of foods for infants and young children.A total of 52 enforcement samples of fruits and vegetables were collected and 17 lots (148.5 tons)were prohibited from being sold.The short-term intake was estimated for 18 pesticides based on the highest residue found in asurveillance (composite) sample and using UK consumption data. The acute reference dose (ARfD)was exceeded for toddlers in two cases, endosulfan in melons and monocrotophos in table grapesand in one case for adults, monocrotophos in table grapes.

Design of the national monitoring programme

The target number of samples to be collected of each food is roughly proportional to the food'sconsumption rate and takes into account both the amount of domestic production and the amount ofimports from EU-countries and third countries. However, the number is also based on theimportance of the foodstuff in the diets of infants and young children as well as residues found inprior samples. The National Food Administration (NFA) is responsible for the pesticide residuecontrol in Sweden.

Surveillance sampling

Samples collected in accordance with the monitoring programme were defined as surveillancesamples, i.e. there were no suspicions about excessive amounts of pesticide residues in the lots priorto sampling.Fresh fruit and vegetables were sampled at wholesalers' warehouses in the first trade channel. Nor-mally, a sample included three sub-samples, each of about 1–3 kg. The sub-samples were collectedfrom at least three different boxes or places throughout the lot. The sample was sealed and labelledwith a unique sample identity.Samples of domestic produced cereal grains were collected at the milling plants. The imported ce-real grains were sampled at the port where the shipment was discharged. Usually, one bulk sampleof about 3–5 kg was collected by stream sampling technique.Most of the samples of processed or frozen fruit and vegetables, juices, fruit drinks, rice, cerealproducts, vegetable oils, and oil seeds were collected in retail shops or department stores.Plant inspectors from the National Board of Agriculture collected most of the samples.

48

Enforcement sampling

When a surveillance sample contained a pesticide residue above the national or EC-MRL, theNational Food Administration prescribed a condition for the offering for sale or other handling ofthe food or lot to which the food belonged. As a follow-up, next lots of the commodity from thegrower/exporter were detained and enforcement samples were collected.

Analytical methods and laboratory status

Practically all samples of fruit and vegetables were analysed by the multi-residue method. By thismethod, the samples were extracted with ethyl acetate, cleaned up on an S-X3 gel permeationcolumn and determined by capillary gas chromatography.In all, by using both multi-residue methods and single residue methods it was possible to determine224 pesticides corresponding to 263 analytes. A total of about394 000 residues (analyte/commodity combinations) were sought.All analyses were carried out at AnalyCen Nordic AB, Lidköping. This laboratory is accredited bythe Swedish accreditation authority SWEDAC for all analytical methods used for the NFA’s officialcontrol of pesticide residues in food of plant origin.

Quality control procedures and LODs

The EC guidelines “Quality Control Procedures for Pesticide Residue Analysis”, second edition,1999/2000 have been implemented as far as practicable. The laboratory has participated in sixproficiency tests (Table G).The majority of the pesticide residues were measured and reported from the limit of quantitation(determination), generally in the range of 0.01 - 0.2 mg/kg. For certain pesticides, e.g.cypermethrin, imazalil, methamidophos, procymidone and thiabendazole the EC-MRLs set at theLODs were not achievable in our routine monitoring.

Homogeneity exercise

In the EU co-ordinated programme the homogeneity factor should be determined for methidathionin apples and/or phorate in potatoes. No residues were found of methidathion in apples. Phorate isnot yet included in the Swedish monitoring programme. However, the homogeneity factor wasdetermined for eleven other pesticides. The factor varied between 1.4-5.6.

Authorisation status

None of the four pesticides disulfotone, oxydemeton-methyl, phorate and thiometon is authorisedfor use in Sweden.

49

UNITED KINGDOM

THE UK PESTICIDES MONITORING PROGRAMMEBRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMME, RESULTS AND MONITORING

1. BackgroundThe purpose of the UK monitoring is threefold: to back up the statutory approvals process for pesticides bychecking that no unexpected residues are occurring; to check that residues do not exceed statutory EU andUK maximum residue levels (MRLs) and to check that human dietary intakes of residues are at acceptablelevels. This monitoring, together with that carried out by local authorities and the food industry provided awide-ranging overview of the residues present in food. Only 0.7% of samples analysed contained residuesabove MRLs, and the majority of these would not lead to an exceedance of the acceptable daily intake (ADI).

The results from the programme of work were submitted to the European Commission in fulfilment ofobligations for reporting results of surveillance for pesticide residues established by Directives 86/362/EEC,86/363/EEC and 90/642/EEC. Results of the co-ordinated recommended monitoring programme carried outacross the EU were again included in the report.

2. Selection criteriaSamples for the main commodity rolling programmes have generally been obtained at fortnightly intervalsfrom two population centres in each of twelve regions of the UK. The centres selected are changed eachyear. Generally, the choice of foodstuffs to be analysed in the programmes represents a balance betweenthe levels of consumption of those foodstuffs, information on the possible levels of residues and the need toensure that as wide a range of commodities as possible is included in the surveillance. Where practicablesamples are taken, prepared and analysed according to CAC guidelines (Recommended Method ofSampling for the Determination of Pesticide Residues (Vol. 2, section 3, Codex Alimentarius, 1993) andPortion of Commodities to which Codex Maximum Residue Limits Apply and which is Analysed (Vol. 2,Codex Alimentarius, 1993). Samples are generally analysed unwashed and unpeeled, with the exception ofroot crops which are routinely washed. Only one variety, from a single source, is included in each sample.

In determining its surveillance programme, the Pesticide Residues Committee (PRC) considers data fromother sources including publications produced by other UK Agriculture departments. The UK also considersdata published on monitoring carried out by other governments, as well as data and intelligence fromindustry and other sources.

3. EnforcementWhen the level of pesticide residues found during PRC surveys indicates use of a non-approved pesticide, orthe use of a pesticide other than in accordance with the conditions of its approval, the source of the samplesinvolved is investigated to establish the cause of the residues. Further targeted surveillance is normallycarried out to check whether the result represented an isolated incident. For UK-produced commodities,enforcement involves the taking of samples from a grower's premises for analysis. If evidence of misuse isfound the grower is prosecuted. In the case of imported produce from third countries, sampling is normallycarried out at the point of entry while the consignment is detained. If unacceptable residues are found, thewhole consignment is refused entry to the UK, and other EU member states are notified. If problems areidentified in retail samples of produce of EU origin, the details are reported to the Member State concerned,to allow the relevant authorities to follow up the case.

4. The 2001 European Union recommended monitoring programmeSurveys were carried out in support of the Commission recommendation for a harmonised, specific, EUprogramme. Samples of apples, grapes, lettuce, strawberries and tomatoes were analysed for a range ofpesticides indicated in the recommendation. Residues were detected in 68 of the 252 apple samples, and29 contained multiple residues. No MRLs were exceeded. Residues were detected in 39 of the 72 grapesamples analysed, and 16 contained multiple residues. No MRLs were exceeded. Residues were detectedin 54 of the 180 lettuce samples analysed, and 17 contained multiple residues. The MRL was exceeded intwo samples. Residues were detected in 115 of the 179 strawberry samples analysed, and 68 containedmultiple residues. The MRL was exceeded in four samples. Residues were detected in 26 of the 144tomato samples analysed, and 8 contained multiple residues. No MRLs were exceeded.

50

5. Implications of 2001 results for consumers0.7% of samples analysed contained residues in excess of an MRL. This confirmed that in the vastmajority of cases pesticides were being applied in accordance with their label requirements, andalso provided an assurance to consumers that, where they were being exposed to residues, they wereat safe levels. In all cases where MRLs were exceeded, or where there are potential intake issues, aseparate consumer risk assessment was carried out to establish whether the level of residues presentwould lead to an exceedance of the ADI or, where appropriate the ARfD, by a high level consumer.The risk assessments indicated that in the great majority of cases there would be no exceedance.Both the ADI and the ARfD incorporate safety margins and the risk assessments assume foodintake at the 97.5 percentile level in food surveys. Therefore, even where exceedances arecalculated, the risk to consumers is unlikely.

6. Methods of Work and Quality ControlFull details of the Committee's methods of work are contained inSurveillance: The Estimation ofDietary Exposure to Pesticides - Report of the Working Party on Pesticide Residues: 1991-1993which is published as Food Surveillance Paper Number 50 available from the Stationery Office(ISBN 0 11 243015 5).

6.1 Quality ControlAnalytical methods were deemed acceptable if the level of recovery of added pesticide was between60% - 140%, providing that routinely the mean recovery was in the range 70% - 110%. Resultswhich exceeded MRLs, or which were unusual in occurrence, or were otherwise of particularsignificance were required to be accompanied by acceptable recovery data and, whereverpracticable, to have been confirmed using mass spectrometry. The residues data provided in thisreport have not been corrected for recovery and are expressed, unless otherwise stated, on the basisof the fresh weight of the sample and as defined by the MRL.

6.2 Proficiency Testing ProgrammeAll laboratories carrying out work have taken part in proficiency testing exercises, including theDutch Chek Monitoring Programme and other international programmes. Recognising theimportance of proficiency testing, MAFF started a scheme in 1990 for laboratories known as theFood Analysis Performance Assessment Scheme (FAPAS). All of the laboratories which submitdata to the PRC participate in FAPAS. Since 1997, all laboratories have allowed the FAPASSecretariat to release their individual results and details of their performance to PSD. This allowsan independent check of the laboratories’ performance to be made. Additionally, all of thelaboratories meet the requirements of a recognised accreditation scheme, such as the UnitedKingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) or the requirements of Good Laboratory Practice (GLP).

THE UK PESTICIDES MONITORING PROGRAMME

Country Total no. of samples No. of samples No. of samplesanalysed * with residues where 1 or more

detected <MRL MRL exceeded

UK 2010 733 27

*= Extract from UK programme. Results of monitoring:Fruit and vegetablesCereal products

51

NORWAY

Pesticide Residue Monitoring in Fruit, Vegetables and Cereals in Norway - 2001

A total of 2431 samples of fresh and frozen fruits, vegetables and cereals, both imported (61 %) anddomestically produced (39 %) was included in the monitoring programme for 2001. The monitoringprogramme included also 152 samples of processed products and 35 follow-up samples. A total of132 different commodities were analysed.The samples were taken by trained inspectors from the food control authorities, mainly fromwholesaler’s warehouse in different parts of Norway. Samples from retails and farmgates were alsotaken. The number of surveillance samples of each commodity roughly reflects their share of themarket, but more samples were taken of commodities suspected to contain residues. For sampleswith residues exceeding the MRL compliance samples were collected as a follow-up. Whenanalysing the compliance samples the whole consignement is stopped until the results of theanalysis are ready. If the results of the follow-up again show an exceedance of the MRL the wholeconsignement is destructed. It is the responsibility of the local food control authority to carry out thenecessary procedures concering the follow-up of exceedances.The Norwegian Crop Research Institute, Pesticide Laboratory, did the analyses.All samples of fruit and vegetables were analysed using a GC multi-residue method, based onextraction with acetone (Luke methode), covering 144 pesticides, isomers and breakdown products.Five pesticides were analysed by LC/MS using the same extraction method. LC/MS was also usedfor analysis of N-methylcarbamates, chlormequat, diquat, dithianon and propamocarb. Biphenyl,orto-phenylphenol and progargite were analysed using GC/MS. The dithiocarbamates weredetermined with a spectrophotometric method. The reporting levels are the limit of determinationfor all methods.The Pesticide Laboratory was accredited on April 1st 1997. The accreditation is based on theEuropean Standard EN 45001 and also includes no. 2 and 7 of the OECD Principles of GoodLaboratory Practice, section II. The analyses were carried out in accordance with the QualityAssurance Manual of the Pesticide Laboratory and the EU Guidelines for Pesticide Analysis. As apart of the quality assurance programme the laboratory participate regularly in internationalintercalibrations / proficiency tests. When a pesticide residue exceeds the MRL, quantitativedetermination is carried out on three replicate samples using three-level calibration, recovery ischecked and the identity of the pesticide confirmed by GC/MS or LC/MS.The monitoring programme covered 179 pesticides including some isomers and breakdownproducts.Among the domestic products violations occurred most frequently in celery. Among the importedproducts carambola, mango and celeriac had the highest number of samples exceeding the MRL.Ninety samples of organic grown products were also analysed. A pesticide residue below MRL wasfound in one sample of carrot.

52

ICELAND

Monitoring of pesticide residues in fresh fruits and vegetables in Iceland in 2001

An official monitoring program for pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables was carriedout in Iceland in 2001. Samples are taken at wholesaler’s warehouses in Reykjavík. Since fruits forcommercial purposes are not grown in Iceland, all fruits and a greater part of the vegetables areimported.

Around 300 samples are analysed each year. Approximately 85% are imported commoditiesand fruits count for 53% of all samples examined. Samples are analyzed by a GC/MS multi methodbased on ethyl acetate extraction, covering 40 pesticides.

As a main rule the maximum residue limits (MRL’s) conform to EU directives, but in fewcases, where EU has not set any limits, they are in accordance with either Codex Alimentarius orregulations from other Nordic countries. When a pesticide residue exceeds MRL, a new sample isanalyzed to confirm the results. No actions are taken unless the value exceeds the MRL plus astandard deviation.

In 2001 a total of 300 samples were examined for pesticides in fruits and vegetables.Imported samples were 242 and domestic samples 58. In 63% of all samples, no pesticide residues,which were looked for, were detected. 37% of the samples contained pesticide residues andviolations of maximum residue limits (MRL’s) were found in 3% of all samples. Commoditiesoriginated from 26 countries, most came from Spain (26%) and The Netherlands (19%). Thepesticides most frequently found were imazalil, thiabendazole, orthophenylphenol, chlorpyrifos,dicofol, metidation, tolylfluanid, chlortalonyl and iprodion.

The laboratory of the Environmental and Food Agency has taken part in FAPAS and willcontinue to do so in the future. The laboratory has not been accredited yet but is planning to initiatethe preparation work next year. It is estimated that it could take at least 2-3 years to receiveaccreditation.

Iceland participated only partially in the coordinated program.

53

LIECHTENSTEIN

Pesticide residues monitoring in fruits and vegetables and cereals carried out inLiechtenstein in 2001

Introduction

This report summarizes the results of the co-ordinated and the national pesticide monitoringprogramme in fruits, vegetables and cereals on the Liechtenstein market in 2001. This report hasbeen prepared according to the recommendation of the ESA as far as technically possible.

Sampling

The samples were collected according to the annual sampling plan prepared by the office for foodinspection and veterinary affairs. The sampling plan is based on the domestic production situationin the agricultural sector and on the ESA co-ordinated monitoring programme. The programme hasstarted in the second half of the year 2001.Samples of fresh fruits, vegetables and cereals were collected mostly from retailers, but also fromfarms and food processing plants. Sampling is done mostly according to directive 79/700/EEC. Thesize of a laboratory sample was at least 1 kg.

Analysis

All samples were analysed by a gas chromatographic multiresidue method (modified germanofficial method DFG S19).This method consists of an acetone/cyclohexane/ethylacetate extraction and a clean-up on a biobeads S-X3 gel permeation column. The extract was analysed by GC with selective detectors (ECD,NPD and FPD) / exception: Carbendazim and Thiabendazol were analysed by HPLC. When apesticide residue exceeded the MRL, the identity of the pesticide was confirmed by GC-MS.Dithiocarbamates were also determined on each sample by using an CS2 evolution method. The CS2is determined by headspace analysing using GC with ECD (DIN 12396-2).

Accreditation and quality assurance

Analyses have been carried out in the Labor Dr. Matt AG, Im Alten Riet 36, FL-9494 Schaan. Thelaboratory is accredited in accordance with the provisions of article 3 of directive 93/99 (accordingto EN 45001[see copy of accreditation certificate in the annex]).

The analytical results are governed by a quality assurance system. The laboratory takes intoaccount, as far as it is possible for a laboratory of its size, of the document “Quality controlProcedures for Pesticide Residues Analysis“- as set out in Annex II to the Recommendation of theESA for the year 1999, OJ L 74, 23.3.2000.

Reporting levels

The lowest residue levels are the same as the limits of determination (generally in the range of0,005 - 0,05 mg/kg). The limits of determination are determined by recovery tests.

54

Results

A total of 63 samples were analysed out of which 22 fruits, 37 vegetables and 4 cereals.In 46 samples no pesticide residues were detected. 16 samples showed pesticide contamination at orbelow MRL's national and EC. Two samples contained a residue level higher than the maximumEC and national level. The product pesticide combinations concerned were grape/Maneb group andcarrots/Diazinon, the first one is the sample from domestic production, the second one an importedsample.The total number of residues analyzed for is 32. The pesticides Disulfotone, Phorate, Thiomethoneand Oxydemethonmethyl were not searched for because their use on the products sampled was notauthorized.The most frequently found residues derived from the pesticides Folpet, Azinphosmethyl and fromthe Maneb group.

Summary of results:

Total nr. ofsamplesanalysed

Nr. ofsampleswithoutresidues

Nr. ofsamples withresidues at orbelow theMRL

Nr. ofexceedings

of EC-MRLs

Nr. ofexceedingsof N-MRLs

Co-ordinated and nationalprogramme, vegetablesand cereals

63 46 16 2 2

Schaan, January 9, 2003 PM/st

Encl.: Tables A - G

Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for APPLES

Number of samples analysed

Without detectable residues %

With residues at or below

MRL or without MRL %

With residues above MRL %

With residues above EC-MRL %

With residues above national

MRL %

Country 2496

Belgium 44 37 84 7 15.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Denmark 139 106 76 29 20.9 4 2.9 4 2.9 0 0.0

Germany 558 259 46 294 52.7 5 0.9 5 0.9 0 0.0

Greece 55 14 25 40 72.7 1 1.8 1 1.8 0 0.0

Spain 45 7 16 38 84.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

France 308 149 48 157 51.0 2 0.6 2 0.6 0 0.0

Ireland 40 10 25 28 70.0 2 5.0 2 5.0 2 5.0

Italy 525 280 53 236 45.0 9 1.7 9 1.7 0 0.0

Luxembourg 21 13 62 7 33.3 1 4.8 1 4.8 0 0.0

The Netherlands 129 16 12 112 86.8 1 0.8 1 0.8 0 0.0

Austria 12 3 25 9 75.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Portugal 50 24 48 25 50.0 1 2.0 1 2.0 0 0.0

Finland 116 67 58 49 42.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Sweden 202 112 55 89 44.1 1 0.5 1 0.5 0 0.0

United Kingdom 252 183 73 69 27.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Norway 115 67 58 48 41.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Iceland 20 17 85 2 10.0 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

Liechtenstein 10 8 80 2 20.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

TOTAL 2641 1372 52 1241 47.0 28 1.1 27 1.0 3 0.1

Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for TOMATOES








MRL %

Country 1908

Belgium 39 31 79 8 20.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Denmark 129 92 71 34 26.4 3 2.3 3 2.3 0 0.0

Germany 489 256 52 219 44.8 14 2.9 14 2.9 0 0.0

Greece 77 16 21 58 75.3 3 3.9 3 3.9 0 0.0

Spain 45 29 64 16 35.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

France 272 167 61 95 34.9 10 3.7 10 3.7 0 0.0

Ireland 10 7 70 3 30.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Italy 318 264 83 54 17.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Luxembourg 15 10 67 5 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

The Netherlands 109 68 62 40 36.7 1 0.9 1 0.9 0 0.0

Austria 12 7 58 5 41.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Portugal 66 44 67 22 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Finland 78 54 69 24 30.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Sweden 105 78 74 27 25.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

United Kingdom 144 118 82 26 18.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Norway 86 59 69 27 31.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Iceland 11 9 82 2 18.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Liechtenstein 11 11 100 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

TOTAL 2016 1320 65 665 33.0 31 1.5 31 1.5 0 0.0

Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for LETTUCE








MRL %

Country 1734

Belgium 76 26 34 48 63.2 2 2.6 2 2.6 0 0.0

Denmark 89 59 66 28 31.5 2 2.2 2 2.2 0 0.0

Germany 325 100 31 208 64.0 17 5.2 17 5.2 0 0.0

Greece 45 5 11 39 86.7 1 2.2 1 2.2 0 0.0

Spain 45 21 47 20 44.4 4 8.9 4 8.9 0 0.0

France 379 132 35 220 58.0 27 7.1 27 7.1 0 0.0

Ireland 37 23 62 13 35.1 1 2.7 1 2.7 0 0.0

Italy 149 112 75 36 24.2 1 0.7 1 0.7 0 0.0

Luxembourg 20 9 45 10 50.0 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

The Netherlands 134 37 28 96 71.6 1 0.7 1 0.7 0 0.0

Austria 12 6 50 5 41.7 1 8.3 1 8.3 0 0.0

Portugal 85 53 62 25 29.4 7 8.2 7 8.2 0 0.0

Finland 83 27 33 54 65.1 2 2.4 2 2.4 0 0.0

Sweden 75 51 68 24 32.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

United Kingdom 180 126 70 53 29.4 1 0.6 1 0.6 0 0.0

Norway 93 70 75 20 21.5 3 3.2 3 3.2 0 0.0

Iceland 4 4 100 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Liechtenstein 7 5 71 2 28.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

TOTAL 1838 866 47 901 49.0 71 3.9 70 3.8 1 0.1

Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for STRAWBERRIES








MRL %

Country 1501

Belgium 23 18 78 5 21.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Denmark 46 33 72 13 28.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Germany 389 173 44 202 51.9 14 3.6 14 3.6 0 0.0

Greece 47 20 43 13 27.7 14 29.8 14 29.8 0 0.0

Spain 45 35 78 7 15.6 3 6.7 3 6.7 0 0.0

France 141 50 35 80 56.7 11 7.8 11 7.8 0 0.0

Ireland 5 2 40 3 60.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Italy 235 116 49 114 48.5 5 2.1 5 2.1 0 0.0

Luxembourg 17 11 65 4 23.5 2 11.8 2 11.8 0 0.0

The Netherlands 128 22 17 106 82.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Austria 12 8 67 4 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Portugal 21 11 52 8 38.1 2 9.5 2 9.5 0 0.0

Finland 145 93 64 52 35.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Sweden 68 54 79 14 20.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

United Kingdom 179 64 36 112 62.6 3 1.7 3 1.7 0 0.0

Norway 141 42 30 99 70.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Iceland 8 8 100 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Liechtenstein 2 2 100 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

TOTAL 1652 762 46 836 50.6 54 3.3 54 3.3 0 0.0

Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for TABLE GRAPES








MRL %

Country 1630

Belgium 33 14 42 19 57.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Denmark 140 64 46 75 53.6 1 0.7 1 0.7 0 0.0

