HEALTH & CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH & CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate F - Food and Veterinary Office DG(SANCO)/ MR - FINAL FINAL REPORT OF A SPECIFIC AUDIT CARRIED OUT IN THE UNITED KINGDOM FROM 27 APRIL TO 01 MAY 2009 IN ORDER TO ASSESS THE OFFICIAL CONTROL SYSTEMS IN PLACE FOR PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN AND ON FOOD OF PLANT ORIGIN IN THE CONTEXT OF A GENERAL AUDIT In response to information provided by the Competent Authority, any factual error noted in the draft report has been corrected;any clarification appears in the form of an endnote.

2 Executive Summary The objective of the mission was to evaluate the control systems put in place in the United Kingdom for pesticide residues in foodstuffs of plant origin. The mission formed part of the FVO's planned mission programme and was carried out as a Specific Audit and as a component of a General Audit in accordance with Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. This report focuses on the sector specific issues identified during the audit. National legislation has been adopted to transpose and implement the EC legislation within the scope of this mission. A risk-based multi-annual national control programme for pesticide residues is put in place as required by Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. The criteria and contents of the national programme fulfil the requirements of the Regulation, but the majority of samples are taken at point of supply to the consumers, which can impede subsequent enforcement action to be taken. The competent authorities generally report and publish the results of the national control programme in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, but the results of pesticide residue samples taken by local authorities are not included. The public naming of non-compliant food business operators is considered a proportionate, effective and dissuasive sanction for the supermarket chains, where the majority of samples are taken. However, for small food business operators this approach is not always sufficient to ensure that the operator remedies the situation. The requirements for sampling of Commission Directive 2002/63/EC were generally followed. Imported produce is mainly controlled on the market level, but there is a system of risk-based and targeted controls for pesticide residues in place at the import point of the visited London airport. Effective control measures for non-compliant produce are compromised by the lack of cooling facilities and the delayed availability of laboratory results. Substantial laboratory resources are available in the visited laboratory, which allow for the analysis of a high number of samples with a broad analytical screen. The laboratory is accredited and has mostly implemented the SANCO Method Validation and Quality Control Procedures, but not all reported limits of quantification are sufficiently supported by quality control data. Procedures and responsibilities for the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 are well defined. Overall conclusion For the control of pesticide residues, there is a risk-based, clear and transparent multi-annual national control programme in place, using accredited laboratories with appropriate equipment and methods. However, the controls mostly rely on sampling at the point of supply to the consumers and enforcement measures, in particular for non-compliant imported produce, need strengthening. The report contains recommendations to the United Kingdom to address identified shortcomings. i

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES OF THE MISSION LEGAL BASIS FOR THE MISSION BACKGROUND FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Legislation Legal requirements Findings Conclusions Controls for pesticide residues National control programmes Controls of pesticide residues in imported produce Sampling Reporting Controls of illegal pesticides Legal requirements Findings Conclusions Laboratories for pesticide residue analysis Legal requirements Findings Conclusions Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed Legal requirements Findings Conclusions Follow-up of previous missions Legal requirements Findings Conclusions OVERALL CONCLUSION CLOSING MEETING RECOMMENDATIONS ii

4 ABBREVIATIONS & SPECIAL TERMS USED IN THE REPORT Abbreviation CRD CS2 EN EU FSA FVO GC-MS/MS GC-MSD HMI HSE ISO LCL LC-MS/MS LOQ MRL MS NRL PHSI RASFF Explanation Chemicals Regulation Directorate Carbon disulfite European Norm European Union Food Standards Agency Food and Veterinary Office Gas Chromatograph - Tandem Mass Spectrometry Gas Chromatograph - Mass Selective Detector Horticultural and Marketing Inspectorate Health and Safety Executive International Organisation for Standardisation Lowest Calibration Level Liquid Chromatograph - Tandem Mass Spectrometry Limit of Quantification Maximum Residue Level Mass Spectrometry National Reference Laboratory Plant Health and Seed Inspectorate Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed iii

5 1 INTRODUCTION The Specific Audit took place in the UK from 27 April to 1 May The mission team comprised 2 inspectors from the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) and one national expert. The Specific Audit formed part of the FVO's planned mission programme and was carried out as a component of a General Audit, in accordance with Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules. This report focuses on the sector specific issues identified during the audit. It does not necessarily include aspects relating to Regulation (EC) No 882/2004; these aspects will be addressed in the subsequent General Audit report. The inspection team was accompanied during the whole mission by representatives from the central competent authorities, the Chemicals Regulation Directorate (CRD) and the Food Standards Agency (FSA). An opening meeting was held on 27 April 2009 with representatives from the central competent authorities the CRD and the FSA. At this meeting, the objectives and itinerary for the mission were confirmed by the inspection team. 2 OBJECTIVES OF THE MISSION The objective of the mission was to evaluate the control systems put in place for pesticide residues in foodstuffs of plant origin under Regulations (EC) No 396/2005, No 882/2004, No. 852/2004 and No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The follow-up of recommendations made by mission DG(SANCO)/7562/2005 was a further objective of the present mission. The mission formed part of a wider series of missions to Member States to evaluate control systems and operational standards in this sector. In pursuit of these objectives, the following sites were visited: Table 1: Mission visits and meetings 1