Germany 593 199 34 376 63.4 18 3.0 18 3.0 0 0.0

Greece 81 22 27 58 71.6 1 1.2 1 1.2 0 0.0

Spain 35 10 29 23 65.7 2 5.7 2 5.7 0 0.0

France 61 24 39 35 57.4 2 3.3 2 3.3 0 0.0

Ireland 4 2 50 2 50.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Italy 144 83 58 61 42.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Luxembourg 14 10 71 4 28.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

The Netherlands 180 40 22 137 76.1 3 1.7 3 1.7 0 0.0

Austria 12 3 25 8 66.7 1 8.3 1 8.3 0 0.0

Portugal 88 53 60 35 39.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Finland 68 17 25 51 75.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Sweden 105 59 56 44 41.9 2 1.9 2 1.9 0 0.0

United Kingdom 72 33 46 39 54.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Norway 72 24 33 48 66.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Iceland 9 6 67 3 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Liechtenstein 10 2 20 7 70.0 1 10.0 1 10.0 1 10.0

TOTAL 1721 665 39 1025 59.6 31 1.8 31 1.8 1 0.1

Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for ALL FIVE PRODUCTS








MRL %

Country 9269

Belgium 215 126 59 87 40 2 0.9 2 0.9 0 0.0

Denmark 543 354 65 179 33 10 1.8 10 1.8 0 0.0

Germany 2354 987 42 1299 55 68 2.9 68 2.9 0 0.0

Greece 305 77 25 208 68 20 6.6 20 6.6 0 0.0

Spain 215 102 47 104 48 9 4.2 9 4.2 0 0.0

France 1161 522 45 587 51 52 4.5 52 4.5 0 0.0

Ireland 96 44 46 49 51 3 3.1 3 3.1 2 2.1

Italy 1371 855 62 501 37 15 1.1 15 1.1 0 0.0

Luxembourg 87 53 61 30 34 4 4.6 3 3.4 1 1.1

The Netherlands 680 183 27 491 72 6 0.9 6 0.9 0 0.0

Austria 60 27 45 31 52 2 3.3 2 3.3 0 0.0

Portugal 310 185 60 115 37 10 3.2 10 3.2 0 0.0

Finland 490 258 53 230 47 2 0.4 2 0.4 0 0.0

Sweden 555 354 64 198 36 3 0.5 3 0.5 0 0.0

United Kingdom 827 524 63 299 36 4 0.5 4 0.5 0 0.0

Norway 507 262 52 242 48 3 0.6 3 0.6 0 0.0

Iceland 52 44 85 7 13 1 1.9 0 0.0 1 1.9

Liechtenstein 40 28 70 11 28 1 2.5 1 2.5 1 2.5

TOTAL 9868 4985 51 4668 47 215 2.2 213 2.2 5 0.1

Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for APPLES

Reporting country: EU+Norway+Iceland+Lichtenstein Year of sampling: 2001

% %

Number of samples analysed: 2641 With residues above MRL: 28 1.06

Without detectable residues: 1372 52.0 With residues above EC-MRL: 27 1.0

With residues at or below MRL or without MRL: 1241 47.0 With residues above national MRL: 3 0.1

Product group: Pome Fruit Food item: Apples

Pesticide (**)Total number of samples

Number of samples without

residues %

Number of samples with

detectable residues %


residues below/ equal

MRL % Reporting

level (mg/kg) 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 50 >50Maximum (mg/kg)


residues exceeding the

MRL MRL (mg/kg)Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 1918 1911 100 7 0.36 7 0.36 1 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Azinphosmethyl 2286 2161 95 125 5.47 125 5.47 6 11 30 46 22 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Azoxystrobin 1093 1093 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Benomyl group(#) 1540 1305 85 235 15.26 235 15.26 18 12 47 60 44 42 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Captan 2049 1634 80 415 20.25 414 20.20 12 49 71 59 82 76 44 16 5 1 0 0 0 1

Chlorothalonil 2232 2222 100 10 0.45 10 0.45 0 1 2 3 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorpyriphos 2285 2035 89 250 10.94 250 10.94 52 54 81 41 14 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 2243 2203 98 40 1.78 40 1.78 9 9 14 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Deltamethrin 2095 2092 100 3 0.14 3 0.14 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Diazinon 2190 2177 99 13 0.59 13 0.59 2 2 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dichlofluanid 2202 2132 97 70 3.18 70 3.18 15 14 15 14 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dicofol 2046 2030 99 16 0.78 7 0.34 0 1 1 3 2 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

Dimethoate 2280 2231 98 49 2.15 49 2.15 7 7 18 9 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Disulfotone(###) 633 633 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Endosulfan 2170 2131 98 39 1.80 37 1.71 8 9 11 5 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Folpet 1881 1859 99 22 1.17 22 1.17 0 0 2 1 1 6 5 3 4 0 0 0 0 0

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 2110 1674 79 436 20.66 432 20.47 12 49 73 60 83 81 49 19 9 1 0 0 0 4

Imazalil 2096 2073 99 23 1.10 23 1.10 4 2 4 5 1 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iprodione 2166 2130 98 36 1.66 36 1.66 1 2 8 3 5 8 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 0

Lambda-cyhalothrin 1890 1882 100 8 0.42 8 0.42 3 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Malathion 2245 2241 100 4 0.18 4 0.18 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Maneb-group(##) 1070 948 89 122 11.40 122 11.40 5 5 8 14 18 28 33 8 3 0 0 0 0 0

Mecarbam 1697 1697 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Metalaxyl 1932 1928 100 4 0.21 4 0.21 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Methamidophos 1910 1907 100 3 0.16 1 0.05 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Methidathion 2284 2279 100 5 0.22 5 0.22 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Omethoate 1971 1965 100 6 0.30 6 0.30 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 340 340 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Permethrin 1971 1970 100 1 0.05 1 0.05 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Phorate(###) 1002 1002 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pirimiphos-methyl 2213 2212 100 1 0.05 1 0.05 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Procymidone 2243 2222 99 21 0.94 10 0.45 2 7 7 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

Propyzamide 1548 1548 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thiabendazol 1900 1720 91 180 9.47 180 9.47 3 3 4 16 28 48 50 23 5 0 0 0 0 0

Triazophos 1441 1440 100 1 0.07 1 0.07 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thiomethon(###) 642 642 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vinclozolin 2260 2255 100 5 0.22 5 0.22 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)

(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg

(**) in alphabetical order of the English name

(***) E=EC-MRL, N=National MRL, W=without MRL

Samples with quantifiable residues in classes up to and including (in mg/kg) (*)

Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for TOMATOES


% %




Product group: Fruiting vegetables Food item: Tomatoes



residues %





MRL % Reporting





Acephate 1553 1540 99 13 0.84 8 0.52 0 0 1 3 3 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

Azinphosmethyl 1723 1722 100 1 0.06 1 0.06 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Azoxystrobin 943 935 99 8 0.85 8 0.85 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Benomyl group(#) 1180 1117 95 63 5.34 60 5.08 13 1 15 11 12 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Captan 1626 1624 100 2 0.12 2 0.12 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorothalonil 1770 1655 94 115 6.50 115 6.50 20 18 24 18 13 14 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorpyriphos 1802 1782 99 20 1.11 20 1.11 6 5 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Deltamethrin 1707 1700 100 7 0.41 7 0.41 1 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Diazinon 1776 1774 100 2 0.11 2 0.11 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dichlofluanid 1686 1668 99 18 1.07 18 1.07 1 2 7 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dicofol 1639 1616 99 23 1.40 21 1.28 0 0 2 7 8 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Dimethoate 1737 1737 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Disulfotone(###) 524 524 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Endosulfan 1712 1553 91 159 9.29 153 8.94 23 20 47 30 22 13 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 6

Folpet 1570 1568 100 2 0.13 2 0.13 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Imazalil 1577 1574 100 3 0.19 3 0.19 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iprodione 1728 1662 96 66 3.82 66 3.82 2 5 18 18 14 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Malathion 1788 1788 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Maneb-group(##) 1234 1089 88 145 11.75 145 11.75 1 6 19 26 21 50 15 7 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mecarbam 1579 1579 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Metalaxyl 1644 1639 100 5 0.30 5 0.30 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Methamidophos 1578 1563 99 15 0.95 8 0.51 2 0 5 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

Methidathion 1777 1777 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Omethoate 1559 1557 100 2 0.13 2 0.13 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Permethrin 1627 1621 100 6 0.37 6 0.37 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Phorate(###) 808 808 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Procymidone 1805 1572 87 233 12.91 233 12.91 17 25 70 63 41 13 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Propyzamide 1504 1504 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thiabendazol 1451 1445 100 6 0.41 5 0.34 3 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Triazophos 1455 1455 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thiomethon(###) 575 575 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vinclozolin 1815 1784 98 31 1.71 24 1.32 7 8 8 5 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7






Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for LETTUCE


% %




Product group: Leafy vegetables Food item: Lettuce



residues %





MRL % Reporting





Acephate 1367 1325 97 42 3.07 39 2.85 2 3 7 12 4 5 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 3

Azinphosmethyl 1593 1593 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Azoxystrobin 880 877 100 3 0.34 1 0.11 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2

Benomyl group(#) 894 860 96 34 3.80 34 3.80 2 1 1 8 5 9 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

Captan 1510 1508 100 2 0.13 2 0.13 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorothalonil 1582 1573 99 9 0.57 3 0.19 3 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 6

Chlorpyriphos 1619 1613 100 6 0.37 3 0.19 0 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3


Deltamethrin 1507 1450 96 57 3.78 57 3.78 5 9 8 19 11 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Diazinon 1604 1601 100 3 0.19 3 0.19 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dichlofluanid 1608 1592 99 16 1.00 15 0.93 1 3 3 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

Dicofol 1419 1419 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dimethoate 1553 1504 97 49 3.16 47 3.03 0 2 12 17 11 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 2

Disulfotone(###) 591 591 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Endosulfan 1565 1519 97 46 2.94 37 2.36 11 8 14 3 3 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 9

Folpet 1518 1491 98 27 1.78 27 1.78 0 3 1 6 2 3 5 4 2 0 0 1 0 0


Imazalil 1173 1170 100 3 0.26 3 0.26 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iprodione 1658 1297 78 361 21.77 359 21.65 3 9 26 35 44 60 55 62 38 25 3 1 0 2


Malathion 1548 1548 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Maneb-group(##) 1145 863 75 282 24.63 254 22.18 3 0 5 9 29 47 63 55 41 17 11 2 0 28

Mecarbam 1413 1413 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Metalaxyl 1467 1402 96 65 4.43 64 4.36 10 3 22 18 2 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Methamidophos 1379 1349 98 30 2.18 28 2.03 5 5 9 8 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Methidathion 1569 1569 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Omethoate 1302 1272 98 30 2.30 29 2.23 1 1 7 11 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1


Permethrin 1464 1456 99 8 0.55 8 0.55 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Phorate(###) 691 690 100 1 0.14 1 0.14 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Procymidone 1678 1477 88 201 11.98 200 11.92 13 18 31 34 37 35 13 12 7 0 1 0 0 1

Propyzamide 1381 1360 98 21 1.52 20 1.45 3 2 7 6 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Thiabendazol 1143 1139 100 4 0.35 3 0.26 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Triazophos 1265 1265 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thiomethon(###) 653 653 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vinclozolin 1622 1482 91 140 8.63 135 8.32 11 15 23 22 16 15 16 12 5 4 1 0 0 5






Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for STRAWBERRIES


% %




Product group: Berries and small fruit Food item: Strawberries



residues %





MRL % Reporting





Acephate 1268 1266 100 2 0.16 0 0.00 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Azinphosmethyl 1452 1448 100 4 0.28 4 0.28 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Azoxystrobin 871 869 100 2 0.23 2 0.23 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Benomyl group(#) 774 723 93 51 6.59 34 4.39 4 3 7 9 15 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 17

Captan 1334 1270 95 64 4.80 63 4.72 1 2 15 13 7 17 4 4 0 1 0 0 0 1

Chlorothalonil 1416 1376 97 40 2.82 40 2.82 3 3 7 4 6 9 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorpyriphos 1487 1475 99 12 0.81 12 0.81 5 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Deltamethrin 1372 1371 100 1 0.07 1 0.07 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Diazinon 1467 1466 100 1 0.07 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Dichlofluanid 1430 1343 94 87 6.08 87 6.08 8 10 19 19 13 10 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dicofol 1378 1359 99 19 1.38 10 0.73 0 4 4 4 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

Dimethoate 1467 1454 99 13 0.89 13 0.89 0 3 1 5 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Disulfotone(###) 439 439 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Endosulfan 1459 1377 94 82 5.62 72 4.93 30 14 23 10 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

Folpet 1228 1216 99 12 0.98 12 0.98 0 0 2 0 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0


Imazalil 1339 1339 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iprodione 1508 1327 88 181 12.00 181 12.00 1 7 22 36 31 51 25 7 1 0 0 0 0 0


Malathion 1497 1473 98 24 1.60 22 1.47 3 7 2 5 3 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2

Maneb-group(##) 770 731 95 39 5.06 39 5.06 0 1 2 11 5 11 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mecarbam 1193 1193 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Metalaxyl 1411 1391 99 20 1.42 18 1.28 4 2 3 5 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2

Methamidophos 1306 1298 99 8 0.61 1 0.08 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 7

Methidathion 1472 1471 100 1 0.07 1 0.07 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Omethoate 1241 1241 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Permethrin 1279 1279 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Phorate(###) 642 642 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Procymidone 1540 1351 88 189 12.27 189 12.27 12 19 37 28 37 34 14 5 3 0 0 0 0 0

Propyzamide 1159 1159 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thiabendazol 1165 1157 99 8 0.69 4 0.34 0 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

Triazophos 1096 1096 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thiomethon(###) 391 391 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vinclozolin 1533 1451 95 82 5.35 82 5.35 13 15 23 14 8 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0






Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for TABLE GRAPES


% %




Product group: Berries and small fruit Food item: Table Grapes



residues %





MRL % Reporting





Acephate 1444 1440 100 4 0.28 1 0.07 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Azinphosmethyl 1550 1546 100 4 0.26 4 0.26 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Azoxystrobin 1065 983 92 82 7.70 82 7.70 2 4 10 23 22 16 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Benomyl group(#) 1045 957 92 88 8.42 84 8.04 11 14 6 4 17 16 11 5 4 0 0 0 0 4

Captan 1483 1390 94 93 6.27 93 6.27 7 2 6 14 8 24 18 11 3 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorothalonil 1586 1582 100 4 0.25 4 0.25 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorpyriphos 1596 1420 89 176 11.03 171 10.71 30 25 35 33 24 23 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 5


Deltamethrin 1486 1471 99 15 1.01 13 0.87 1 4 5 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Diazinon 1538 1535 100 3 0.20 1 0.07 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Dichlofluanid 1538 1518 99 20 1.30 20 1.30 0 4 4 2 5 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dicofol 1489 1467 99 22 1.48 20 1.34 0 1 3 3 4 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Dimethoate 1519 1445 95 74 4.87 74 4.87 10 15 18 19 8 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Disulfotone(###) 284 284 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Endosulfan 1572 1545 98 27 1.72 27 1.72 8 11 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Folpet 1435 1387 97 48 3.34 48 3.34 0 4 12 2 11 7 4 8 0 0 0 0 0 0


Imazalil 1409 1403 100 6 0.43 5 0.35 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Iprodione 1566 1306 83 260 16.60 260 16.60 0 5 18 27 36 79 56 29 8 2 0 0 0 0


Malathion 1533 1530 100 3 0.20 3 0.20 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Maneb-group(##) 1055 799 76 256 24.27 252 23.89 14 13 24 38 44 82 31 6 3 0 1 0 0 4

Mecarbam 1426 1425 100 1 0.07 1 0.07 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Metalaxyl 1520 1461 96 59 3.88 59 3.88 5 7 20 16 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Methamidophos 1444 1441 100 3 0.21 0 0.00 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Methidathion 1582 1580 100 2 0.13 2 0.13 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Omethoate 1427 1384 97 43 3.01 43 3.01 4 9 23 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Permethrin 1481 1480 100 1 0.07 1 0.07 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Phorate(###) 512 512 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Procymidone 1600 1318 82 282 17.63 281 17.56 21 19 26 38 46 83 34 11 3 1 0 0 0 1

Propyzamide 1368 1367 100 1 0.07 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Thiabendazol 1350 1338 99 12 0.89 12 0.89 6 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Triazophos 1333 1333 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thiomethon(###) 338 338 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vinclozolin 1598 1559 98 39 2.44 39 2.44 4 2 7 13 4 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0






Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission for all FIVE PRODUCTS


% %




Product group: All Products Food item: All Products



residues %





MRL % Reporting




MRL

% samples with residues exceeding the

MRL

Acephate 7550 7482 99 68 0.90 55 0.73 4 4 12 17 9 10 9 1 2 0 0 0 0 13 0.17

Azinphosmethyl 8604 8470 98 134 1.56 134 1.56 6 11 34 46 25 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Azoxystrobin 4852 4757 98 95 1.96 93 1.92 2 4 12 31 23 16 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.04

Benomyl group(#) 5433 4962 91 471 8.67 447 8.23 48 31 76 92 93 85 34 8 4 0 0 0 0 24 0.44

Captan 8002 7426 93 576 7.20 574 7.17 20 54 92 86 97 119 67 31 8 2 0 0 0 2 0.02

Chlorothalonil 8586 8408 98 178 2.07 172 2.00 26 23 34 28 23 25 12 4 2 0 1 0 0 6 0.07

Chlorpyriphos 8789 8325 95 464 5.28 456 5.19 93 88 127 77 41 31 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 8 0.09

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 8743 8612 99 131 1.50 127 1.45 36 27 35 22 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0.05

Deltamethrin 8167 8084 99 83 1.02 81 0.99 9 15 17 23 13 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.02

Diazinon 8575 8553 100 22 0.26 19 0.22 3 4 7 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.03

Dichlofluanid 8464 8253 98 211 2.49 210 2.48 25 33 48 45 30 18 8 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 0.01

Dicofol 7971 7891 99 80 1.00 58 0.73 0 6 10 17 19 24 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0.28

Dimethoate 8556 8371 98 185 2.16 183 2.14 17 27 49 50 26 9 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.02

Disulfotone(###) 2471 2471 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Endosulfan 8478 8125 96 353 4.16 326 3.85 80 62 98 50 37 17 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 27 0.32

Folpet 7632 7521 99 111 1.45 111 1.45 0 7 18 9 17 20 16 17 6 0 0 1 0 0 0.00

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 7965 7289 92 676 8.49 665 8.35 20 61 110 95 113 134 79 48 13 2 0 1 0 11 0.14

Imazalil 7594 7559 100 35 0.46 34 0.45 14 3 5 5 1 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.01

Iprodione 8626 7722 90 904 10.48 902 10.46 7 28 92 119 130 207 142 100 48 27 3 1 0 2 0.02

Lambda-cyhalothrin 7713 7638 99 75 0.97 71 0.92 16 13 17 15 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0.05

Malathion 8611 8580 100 31 0.36 29 0.34 4 8 5 6 4 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.02

Maneb-group(##) 5274 4430 84 844 16.00 812 15.40 23 25 58 98 117 218 149 78 47 17 12 2 0 32 0.61

Mecarbam 7308 7307 100 1 0.01 1 0.01 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Metalaxyl 7974 7821 98 153 1.92 150 1.88 21 13 47 41 14 13 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0.04

Methamidophos 7617 7558 99 59 0.77 38 0.50 8 7 16 16 4 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 21 0.28

Methidathion 8684 8676 100 8 0.09 8 0.09 4 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Omethoate 7500 7419 99 81 1.08 80 1.07 7 12 32 20 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0.01

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 1430 1430 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Permethrin 7822 7806 100 16 0.20 16 0.20 0 0 2 6 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Phorate(###) 3655 3654 100 1 0.03 1 0.03 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Pirimiphos-methyl 8495 8491 100 4 0.05 3 0.04 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.01

Procymidone 8866 7940 90 926 10.44 913 10.30 65 88 171 165 163 166 64 29 13 1 1 0 0 13 0.15

Propyzamide 6960 6938 100 22 0.32 20 0.29 3 2 7 6 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0.03

Thiabendazol 7009 6799 97 210 3.00 204 2.91 13 7 6 20 30 55 51 23 5 0 0 0 0 6 0.09

Triazophos 6590 6589 100 1 0.02 1 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Thiomethon(###) 2599 2599 100 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Vinclozolin 8828 8531 97 297 3.36 285 3.23 36 43 62 54 29 29 22 12 5 4 1 0 0 12 0.14






Overview of the pesticide/sample combinations for the five products

Commodities

Total number of sample* pesticide

combina-tions analysed

Number of sample-pesticide

combi-nations without

residues %


combi-nations with



combi-nations with residues below/ equal

MRL % Reporting

level (mg/kg) 0 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 2.0 5.0 10.0 20.0 50.0 >50Maximum (mg/kg)

Number of pesticide- sample

combina-tions, in which

residues exceed the

MRL %

Apples 68074 65924 97 2150 3.2 2121 3.1 167 249 414 355 330 332 203 71 27 2 0 0 0 0 29 0.04

Tomatoes 55538 54578 98 960 1.7 927 1.7 106 94 236 207 146 127 32 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0.06

Lettuce 49827 48329 97 1498 3.0 1422 2.9 83 94 186 232 188 208 181 157 100 46 18 5 0 0 76 0.15

Strawberries 45071 44027 98 1044 2.3 988 2.2 94 103 197 188 158 183 79 33 7 2 0 0 0 0 56 0.12

Table grapes 49483 47629 96 1854 3.7 1821 3.7 162 167 270 284 273 390 189 92 23 3 1 0 0 0 33 0.07SUM 267993 260487 97 7506 2.8 7279 2.7 612 707 1303 1266 1095 1240 684 365 157 53 19 5 0 227 0.08

Number of pesticide*sample combinations, in which a residue was found with quantifiable residues in classes up to and including (in mg/kg) (*)

Table B: Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European Commission

Product group: Pome fruit Food item: Apples

Reporting country: Belgium Year of sampling:

Total number of samples analysed: 44 With residues above MRL (EC+national): 0Without detectable residues: 37 With residues above EC-MRL: 0With detectable residues at or below MRL With residues above national MRL: 0or without MRL: 7


Pesticide (**)

Total number of samples

Number of samples without residues

Reporting level (mg/kg) 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 50 >50

Maximum residue level found (mg/kg)

Number of samples with residues exceeding the MRL

MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 44 44Azinphosmethyl 44 44Azoxystrobin 0Benomyl group(#) 44 39 0.20 4 1 0.3 0 2.00 ECaptan 44 44Chlorothalonil 44 44Chlorpyriphos 44 43 0.05 1 0.05 0 0.50 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 44 44Deltamethrin 44 44Diazinon 44 44Dichlofluanid 44 44Dicofol 44 44Dimethoate 44 44Disulfotone(###) 0Endosulfan 44 44Folpet 44 44Captan+ Folpet (Sum)Imazalil 44 44Iprodione 44 44Lambda-cyhalothrin 44 44

Malathion 44 44

Maneb-group(##) 44 44Mecarbam 44 44Metalaxyl 44 44Methamidophos 44 44

Methidathion 44 44

Omethoate 44 44

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0

Permethrin 44 44

Phorate(###) 0

Pirimiphos-methyl 44 44Procymidone 44 44

Propyzamide 44 44

Thiabendazol 44 43 0.10 1 0.4 0 5.00 ETriazophos 0Thiomethon(###) 0Vinclozolin 44 44

(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2

(***) E=EC-MRL, N=National MRL, W=without MRL (###) for those countries where an authorisation of this pesticide/commodity combination exist

2001






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 39 39Azinphosmethyl 39 39Azoxystrobin 39 39Benomyl group(#) 39 32 0.05 4 3 0.09 0 0.50 E

Captan 39 39

Chlorothalonil 39 39Chlorpyriphos 39 39Chlorpyriphos-methyl 39 39

Deltamethrin 39 39

Diazinon 39 39

Dichlofluanid 39 39

Dicofol 39 39

Dimethoate 39 39

Disulfotone(###) 39 39

Endosulfan 39 38 0.02 1 0.4 0 1/0,5 EFolpet 39 39Captan+ Folpet (Sum)

Imazalil 39 39

Iprodione 39 39Lambda-cyhalothrin 39 39Malathion 39 39Maneb-group(##) 39 38 0.30 1 1.3 0 3.00 EMecarbam 39 39Metalaxyl 39 39Methamidophos 39 39Methidathion 39 39Omethoate 39 39Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0Permethrin 39 39Phorate(###) 39 39Pirimiphos-methyl 39 39Procymidone 39 38 0.28 1 0.47 0 2.00 EPropyzamide 39 39Thiabendazol 39 39Triazophos 39 39Thiomethon(###) 0Vinclozolin 39 38 0.05 1 0.1 0 3.00 E



2001


Product group: Leafy vegetables Food item: Lettuce (Protected and Open air)




Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 76 76

Azinphosmethyl 76 76

Azoxystrobin 27 27Benomyl group(#) 76 74 0,05-0,2 1 1 0.7 0 5.00 ECaptan 76 76Chlorothalonil 76 76Chlorpyriphos 76 76Chlorpyriphos-methyl 76 76Deltamethrin 76 74 0,1-0,19 1 1 0.3 0 0.50 EDiazinon 76 76Dichlofluanid 76 76Dicofol 76 76Dimethoate 76 76Disulfotone(###) 27 27Endosulfan 76 76Folpet 76 76Captan+ Folpet (Sum)Imazalil 27 27Iprodione 76 35 0,2-0,55 6 10 14 8 3 7 0 10.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 76 76Malathion 76 76Maneb-group(##) 76 54 0,3-0,5 2 12 3 4 1 8.7 1 5.00 EMecarbam 76 76Metalaxyl 76 76Methamidophos 76 73 0,01-0,03 1 2 0.09 0 0.20 EMethidathion 76 76Omethoate 76 73 0.03 1 1 1 4.47 1 0.20 EOxydemethonmethyl(###) 0Permethrin 76 73 0,1-0,5 2 1 0.5 0 2.00 E

Phorate(###) 27 27

Pirimiphos-methyl 76 76Procymidone 76 67 0,02-0,28 1 1 3 2 2 1.5 0 5.00 EPropyzamide 76 76Thiabendazol 76 76

Triazophos 76 76

Thiomethon(###) 0

Vinclozolin 76 76



2001






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 23 23


Azoxystrobin 0

Benomyl group(#) 23 23

Captan 23 23

Chlorothalonil 23 23

Chlorpyriphos 23 23

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 23 23

Deltamethrin 23 23

Diazinon 23 23

Dichlofluanid 23 23

Dicofol 23 23

Dimethoate 23 23

Disulfotone(###) 0

Endosulfan 23 23

Folpet 23 23


Imazalil 23 23

Iprodione 23 22 0.20 1 0.4 0 10.00 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 23 23

Malathion 23 23

Maneb-group(##) 23 23

Mecarbam 23 23

Metalaxyl 23 23

Methamidophos 23 23

Methidathion 23 23

Omethoate 23 23


Permethrin 23 23

Phorate(###) 0

Pirimiphos-methyl 23 23

Procymidone 23 22 0.02 1 0.43 0 5.00 E

Propyzamide 23 23

Thiabendazol 23 23

Triazophos 0

Thiomethon(###) 0

Vinclozolin 23 18 0.02 1 1 1 2 0.29 0 5.00 E

(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).

(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001


Product group: Berries and small fruit Food item: Table grapes




Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 33 33


Azoxystrobin 33 33

Benomyl group(#) 31 30 0.05 1 0.05 0 2.00 E

Captan 33 26 0.15 3 4 0.8 0 3.00 E

Chlorothalonil 33 32 0.10 1 0.1 0 1.00 E

Chlorpyriphos 33 32 0.11 1 0.22 0 0.50 E


Deltamethrin 33 33

Diazinon 33 33

Dichlofluanid 33 29 0.07 2 1 1 1.94 0 10.00 E

Dicofol 33 33

Dimethoate 33 31 0.04 2 0.16 0 1.00 E


Endosulfan 33 33

Folpet 33 33


Imazalil 33 33

Iprodione 33 27 0.55 2 4 1.58 0 10.00 E


Malathion 33 33

Maneb-group(##) 33 33

Mecarbam 33 33

Metalaxyl 33 33

Methamidophos 33 33

Methidathion 33 33

Omethoate 33 31 0.03 2 0.04 0 0.10 E


Permethrin 33 33

Phorate(###) 33 33


Procymidone 33 32 0.28 1 0.82 0 5.00 E

Propyzamide 33 33

Thiabendazol 33 33

Triazophos 33 33

Thiomethon(###) 0

Vinclozolin 33 32 0.05 1 0.32 0 5.00 E




2001



Reporting country: Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 139 139 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 EAzinphosmethyl 139 136 0.01 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.16 0 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 0 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 139 132 0.05 0 0 0 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.98 0 2.00 ECaptan 139 139 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 EChlorpyriphos 139 139 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 139 139 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EDeltamethrin 139 138 0.01 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.014 0 0.10 EDiazinon 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.30 EDichlofluanid 139 136 0.01 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 0 5.00 EDicofol 139 137 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.464 2 0.02 EDimethoate 139 137 0.03 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.063 0 1.00 EDisulfotone(###) 0 0.02 EEndosulfan 139 135 0.03 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.136 2 0.05 EFolpet 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 139 139 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 EImazalil 139 138 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.92 0 5.00 EIprodione 139 138 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.22 0 10.00 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.10 E

Malathion 139 139 0.30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EManeb-group(##) 139 124 0.10 0 0 0 0 6 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.79 0 3.00 EMecarbam 139 139 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EMetalaxyl 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 E

Methamidophos 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Methidathion 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.30 E

Omethoate 139 138 0.01 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0.20 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 139 139 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.40 E

Permethrin 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 E

Phorate(###) 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EPirimiphos-methyl 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Procymidone 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Propyzamide 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EThiabendazol 139 134 0.05 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.551 0 5.00 ETriazophos 139 139 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EThiomethon(###) 139 139 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WVinclozolin 139 139 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 Exxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


Denmark 2001

Only add information regarding apples and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 129 129 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EAzinphosmethyl 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 0 2.00 E

Benomyl group(#) 129 129 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Captan 129 129 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 129 125 0.01 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.088 0 2.00 EChlorpyriphos 129 129 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 129 129 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Deltamethrin 129 125 0.01 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 0 0.20 E

Diazinon 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Dichlofluanid 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.00 E

Dicofol 129 127 0.03 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.333 2 0.02 E

Dimethoate 129 129 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###) 0 0.02 EEndosulfan 129 122 0.03 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.19 3 0.50 E

Folpet 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 E

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 129 129 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxx EImazalil 129 129 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EIprodione 129 125 0.01 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.22 0 5.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EMalathion 129 129 0.30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 EManeb-group(##) 121 116 0.10 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.32 0 3.00 EMecarbam 129 129 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EMetalaxyl 129 128 0.01 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.016 0 0.05 EMethamidophos 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EMethidathion 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EOmethoate 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.20 EOxydemethonmethyl(###) 129 129 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.40 EPermethrin 129 128 0.01 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.044 0 0.50 EPhorate(###) 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EPirimiphos-methyl 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 EProcymidone 129 107 0.01 2 3 5 6 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.78 0 2.00 EPropyzamide 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EThiabendazol 129 129 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 ETriazophos 129 129 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EThiomethon(###) 129 129 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WVinclozolin 129 128 0.06 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0.05 E

xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


Denmark 2001

Only add information regarding cucumbers and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 89 87 0.03 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0 1.00 EAzinphosmethyl 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 0 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 89 89 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.00 ECaptan 89 89 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 EChlorpyriphos 89 89 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 89 89 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EDeltamethrin 89 87 0.01 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.061 0 0.50 EDiazinon 89 88 0.01 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.014 0 0.02 EDichlofluanid 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10.00 EDicofol 89 89 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EDimethoate 89 85 0.03 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.684 0 1.00 EDisulfotone(###) 0 0.02 EEndosulfan 89 83 0.03 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.094 2 0.05 EFolpet 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxx ECaptan+Folpet (Sum) 89 89 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 EImazalil 89 89 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EIprodione 89 83 0.01 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.237 0 10.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 EMalathion 89 89 0.30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 EManeb-group(##) 85 77 0.10 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 4.32 0 5.00 EMecarbam 89 89 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EMetalaxyl 89 79 0.01 2 0 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0 1.00 EMethamidophos 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.20 EMethidathion 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Omethoate 89 85 0.01 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.143 0 0.20 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 89 89 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.40 EPermethrin 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 EPhorate(###) 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EPirimiphos-methyl 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Procymidone 89 82 0.01 1 3 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.55 0 5.00 E

Propyzamide 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 E

Thiabendazol 89 89 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Triazophos 89 89 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 89 89 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W

Vinclozolin 89 87 0.06 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.26 0 5.00 E





Denmark 2001

Only add information regarding head cabbage and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 46 46 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Azinphosmethyl 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Azoxystrobin 0 0.05 E

Benomyl group(#) 46 45 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.72 W

Captan 46 46 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxx

Chlorothalonil 46 42 0.01 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 3.00 E

Chlorpyriphos 46 46 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.20 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 46 46 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Deltamethrin 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Diazinon 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Dichlofluanid 46 42 0.01 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.102 0 10.00 E

Dicofol 46 46 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Dimethoate 46 46 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###) 0 0.02 E

Endosulfan 46 45 0.03 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.017 0 0.05 E

Folpet 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxx

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 46 46 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 E

Imazalil 46 46 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Iprodione 46 45 0.01 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.178 0 10.00 E


Malathion 46 45 0.30 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0.50 E

Maneb-group(##) 46 46 0.10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 E

Mecarbam 46 46 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Methamidophos 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 E

Methidathion 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Omethoate 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.10 E


Permethrin 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 E

Phorate(###) 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Pirimiphos-methyl 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Procymidone 46 41 0.01 0 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.463 0 5.00 E

Propyzamide 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 46 46 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Triazophos 46 46 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 46 46 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W

Vinclozolin 46 43 0.06 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.017 0 5.00 E





Denmark 2001

Only add information regarding peas and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 140 140 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E


Azoxystrobin 0 2.00 E

Benomyl group(#) 140 136 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.28 0 2.00 E

Captan 140 140 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxx

Chlorothalonil 140 140 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 E

Chlorpyriphos 140 140 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 140 133 0.03 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0245 0 0.20 E

Deltamethrin 140 137 0.01 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.023 0 0.10 E

Diazinon 140 138 0.01 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.079 1 0.02 E

Dichlofluanid 140 138 0.01 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1035 0 10.00 E

Dicofol 140 140 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Dimethoate 140 133 0.03 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.042 0 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###) 0 0.02 E

Endosulfan 140 139 0.03 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0075 0 0.50 E

Folpet 140 140 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxxxx

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 140 140 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 E

Imazalil 140 140 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Iprodione 140 115 0.01 0 2 2 2 3 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.68 0 10.00 E


Malathion 140 140 0.30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Maneb-group(##) 137 119 0.10 0 0 0 2 6 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.61 0 2.00 E

Mecarbam 140 140 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 140 126 0.01 2 4 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 2.00 E

Methamidophos 140 140 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 E

Methidathion 140 140 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 E

Omethoate 140 133 0.01 2 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.035 0 0.10 E


Permethrin 140 140 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 E

Phorate(###) 140 140 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E


Procymidone 140 120 0.01 2 2 3 1 3 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.639 0 5.00 E

Propyzamide 140 140 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 140 140 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Triazophos 140 140 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 140 140 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W

Vinclozolin 140 138 0.06 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0505 0 5.00 E





Denmark 2001




Reporting country: Germany Year of sampling: Remark:








MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 307 306 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.023 0 1 EAzinphosmethyl 489 485 0.02 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 322 322 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 284 208 0.005 17 10 27 11 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.34 0 2 ECaptan 427 277 0.01 7 25 30 16 22 29 13 4 3 1 0 0 0 7 0 Chlorothalonil 494 493 0.01 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.11 0 1 EChlorpyriphos 467 407 0.01 16 14 21 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.11 0 0.5 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 494 490 0.01 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.033 0 0.5 EDeltamethrin 425 425 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 EDiazinon 419 417 0.02 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0 0.3 EDichlofluanid 471 431 0.01 13 4 12 7 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.44 0 5 EDicofol 390 388 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 2 0.02 EDimethoate 489 480 0.01 3 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.088 0 1 EDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 466 460 0.005 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.029 0 0.3 EFolpet 396 396 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 427 277 0.01 7 25 30 16 22 29 13 4 3 1 0 0 0 7 2 3 EImazalil 473 467 0.05 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 5 EIprodione 386 382 0.02 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.32 0 10 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 440 438 0.02 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0 0.1 E

Malathion 482 481 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.028 0 0.5 EManeb-group(##) 194 164 0.01 5 5 6 4 2 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.87 0 3 EMecarbam 363 363 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EMetalaxyl 449 449 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 EMethamidophos 295 295 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EMethidathion 466 465 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.027 0 0.3 E

Omethoate 358 357 0.1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.2 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###)

Permethrin 372 372 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 E

Phorate(###)

Pirimiphos-methyl 454 453 0.01 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.013 0 0.05 E

Procymidone 466 461 0.01 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.11 1 0.02 E

Propyzamide 385 385 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EThiabendazol 288 267 0.005 3 1 1 4 4 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 1.3 0 5 ETriazophos 370 369 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.021 0 0.2 EThiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 464 460 0.01 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0 1 Exxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001












MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 384 378 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.56 5 0.05 EAzinphosmethyl 435 435 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 330 325 0.03 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.086 0 2 E

Benomyl group(#) 277 256 0.1 13 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.18 0 0.5 E

Captan 424 424 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorothalonil 461 421 0.01 8 8 8 6 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.43 0 2 EChlorpyriphos 461 449 0.01 4 3 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0.5 E


Deltamethrin 430 428 0.05 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.031 0 0.2 E

Diazinon 432 430 0.02 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.11 0 0.5 E

Dichlofluanid 443 436 0.01 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.047 0 5 E

Dicofol 421 415 0.02 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.65 0 1 E

Dimethoate 453 453 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 E

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 461 385 0.005 14 12 22 12 7 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0.5 E

Folpet 422 421 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.033 0

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 424 423 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.033 0 3 EImazalil 427 424 0.05 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0006 0 0.5 EIprodione 427 393 0.02 2 2 10 9 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 5 ELambda-cyhalothrin 431 430 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.025 0 0.5 EMalathion 435 435 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 EManeb-group(##) 316 262 0.01 1 6 15 14 10 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.72 0 3 EMecarbam 443 443 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EMetalaxyl 427 424 0.05 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0 0.05 EMethamidophos 376 373 0.05 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0 0.5 EMethidathion 461 461 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EOmethoate 377 377 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 EOxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 432 430 0.05 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.08 0 0.5 EPhorate(###)Pirimiphos-methyl 435 434 0.01 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.005 0 1 EProcymidone 461 367 0.01 12 11 24 27 14 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 EPropyzamide 441 441 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EThiabendazol 300 296 0.05 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 1 0.05 ETriazophos 405 405 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EThiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 478 458 0.01 6 4 5 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.28 5 0.05 E



2001






Samples with quantifiable residues in classes up to and including (in mg/kg) (*)Pesticide (**) of samples samples level 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 50 >50 residue samples (mg/kg) MRL (***)

Acephate 224 223 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.56 0 1 EAzinphosmethyl 270 270 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 152 152 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 122 119 0.05 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 5 ECaptan 247 246 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.23 0 Chlorothalonil 284 281 0.01 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.18 1 0.01 EChlorpyriphos 288 288 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 288 286 0.01 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.055 1 0.05 EDeltamethrin 215 200 0.02 1 2 2 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.14 0 0.5 EDiazinon 273 273 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EDichlofluanid 270 263 0.01 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.066 0 10 EDicofol 216 216 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 EDimethoate 253 233 0.02 0 1 6 5 5 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1.9 2 1 EDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 288 276 0.005 1 4 5 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 2 0.05 EFolpet 247 244 0.02 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.52 0 Captan+Folpet (Sum) 247 243 0.02 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.52 3 0.1 EImazalil 198 195 0.05 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0.02 EIprodione 274 157 0.02 2 3 13 12 19 23 14 15 8 7 0 1 0 29 1 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 249 245 0.02 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 0 1 EMalathion 217 217 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 EManeb-group(##) 187 113 0.25 3 0 3 6 14 16 12 10 3 6 1 0 0 17.5 7 5 EMecarbam 239 239 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 EMetalaxyl 249 222 0.05 7 2 4 10 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.47 0 1 EMethamidophos 206 203 0.05 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.45 1 0.2 EMethidathion 251 251 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Omethoate 161 147 0.1 0 0 6 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.18 0 0.2 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 250 246 0.05 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.26 0 2 EPhorate(###)Pirimiphos-methyl 254 254 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Procymidone 288 241 0.01 5 7 8 11 10 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 E

Propyzamide 276 264 0.01 2 2 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0 1 E

Thiabendazol 136 133 0.05 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.29 1 0.05 E

Triazophos 188 188 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 293 241 0.01 7 10 9 11 8 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 5 E





2001












MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 274 274 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E


Azoxystrobin 222 222 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Benomyl group(#) 162 154 0.005 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.53 1 0.1 E

Captan 302 288 0.02 1 2 5 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.55 0

Chlorothalonil 389 380 0.01 2 1 0 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.41 0 3 E

Chlorpyriphos 387 379 0.01 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.066 0 0.2 E


Deltamethrin 313 313 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Diazinon 365 364 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.34 1 0.02 E

Dichlofluanid 357 304 0.01 5 4 13 12 8 6 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 0 10 E

Dicofol 304 297 0.02 0 1 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 6 0.02 E

Dimethoate 386 377 0.02 0 2 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.16 0 1 E

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 388 347 0.005 14 9 13 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.14 5 0.05 E

Folpet 301 298 0.02 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 302 285 0.02 1 2 6 1 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 3 E

Imazalil 311 311 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Iprodione 363 350 0.02 1 1 2 4 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.46 0 10 E


Malathion 339 328 0.02 3 2 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0.5 E

Maneb-group(##) 143 129 0.05 0 1 2 3 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 2 E

Mecarbam 265 265 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 334 324 0.05 3 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.23 0 0.5 E

Methamidophos 254 253 0.01 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 1 0.01 E

Methidathion 387 386 0.01 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0.02 E

Omethoate 242 242 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 E


Permethrin 281 281 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 E

Phorate(###)


Procymidone 387 326 0.01 7 5 11 11 9 14 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 2.2 0 5 E

Propyzamide 301 301 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 172 172 0.005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 E

Triazophos 276 276 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 376 323 0.01 11 11 14 10 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 5 E





2001












MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 460 458 0.02 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.11 2 0.02 E

Azinphosmethyl 508 507 0.04 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0 1 E

Azoxystrobin 401 354 0.03 2 3 6 12 13 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.83 0 2 E

Benomyl group(#) 337 310 0.1 11 1 2 0 2 5 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 2.9 2 2 E

Captan 508 483 0.02 5 1 5 5 2 2 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 1.8 0

Chlorothalonil 555 555 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 E

Chlorpyriphos 552 449 0.01 24 16 20 17 14 9 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0.5 E


Deltamethrin 475 469 0.05 1 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.101 1 0.1 E

Diazinon 490 489 0.02 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.058 1 0.02 E

Dichlofluanid 523 515 0.01 0 3 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.13 0 10 E

Dicofol 482 474 0.02 0 0 2 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.41 0 2 E

Dimethoate 481 467 0.02 1 2 3 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0 1 E

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 555 531 0.005 6 10 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.18 0 0.5 E

Folpet 470 452 0.02 0 0 5 0 6 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 508 466 0.02 5 1 10 5 8 4 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 E

Imazalil 429 423 0.05 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 1 0.02 E

Iprodione 530 454 0.02 0 3 10 9 9 17 11 10 5 2 0 0 0 7 0 10 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 501 479 0.02 3 4 5 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.33 1 0.2 E

Malathion 482 481 0.02 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0.5 E

Maneb-group(##) 443 294 0.25 14 12 23 23 25 31 14 4 3 0 0 0 0 2.7 3 2 E

Mecarbam 469 468 0.02 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.007 0 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 501 479 0.05 3 2 8 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.26 0 2 E

Methamidophos 452 451 0.05 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 1 0.01 E

Methidathion 555 554 0.02 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.16 0 0.5 E

Omethoate 434 431 0.1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.041 0 0.1 E


Permethrin 515 515 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 E

Phorate(###)


Procymidone 555 419 0.01 14 12 11 20 21 36 15 5 1 1 0 0 0 9.8 1 5 E

Propyzamide 467 466 0.01 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.15 1 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 322 314 0.05 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.016 0 0.05 E

Triazophos 434 434 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 553 536 0.01 2 1 4 3 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.76 0 5 E