6 Visits/meetings Comments Competent Authorities Central Import Point Laboratories 2 1 Chemicals Regulation Directorate, York; Food Standards Agency, London; Airport, London Borough of Hillingdon. Private 1 Public Analyst, Wolverhampton. Analyses samples taken by London Borough of Hillingdon and samples taken within the national control programme for pesticide residues. INSPECTION VISITS Wholesale market Import point 1 1 Sampling for pesticide residue analysis by an inspector of the Horticultural Marketing Inspectorate. Sampling at import point by two inspectors of London Borough of Hillingdon. 3 LEGAL BASIS FOR THE MISSION The mission was carried out under the general provisions of Community legislation, in particular: Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the Parliament and the Council. Legal acts quoted in this report refer, where applicable, to the last amended version. Full references to the acts quoted in this report are given in Annex 1. 2

7 4 BACKGROUND Prior to this mission series, the FVO carried out two series of missions to all Member States concerning pesticides in food of plant origin. The final reports of these missions can be found on the DG Health and Consumer Protection Internet site: During these missions, a number of deficiencies in control systems were identified such as deficiencies in the planning and conducting of inspections for control of the marketing and use of plant protection products, the technique of sampling, assessment of risk to consumers and operation of the EU Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed, the follow up of infringements and the range of analysis in pesticide residue laboratories. Action Plans outlining how the recommendations would be addressed were submitted by the competent authorities. In addition, the FVO has published a country profile for the UK, which describes in summary form the control systems for food and feed safety, animal health, animal welfare and plant health. The country profile for the UK (DG(SANCO)/7713/2008) can be found at: Findings during missions to third countries have shown deficiencies in control systems for pesticide residues in plant produce exported to the EU. As a result, the assessment of controls at the point of import from third countries is included in the current series of missions. 5 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 5.1 LEGISLATION Legal requirements The EC legislation within the scope of this mission is listed in the Annex Findings National legislation to implement Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 has been adopted with additional monitoring and enforcement powers introduced under The Pesticides (Maximum Residue Levels) (England and Wales) Regulations 2008, The Pesticides (Maximum Residue Levels) (Scotland) Regulations 2008 and The Pesticides (Maximum Residue Levels) Regulations (Northern Ireland) The FSA informed the mission team that Commission Directive 2006/141/EC on infant formulae and follow-on formulae was implemented in the UK by: 3

8 Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula (England) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/3521) as amended by the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008 (SI 2008/2445) The Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula (Scotland) Regulations 2007 as amended by the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2008 (SSI 2008/322). The Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula (Wales) Regulations 2007 as amended by the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2008 (SI 2008/W.228) The Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2007 as amended by the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2008 (SR 2008/405) The FSA informed the mission team that Commission Directive 2006/125/EC on processed cereal-based foods and baby foods for infants and young children was implemented in the UK by: The Processed Cereal-Based Foods and Baby Foods for Infants and Young Children (England) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/3207) as amended by The Food for Particular Nutritional Uses (Miscellaneous Amendments) (England) Regulations 2007 The Processed Cereal-based Foods and Baby Foods for Infants and Young Children (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (SSI 2004 No. 8) as amended by The Food for Particular Nutritional Uses (Scotland) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2007 (SSI 2007/424) The Processed Cereal-based Foods and Baby Foods for Infants and Young Children (Wales) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/314 (W.32)) as amended by The Food for Particular Nutritional Uses (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Wales) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/2753 (W.232)) Processed Cereal-based Foods and Baby Foods for Infants and Young Children Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2003 (SR 2003/530) as amended by The Food for Particular Nutritional Uses (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2007 (SI 2007/408) All the above national legislation can be accessed from the Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI) at: Conclusions According to the information provided by the competent authorities, national legislation has been adopted to transpose and implement the EC legislation within the scope of this mission. 5.2 CONTROLS FOR PESTICIDE RESIDUES National control programmes 4