2001




Reporting country: Hellas Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 32 32Azinphos methyl 32 30 0.02 1 1 0.02 0 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 32 32Benomyl group(#) 41 28 0.10 2 4 4 3 0.71 0 2.00 ECaptan 32 32Chlorothalonil 32 32Chlorpyriphos 32 23 0.01 1 3 2 2 1 0.12 0 0.50 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 32 32Deltamethrin 32 32Diazinon 32 31 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.30 EDichlofluanid 32 32Dicofol 32 32Dimethoate 32 32Disulfotone(###) 32 32Endosulfan 32 29 0.01 2 1 0.03 0 0.30 EFolpet 32 32Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 32 32Imazalil 32 32Iprodione 32 32


Malathion 32 32Maneb-group(##) 41 30 0.10 2 1 5 2 1 1.14 0 3.00 EMecarbam 32 32Metalaxyl 32 32

Methamidophos 32 31 0.01 1 0.14 1 0.05 E

Methidathion 32 31 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.30 E

Omethoate 32 31 0.01 1 0.02 0 0.20 E

Oxydemethon methyl(###) 32 32

Permethrin 32 32

Phorate(###) 32 32Pirimiphos-methyl 32 32

Procymidone 32 32

Propyzamide 32 32Thiabendazol 41 35 0.01 1 3 2 0.86 0 5.00 ETriazophos 32 32Thiomethon(###) 32 32Vinclozolin 32 32



2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 15 15Azinphos methyl 15 15Azoxystrobin 15 15

Benomyl group (#) 46 28 0.10 1 6 8 3 0.74 3 0.50 E

Captan 15 15Chlorothalonil 15 15Chlorpyriphos 15 14 0.01 1 0.03 0 0.50 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 15 14 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.50 E

Deltamethrin 15 15

Diazinon 15 15

Dichlofluanid 15 14 0.01 1 0.06 0 5.00 E

Dicofol 15 15

Dimethoate 15 15

Disulfotone (###) 15 15Endosulfan 15 12 0.01 1 1 1 0.10 0 0.50 E

Folpet 15 15

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 15 15Imazalil 15 15Iprodione 15 14 0.01 1 0.02 0 5.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 15 15Malathion 15 15Maneb-group(##) 77 29 0.10 1 4 34 9 0.73 0 3.00 EMecarbam 15 15Metalaxyl 15 15Methamidophos 15 15Methidathion 15 15Omethoate 15 15Oxydemethon methyl (###) 15 15Permethrin 15 15Phorate (###) 15 15Pirimiphos-methyl 15 15Procymidone 15 15Propyzamide 15 15Thiabendazol 49 48 0.01 1 0.46 0 5.00 ETriazophos 15 15Thiomethon(###) 15 15Vinclozolin 15 15



2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 16 16Azinphosmethyl 16 16Azoxystrobin 16 16Benomyl group(#) 34 20 0.10 4 3 4 3 0.94 0 5.00 ECaptan 16 16Chlorothalonil 16 16Chlorpyriphos 16 16Chlorpyriphos-methyl 16 15 0.01 1 0.20 1 0.05* EDeltamethrin 16 16Diazinon 16 16Dichlofluanid 16 16Dicofol 16 16Dimethoate 16 15 0.01 1 0.03 0 1.00 EDisulfotone(###) 16 16Endosulfan 16 12 0.01 4 0.01 0 1.00 EFolpet 16 16Captan+Folpet (Sum) 16 16Imazalil 16 16Iprodione 16 16Lambda-cyhalothrin 16 16Malathion 16 16Maneb-group(##) 45 10 0.10 2 1 8 5 9 9 1 2.07 0 5.00 EMecarbam 16 16Metalaxyl 16 15 0.01 1 0.25 0 1.00 EMethamidophos 16 16Methidathion 16 16

Omethoate 16 16

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 16 16Permethrin 16 16Phorate(###) 16 16Pirimiphos-methyl 16 16

Procymidone 16 16

Propyzamide 16 16

Thiabendazol 37 37

Triazophos 16 16

Thiomethon(###) 16 16

Vinclozolin 16 16




2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 14 14


Azoxystrobin 14 14

Benomyl group(#) 46 30 0.10 1 3 7 5 0.48 12 0.1* E

Captan 14 14


Chlorpyriphos 14 14


Deltamethrin 14 14

Diazinon 14 14

Dichlofluanid 14 14

Dicofol 14 14

Dimethoate 14 14


Endosulfan 14 14

Folpet 14 14

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 14 14

Imazalil 14 14

Iprodione 14 14


Malathion 14 14

Maneb-group(##) 47 33 0.10 6 5 2 1 1.10 0 2.00 E

Mecarbam 14 14

Metalaxyl 14 14

Methamidophos 14 12 0.01 1 1 1.12 2 0.01* E

Methidathion 14 14

Omethoate 14 14

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 14 14

Permethrin 14 14

Phorate(###) 14 14


Procymidone 14 14

Propyzamide 14 14

Thiabendazol 46 46

Triazophos 14 14


Vinclozolin 14 14




2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 15 15

Azinphos methyl 15 14 0.04 1 0.05 0 1.00 E

Azoxystrobin 15 15

Benomyl group(#) 52 36 0.10 12 3 1 0.72 0 2.00 E

Captan 15 15


Chlorpyriphos 15 15


Deltamethrin 15 13 0.01 1 1 0.40 1 0.10 E

Diazinon 15 15

Dichlofluanid 15 15

Dicofol 15 15

Dimethoate 15 15


Endosulfan 15 15

Folpet 15 15

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 15 15

Imazalil 15 15

Iprodione 15 15

Lambda-cyhalothrin 15 13 0.01 1 1 0.07 0 0.20 E

Malathion 15 15

Maneb-group(##) 81 27 0.10 1 10 9 25 8 1 1.81 0 2.00 E

Mecarbam 15 15

Metalaxyl 15 15

Methamidophos 15 15

Methidathion 15 14 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.50 E

Omethoate 15 15


Permethrin 15 15

Phorate(###) 15 15


Procymidone 15 15

Propyzamide 15 15

Thiabendazol 52 52

Triazophos 15 15


Vinclozolin 15 15




2001




Reporting country: SPAIN Year of sampling: Remark:

Total number of samples analysed: 45 With residues above MRL (EC+national): 0Without detectable residues: 7 With residues above EC-MRL:

With detectable residues at or below MRL With residues above national MRL:

or without MRL: 38


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 45 44 0.02 1 0.04 1.00 EAzinphosmethyl 45 45 0.05Azoxystrobin 45 45 0.05Benomyl group(#) 45 44 0.10 1 0.53 2.00 ECaptan 45 27 0.10 3 2 6 6 1 2 2.00 EChlorothalonil 45 41 0.01 1 2 1 0.41 1.00 EChlorpyriphos 45 43 0.05 2 0.06 0.50 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 45 40 0.05 3 1 1 0.11 0.50 EDeltamethrin 45 45 0.05Diazinon 45 44 0.05 1 0.15 0.30 EDichlofluanid 45 45 0.10Dicofol 45 45 0.02Dimethoate 45 43 0.05 1 1 0.7 1.00 EDisulfotone(###) 45 45 0.02Endosulfan 45 45 0.05Folpet 45 28 0.10 1 1 5 5 3 2 2.6 3.00 ECaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 45 10 0.10 4 3 11 11 4 2 2.6 3.00 EImazalil 45 32 0.02 1 4 4 4 0.43 5.00 EIprodione 45 44 0.02 1 0.03 10.00 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 45 45 0.02

Malathion 45 43 0.05 1 1 0.13 0.50 EManeb-group(##) 45 45 0.05Mecarbam 45 45 0.05Metalaxyl 45 45 0.05

Methamidophos 45 45 0.01

Omethoate 45 45 0.10

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 45 45 0.05

Permethrin 45 45 0.05

Phorate(###) 45 45 0.05

Pirimiphos-methyl 45 45 0.05

Procymidone 45 45 0.02

Propyzamide 45 45 0.02Thiabendazol 45 45 0.05Triazophos 45 45 0.02Thiomethon(###) 45 45 0.03Vinclozolin 45 45 0.05



2001







or without MRL: 16


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 45 45 0.02Azinphosmethyl 45 45 0.05Azoxystrobin 45 45 0.05

Benomyl group(#) 45 45 0.10

Captan 45 45 0.10Chlorothalonil 45 37 0.01 3 1 2 1 1 1.7 2.00 EChlorpyriphos 45 45 0.05

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 45 45 0.05

Deltamethrin 45 45 0.05

Diazinon 45 45 0.05

Dichlofluanid 45 45 0.10

Dicofol 45 45 0.02

Dimethoate 45 45 0.05

Disulfotone(###) 45 45 0.02Endosulfan 45 40 0.05 4 1 0.23 0.50 E

Folpet 45 45 0.10

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 45 45 0.10Imazalil 45 45 0.02Iprodione 45 45 0.02Lambda-cyhalothrin 45 45 0.02Malathion 45 45 0.05Maneb-group(##) 45 42 0.05 1 2 1.5 2.00 EMecarbam 45 45 0.05Metalaxyl 45 45 0.05Methamidophos 45 45 0.01Methidathion 45 45 0.02Omethoate 45 45 0.10Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 45 45 0.05Permethrin 45 45 0.05Phorate(###) 45 45 0.05Pirimiphos-methyl 45 45 0.05Procymidone 45 44 0.02 1 0.04 2.00 EPropyzamide 45 45 0.02Thiabendazol 45 45 0.05Triazophos 45 45 0.02Thiomethon(###) 45 45 0.03Vinclozolin 45 45 0.05



2001





Total number of samples analysed: 45 With residues above MRL (EC+national): 4Without detectable residues: 21 With residues above EC-MRL: 4With detectable residues at or below MRL With residues above national MRL:

or without MRL: 20


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 45 45 0.02Azinphosmethyl 45 45 0.05Azoxystrobin 45 45 0.05Benomyl group(#) 45 45 0.10Captan 45 45 0.10Chlorothalonil 45 43 0.01 1 1 0.06 2 0.01 EChlorpyriphos 45 43 0.05 1 1 0.07 1 0.05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 45 45 0.05Deltamethrin 45 45 0.05Diazinon 45 45 0.05Dichlofluanid 45 45 0.10Dicofol 45 45 0.02Dimethoate 45 45 0.05Disulfotone(###) 45 45 0.02Endosulfan 45 44 0.05 1 0.07Folpet 45 44 0.10 1 1.6 2.00 ECaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 45 44 0.10 1 1.6 2.00 EImazalil 45 45 0.02Iprodione 45 44 0.02 1 0.4 10.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 45 45 0.02Malathion 45 45 0.05Maneb-group(##) 45 35 0.05 3 2 4 1 5.22 1 5.00 EMecarbam 45 45 0.05Metalaxyl 45 42 0.05 1 2 0.07 0.10 EMethamidophos 45 45 0.01Methidathion 45 45 0.02


Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 45 45 0.05Permethrin 45 45 0.05Phorate(###) 45 45 0.05Pirimiphos-methyl 45 45 0.05

Procymidone 45 38 0.02 1 1 2 1 1 1 3.46 5.00 E

Propyzamide 45 45 0.02

Thiabendazol 45 45 0.05

Triazophos 45 45 0.02

Thiomethon(###) 45 45 0.03

Vinclozolin 45 43 0.05 1 1 0.13 5.00 E




2001






or without MRL: 7


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 45 45 0.02

Azinphosmethyl 45 45 0.05

Azoxystrobin 45 45 0.05


Captan 45 44 0.10 1 0.13 3.00 E

Chlorothalonil 45 45 0.01

Chlorpyriphos 45 45 0.05



Diazinon 45 45 0.05


Dicofol 45 45 0.02


Disulfotone(###) 45 45 0.02

Endosulfan 45 45 0.05

Folpet 45 43 0.10 2 0.16 3.00 E

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 45 42 0.10 3 0.16 3.00 E

Imazalil 45 45 0.02

Iprodione 45 45 0.02


Malathion 45 41 0.05 2 2 1.66 2 0.50 E

Maneb-group(##) 45 45 0.05

Mecarbam 45 45 0.05

Metalaxyl 45 44 0.05 1 0.05 0.50 E


Methidathion 45 45 0.02




Phorate(###) 45 45 0.05




Thiabendazol 45 44 0.05 1 0.24 1 0.05 E


Thiomethon(###) 45 45 0.03

Vinclozolin 45 45 0.05




2001






or without MRL: 23


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 35 35 0.02



Benomyl group(#) 35 22 0.10 1 3 5 1 2 1 2.56 1 2.00 E

Captan 35 34 0.10 1 2.48 3.00 E


Chlorpyriphos 35 27 0.05 1 3 3 1 0.6 1 0.50 E



Diazinon 35 35 0.05


Dicofol 35 32 0.02 1 2

Dimethoate 35 35 0.05 0.67 2.00 E



Folpet 35 35 0.10

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 35 34 0.10 1 2.48 3.00 E

Imazalil 35 35 0.02


Lambda-cyhalothrin 35 33 0.02 1 1 0.12 0.20 E

Malathion 35 35 0.05

Maneb-group(##) 35 23 0.05 9 2 1 1.14 2.00 E

Mecarbam 35 35 0.05

Metalaxyl 35 35 0.05






Phorate(###) 35 35 0.05


Procymidone 35 18 0.02 1 1 2 3 6 3 1 1.61 5.00 E




Thiomethon(###) 35 35 0.03

Vinclozolin 35 33 0.05 1 1 0.25 5.00 E




2001




Reporting country: France Year of sampling:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 213 213 0.01 0 0.00 EC

Azinphosmethyl 308 305 0.01 2 1 0.08 0 0.50 EC

Azoxystrobin 27 27 0.02 0 0.02 EC

benomyl group 308 218 0.02 1 16 36 19 16 2 0.94 0 2.00 EC

captan 308 267 0.01 4 10 13 6 6 1 1 0.81 0 3.00 EC

Chlorothalonil 252 252 0.01 0 1.00 EC

Chlorpyriphos 308 291 0.01 6 5 3 1 2 0.16 0 0.50 EC

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 252 252 0.01 0 0.50 EC

Deltamethrin 308 307 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.10 EC

Diazinon 252 252 0.01 0 0.30 EC

Dichlofluanid 308 307 0.01 1 0.15 0 5.00 EC

Dicofol 308 305 0.01 1 1 1 0.13 2 0.05 EC

Dimethoate 308 303 0.01 3 1 1 0.03 0 1.00 EC

Disulfotone(###) 215 215 0.05 0 0.02 EC

Endosulfan 308 300 0.01 2 1 2 1 2 0.2 0 0.30 EC

Folpet 308 308

Captan+folpel 308 267 0.01 4 10 13 6 6 1 1 0.81 0 3.00 EC

Imazalil 197 197 0.05 0 5.00 EC

Iprodione 308 306 0.01 2 0.05 0 10.00 EC

cyhalothrine lambda 308 303 0.01 2 3 0.02 0 0.10 EC

Malathion 252 252 0.01 0 0.50 EC

Maneb-group(##) 121 118 0.05 1 1 1 0.67 0 3.00 E

Mecarbam 215 215 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Metalaxyl 197 197 0.02 0 1 ECMethamidophos 213 213 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Methidathion 308 307 0.01 1 0.03 0 0.30 EC

Omethoate 213 213 0.01 0 0.20 EC

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 72 72 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Permethrin 308 307 0.02 1 0.14 0 1 ECPhorate(###) 176 176 0.05 0 0.05 ECPirimiphos-methyl 306 306 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Procymidone 306 306 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Propyzamide 232 232 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Thiabendazol 263 212 0.02 2 6 14 10 11 7 1 2.27 0 5.00 EC

Thiomethon(###) 176 176 0.01 0

Triazophos 308 308 0.02 0 0.02 EC

Vinclozolin 308 308 0.01 0 1.00 EC




2001Only add information regarding apples and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns


Product group: Fruiting vegetables Food item: Tomatoes Remark:




Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 272 267 0.01 2 2 1 0.39 0 0.50 EC

Azinphosmethyl 272 272 0.01 0 0.50 EC


Benomyl group(#) 272 260 0.02 7 3 2 0.18 0 0.5 EC

captan 272 271 0.01 1 0.02 0 3.00 EC

Chlorothalonil 272 248 0.01 5 5 3 5 1 3 2 0.62 0 2.00 EC

Chlorpyriphos 272 268 0.01 1 2 1 0.04 0 0.50 EC

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 272 271 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.50 EC

Deltamethrin 272 271 0.01 1 0.1 0 0.20 EC

Diazinon 272 272 0.01 0 0.50 EC


Dicofol 272 265 0.01 1 3 1 2 0.28 0 0,02/1 EC

Dimethoate 272 272 0.01 0 1.00 EC

Disulfotone(###) 257 257 0.05 0 0.02 ECEndosulfan 272 244 0.01 8 2 9 5 2 2 0.5 0 0,05/0,5 EC

Folpet 272 272

Captan + folpel 272 271 0.01 1 0.02 0 3.00 EC

Imazalil 202 202 0.05 0 0.50 EC

Iprodione 272 259 0.01 1 4 3 3 2 0.36 0 5.00 EC

Lambda-cyhalothrin 272 271 0.01 1 0.03 1 0.02 EC

Malathion 272 272 0.01 0 3.00 EC

Maneb-group(##) 272 268 0.05 1 1 2 0.3 0 3.00 EC

Mecarbam 272 272 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Metalaxyl 202 202 0.02 0 0.05 EC

Methamidophos 272 263 0.01 2 4 1 1 1 0.31 7 0.01 EC

Methidathion 272 272 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Omethoate 272 271 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.20 EC


Permethrin 257 257 0.02 0 0.50 EC

Phorate(###) 207 207 0.02 0 0.05 EC

Pirimiphos-methyl 272 272 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Procymidone 272 235 0.01 1 6 10 10 8 2 0.49 0 2.00 EC

Propyzamide 197 197 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Thiabendazol 197 197 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Thiomethon(###) 197 197 0.01 0Triazophos 272 272 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Vinclozolin 272 265 0.01 2 3 2 0.09 2 0.05 EC




Only add information regarding cucumbers and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns2001


Product group: Leafy vegetables Food item: Lettuce Remark:




Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 294 277 0.01 1 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 2 3.58 3 1.00 EC



Benomyl group(#) 192 189 0.02 2 1 1.2 0 5.00 EC

Captan 379 379

Chlorothalonil 379 377 0.01 1 1 14.8 1 0.01 EC

Chlorpyriphos 379 378 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.05 EC


Deltamethrin 379 350 0.01 3 6 5 9 4 2 0.48 0 0.50 EC

Diazinon 379 379 0.01 0 0.02 EC


Dicofol 343 343 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Dimethoate 379 378 0.01 1 0.1 0 1.00 EC

Disulfotone(###) 343 343 0.02 0 0.02 EC

Endosulfan 379 370 0.01 4 1 1 1 1 1 3.5 3 0.05 EC

folpet 379 366 0.01 2 1 4 1 1 2 1 1 29.9 2.00 EC

captan+folpet 379 366 0,,01 2 1 4 1 1 2 1 1 29.9 1 2.00 EC

Imazalil 192 192 0.05 0.02 EC

Iprodione 379 261 0.01 1 6 8 14 12 20 17 17 13 9 1 10 0 10.00 EC

Lambda-cyhalothrin 379 359 0.01 4 1 6 4 4 1 0.21 0 1.00 EC

Malathion 379 379 0.01 3.00 EC

Maneb-group(##) 366 281 0.05 1 9 20 22 16 7 8 2 31 15 5.00 EC

Mecarbam 343 343 0.01 0.05 EC

Metalaxyl 335 331 0.02 1 1 2 0.82 0 1.00 EC

Methamidophos 294 279 0.01 5 2 4 3 1 0.45 1 0.20 EC


Omethoate 294 294 0.02 0 0.20 EC


Permethrin 343 343 0.01 0 2.00 EC

Phorate(###) 256 256 0.02 0 0.05 EC


Procymidone 379 315 0.01 4 4 6 6 11 16 7 5 4 1 10.8 1 5.00 EC

Propyzamide 256 249 0.01 1 3 1 1 1 2.5 1 1.00 EC

Thiabendazol 122 121 0.02 1 0.02 0 0.05 EC

Thiomethon(###) 246 246 0.02

Triazophos 379 379 0.01 0.05 EC

Vinclozolin 379 337 0.01 3 4 9 5 2 3 5 3 4 3 1 14.8 4 5.00 EC




Only add information regarding head cabbage and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns2001

Table B: Notifications of the co-ordinated programme (specific exercise) to the European CommissionRemark:





Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 105 105 0.01 0 0.02 EC



Benomyl group(#) 118 109 0.02 2 2 1 2 2 0.47 4 0.10 EC

captane 141 126 0.01 2 2 1 6 2 1 1 5 1 3 ECChlorothalonil 141 128 0.01 3 2 2 3 1 2 2.74 0 3.00 EC

Chlorpyriphos 141 140 0.01 1 0.02 0 0.20 EC


Deltamethrin 141 141 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Diazinon 141 141 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Dichlofluanid 141 138 0.01 2 1 0.68 0 10.00 EC

Dicofol 141 139 0.01 2 0.02 0 0.02 EC

Dimethoate 141 141 0.01 0 1.00 EC

Disulfotone(###) 118 118 0.02 0 0.02 EC

Endosulfan 141 124 0.01 8 4 2 3 0.07 3 0.05 EC

folpel 141 136 0.01 1 1 2 1 1.2 0 3.00 ECcaptan+folpet 141 121 3 2 2 8 2 2 1 5 1 3.00 EC

Imazalil 90 90 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Iprodione 141 121 0.01 1 2 3 3 7 3 1 2.25 0 10.00 EC

Lambda-cyhalothrin 141 137 0.01 1 3 0.01 0 0.50 EC

Malathion 141 138 0.01 3 0.01 0 0.50 EC

Maneb-group(##) 107 107 0.05 0 2 ECMecarbam 141 141 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Metalaxyl 117 117 0.02 0 0.50 EC

Methamidophos 141 139 0.01 1 1 0.09 1 0.01 EC


Omethoate 132 132 0.02 0 0.10 EC


Permethrin 141 141 0.01 0 1.00 EC

Phorate(###) 95 95 0.02 0 0.05 EC


Procymidone 141 124 0.01 3 1 1 5 3 3 1 1.1 0 5.00 EC

Propyzamide 105 105 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Thiabendazol 118 116 0.02 1 1 0.24 2 0.05 EC

Thiomethon(###) 105 105 0.02 0 EC

Triazophos 141 141 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Vinclozolin 141 131 0.01 1 1 4 1 3 0.17 0 5.00 EC





2001


Product group: Berries and small fruit Food item: Table grapes Remark:


Total number of samples analysed: 61 With residues above MRL (EC+national): 2Without detectable residues: 24 With residues above EC-MRL: 2With detectable residues at or below MRL With residues above national MRL: 0

or without MRL: 35


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 58 58 0.01 0 0.02 EC


Azoxystrobin 0 2.00 EC

Benomyl group(#) 61 54 0.02 1 3 1 1 1 0.46 0 2.00 EC

Captan 61 57 1 3 0.35 0 3.00 EC

Chlorothalonil 61 61 0.01 0.02 0 1.00 EC

Chlorpyriphos 61 55 0.01 1 2 2 1 0.06 0 0.50 EC


Deltamethrin 61 59 0.01 1 1 0.03 0 0.10 EC

Diazinon 61 61 0.01 0 0.02 EC


Dicofol 61 58 0.01 1 1 1 0.15 2 0.02 EC

Dimethoate 61 56 0.01 2 2 1 0.02 0 1.00 EC

Disulfotone(###) 39 39 0.02 0 0.02 EC

Endosulfan 61 61 0.01 0 0.50 EC

Folpel 61 48 3 4 2 2 2 1.63 0 3 ECCaptan+folpet 61 44 0.01 3 4 1 2 5 2 1.63 0 3.00 EC

Imazalil 39 39 0.02 0 0.02 EC

Iprodione 61 54 0.01 2 3 2 1.1 0 10.00 EC

Lambda-cyhalothrin 61 60 0.01 1 0.03 0 0.20 EC

Malathion 61 61 0.01 0 0.50 EC

Maneb-group(##) 61 60 0.05 1 0.75 0 2.00 EC

Mecarbam 61 61 0.01 0 0.05 EC

Metalaxyl 61 61 0.02 0 2.00 EC

Methamidophos 43 43 0.01 0 0.01 EC


Omethoate 58 56 0.02 1 1 0.06 0 0.10 EC


Permethrin 58 58 0.01 0 1.00 EC

Phorate(###) 39 39 0.02 0 0.05 EC


Procymidone 61 57 0.01 1 2 1 0.8 0 5.00 EC

Propyzamide 61 61 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Thiabendazol 54 54 0.02 0 0.05 EC

Thiomethon(###) 39 39 0.02 0 EC

Triazophos 61 61 0.01 0 0.02 EC

Vinclozolin 61 61 0.01 0 5.00 EC




Only add information regarding head cabbage and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns2001



Reporting country: Ireland Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 40 40 0.05Azinphosmethyl 40 40 0.10AzoxystrobinBenomyl group(#) 40 40 0.05Captan 40 30 0.02 2 5 1 1 1 0.68 0 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 40 39 0.02 1 0.02 0 1.00 EChlorpyriphos 40 39 0.06 1 0.12 0 0.50 WChlorpyriphos-methyl 40 40 0.05Deltamethrin 40 40 0.04Diazinon 40 40 0.04Dichlofluanid 40 40 0.02Dicofol 40 38 0.04 2 0.1 1 0.02 EDimethoate 40 36 0.04 2 2 0.2 0 1.00 EDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 40 38 0.03 1 1 0.11 0 0.30 EFolpet 40 40 0.02 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 40 30 0.02 2 5 1 1 1 0.68 0 3.00 EImazalilIprodione 40 40 0.07

Lambda-cyhalothrin 40 40 0.02Malathion 40 40 0.04Maneb-group(##)MecarbamMetalaxylMethamidophos 40 39 0.04 1 0.08 1 0.05 EMethidathion 40 40 0.04

Omethoate 40 40 0.04Oxydemethonmethyl(###)


Phorate(###)



Propyzamide 40 40 0.09Thiabendazol 40 36 0.05 1 1 2 0.87 0 5.00 ETriazophos 40 40 0.03Thiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 40 40 0.02xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001Only add information regarding apples and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 10 10 0.05Azinphosmethyl 10 10 0.10Azoxystrobin

Benomyl group(#) 10 10 0.05Captan 10 10 0.02 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 10 10 0.02




Diazinon 10 10 0.04


Dicofol 10 10 0.04


Disulfotone(###)


Folpet 10 10 0.02 xxxxxx

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 10 10 0.02ImazalilIprodione 10 10 0.07Lambda-cyhalothrin 10 10 0.02Malathion 10 10 0.04Maneb-group(##)MecarbamMetalaxylMethamidophos 10 10 0.04Methidathion 10 10 0.04Omethoate 10 10 0.04Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 10 10 0.20Phorate(###)Pirimiphos-methyl 10 10 0.05Procymidone 10 8 0.09 2 0.13 0 2.00 EPropyzamide 10 10 0.09Thiabendazol 10 10 0.05Triazophos 10 10 0.03Thiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 10 9 0.02 1 0.02 0 3.00 E



2001





Total number of samples analysed: 37 With residues above MRL (EC+national): 1

Without detectable residues: 23 With residues above EC-MRL: 1

With detectable residues at or below MRL With residues above national MRL: 0or without MRL: 13


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 37 36 0.05 1 0.05 0 1.00 EAzinphosmethyl 37 37 0.10AzoxystrobinBenomyl group(#) 37 36 0.05 1 0.13 0 5.00 ECaptan 37 37 0.02 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 37 36 0.02 1 0.07 1 0.05 EChlorpyriphos 37 37 0.06Chlorpyriphos-methyl 37 37 0.05Deltamethrin 37 37 0.04Diazinon 37 37 0.04Dichlofluanid 37 36 0.02 1 0.21 0 10.00 EDicofol 37 37 0.04Dimethoate 37 33 0.04 1 1 2 0.26 0 1.00 EDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 37 37 0.03Folpet 37 37 0.02 xxxxxxCaptan+Folpet (Sum) 37 37 0.02ImazalilIprodione 37 31 0.07 1 2 1 1 1 4.9 0 10.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 37 37 0.02Malathion 37 37 0.04Maneb-group(##)Mecarbam 37 37MetalaxylMethamidophos 37 37 0.04Methidathion 37 37 0.04

Omethoate 37 34 0.04 2 1 0.11 0 0.50 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 37 37 0.20Phorate(###)Pirimiphos-methyl 37 37 0.05





Thiomethon(###)






2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 5 5 0.05


Azoxystrobin


Captan 5 5 0.02 xxxxxx





Diazinon 5 5 0.04


Dicofol 5 5 0.04

Dimethoate 5 5 0.04

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 5 5 0.03


Captan+Folpet (Sum) 5 5 0.02

Imazalil

Iprodione 5 3 0.07 1 1 0.29 0 10.00 E


Malathion 5 5 0.04

Maneb-group(##)

Mecarbam

Metalaxyl



Omethoate 5 5 0.04


Permethrin 5 5 0.20

Phorate(###)





Triazophos 5 5 0.03

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 5 4 0.02 1 0.99 0 5.00 E





2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 4 4 0.05


Azoxystrobin


Captan 4 2 0.02 1 1 2.43 0 3.00 E





Diazinon 4 4 0.04


Dicofol 4 4 0.04

Dimethoate 4 4 0.04

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 4 4 0.03


Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 4 4 0.02

Imazalil

Iprodione 4 4 0.07


Malathion 4 4 0.04

Maneb-group(##)

Mecarbam

Metalaxyl



Omethoate 4 4 0.04


Permethrin 4 4 0.20

Phorate(###)





Triazophos 4 4 0.03

Thiomethon(###)






2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 395 392 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,16 0 1 EAzinphosmethyl 445 394 6 8 14 11 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,33 0 0,5 EAzoxystrobin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 262 248 1 1 3 4 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,6 0 2 ECaptan 262 188 1 6 6 11 24 12 6 6 2 0 0 0 0 5 1Chlorothalonil 444 443 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,4 0 1 EChlorpyriphos 456 345 28 25 33 16 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,34 0 0,5 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 453 422 8 7 10 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,13 0 0,5 EDeltamethrin 339 339 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,1 EDiazinon 465 461 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,08 0 0,3 EDichlofluanid 401 377 2 8 2 6 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,44 0 5 EDicofol 334 334 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EDimethoate 430 428 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,01 0 1 EDisulfotone(###) 129 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EEndosulfan 353 348 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,03 0 0,3 EFolpet 163 161 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,04 0Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 425 349 1 6 8 11 24 12 6 6 2 0 0 0 0 5 1 3 EImazalil 424 424 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 5 EIprodione 420 414 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1,89 0 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 119 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,1 EMalathion 468 468 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 EManeb-group(##) 270 239 0 0 0 0 0 6 20 4 1 0 0 0 0 2,8 0 3 EMecarbam 136 136 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EMetalaxyl 274 271 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,23 0 1 EMethamidophos 358 357 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,01 0 0,05 EMethidathion 466 464 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,07 0 0,3 EOmethoate 405 403 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,04 0 0,2 EOxydemethonmethyl(###) 31 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,4 EPermethrin 248 248 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 EPhorate(###) 398 398 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EPirimiphos-methyl 429 429 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EProcymidone 429 416 0 5 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,36 8 0,02 EPropyzamide 154 154 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EThiabendazol 303 278 0 0 1 2 1 4 11 5 1 0 0 0 0 2,15 0 5 ETriazophos 47 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EThiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 446 445 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,02 0 1 E



ITALY 2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 148 147 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,06 0 0,5 EAzinphosmethyl 216 215 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,12 0 0,5 EAzoxystrobin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 2 EBenomyl group(#) 102 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 ECaptan 107 107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0Chlorothalonil 239 223 5 2 2 4 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1,1 0 2 EChlorpyriphos 246 244 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,05 0 0,5 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 238 236 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,2 0 0,5 EDeltamethrin 193 193 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,2 EDiazinon 249 249 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 EDichlofluanid 184 177 1 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,45 0 5 EDicofol 155 151 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,5 0 1 EDimethoate 189 189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 EDisulfotone(###) 27 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EEndosulfan 156 153 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,04 0 0,5 EFolpet 85 85 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0Captan+Folpet (Sum) 192 192 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 3.00 EImazalil 183 183 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 EIprodione 206 206 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 5 ELambda-cyhalothrin 47 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 EMalathion 258 258 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 3 EManeb-group(##) 153 144 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 1,4 0 3 EMecarbam 87 87 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EMetalaxyl 202 202 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EMethamidophos 155 155 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 EMethidathion 221 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EOmethoate 178 177 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,1 0 0,2 EOxydemethonmethyl(###) 27 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,4 EPermethrin 115 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 EPhorate(###) 221 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EPirimiphos-methyl 248 248 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 EProcymidone 249 228 2 2 8 2 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,8 0 2 EPropyzamide 157 157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EThiabendazol 126 126 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 ETriazophos 41 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EThiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 242 242 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 E



Only add information regarding tomatoes and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns

ITALY 2001






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 83 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 EAzinphosmethyl 124 124 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 EAzoxystrobin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 32 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 5 ECaptan 64 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0Chlorothalonil 129 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,01 EChlorpyriphos 132 130 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,76 1 0,05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 132 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EDeltamethrin 97 95 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,07 0 0,5 EDiazinon 132 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EDichlofluanid 111 110 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,09 0 10 EDicofol 81 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EDimethoate 101 99 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,09 0 1 EDisulfotone(###) 18 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EEndosulfan (a) 78 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0,05 EFolpet 51 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0Captan+Folpet (Sum) 115 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 2 EImazalil 79 79 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EIprodione 123 118 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 4,4 0 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 27 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 EMalathion 132 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 3 EManeb-group(##) 80 79 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2,3 0 5 EMecarbam 45 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EMetalaxyl 100 96 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,4 0 1 EMethamidophos 89 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,2 EMethidathion 119 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EOmethoate 102 98 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,18 0 0,2 EOxydemethonmethyl(###) 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,4 EPermethrin 51 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 2 EPhorate(###) 116 115 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,03 0 0,05 EPirimiphos-methyl 125 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EProcymidone 129 103 1 1 6 1 6 7 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1,97 0 5 EPropyzamide 84 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 EThiabendazol 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 ETriazophos 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EThiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 130 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 5 E



(a) The sample must be considered as regular because the MRL was 1 mg/Kg when analysed.

ITALY 2001

Only add information regarding lettuce and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 175 173 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,21 2 0,02 EAzinphosmethyl 215 213 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,19 0 0,5 EAzoxystrobin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 101 100 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,03 0 0,1 ECaptan 98 96 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1,03 0Chlorothalonil 220 216 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,57 0 3 EChlorpyriphos 216 214 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,04 0 0,2 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 216 207 2 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,09 0 0,5 EDeltamethrin 185 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EDiazinon 219 219 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EDichlofluanid 202 190 1 5 2 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,88 0 10 EDicofol (a) 188 185 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,14 1 0,02 EDimethoate 197 197 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 EDisulfotone(###) 17 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EEndosulfan (b) 189 184 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,18 1 0,05 EFolpet 93 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0Captan+Folpet (Sum) 191 189 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.03 0 3 EImazalil 205 205 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EIprodione 210 191 0 1 6 1 4 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 1,7 0 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 EMalathion 223 222 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,29 0 0,5 EManeb-group(##) 90 84 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,9 0 2 EMecarbam 62 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EMetalaxyl 172 170 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,02 0 0,5 EMethamidophos 172 170 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,45 2 0,01 EMethidathion 202 202 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EOmethoate 185 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,1 EOxydemethonmethyl(###) 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,4 EPermethrin 116 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 EPhorate(###) 197 197 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EPirimiphos-methyl 216 216 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 EProcymidone 218 134 5 10 16 11 20 10 8 2 2 0 0 0 0 2,32 0 5 EPropyzamide 168 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EThiabendazol 107 106 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,06 1 0,05 ETriazophos 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 EThiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 222 222 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 5 E

xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet) (a) One of these samples must be considered as regular because the MRL was 2 mg/Kg when analysed.(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


(b) One of these samples must be considered as regular because the MRL was 1 mg/Kg when analysed.

ITALY 2001

Only add information regarding strawberries and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 103 102 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,01 0 0,02 E

Azinphosmethyl 125 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 E

Azoxystrobin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 2 E

Benomyl group(#) 74 71 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,58 0 2 E

Captan 59 57 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,88 0

Chlorothalonil 125 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 1 E

Chlorpyriphos 127 104 2 5 9 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,48 0 0,5 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 127 119 4 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,11 0 0,2 E

Deltamethrin 104 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,1 E

Diazinon 131 131 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 E

Dichlofluanid 108 107 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,02 0 10 E

Dicofol 99 97 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,36 0 2 E

Dimethoate 122 119 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,9 0 1 E

Disulfotone(###) 19 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 E

Endosulfan 101 100 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,01 0 0,5 E

Folpet 57 56 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,08 0

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 116 113 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.88 0 3 E

Imazalil 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 E

Iprodione 120 107 0 0 1 0 2 5 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 4,7 0 10 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,2 E

Malathion 134 133 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,01 0 0,5 E

Maneb-group(##) 68 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,9 0 2 E

Mecarbam 64 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 E

Metalaxyl 107 102 0 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,37 0 2 E

Methamidophos 103 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,01 E

Methidathion 128 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,5 E

Omethoate 107 106 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,03 0 0,2 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,4 E

Permethrin 53 52 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,04 0 1 E

Phorate(###) 107 107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 E

Pirimiphos-methyl 130 129 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,05 0 0,05 E

Procymidone 129 101 5 1 4 4 4 8 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2,43 0 5 E

Propyzamide 72 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 E

Thiabendazol 88 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,05 E

Triazophos 14 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.d. 0 0,02 E

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 129 127 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,09 0 5 E





ITALY 2001

Only add information regarding table grapes and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns



Reporting country: LU Year of sampling: Remark:


or without MRL: 7


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 0Azinphosmethyl 21 21 0.02Azoxystrobin 0Benomyl group(#) 0Captan 21 17 0.10 1 1 2 0.64 0 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 21 21 0.01Chlorpyriphos 21 20 0.05 1 0.16 0 0.50 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 21 21 0.05Deltamethrin 21 21 0.05Diazinon 21 21 0.02Dichlofluanid 21 21 0.05Dicofol 21 20 0.02 1 0.34 1 1.0 till Jun EDimethoate 21 21 0.05Disulfotone(###)Endosulfan 21 21 0.01Folpet 21 21 0.10 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 21 17 1 1 2 0.64 0 3.00 EImazalil 21 21 0.02Iprodione 21 21 0.05


Malathion 21 21 0.02Maneb-group(##) 0Mecarbam 21 21 0.05Metalaxyl 21 21 0.05






Phorate(###) 0.10Pirimiphos-methyl 21 21 0.05


Propyzamide 21 21 0.02Thiabendazol 21 20 0.20 1 1.96Triazophos 21 21 0.02Thiomethon(###) 0Vinclozolin 21 21 0.05xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001







or without MRL: 5


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 0Azinphosmethyl 15 15 0.02Azoxystrobin 0

Benomyl group(#) 0

Captan 15 15 0.10 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 15 14 0.01 1 0.39 0 2.00 EChlorpyriphos 15 15 0.05



Diazinon 15 15 0.02

Dichlofluanid 15 14 0.05 1 0.15 0 5.00 E

Dicofol 15 15 0.02


Disulfotone(###)Endosulfan 15 14 0.01 1 0.93 0 1.0 till Jun E


Captan+Folpet (Sum) 15 15Imazalil 15 15 0.02Iprodione 15 15 0.05Lambda-cyhalothrin 15 15 0.02Malathion 15 15 0.02Maneb-group(##) 0Mecarbam 15 15 0.05Metalaxyl 15 15 0.05Methamidophos 15 15 0.01Methidathion 15 15 0.02Omethoate 15 15 0.02Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 15 15 0.05Permethrin 15 15 0.05Phorate(###) 0.10Pirimiphos-methyl 15 15 0.05Procymidone 15 13 0.02 2 0.16 0 2.00 EPropyzamide 15 15 0.02Thiabendazol 15 15 0.20Triazophos 15 15 0.02Thiomethon(###) 0Vinclozolin 15 15 0.05



2001






With detectable residues at or below MRL With residues above national MRL: 1or without MRL: 10


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 0Azinphosmethyl 20 20 0.02Azoxystrobin 0Benomyl group(#) 0Captan 20 20 0.10 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 20 20 0.01Chlorpyriphos 20 20 0.05Chlorpyriphos-methyl 20 20 0.05Deltamethrin 20 20 0.05Diazinon 20 20 0.02Dichlofluanid 20 20 0.05Dicofol 20 20 0.02Dimethoate 20 20 0.05Disulfotone(###)Endosulfan 20 20 0.01Folpet 20 20 0.10 xxxxxxCaptan+Folpet (Sum) 20 20Imazalil 20 20 0.02Iprodione 20 11 0.05 2 1 5 1 6.8 0 10.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 20 20 0.02Malathion 20 20 0.02Maneb-group(##) 0Mecarbam 20 20 0.05Metalaxyl 20 19 0.05 1 0.28 1 0.10 N till Jun, E (1.0) after

Methamidophos 20 20 0.01Methidathion 20 20 0.02


Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 20 20 0.05Permethrin 20 19 0.05 1 0.28 0 2.00 EPhorate(###) 0.10Pirimiphos-methyl 20 20 0.05

Procymidone 20 15 0.02 3 1 1 0.9 0 5.00 E




Thiomethon(###) 0

Vinclozolin 20 19 0.05 1 0.49 0 5.00 E





2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 0


Azoxystrobin 0

Benomyl group(#) 0


Chlorothalonil 17 16 0.01 1 0.09 0 3.00 E




Diazinon 17 17 0.02


Dicofol 17 17 0.02


Disulfotone(###)



Captan+Folpet (Sum) 17 17

Imazalil 17 17 0.02



Malathion 17 16 0.02 1 0.06 0 0.50 E

Maneb-group(##) 0

Mecarbam 17 17 0.05

Metalaxyl 17 14 0.05 1 1 1 2.56 2 0.50 E






Phorate(###) 0.10


Procymidone 17 15 0.02 1 1 0.04 0 5.00 E




Thiomethon(###) 0






2001







or without MRL: 4


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 0


Azoxystrobin 0

Benomyl group(#) 0






Diazinon 14 14 0.02


Dicofol 14 14 0.02


Disulfotone(###)


Folpet 14 12 0.10 1 1 0.23 xxxxxx

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 14 12 1 1 0.23 0 3.00 E

Imazalil 14 14 0.02




Maneb-group(##) 0

Mecarbam 14 14 0.05

Metalaxyl 14 13 0.05 1 0.11 0 2.00 E






Phorate(###) 0.10


Procymidone 14 13 0.02 1 0.07 0 5.00 E




Thiomethon(###) 0

Vinclozolin 14 13 0.05 1 0.5 0 5.00 E





2001




Reporting country: The Netherlands Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 129 129 0.02Azinphosmethyl 129 116 0.02 1 3 6 2 1 0.24 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 129 129 0.05Benomyl group(#) 68 68 0.05Captan 129 78 0.03 6 17 9 6 7 6 0.9 xxxxxx EChlorothalonil 129 128 0.01 1 0.03 1.00Chlorpyriphos 129 126 0.03 3 0.05 0.50 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 129 129 0.03Deltamethrin 129 128 0.02 1 0.01 0.10 EDiazinon 129 129 0.02Dichlofluanid 129 129 0.02Dicofol 129 128 0.02 1 0.02 1.00 EDimethoate 129 129 0.03Disulfotone(###)Endosulfan 129 126 0.01 1 1 1 0.34 0.30 EFolpet 129 129 0.03 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 129 78 6 17 9 6 7 6 0.9 3.00 EImazalil 129 128 0.05 1 0.18 5.00 EIprodione 129 128 0.02 1 0.56 10.00 E


Malathion 129 129 0.02Maneb-group(##) 6 6 0.05 0 3.00 EMecarbam 129 129 0.02Metalaxyl 129 129 0.03






Phorate(###) 0Pirimiphos-methyl 129 129 0.03

Procymidone 129 128 0.02 1 0.06 1 0.02 E

Propyzamide 0.02Thiabendazol 129 113 0.02 3 2 6 4 1 3 5.00 ETriazophos 129 129 0.02Thiomethon(###) 0Vinclozolin 129 129 0.03xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)


Benomyl group(#) 61 60 0.05 1 0.06 0.50 E

Captan 109 109 0.03 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 109 102 0.01 1 3 2 1 0.55 2.00 EChlorpyriphos 109 109 0.03



Diazinon 109 109 0.02

Dichlofluanid 109 108 0.02 1 0.04 5.00 E

Dicofol 109 109 0.02


Disulfotone(###)Endosulfan 109 102 0.01 1 2 2 2 0.19 0.50 E

Folpet 109 108 0.03 1 0.21 xxxxxx

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 109 108 1 0.21 3.00 EImazalil 109 109 0.05Iprodione 109 107 0.02 1 1 0.16 5.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 109 108 0.03 1 0.09 1 0.05 EMalathion 109 109 0.02Maneb-group(##) 5 5 0.05 0 3.00 EMecarbam 109 109 0.02Metalaxyl 109 108 0.03 1 0.03 0.05 EMethamidophos 109 109 0.02Methidathion 109 109 0.02Omethoate 109 109 0.02Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 109 107 0.03 1 1 0.11 0.50 EPhorate(###)Pirimiphos-methyl 109 109 0.03Procymidone 109 101 0.02 2 3 3 0.17 2.00 EPropyzamide 109 109 0.02Thiabendazol 109 108 0.02 1 0.06 2.00 ETriazophos 109 109 0.02Thiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 109 108 0.03 1 0.02 3.00 E



2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 134 134 0.02Azinphosmethyl 134 134 0.02Azoxystrobin 134 134 0.05Benomyl group(#) 75 71 0.05 3 1 0.21 5.00 ECaptan 134 134 0.03 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 134 134 0.01Chlorpyriphos 134 134 0.03Chlorpyriphos-methyl 134 134 0.03Deltamethrin 134 127 0.02 1 1 3 2 0.32 0.50 EDiazinon 134 134 0.02Dichlofluanid 134 134 0.02Dicofol 134 134 0.02Dimethoate 134 127 0.03 1 3 2 1 0.46 1.00 EDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 134 133 0.01 1 0.03 1.00 EFolpet 134 134 0.03 xxxxxxCaptan+Folpet (Sum) 134 134Imazalil 134 134 0.05Iprodione 134 94 0.02 3 1 3 3 9 9 7 3 2 16 1 10.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 134 134 0.03Malathion 134 134 0.02Maneb-group(##) 15 12 0.05 1 1 1 0.6 5.00 EMecarbam 134 134 0.02Metalaxyl 134 120 0.03 1 10 2 1 0.26 1.00 EMethamidophos 134 134 0.02Methidathion 134 134 0.02

Omethoate 134 133 0.02 1 0.02 0.20 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 134 134 0.03Phorate(###)Pirimiphos-methyl 134 134 0.03

Procymidone 134 126 0.02 1 3 3 1 0.23 5.00 E




Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 134 101 0.03 3 4 5 7 8 6 1.9 5.00 E





2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 128 128 0.02



Benomyl group(#) 45 35 0.05 2 2 5 1 0.37 3.00 E

Captan 128 109 0.03 4 6 4 5 0.5 xxxxxx E

Chlorothalonil 128 123 0.01 1 1 2 1 1.5 3.00 E

Chlorpyriphos 129 128 0.03 1 0.03 0.20 E


Deltamethrin 128 127 0.02 1 0.04 0.05 E

Diazinon 128 128 0.02

Dichlofluanid 128 123 0.02 1 1 1 2 0.18 10.00 E

Dicofol 128 126 0.02 1 1 0.35 2.00 E

Dimethoate 129 128 0.03 1 0.09 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 128 123 0.01 1 2 2 0.09 0.05 E

Folpet 128 127 0.03 1 0.56 xxxxxx

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 128 108 4 6 4 5 1 0.56 3.00 E

Imazalil 128 128 0.05

Iprodione 129 109 0.02 3 2 4 4 5 2 1.6 10.00 E



Maneb-group(##) 128 128 0.05

Mecarbam 128 128 0.02







Phorate(###)


Procymidone 129 125 0.02 1 1 2 0.3 5.00 E


Thiabendazol 129 125 0.02 1 1 2 0.3 5.00 E


Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 129 125 0.03 1 1 1 1 0.55 5.00 E





2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 181 181 0.02

Azinphosmethyl 181 179 0.02 1 1 0.97 1.00 E


Benomyl group(#) 70 65 0.05 2 2 1 0.31 2.00 E

Captan 181 155 0.03 1 1 1 3 4 7 6 2 1 3.2 xxxxxx E


Chlorpyriphos 181 169 0.03 1 1 3 5 1 1 1.2 1 0.50 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 181 173 0.03 4 2 1 1 0.22 0.20 E

Deltamethrin 181 179 0.02 1 1 0.03 0.10 E

Diazinon 181 181 0.02

Dichlofluanid 181 178 0.02 1 2 0.42 10.00 E

Dicofol 181 175 0.02 1 1 3 1 0.33 2.00 E

Dimethoate 181 168 0.03 3 5 4 1 0.26 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###)


Folpet 181 174 0.03 1 3 1 1 1 1.1 xxxxxx E

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 181 148 1 2 4 3 5 8 6 3 1 3.2 3.00

Imazalil 181 181 0.05

Iprodione 181 148 0.02 2 6 9 9 5 1 1 2.2 10.00 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 181 180 0.03 1 0.3 1 0.20 E

Malathion 181 180 0.02 1 0.03 0.50 E

Maneb-group(##) 6 5 0.05 1 0.71 3.00 E

Mecarbam 181 181 0.02

Metalaxyl 181 170 0.03 2 6 3 0.15 2.00 E



Omethoate 181 178 0.02 1 1 1 0.06 0.10 E



Phorate(###)

Pirimiphos-methyl 181 180 0.03 1 0.18 1 0.05 E

Procymidone 181 159 0.02 1 4 2 9 5 1 1.3 5.00 E


Thiabendazol 181 179 0.02 2 0.03 0.05 E


Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 181 178 0.03 2 1 0.32 5.00 E





2001




Reporting country: Austria Year of sampling: Remark:

Total number of samples analysed: 12 With residues above MRL (EC+national):

Without detectable residues: 3 With residues above EC-MRL:


or without MRL: 9


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 12 12 0,01;0,02Azinphosmethyl 12 11 0,05;0,1 1 0.08Azoxystrobin 5 5 0.05Benomyl group(#) 12 12 0.10Captan 11 7 0,05;0,1 1 2 1 0.8 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 11 11 0.01Chlorpyriphos 12 12 0,01;0,02Chlorpyriphos-methyl 12 12 0,01;0,02Deltamethrin 12 12 0.05Diazinon 12 12 0,01;0,02Dichlofluanid 11 11 0,02;0,03Dicofol 11 11 0.05Dimethoate 12 10 0,01;0,02 2 0.037Disulfotone(###) 12 12 0,02;0,04Endosulfan 12 11 0.01 1 0.038Folpet 11 11 0.10 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 11 7 0.10 1 2 1 0.8Imazalil 11 11 0,05;0,1Iprodione 11 11 0,02;0,04


Malathion 12 12 0,02;0,03Maneb-group(##) 12 10 0,02;0,2 1 1 0.09Mecarbam 12 12 0,01;0,02Metalaxyl 11 11 0,03;0,05

Methamidophos 12 12 0,01;0,02


Omethoate 12 12 0,02;0,05



Phorate(###) 12 12 0,01;0,02Pirimiphos-methyl 12 12 0,01;0,02

Procymidone 11 10 0,01;0,05 1 0.028

Propyzamide 11 11 0.05Thiabendazol 6 6 0.01Triazophos 12 12 0,01;0,02Thiomethon(###) 6 6 0.02Vinclozolin 11 11 0.01xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001








or without MRL: 5


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 12 12 0,01;0,02Azinphosmethyl 12 12 0,05;0,1Azoxystrobin 6 6 0.05


Captan 12 12 0,05;0,1 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 12 11 0.01 1 0.03Chlorpyriphos 12 12 0,01;0,02

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 12 12 0,01;0,02


Diazinon 12 12 0,01;0,02

Dichlofluanid 12 12 0,02;0,03

Dicofol 12 12 0.05

Dimethoate 12 12 0,01;0,02

Disulfotone(###) 12 12 0,02;0,04Endosulfan 12 11 0.01 1 0.13


Captan+Folpet (Sum) 12 12 0.10Imazalil 12 12 0,05;0,1Iprodione 12 12 0,02;0,04Lambda-cyhalothrin 12 12 0.05Malathion 12 12 0,02;0,03Maneb-group(##) 12 10 0,02;0,2 1 1 0.15Mecarbam 12 12 0,01;0,02Metalaxyl 12 12 0,03;0,05Methamidophos 12 12 0,01;0,02Methidathion 12 12 0.02Omethoate 12 12 0,02;0,05Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 12 12 0.05Phorate(###) 12 12 0,01;0,02Pirimiphos-methyl 12 12 0,01;0,02Procymidone 12 10 0,01;0,05 1 1 0.19Propyzamide 12 12 0.05Thiabendazol 6 6 0.01Triazophos 12 12 0,01;0,02Thiomethon(###) 6 6 0.02Vinclozolin 12 12 0.01



2001






or without MRL: 5


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 12 12 0,01;0,02Azinphosmethyl 12 12 0,05;0,1Azoxystrobin 6 5 0.05 1 1.70 1 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 12 12 0.10Captan 12 12 0,05;0,1 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 12 12 0.01Chlorpyriphos 12 12 0,01;0,02Chlorpyriphos-methyl 12 12 0,01;0,02Deltamethrin 12 12 0.05Diazinon 12 12 0,01;0,02Dichlofluanid 12 12 0,02;0,03Dicofol 12 12 0.05Dimethoate 12 11 0,01;0,02 1 0.039Disulfotone(###) 12 12 0,02;0,04Endosulfan 12 12 0.01Folpet 12 12 0.10 xxxxxxCaptan+Folpet (Sum) 12 12 0.10Imazalil 12 12 0,05;0,1Iprodione 12 12 0,02;0,04Lambda-cyhalothrin 12 11 0.05 1 0.31Malathion 12 12 0,02;0,03Maneb-group(##) 12 9 0,02;0,2 1 2 0.28Mecarbam 12 12 0,01;0,02Metalaxyl 12 12 0,03;0,05Methamidophos 12 12 0,01;0,02Methidathion 12 12 0.02

Omethoate 12 12 0,02;0,05

Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 12 12 0.05Phorate(###) 12 12 0,01;0,02Pirimiphos-methyl 12 12 0,01;0,02

Procymidone 12 12 0,01;0,05



Triazophos 12 12 0,01;0,02

Thiomethon(###) 6 6 0.02






2001








or without MRL: 4


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 12 12 0,01;0,02

Azinphosmethyl 12 12 0,05;0,1



Captan 12 12 0,05;0,1 xxxxxx


Chlorpyriphos 12 12 0,01;0,02



Diazinon 12 12 0,01;0,02

Dichlofluanid 12 10 0,02;0,03 2 0.1

Dicofol 12 12 0.05

Dimethoate 12 12 0,01;0,02

Disulfotone(###) 12 12 0,02;0,04

Endosulfan 12 11 0.01 1 0.03



Imazalil 12 12 0,05;0,1

Iprodione 12 12 0,02;0,04


Malathion 12 12 0,02;0,03

Maneb-group(##) 12 12 0,02;0,2

Mecarbam 12 12 0,01;0,02

Metalaxyl 12 12 0,03;0,05



Omethoate 12 12 0,02;0,05



Phorate(###) 12 12 0,01;0,02

Pirimiphos-methyl 12 12 0,01;0,02

Procymidone 12 12 0,01;0,05



Triazophos 12 12 0,01;0,02


Vinclozolin 12 11 0.01 1 0.021





2001






or without MRL: 8


Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 12 12 0,01;0,02

Azinphosmethyl 12 12 0,05;0,1


Benomyl group(#) 12 10 0.10 1 1 3.65 1 2.00 E

Captan 12 12 0,05;0,1 xxxxxx


Chlorpyriphos 12 10 0,01;0,02 1 1 0.29



Diazinon 12 12 0,01;0,02

Dichlofluanid 12 12 0,02;0,03

Dicofol 12 12 0.05

Dimethoate 12 12 0,01;0,02

Disulfotone(###) 12 12 0,02;0,04


Folpet 12 11 0.10 1 0.11 xxxxxx

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 12 11 0.10 1 0.11

Imazalil 12 12 0,05;0,1

Iprodione 12 10 0,02;0,04 1 1 1.8


Malathion 12 12 0,02;0,03

Maneb-group(##) 12 10 0,02;0,2 1 1 0.08

Mecarbam 12 12 0,01;0,02

Metalaxyl 12 12 0,03;0,05



Omethoate 12 12 0,02;0,05



Phorate(###) 12 12 0,01;0,02

Pirimiphos-methyl 12 12 0,01;0,02

Procymidone 12 11 0,01;0,05 1 0.014



Triazophos 12 12 0,01;0,02







2001




Reporting country: Portugal Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 50 50 0.02 0Azinphosmethyl 50 48 0.05 1 1 0.40 0 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 49 49 0.05 0Benomyl group(#) 32 26 0.1 1 5 0.45 0 2.00 ECaptan 49 38 0.05 2 3 4 2 1.6 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 49 49 0.01 0Chlorpyriphos 50 46 0.05 4 0.09 0 0.30 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 50 50 0.02 0Deltamethrin 49 49 0.05 0Diazinon 50 50 0.02 0Dichlofluanid 49 49 0.05 0Dicofol 49 49 0.05 0Dimethoate 49 44 0.02 1 1 3 0.43 0 1.00 EDisulfotone(###) 0Endosulfan 49 49 0.05 0Folpet 49 47 0.05 2 4.1 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 49 36 2 3 4 2 2 4.1 1 3.00 EImazalil 49 49 0.1 0Iprodione 49 49 0.02 0

Lambda-cyhalothrin 49 49 0.02 0

Malathion 49 48 0.02 1 0.07 0 0.50 EManeb-group(##) 1 1 0.2 0Mecarbam 49 49 0.05 0Metalaxyl 49 49 0.05 0

Methamidophos 50 50 0.01 0

Methidathion 50 50 0.02 0

Omethoate 49 49 0.02 0


Permethrin 49 49 0.05 0

Phorate(###) 0 0Pirimiphos-methyl 50 50 0.05 0

Procymidone 49 49 0.02 0

Propyzamide 49 49 0.05 0Thiabendazol 49 49 0,1-0,2 0Triazophos 49 49 0.02 0Thiomethon(###) 0Vinclozolin 49 49 0.02 0xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 41 41 0.02 0Azinphosmethyl 66 66 0.05 0Azoxystrobin 41 41 0.05 0

Benomyl group(#) 29 28 0.1 1 0.12 0 0.5 E

Captan 66 65 0.05 1 0.25 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 41 41 0.01 0Chlorpyriphos 66 65 0.02 1 0.04 0 0.5 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 66 66 0.05 0

Deltamethrin 66 66 0.05 0

Diazinon 66 66 0.02 0

Dichlofluanid 41 41 0.05 0

Dicofol 66 64 0.05 2 0.13 0 1 E

Dimethoate 66 66 0.02 0

Disulfotone(###) 0Endosulfan 66 63 0.05 1 2 0.30 0 0.5 E


Captan+Folpet (Sum) 66 65 1 0.25 0 3 EImazalil 41 41 0.1 0Iprodione 66 66 0.02 0Lambda-cyhalothrin 66 66 0.02 0Malathion 66 66 0.02 0Maneb-group(##) 26 14 0.05 1 5 2 3 1 1.6 0 3 EMecarbam 41 41 0.05 0Metalaxyl 66 66 0.05 0Methamidophos 41 41 0.01 0Methidathion 66 66 0.02 0Omethoate 41 41 0.02 0Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0Permethrin 66 65 0.05 1 0.12 0 0.5 EPhorate(###) 0Pirimiphos-methyl 66 66 0.05 0Procymidone 66 59 0.02 3 3 1 0.61 0 2 EPropyzamide 41 41 0.05 0Thiabendazol 66 66 0.2 0Triazophos 66 66 0.02 0Thiomethon(###) 25 25 0.05 0Vinclozolin 66 66 0.02 0



2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 32 30 0.02 1 1 0.53 0 1 EAzinphosmethyl 62 62 0.05 0Azoxystrobin 32 32 0.05 0Benomyl group(#) 32 27 0.1 1 1 1 2 2.0 0 5 ECaptan 62 61 0.05 1 0.89 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 32 31 0.01 1 0.86 1 0.01 EChlorpyriphos 62 61 0.05 1 0.14 1 0.05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 62 62 0.05 0Deltamethrin 62 62 0.05 0Diazinon 62 61 0.02 1 0.02 0 0.02 EDichlofluanid 32 32 0.05 0Dicofol 62 62 0.05 0Dimethoate 62 62 0.02 0Disulfotone(###) 0Endosulfan 62 60 0.05 2 0.86 0 1 a) EFolpet 62 61 0.05 1 2.0 xxxxxxCaptan+Folpet (Sum) 62 60 1 1 2.0 0 2 EImazalil 32 32 0.1 0Iprodione 62 61 0.02 1 5.8 0 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 62 62 0.02 0Malathion 62 62 0.02 0Maneb-group(##) 85 59 0.05 5 4 6 7 2 2 19.5 4 5 EMecarbam 32 32 0.05 0Metalaxyl 62 62 0.05 0Methamidophos 32 29 0.01 2 1 0.10 0 0.20 EMethidathion 62 62 0.02 0


Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0Permethrin 62 62 0.05 0Phorate(###) 0Pirimiphos-methyl 62 62 0.05 0

Procymidone 62 61 0.02 1 2.0 0 5 E

Propyzamide 32 32 0.05 0

Thiabendazol 62 62 0.2 0

Triazophos 62 62 0.02 0

Thiomethon(###) 30 30 0.05 0

Vinclozolin 62 60 0.02 1 1 6.0 1 5 E

xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet) a) Sampling before directive EC/42/00 came into force




2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 18 18 0.02 0

Azinphosmethyl 21 21 0.05 0

Azoxystrobin 17 17 0.05 0

Benomyl group(#) 17 14 0.1 1 1 1 0.52 0 2 a) N

Captan 20 18 0.05 1 1 1.1 xxxxxx

Chlorothalonil 17 17 0.01 0

Chlorpyriphos 21 21 0.05 0



Diazinon 21 21 0.02 0


Dicofol 20 19 0.05 1 0.07 0 2 a) E

Dimethoate 21 20 0.02 1 0.55 0 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###) 0

Endosulfan 20 19 0.05 1 0.21 1 0.05 E

Folpet 20 19 0.05 1 0.26 xxxxxx

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 20 17 1 1 1 1.1 0 3 E

Imazalil 17 17 0.1 0

Iprodione 20 19 0.02 1 0.10 0 10 E


Malathion 21 21 0.02 0

Maneb-group(##) 4 4 0.05 0

Mecarbam 17 17 0.05 0

Metalaxyl 20 20 0.05 0

Methamidophos 18 17 0.01 1 0.12 1 0.01 E





Phorate(###) 0

Pirimiphos-methyl 21 21 0.05 0

Procymidone 20 19 0.02 1 0.35 0 5 E




Thiomethon(###) 3 3 0.05 0

Vinclozolin 20 19 0.02 1 0.72 0 5 E

xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet) a) Sampling before directive EC/42/00 came into force




2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 77 77 0.02 0


Azoxystrobin 76 71 0.02 1 1 3 0.07 0 2 E

Benomyl group(#) 76 73 0.1 3 0.18 0 2 E

Captan 86 79 0.05 2 1 3 1 1.6 xxxxxx

Chlorothalonil 76 76 0.02 0

Chlorpyriphos 87 85 0.05 1 1 0.08 0 0.5 E



Diazinon 87 87 0.02 0


Dicofol 86 86 0.05 0

Dimethoate 86 82 0.02 4 0.02 0 1 E

Disulfotone(###) 0

Endosulfan 86 86 0.05 0

Folpet 86 85 0.05 1 1.3 xxxxxx

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 86 78 2 1 3 2 1.6 0 3 E

Imazalil 76 76 0.1 0

Iprodione 86 75 0.02 3 3 5 0.97 0 10 E


Malathion 87 87 0.02 0

Maneb-group(##) 12 11 0.05 1 0.09 0 2 E

Mecarbam 76 76 0.05 0

Metalaxyl 86 85 0.05 1 0.11 0 2 E

Methamidophos 77 77 0.01 0


Omethoate 76 75 0.02 1 0.02 0 0.1 E



Phorate(###) 0

Pirimiphos-methyl 87 87 0.05 0

Procymidone 86 81 0.02 1 2 2 0.86 0 5 E




Thiomethon(###) 10 10 0.05 0

Vinclozolin 86 85 0.02 1 0.10 0 5 E





2001




Reporting country: Finland Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 116 114 0.05 1 1 0.012 1.00 EAzinphosmethyl 116 108 0.01 1 4 1 2 0.17 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 88 88 0.03 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 15 14 0.10 1 0.1 2.00 ECaptan 116 116 0.10 xxxxxChlorothalonil 116 115 0.01 1 0.1 1.00 EChlorpyriphos 116 100 0.01 1 3 6 5 1 0.14 0.50 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 116 116 0.01 0.50 EDeltamethrin 116 116 0.10 0.10 EDiazinon 116 113 0.01 2 1 0.021 0.30 EDichlofluanid 116 116 0.01 5.00 EDicofol 88 84 0.02 1 3 0.46 1.00 EDimethoate 116 106 0.01 2 4 3 1 0.11 1.00 EDisulfotone(###) 88 88 0.05 0.02 EEndosulfan 116 114 0.01 1 1 0.025 0.30 EFolpet 88 88 0.10 xxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 88 88 0.10 3.00 EImazalil 116 116 0.15 5.00 EIprodione 116 115 0.02 1 0.09 10.00 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 116 115 0.01 1 0.01 0.10 E

Malathion 116 116 0.01 0.50 EManeb-group(##) 15 6 0.20 1 1 3 2 2 3.2 3.00 EMecarbam 116 116 0.05 0.05 EMetalaxyl 116 116 0.05 1.00 E

Methamidophos 116 116 0.02 0.05 E

Methidathion 116 116 0.01 0.30 E

Omethoate 88 88 0.05 0.20 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0 0 0.40 E

Permethrin 116 116 0.10 1.00 E

Phorate(###) 88 88 0.05 0.05 EPirimiphos-methyl 116 116 0.01 0.05 E

Procymidone 116 116 0.01 0.02 E

Propyzamide 0 0 0.02 EThiabendazol 116 105 0.03 2 2 3 1 2 1 2.1 5.00 ETriazophos 116 116 0.02 0.02 EThiomethon(###) 0 0 WVinclozolin 116 116 0.01 1.00 Exxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 78 78 0.05 0.50 EAzinphosmethyl 78 78 0.01 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 46 46 0.03 2.00 E

Benomyl group(#) 9 9 0.10 0.50 E

Captan 78 78 0.10 xxxxx Chlorothalonil 78 74 0.01 2 1 1 0.54 2.00 EChlorpyriphos 78 78 0.01 0.50 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 78 78 0.01 0.50 E

Deltamethrin 78 78 0.10 0.20 E

Diazinon 78 78 0.01 0.50 E

Dichlofluanid 78 78 0.01 5.00 E

Dicofol 46 46 0.02 1.00 E

Dimethoate 78 78 0.01 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###) 46 46 0.05 0.02 EEndosulfan 78 71 0.01 1 1 1 2 2 0.43 0.50 E

Folpet 46 46 0.10 xxxxx

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 46 46 0.10 3.00 EImazalil 78 78 0.15 0.50 EIprodione 78 75 0.02 1 1 1 0.24 5.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 78 77 0.01 1 0.01 0.50 EMalathion 78 78 0.01 3.00 EManeb-group(##) 9 9 0.20 3.00 EMecarbam 78 78 0.05 0.05 EMetalaxyl 78 78 0.05 0.05 EMethamidophos 78 78 0.02 0.50 EMethidathion 78 78 0.01 0.02 EOmethoate 46 46 0.05 0.20 EOxydemethonmethyl(###) 0 0 0.40 EPermethrin 78 78 0.10 0.50 EPhorate(###) 46 46 0.05 0.05 EPirimiphos-methyl 78 78 0.01 1.00 EProcymidone 78 69 0.01 4 3 1 1 0.27 2.00 EPropyzamide 0 0 0.02 EThiabendazol 78 78 0.03 0.05 ETriazophos 78 78 0.02 0.02 EThiomethon(###) 0 0 WVinclozolin 78 78 0.01 0.05 E



2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 83 78 0.05 2 2 1 0.21 1.00 EAzinphosmethyl 83 83 0.01 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 42 42 0.03 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 9 9 0.10 5.00 ECaptan 83 83 0.10 xxxxxChlorothalonil 83 83 0.01 0.01 EChlorpyriphos 83 83 0.01 0.05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 83 83 0.01 0.05 EDeltamethrin 83 83 0.10 0.50 EDiazinon 83 83 0.01 0.02 EDichlofluanid 83 81 0.01 1 1 0.5 10.00 EDicofol 42 42 0.02 0.02 EDimethoate 83 82 0.01 1 0.09 1.00 EDisulfotone(###) 42 42 0.05 0.02 EEndosulfan 83 75 0.01 2 4 1 1 0.21 2 0.05 EFolpet 42 41 0.10 1 0.65 xxxxxCaptan+Folpet (Sum) 42 41 1 0.65 2.00 EImazalil 83 83 0.15 0.02 EIprodione 83 82 0.02 1 0.28 10.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 83 83 0.01 1.00 EMalathion 83 83 0.01 3.00 EManeb-group(##) 9 7 0.20 1 1 3.7 5.00 EMecarbam 83 83 0.05 0.05 EMetalaxyl 83 83 0.05 1.00 EMethamidophos 83 83 0.02 0.20 EMethidathion 83 83 0.01 0.02 E

Omethoate 42 42 0.05 0.20 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0 0 0.40 EPermethrin 83 83 0.10 2.00 EPhorate(###) 42 42 0.05 0.05 EPirimiphos-methyl 83 83 0.01 0.05 E

Procymidone 83 73 0.01 2 2 4 1 1 0.13 5.00 E

Propyzamide 0 0 1.00 E

Thiabendazol 83 83 0.03 0.05 E

Triazophos 83 83 0.02 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 0 0 W

Vinclozolin 83 79 0.01 1 2 1 0.27 5.00 E





2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 145 145 0.05 0.02 E

Azinphosmethyl 145 144 0.01 1 0.031 0.50 E

Azoxystrobin 97 97 0.03 0.05 E

Benomyl group(#) 15 15 0.10 0.10 E

Captan 145 145 0.10 xxxxx

Chlorothalonil 145 144 0.01 1 0.015 3.00 E

Chlorpyriphos 145 145 0.01 0.20 E



Diazinon 145 145 0.01 0.02 E

Dichlofluanid 145 142 0.01 1 2 0.15 10.00 E

Dicofol 97 97 0.02 0.02 E

Dimethoate 145 143 0.01 1 1 0.052 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###) 97 97 0.05 0.02 E

Endosulfan 145 137 0.01 5 3 0.024 0.05 E


Captan+Folpet (Sum) 97 97 0.10 3.00 E

Imazalil 145 145 0.15 0.02 E

Iprodione 145 118 0.02 3 4 10 7 3 0.78 10.00 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 145 143 0.01 2 0.01 0.50 E

Malathion 145 144 0.01 1 0.015 0.50 E

Maneb-group(##) 15 15 0.20 2.00 E

Mecarbam 145 145 0.05 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 145 145 0.05 0.50 E



Omethoate 97 97 0.05 0.10 E


Permethrin 145 145 0.10 1.00 E

Phorate(###) 97 97 0.05 0.05 E

Pirimiphos-methyl 145 145 0.01 0.05 E

Procymidone 145 137 0.01 4 1 1 1 1 0.84 5.00 E



Triazophos 145 145 0.02 0.02 E


Vinclozolin 145 143 0.01 1 1 0.26 5.00 E





2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 68 68 0.05 0.02 E

Azinphosmethyl 68 68 0.01 1.00 E

Azoxystrobin 60 57 0.03 1 2 0.40 2.00 E

Benomyl group(#) 19 17 0.10 2 0.13 2.00 E



Chlorpyriphos 68 61 0.01 3 1 1 2 0.2 0.50 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 68 67 0.01 1 0.02 0.20 E


Diazinon 68 68 0.01 0.02 E

Dichlofluanid 68 68 0.01 10.00 E

Dicofol 60 60 0.02 2.00 E

Dimethoate 68 50 0.01 4 4 7 1 2 0.31 1.00 E

Disulfotone(###) 60 60 0.05 0.02 E

Endosulfan 68 67 0.01 1 0.019 0.50 E


Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 60 60 0.10 3.00 E

Imazalil 68 68 0.15 0.02 E

Iprodione 68 40 0.02 1 4 1 9 9 3 1 2.1 10.00 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 68 68 0.01 0.20 E

Malathion 68 68 0.01 0.50 E

Maneb-group(##) 28 24 0.20 3 1 0.55 2.00 E

Mecarbam 68 68 0.05 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 68 63 0.05 2 3 0.1 2.00 E



Omethoate 60 45 0.05 1 3 8 3 0.08 0.10 E


Permethrin 68 68 0.10 1.00 E

Phorate(###) 60 60 0.05 0.05 E


Procymidone 68 65 0.01 1 2 0.073 5.00 E



Triazophos 68 68 0.02 0.02 E


Vinclozolin 68 65 0.01 1 1 1 0.043 5.00 E





2001




Reporting country: Sweden Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)



residues

Reporting level

(mg/kg) 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 50 >50

Maximum residue

level found

(mg/kg)

Number of samples

with residues

exceeding the MRL

MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 202 202 0.02 1 EAzinphosmethyl 202 176 0.05 1 16 6 3 0.37 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 202 202 0.1 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 144 133 0.1 1 2 6 2 0.84 2 ECaptan 202 169 0.05 8 9 11 3 2 1.46 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 202 201 0.02 1 0.56 1 EChlorpyriphos 202 197 0.05 3 2 0.18 0.5 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 202 202 0.05 0.5 EDeltamethrin 202 202 0.05 0.1 EDiazinon 202 201 0.02 1 0.02 0.5/0.3 E/EDichlofluanid 202 202 0.05 5 EDicofol 202 202 0.2 1/0.02 E/EDimethoate 202 199 0.02 2 1 0.1 1 EDisulfotone(###) 0 0Endosulfan 202 198 0.01 2 1 1 0.061 1/0.3 E/EFolpet 202 201 0.05 1 0.37 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 202 169 0.05 8 9 11 3 2 1.83 3 E

Imazalil 202 200 0.2 2 0.35 5 E

Iprodione 202 190 0.02 3 1 5 3 0.75 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 202 202 0.1 0.1 E

Malathion 202 202 0.05 0.5 EManeb-group(##) 40 32 0.1 4 3 1 1.73 3 EMecarbam 202 202 0.05 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 202 202 0.1 1 E



Omethoate 202 201 0.02 1 0.046 0.2 E


Permethrin 202 202 0.05 1 EPhorate(###) 0 0Pirimiphos-methyl 202 202 0.05 1/0.05 N/E

Procymidone 202 201 0.02 1 0.044 1 0.02 E

Propyzamide 202 202 0.02 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 202 184 0.3/0.2 4 9 4 1 2.51 5 E

Triazophos 71 71 0.02 0.1/0.02 N/E

Thiomethon(###) 0 0Vinclozolin 202 202 0.05 1 E

(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl. carbendazim. thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates. expressed as CS2(***) E=EC-MRL. N=National MRL. W=without MRL (###) for those countries where an authorisation of this pesticide/commodity combination exist

2001







Pesticide (**)



residues

Reporting level

(mg/kg) 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 50 >50

Maximum residue

level found

(mg/kg)

Number of samples

with residues

exceeding the MRL

MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 105 104 0.02 1 0.11 0.5 EAzinphosmethyl 105 105 0.05 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 105 105 0.1 0.05/2 E/EBenomyl group(#) 46 46 0.1 0.5 E

Captan 105 105 0.05 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 105 102 0.02 2 1 0.62 2 EChlorpyriphos 105 105 0.05 0.5 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 105 105 0.05 0.5 E


Diazinon 105 105 0.02 0.5 E

Dichlofluanid 105 105 0.05 5 E

Dicofol 105 105 0.2 0.5/0.02 E/E

Dimethoate 105 105 0.02 1 E

Disulfotone(###) 0 0Endosulfan 105 97 0.01 2 1 2 3 0.13 0.5 E


Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 105 105 0.05 3 EImazalil 105 105 0.2Iprodione 105 102 0.02 1 1 1 0.23 5 ELambda-cyhalothrin 105 105 0.1 /0.5 W/EMalathion 105 105 0.05 3 EManeb-group(##) 35 34 0.1 1 0.12 3 EMecarbam 105 105 0.05 0.05 EMetalaxyl 105 105 0.1 /0.05 W/EMethamidophos 105 102 0.02 2 1 0.26 0.5 EMethidathion 105 105 0.02 0.02 EOmethoate 105 105 0.02 0.2 EOxydemethonmethyl(###) 0 0Permethrin 105 105 0.05 0.5 EPhorate(###) 0 0Pirimiphos-methyl 105 105 0.05 1/1 N/EProcymidone 105 93 0.02 9 3 0.073 2.0 EPropyzamide 105 105 0.02 0.02 EThiabendazol 105 105 0.3/0.2 6/0.05 N/ETriazophos 105 105 0.02 0.02 EThiomethon(###) 0 0Vinclozolin 105 105 0.05 3/0.05 E/E

(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl. carbendazim. thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates. expressed as CS2(***) E=EC-MRL. N=National MRL. W=without MRL (###) for those countries where an authorisation of this pesticide/commodity combination exist

2001







Pesticide (**)



residues

Reporting level

(mg/kg) 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 50 >50

Maximum residue

level found

(mg/kg)

Number of samples

with residues

exceeding the MRL

MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 75 67 0.02 2 5 1 0.12 1 EAzinphosmethyl 75 75 0.05 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 75 75 0.1 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 47 47 0.1 0.5 ECaptan 75 75 0.05 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 75 75 0.02 0.01 EChlorpyriphos 75 75 0.05 0.05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 75 75 0.05 0.05 EDeltamethrin 75 75 0.05 0.5 EDiazinon 75 75 0.02 0.5/0.02 E/EDichlofluanid 75 75 0.05 10 EDicofol 75 75 0.2 0.02 EDimethoate 75 67 0.02 2 4 2 0.13 1 EDisulfotone(###) 0 0Endosulfan 75 73 0.01 2 0.025 1/0.05 E/EFolpet 75 75 0.05 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 75 75 0.05 0.5 EImazalil 75 75 0.2 0.02 EIprodione 75 71 0.02 1 2 1 0.13 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 75 75 0.1 1 EMalathion 75 75 0.05 3 EManeb-group(##) 20 18 0.1 1 1 2.57 5 EMecarbam 75 75 0.05 0.05 EMetalaxyl 75 75 0.1 /1 W/EMethamidophos 75 75 0.02 0.2 EMethidathion 75 75 0.02 0.02 EOmethoate 75 74 0.02 1 0.135 0.2 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0 0Permethrin 75 75 0.05 2 EPhorate(###) 0 0Pirimiphos-methyl 75 75 0.05 1/0.05 N/E

Procymidone 75 74 0.02 1 5 E

Propyzamide 75 75 0.02 /1 W/E

Thiabendazol 75 75 0.3/0.2 /0.05 W/E

Triazophos 75 75 0.02 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 0 0

Vinclozolin 75 74 0.05 1 1.3 5 E

(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl. carbendazim. thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).

(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates. expressed as CS2

(***) E=EC-MRL. N=National MRL. W=without MRL (###) for those countries where an authorisation of this pesticide/commodity combination exist

2001







Pesticide (**)



residues

Reporting level

(mg/kg) 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 50 >50

Maximum residue

level found

(mg/kg)

Number of samples

with residues

exceeding the MRL

MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 68 68 0.02 0.02 E



Benomyl group(#) 43 43 0.1 1/0.1 N/E

Captan 68 66 0.05 1 1 1.1 xxxxxx

Chlorothalonil 68 68 0.02 3 E




Diazinon 68 68 0.02 0.5/0.02 E/E

Dichlofluanid 68 67 0.05 1 0.73 10 E

Dicofol 68 68 0.2 2/0.02 E/E



Endosulfan 68 67 0.01 1 0.047 1 E


Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 68 66 0.05 1 1 1.1 3 E

Imazalil 68 68 0.2 0.1 E

Iprodione 68 60 0.02 3 2 2 1 0.54 10 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 68 68 0.1 /0.5 W/E

Malathion 68 68 0.05 0.5 E

Maneb-group(##) 10 9 0.1 1 0.26 2 E

Mecarbam 68 68 0.05 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 68 68 0.1 0.5 E



Omethoate 68 68 0.02 0.1 E


Permethrin 68 68 0.05 1 E

Phorate(###) 0 0

Pirimiphos-methyl 68 68 0.05 1/0.05 N/E

Procymidone 68 66 0.02 2 0.046 5 E

Propyzamide 68 68 0.02 /0.02 W/E

Thiabendazol 68 68 0.3/0.2 5/0.05 E/E

Triazophos 68 68 0.02 0.1/0.02 N/E

Thiomethon(###) 0 0

Vinclozolin 68 67 0.05 1 0.063 5 E




2001







Pesticide (**)



residues

Reporting level

(mg/kg) 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 50 >50

Maximum residue

level found

(mg/kg)

Number of samples

with residues

exceeding the MRL

MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 105 104 0.02 1 0.548 1 0.02 E

Azinphosmethyl 105 105 0.05 1 E

Azoxystrobin 105 99 0.1 3 2 1 0.745 2 E

Benomyl group(#) 100 95 0.1 1 4 0.93 2 E

Captan 105 100 0.05 1 1 1 2 1.1 xxxxxx

Chlorothalonil 105 104 0.02 1 0.11 1 E

Chlorpyriphos 105 96 0.05 3 1 5 0.47 0.5 E



Diazinon 105 105 0.02 0.5/0.02 E/E


Dicofol 105 105 0.2 1/0.02 E/E

Dimethoate 105 102 0.02 2 1 0.11 1 E


Endosulfan 105 105 0.01 1/0.5 E/E


Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 105 100 0.05 1 1 1 2 1.1 3 E

Imazalil 105 105 0.2 0.02 E

Iprodione 105 90 0.02 2 1 4 3 4 1 1.21 10 E


Malathion 105 105 0.05 0.5 E

Maneb-group(##) 40 36 0.1 1 1 1 1 0.77 2 E

Mecarbam 105 105 0.05 0.05 E


Methamidophos 105 103 0.02 1 1 0.087 2 0.01 E


Omethoate 105 97 0.02 7 1 0.058 0.2 E



Phorate(###) 0 0

Pirimiphos-methyl 105 105 0.05 1/0.05 N/E

Procymidone 105 92 0.02 3 1 3 4 1 1 1.94 5 E

Propyzamide 105 105 0.02 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 105 105 0.3/0.2 /0.05 W/E

Triazophos 105 105 0.02 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 0 0

Vinclozolin 105 103 0.05 1 1 0.11 5 E




2001




Reporting country: UK Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 72 72 0.05 0 0 1 EAzinphosmethyl 72 68 0.05 1 3 0.1 0 1 EAzoxystrobin 72 72 0.05 0 0 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 72 67 0.1 2 2 1 0.7 0 2 ECaptan 82 76 0.05 2 3 1 0.3 0 3 EChlorothalonil 72 72 0.05 0 0 1 EChlorpyriphos 82 65 0.01 4 11 1 1 0.3 0 0.5 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 72 72 0.05 0 0 0.5 EDeltamethrin 72 72 0.05 0 0 0.1 EDiazinon 82 81 0.02 1 0.04 0 0.5 EDichlofluanid 72 72 0.05 0 0 5 NDicofol 72 72 0.05 0 0 1/0.02+ EDimethoate 82 81 0.01 1 0.02 0 1 EDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 72 72 0.05 0 0 1/0.3+ EFolpet 72 72 0.05 0 0 WCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 72 66 0.05 2 3 1 0.3 0 3 EImazalil 72 72 0.05 0 0 5 EIprodione 82 80 0.05 1 1 2.6 0 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 72 72 0.02 0 0 0.1 E

Malathion 72 72 0.05 0 0 0.5 N

Maneb-group(##) 84 72 0.05 1 7 2 2 0.3 0 3 CMecarbam 72 72 0.05 0 0 0.05 EMetalaxyl 82 81 0.05 1 0.2 0 1 EMethamidophos 72 72 0.05 0 0 0.05 E

Methidathion 72 72 0.02 0 0 0.3 E

Omethoate 72 72 0.10 0 0 0.2 N


Permethrin 72 72 0.05 0 0 1 E

Phorate(###)

Pirimiphos-methyl 72 72 0.02 0 0 W/0.05+

Procymidone 72 72 0.02 0 0 0.02 E

Propyzamide 72 72 0.02 0 0 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 72 63 0.05 1 6 2 0.7 0 5 ETriazophos 72 72 0.02 0 0 W/0.02+ EThiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 72 72 0.05 0 0 1 E(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


+MRL changed 1 July 2001

2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 72 72 0.02 0 0 0.5 EAzinphosmethyl 72 72 0.05 0 0 0.5 NAzoxystrobin 95 92 0.05 2 1 0.2 0 2 E

Benomyl group(#) 72 71 0.05 1 0.1 0 0.5 E

Captan 95 95 0.05 0 0 3 NChlorothalonil 95 93 0.05 1 1 0.4 0 2 EChlorpyriphos 95 95 0.05 0 0 0.5 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 95 95 0.05 0 0 0.5 E

Deltamethrin 95 95 0.05 0 0 0.2 E

Diazinon 95 95 0.02 0 0 0.5 E

Dichlofluanid 95 95 0.05 0 0 5 N

Dicofol 95 93 0.02 1 1 0.09 0 0.5 E

Dimethoate 95 95 0.05 0 0 1 N

Disulfotone(###)Endosulfan 95 91 0.05 3 1 0.2 0 1 E

Folpet 95 95 0.05 0 0 W

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 95 95 0.05 0 0 ?

Imazalil 72 72 0.02 0 0 0.5 EIprodione 95 94 0.05 1 0.4 0 5 ELambda-cyhalothrin 95 94 0.02 1 0.03 0 W/0.5+ EMalathion 95 95 0.05 0 0 3 NManeb-group(##) 81 81 0.2 0 0 3 EMecarbam 95 95 0.05 0 0 0.05 EMetalaxyl 95 95 0.05 0 0 W/0.05+ EMethamidophos 72 72 0.01 0 0 0.5 EMethidathion 95 95 0.02 0 0 0.02 EOmethoate 72 72 0.05 0 0 1 NOxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 95 95 0.05 0 0 0.5 EPhorate(###)Pirimiphos-methyl 95 95 0.05 0 0 W/1+Procymidone 95 88 0.02 3 3 1 0.2 0 2 EPropyzamide 95 95 0.02 0 0 0.02 EThiabendazol 72 72 0.05 0 0 W/0.05+Triazophos 95 95 0.02 0 0 0.02 EThiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 95 95 0.05 0 0 0.05 E(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


+MRL changed 1 July 2001

2001

Only add information regarding tomatoes and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 72 66 0.02 1 4 1 0.2 0 1 EAzinphosmethyl 72 72 0.05 0.5 NAzoxystrobin 134 132 0.05 1 1 0.9 1 0.05/3+ EBenomyl group(#) 72 71 0.1 1 0.1 0 5 ECaptan 72 72 0.05 2 NChlorothalonil 72 72 0.05 0.01 EChlorpyriphos 72 72 0.05 0.05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 72 72 0.05 0.05 EDeltamethrin 72 72 0.05 0.5 EDiazinon 72 72 0.02 0.5/0.02++ EDichlofluanid 134 133 0.05 1 0.6 0 10 EDicofol 72 72 0.05 0.02 EDimethoate 72 72 0.05 2 NDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 72 72 0.05 1/0.05++ EFolpet 134 131 0.05 2 1 1.4 0 50 CCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 72 69 0.05 2 1 1.4 0 50 CImazalil 72 72 0.02 0.02 EIprodione 134 127 0.05 3 3 1 0.4 0 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 134 133 0.02 1 0.2 0 1 EMalathion 72 72 0.05 3 NManeb-group(##) 83 78 0.1 2 1 2 2 0 5 EMecarbam 72 72 0.05 0.05 EMetalaxyl 72 72 0.05 W/1++ EMethamidophos 72 66 0.01 2 2 2 0.09 0 0.2 EMethidathion 72 72 0.02 0.02 EOmethoate 72 72 0.05 0.2 N


Permethrin 72 72 0.05 2 EPhorate(###)Pirimiphos-methyl 72 72 0.05 W/0.05++ EProcymidone 134 126 0.02 4 4 0.1 0 5 E

Propyzamide 134 132 0.02 2 0.02 0 W/1++ E

Thiabendazol 72 72 0.05 W/0.05++ E

Triazophos 72 72 0.02 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 72 72 0.05 5 E




+ Temporary UK MRL of 3 mg/kg for azoxystrobin was implemented on 6 July 2001. EC MRL of 0.05 mg/kg referred to, before this date

++ MRL changed 1 July 2001

2001

Only add information regarding lettuce and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 72 72 0.02 0 0.02 E

Azinphosmethyl 72 72 0.05 0 1 E

Azoxystrobin 124 122 0.02 2 0.03 0 0.05 E

Benomyl group(#) 72 70 0.1 1 1 0.3 0 5/0.1+ N/E

Captan 124 115 0.02 4 3 1 1 0.7 0 3 E

Chlorothalonil ++ 0

Chlorpyriphos 72 72 0.05 0 0.2 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 72 72 0.05 0 0.5 E

Deltamethrin 72 72 0.05 0 0.05 E

Diazinon 72 72 0.02 0 0.5/0.02+ E

Dichlofluanid 72 69 0.02 1 1 1 0.3 0 10 E

Dicofol 124 120 0.02 1 1 2 0.2 2 2/0.02+ E

Dimethoate 72 72 0.05 0 1 N/E

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 72 72 0.02 0 2/0.05+ N/E

Folpet 72 72 0.05 0 WCaptan+Folpet (Sum) 72 63 ? 4 3 1 1 0.7 0 ?

Imazalil 72 72 0.02 0 0.02 E

Iprodione 124 86 0.05 10 3 16 5 4 2 0 10 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 72 72 0.02 0 W/0.5+ E

Malathion 124 123 0.05 1 0.06 0 0.5 E

Maneb-group(##) 82 79 0.05 1 2 0.3 0 2 E

Mecarbam 72 72 0.05 0 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 124 120 0.05 4 0.1 0 0.5 E

Methamidophos 72 72 0.01 0 0.01 E

Methidathion 72 72 0.02 0 0.02 E

Omethoate 72 72 0.05 0 1 N


Permethrin 72 72 0.05 0 1 E

Phorate(###)

Pirimiphos-methyl 72 72 0.05 0 W/0.05+ E

Procymidone 124 122 0.02 2 0.04 0 5 E

Propyzamide 72 72 0.02 0 W/0.02+ E

Thiabendazol 72 72 0.05 0 5/0.05+ E

Triazophos 72 72 0.02 0 W/0.02+ E

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 124 123 0.02 1 0.02 0 5 E




+ MRL changed 1 July 2001

++ Samples not analysed for chlorothalonil, due to problems with sample preparation.

2001

Only add information regarding strawberries and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns






Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 72 72 0.02 0


Azoxystrobin 72 63 0.05 1 5 1 2 0.3 0 2 E

Benomyl group(#)

Captan 72 60 0.05 2 4 3 3 1.7 0 3 E

Chlorothalonil 72 72 0.05 0 1 E

Chlorpyriphos 72 71 0.05 1 0.3 0 0.5 E

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 72 70 0.05 2 0.06 0 0.2 E

Deltamethrin 72 72 0.05 0 0.1 E

Diazinon 72 72 0.02 0 0.5/0.02+ E

Dichlofluanid 72 72 0.05 0 15 N

Dicofol 72 72 0.05 0 1/2+ E

Dimethoate 72 71 0.05 1 0.08 0 1 E

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 72 72 0.05 0 1/0.5+ E

Folpet 72 72 0.05 0 W

Captan+Folpet (Sum) 72 60 0.05 2 4 3 3 1.7 0 ?

Imazalil 72 72 0.02 0 0.02 E

Iprodione 72 59 0.05 2 1 6 4 1 0 10 E

Lambda-cyhalothrin 72 72 0.02 0 0.2 E

Malathion 72 72 0.05 0 0.5 N

Maneb-group(##) 69 68 0.1 1 0.3 0 2 E

Mecarbam 72 72 0.05 0 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 72 72 0.05 0 2 E

Methamidophos 72 72 0.01 0 0.01 E

Methidathion 72 72 0.02 0 0.5 E

Omethoate 72 71 0.05 1 0.07 0 1 E


Permethrin 72 72 0.05 0 1 E

Phorate(###)

Pirimiphos-methyl 72 72 0.05 0 W/0.05+ E

Procymidone 72 56 0.02 1 1 3 4 5 2 1.3 0 5 E

Propyzamide 72 72 0.02 0 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 72 72 0.05 0 W/0.05+ E

Triazophos 72 72 0.02 0 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 72 70 0.05 2 0.1 0 5 E




+ MRL changed 1 July 2001

2001

Only add information regarding table grapes and the 36 pesticides and do not change or delete rows or columns



Reporting country: Norway Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 112 112 0.05Azinphosmethyl 112 104 0.05 3 3 1 1 0.46 0.50 EAzoxystrobin 112 112 0.05Benomyl group(#) 24 19 0.05 1 2 2 0.4 2.00 ECaptan 112 99 0.05 2 5 4 1 1 1.8 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 112 112 0.02Chlorpyriphos 112 109 0.05 1 1 1 0.12 0.50 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 112 112 0.05Deltamethrin 112 112 0.05Diazinon 112 112 0.02Dichlofluanid 112 110 0.05 1 1 0.11 5.00 EDicofol 112 112 0.1Dimethoate 112 111 0.05 1 0.1 1.00 EDisulfotone(###) 112 112 0.02Endosulfan 112 111 0.02 1 0.19 1.00 EFolpet 112 112 0.05 xxxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 112 99 0.05 2 5 4 1 1 1.8 3.00 EImazalil 112 112 0.05Iprodione 112 106 0.02 1 2 2 1 0.24 10.00 E


Malathion 112 112 0.05Maneb-group(##) 48 47 0.05 1 0.18 3.00 EMecarbam 112 112 0.05Metalaxyl 112 112 0.05






Phorate(###) 112 112 0.05Pirimiphos-methyl 112 112 0.05


Propyzamide 112 112 0.05Thiabendazol 112 101 0.05 2 4 4 1 1.8 5.00 ETriazophos 112 112 0.05Thiomethon(###) 112 112 0.05Vinclozolin 112 112 0.02xxxx: do not report MRL here, report MRL in the row (Sum Captan+Folpet)(*) i.e column 0.02 includes the range from 0.011... mg/kg upto 0.020... mg/kg (#) Benomyl, carbendazim, thiophanate-methyl (sum of residues expressed as carbendazim).(**) in alphabetical order of the English name (##) Sum of dithiocarbamates, expressed as CS2


2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)


Benomyl group(#) 20 18 0.05 1 1 0.13 0.50 E

Captan 83 83 0.05 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 83 79 0.02 2 2 0.04 2.00 EChlorpyriphos 83 83 0.05



Diazinon 83 83 0.02


Dicofol 83 83 0.1


Disulfotone(###) 83 83 0.02Endosulfan 83 78 0.02 2 2 1 0.2 1.00 E


Captan+Folpet (Sum) 83 83 0.05Imazalil 83 83 0.05Iprodione 83 78 0.02 1 1 1 1 1 0.25 5.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 83 83 0.02Malathion 83 83 0.05Maneb-group(##) 32 26 0.05 4 1 1 0.42 3.00 EMecarbam 83 83 0.05Metalaxyl 83 83 0.05Methamidophos 83 83 0.05Methidathion 83 83 0.05Omethoate 83 83 0.05Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 83 83 0.05Phorate(###) 83 83 0.05Pirimiphos-methyl 83 83 0.05Procymidone 83 76 0.02 1 3 2 1 0.48 2.00 EPropyzamide 83 83 0.05Thiabendazol 83 83 0.05Triazophos 83 83 0.05Thiomethon(###) 83 83 0.05Vinclozolin 83 83 0.02



2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 88 88 0.05Azinphosmethyl 88 88 0.05Azoxystrobin 88 88 0.05Benomyl group(#) 13 12 0.05 1 0.3 5.00 ECaptan 88 88 0.05 xxxxxxChlorothalonil 88 88 0.02Chlorpyriphos 88 88 0.05Chlorpyriphos-methyl 88 88 0.05Deltamethrin 88 88 0.05Diazinon 88 87 0.02 1 0.07 0.50 EDichlofluanid 88 85 0.05 1 1 1 13 1 10.00 EDicofol 88 88 0.1Dimethoate 88 88 0.05Disulfotone(###) 88 88 0.02Endosulfan 88 88 0.02Folpet 88 83 0.05 2 1 2 4.8 xxxxxxCaptan+Folpet (Sum) 88 83 0.05 2 1 2 4.8 2 2.00 EImazalil 88 88 0.05Iprodione 88 83 0.02 2 1 1 1 8.1 10.00 ELambda-cyhalothrin 88 88 0.02Malathion 88 88 0.05Maneb-group(##) 30 26 0.05 2 1 1 4 5.00 EMecarbam 88 88 0.05Metalaxyl 88 87 0.05 1 0.06 WMethamidophos 88 88 0.05Methidathion 88 88 0.05


Oxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 88 88 0.05Phorate(###) 88 88 0.05Pirimiphos-methyl 88 88 0.05

Procymidone 88 80 0.02 2 2 2 2 4.1 5.00 E




Thiomethon(###) 88 88 0.05

Vinclozolin 88 87 0.02 1 0.06 5.00 E





2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 136 136 0.05

Azinphosmethyl 136 135 0.05 1 0.05 0.50 E


Benomyl group(#) 22 21 0.05 1 0.09 W


Chlorothalonil 136 133 0.02 1 2 0.04 3.00 E




Diazinon 136 136 0.02

Dichlofluanid 136 135 0.05 1 0.23 10.00 E

Dicofol 136 136 0.1


Disulfotone(###) 136 136 0.02

Endosulfan 136 134 0.02 1 1 0.17 1.00 E



Imazalil 136 136 0.05

Iprodione 136 105 0.02 4 3 9 4 7 4 1 10.00 E


Malathion 136 135 0.05 1 0.46 0.50 E

Maneb-group(##) 16 15 0.05 1 0.08 2.00 E

Mecarbam 136 136 0.05







Phorate(###) 136 136 0.05


Procymidone 136 134 0.02 1 1 0.63 5.00 E




Thiomethon(###) 136 136 0.05






2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 71 71 0.05


Azoxystrobin 71 59 0.05 2 2 5 3 0.38 2.00 E


Captan 71 69 0.05 1 1 0.52 xxxxxx


Chlorpyriphos 71 69 0.05 1 1 0.14 0.50 E



Diazinon 71 71 0.02

Dichlofluanid 71 70 0.05 1 0.12 10.00 E

Dicofol 71 71 0.1

Dimethoate 71 68 0.05 1 2 0.09 1.00 E




Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 71 69 0.05 1 1 0.52 3.00 E

Imazalil 71 71 0.05

Iprodione 71 41 0.02 3 2 10 10 5 1.6 10.00 E



Maneb-group(##) 20 14 0.05 3 3 0.36 2.00 E

Mecarbam 71 71 0.05







Phorate(###) 71 71 0.05


Procymidone 71 56 0.02 2 1 1 6 4 1 3.2 5.00 E




Thiomethon(###) 71 71 0.05

Vinclozolin 71 69 0.02 1 1 0.13 5.00 E





2001




Reporting country: Iceland Year of sampling: Remark:



Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

AcephateAzinphosmethyl 20 20 0.05AzoxystrobinBenomyl group(#)Captan 20 20 0.05Chlorothalonil 20 20 0.05Chlorpyriphos 20 20 0.05Chlorpyriphos-methyl 20 20 0.05DeltamethrinDiazinon 20 20 0.05DichlofluanidDicofol 20 19 0.05 1 0.8 1 0.02 NDimethoate 20 19 0.05 1 0.13 0 1.00 NDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 20 20 0.05Folpet 20 20 0.05Captan+ Folpet (Sum)Imazalil 20 20 0.05Iprodione 20 20 0.05

Lambda-cyhalothrin


Maneb-group(##)

MecarbamMetalaxyl 20 20 0.05Methamidophos 20 20 0.05Methidathion 20 20 0.05

Omethoate



Phorate(###)Pirimiphos-methylProcymidone 20 20 0.05Propyzamide

Thiabendazol 20 19 0.05 1 1 0 5.00 NTriazophos

Thiomethon(###)




2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

AcephateAzinphosmethyl 11 11 0.05AzoxystrobinBenomyl group(#)Captan 11 11 0.05Chlorothalonil 11 10 0.05 1 0.06 0 2.00 NChlorpyriphos 11 11 0.05Chlorpyriphos-methyl 11 11 0.05Deltamethrin

Diazinon 11 11 0.05Dichlofluanid

Dicofol 11 11 0.05


Disulfotone(###)Endosulfan 11 11 0.05

Folpet 11 11 0.05


Imazalil 11 11 0.05


Lambda-cyhalothrinMalathion 11 11 0.05Maneb-group(##)MecarbamMetalaxyl 11 11 0.05Methamidophos 11 11 0.05Methidathion 11 11 0.05OmethoateOxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 11 11 0.05Phorate(###)Pirimiphos-methylProcymidone 11 10 0.05 1 0.08 0 2.00 NPropyzamideThiabendazol 11 11 0.05TriazophosThiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 11 11 0.05



2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate

Azinphosmethyl 4 4 0.05 N

Azoxystrobin

Benomyl group(#)Captan 4 4 0.05 NChlorothalonil 4 4 0.05 NChlorpyriphos 4 4 0.05 N

Chlorpyriphos-methyl 4 4 0.05 N

DeltamethrinDiazinon 4 4 0.05 NDichlofluanidDicofol 4 4 0.05 NDimethoate 4 4 0.05 NDisulfotone(###)Endosulfan 4 4 0.05 NFolpet 4 4 0.05 NCaptan+ Folpet (Sum)Imazalil 4 4 0.05 NIprodione 4 4 0.05 NLambda-cyhalothrinMalathion 4 4 0.05 NManeb-group(##)MecarbamMetalaxyl 4 4 0.05 NMethamidophos 4 4 0.05 NMethidathion 4 4 0.05 NOmethoateOxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 4 4 0.05 NPhorate(###)Pirimiphos-methylProcymidone 4 4 0.05 NPropyzamideThiabendazol 4 4 0.05 N

Triazophos

Thiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 4 4 0.05 N




2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate


Azoxystrobin

Benomyl group(#)

Captan 8 8 0.05 N

Chlorothalonil 8 8 0.05 N

Chlorpyriphos 8 8 0.05 N


Deltamethrin

Diazinon 8 8 0.05 N

Dichlofluanid

Dicofol 8 8 0.05 N

Dimethoate 8 8 0.05 N

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 8 8 0.05 N

Folpet 8 8 0.05 N


Imazalil 8 8 0.05 N

Iprodione 8 8 0.05 N

Lambda-cyhalothrin

Malathion 8 8 0.05 N

Maneb-group(##)

Mecarbam

Metalaxyl 8 8 0.05 N

Methamidophos 8 8 0.05 N

Methidathion 8 8 0.05 N

Omethoate


Permethrin 8 8 0.05 N

Phorate(###)

Pirimiphos-methyl

Procymidone 8 8 0.05 N

Propyzamide

Thiabendazol 8 8 0.05 N

Triazophos

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 8 8 0.05 N




2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate


Azoxystrobin

Benomyl group(#)

Captan 9 9 0.05 N

Chlorothalonil 9 9 0.05 N

Chlorpyriphos 9 9 0.05 N


Deltamethrin

Diazinon 9 9 0.05 N

Dichlofluanid

Dicofol 9 9 0.05 N

Dimethoate 9 8 0.05 1 0.08 0 1.00 N

Disulfotone(###)

Endosulfan 9 9 0.05 N

Folpet 9 9 0.05 N


Imazalil 9 9 0.05 N

Iprodione 9 8 0.05 1 0.39 0 10.00 N

Lambda-cyhalothrin

Malathion 9 9 0.05 N

Maneb-group(##)

Mecarbam

Metalaxyl 9 9 0.05 N

Methamidophos 9 9 0.05 N

Methidathion 9 9 0.05 N

Omethoate


Permethrin 9 9 0.05 N

Phorate(###)

Pirimiphos-methyl

Procymidone 9 9 0.05 N

Propyzamide

Thiabendazol 9 9 0.05 N

Triazophos

Thiomethon(###)

Vinclozolin 9 8 0.05 1 0.09 0 5.00 N




2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 10 10 0.05 1 EAzinphosmethyl 10 10 0.05 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 10 10 0.02 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 10 9 0.05 1 0.05 2 ECaptan 10 10 0.005 xxxxxChlorothalonil 10 10 0.005 1Chlorpyriphos 10 10 0.01 0.5 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 10 10 0.01 0.5 EDeltamethrin 10 10 0.005 0.1 EDiazinon 10 10 0.01 0.3 EDichlofluanid 10 10 0.005 5 EDicofol 10 10 0.005 0.02 EDimethoate 10 8 0.01 2 0.07 1 EDisulfotone(###) 0 0 0Endosulfan 10 10 0.005 0.3 EFolpet 10 10 0.005 xxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 10 10 0.005 3 EImazalil 10 10 0.02 5 EIprodione 10 10 0.005 10 E


Malathion 10 10 0.01 0.5 EManeb-group(##) 10 10 0.05 3 EMecarbam 10 10 0.01 0.05 EMetalaxyl 10 10 0.01 1 E


Methidathion 10 10 0.3 E

Omethoate 10 10 0.02 0.2 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0 0 0


Phorate(###) 0 0 0Pirimiphos-methyl 10 10 0.01 0.05 E

Procymidone 10 10 0.005 0.02 E

Propyzamide 10 10 0.02 EThiabendazol 10 10 0.05 5 ETriazophos 10 10 0.05 0.02 EThiomethon(###) 0 0 0Vinclozolin 10 10 0.005 1 E



Liechtenstein 2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 11 11 0.05 0.5 EAzinphosmethyl 11 11 0.05 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 11 11 0.02 0.05 E

Benomyl group(#) 11 11 0.05 0.5 E

Captan 11 11 0.005 xxxxxChlorothalonil 11 11 0.005 2 EChlorpyriphos 11 11 0.01 0.5 E



Diazinon 11 11 0.01 0.5 E


Dicofol 11 11 0.005 0.02 E


Disulfotone(###)Endosulfan 11 11 0.005 0.5 E


Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 11 11 0.005 3 EImazalil 11 11 0.02Iprodione 11 11 0.005 5 ELambda-cyhalothrin 11 11 0.005 0.5 EMalathion 11 11 0.01 3 EManeb-group(##) 11 11 0.05 3 EMecarbam 11 11 0.01 0.05 EMetalaxyl 11 11 0.01 0.05 EMethamidophos 11 11 0.01 0.5 EMethidathion 11 11 0.01 0.02 EOmethoate 11 11 0.02 0.2 EOxydemethonmethyl(###)Permethrin 11 11 0.005 0.5 EPhorate(###) 11 11Pirimiphos-methyl 11 11 0.01 1 EProcymidone 11 11 0.005 2 EPropyzamide 11 11 0.01 0.02 EThiabendazol 11 11 0.05 0.05 ETriazophos 11 11 0.05 0.02 EThiomethon(###)Vinclozolin 11 11 0.005 0.05 E



Liechtenstein 2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 7 7 0.05 1 EAzinphosmethyl 7 7 0.05 0.5 EAzoxystrobin 7 7 0.02 0.05 EBenomyl group(#) 7 7 0.05 0.5 ECaptan 7 7 0.005 xxxxxChlorothalonil 7 7 0.005 0.01 EChlorpyriphos 7 7 0.01 0.05 EChlorpyriphos-methyl 7 7 0.01 0.05 EDeltamethrin 7 7 0.05 0.5 EDiazinon 7 7 0.01 0.02 EDichlofluanid 7 7 0.005 10 EDicofol 7 7 0.005 0.02 EDimethoate 7 7 0.01 1 EDisulfotone(###) 0 0Endosulfan 7 7 0.005 0.05 EFolpet 7 7 0.005 xxxxxCaptan+ Folpet (Sum) 7 7 0.005 0.5 EImazalil 7 7 0.02 0.02 EIprodione 7 7 0.005 10 ELambda-cyhalothrin 7 7 0.005 1 EMalathion 7 7 0.01 3 EManeb-group(##) 7 5 0.05 1 1 0.73 5 EMecarbam 7 7 0.01 0.05 EMetalaxyl 7 7 0.01 1 EMethamidophos 7 7 0.01 0.2 EMethidathion 7 7 0.01 0.02 E

Omethoate 7 7 0.02 0.2 E

Oxydemethonmethyl(###) 0 0Permethrin 7 7 0.005 2 EPhorate(###) 0 0Pirimiphos-methyl 7 7 0.01 0.05 E

Procymidone 7 7 0.005 5 E

Propyzamide 7 7 0.01 1 E


Triazophos 7 7 0.05 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 0 0





Liechtenstein 2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 2 2 0.05 0.02 E



Benomyl group(#) 2 2 0.05 0.1 E






Diazinon 2 2 0.01 0.02 E


Dicofol 2 2 0.005 0.02 E



Endosulfan 2 2 0.005 1 E


Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 2 2 0.005 3 E

Imazalil 2 2 0.02 0.1 E

Iprodione 2 2 0.005 10 E


Malathion 2 2 0.01 0.5 E

Maneb-group(##) 2 2 0.05 2 E

Mecarbam 2 2 0.01 0.05 E

Metalaxyl 2 2 0.01 0.5 E



Omethoate 2 2 0.02 0.1 E



Phorate(###) 0 0



Propyzamide 2 2 0.01 0.02 E


Triazophos 2 2 0.05 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 0 0





Liechtenstein 2001







Pesticide (**)






MRL (mg/kg)

Source of MRL (***)

Acephate 10 10 0.05 0.02 E

Azinphosmethyl 10 10 0.05 1 E

Azoxystrobin 10 10 0.02 2 E

Benomyl group(#) 10 10 0.05 2 E






Diazinon 10 10 0.01 0.02 E


Dicofol 10 10 0.005 0.02 E



Endosulfan 10 10 0.005 0.5 E

Folpet 10 5 0.005 1 1 3 1.8 xxxxx

Captan+ Folpet (Sum) 10 5 0.005 1 1 3 1.8 3 E

Imazalil 10 10 0.02 0.02 E

Iprodione 10 10 0.005 10 E


Malathion 10 10 0.01 0.5 E

Maneb-group(##) 10 9 0.05 1 15 1 2 E

Mecarbam 10 10 0.01 0.05 E




Omethoate 10 10 0.02 0.2 E



Phorate(###) 0 0



Propyzamide 10 10 0.01 0.02 E

Thiabendazol 10 8 0.05 1 1 0.54 0.05 E

Triazophos 10 10 0.05 0.02 E

Thiomethon(###) 0 0





Liechtenstein 2001


Documents

Annual EU Wide Pesticide Residues MR 2001