9 Legal requirements Article 26 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 requires Member States to carry out official controls on pesticide residues in order to enforce the compliance with the Regulation. Article 27 requires Member States to take a sufficient number and range of samples to ensure that the results are representative of the market. Article 30 requires Member States to establish multi-annual control programmes for pesticide residues. It specifies the requirements of the control programme and requires Member States to participate in the Community control programme Findings There is a risk based multi-annual control programme for pesticide residues in place. The programme for 2009 is aimed at assessing consumer exposure and compliance with current legislation. The programme specifies the products to be sampled and samples to be taken, the analyses to be carried out and pesticides to be analysed as required by the Regulation. The programme includes the Community control programme, and the laboratories designated to perform the analyses in the national programme can analyse for all of the pesticides specified in the Community control programme. A market research company has been designated for sampling.the majority of the 3,800 annual samples are taken at national supermarket chains and a small number of samples are taken from smaller shops, whereas Article 27(1) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 requires samples to be taken as close to the point of supply as is reasonable to allow for any subsequent enforcement action to be taken. In addition, inspectors from the Plant Health and Seeds Inspectorate (PHSI) take 144 samples of potatoes from various points in the supply chain, specifically ports, factories/processors, packers, wholesalers and cash & carry markets. Inspectors from the Horticultural Marketing Inspectorate (HMI) take some 350 samples at ports, wholesalers, secondary wholesalers, cash & carry outlets and distribution depots. Samples are taken as surveillance samples, which does not allow legal enforcement measures of the identified breaches with MRL legislation. In case of non-compliance, letters are written to the Food Business Operators (FBO) accordingly, and information on the FBO concerned is generally published in accordance with the competent authorities "brand-naming" policy and in line with Article 30(3) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. The information on non-compliant samples that exceed the acute reference dose for the active substance is forwarded to the FSA for risk assessment and possible notification in the EU Rapid Alert system for Food and Feed (RASFF). The national legislation allows taking enforcement samples, and there have been periodic targeted enforcement programmes involving the taking of enforcement samples for many years. In 2006 there was a particular enforcement programme targeting beans. Whilst there have been no similar programmes targeting individual commodities since that date, enforcement officers have continued to take individual enforcement samples since 2006, prompted by results arising from the national monitoring programme, where suspicions of illegal pesticide use have arisen. These have been followed through under formal investigations. Non-compliance can lead to further enforcement measures such as the destruction of the consignment. 5

10 The programme was submitted to the European Commission Conclusions A risk-based multi-annual national control programme is put in place as required by Article 30(1) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. The criteria and contents of the national programme fulfil the requirements of Article 30(1), and the programme was submitted to the Commission as required by Article 30(2) of the Regulation. The majority of samples are taken at point of supply to the consumers, which can impede subsequent enforcement action to be taken. The publication of brand names of samples exceeding MRLs is considered a proportionate, effective and dissuasive sanction for the supermarket chains, where many samples are taken, and many brand owners. However, for other FBOs, e.g. small importers, market stalls and corner shops, this approach is not always sufficient to ensure that the operator remedies the situation as required by Article 54 of Regulation (EC) No 882/ Controls of pesticide residues in imported produce Legal requirements Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 requires that food and feed imported into the Community shall comply with the relevant requirements of food law. Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 establishes that the CA shall carry out regular official controls on food and feed of non-animal origin imported into the EU. Article 16(3) of the Regulation requires Member States to ensure that the equipment and methodology are adequate for measuring the limit values laid down under Community or national legislation. Article 24 of the Regulation requires that the CA and the customs services shall cooperate closely for the organisation of the official controls Findings Imported produce is mainly controlled on the market level, but a small number of samples are taken in the national programme by HMI inspectors at ports/import points (46 samples are planned for 2009). In addition, local authorities may take samples for pesticide residue testing. This is mainly carried out at import points. Although all local authority sampling is reported back to the FSA and the EU annually, this area of pesticide testing falls under the general heading of contaminants. Specific reporting of local authority pesticide sampling levels will not be available until 2011 when the UK Food Surveillance System (UKFSS) has been fully rolled out. The mission team met the local authority of Hillingdon, who is performing import controls at a London Airport. In 2008, the import of some 15,000 consignments of fruit and vegetables with a total weight of 27,000 tonnes was notified to the authority. There is no obligation for importers to notify the imports, and the local authorities estimate that only some % of consignments are notified. There is no close co-operation between 6

11 the local authority in Hillingdon and Customs for the pesticide residue controls as required by Article 24(1) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. The local authority took 15 samples for pesticide residue analysis in 2008, based on risks identified through the RASFF system and the results of previous analyses. Another 5 samples were taken between January and April As there is not sufficient funding to take a higher number of samples according to the identified risk, the local authority applied for further funding from FSA, and funds for a survey with an additional 60 samples of beans, aubergines and okra were granted. The samples within the survey were taken from February to April 2009, and the survey is now being finalised. The results show that 17 of the 60 samples were non-compliant, and for 5 samples a possible health risk to the consumer was identified by the FSA. The FSA risk assessment for another non-compliant sample was not yet available at the time of the mission. In cases, where a possible health risk was identified, notifications were sent by FSA to the EU RASFF operated by the European Commission,. The sampling concentrates on produce for which a high risk was identified, but the produce is never detained during analysis in case of suspicion as required by Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. The local authorities stated that no cooling facilities are available at the Airport for the storage of detained produce of plant origin, and the average time lapse between sampling and availability of laboratory results was 8 working days, so that detained produce would have perished. Where non-compliance is detected, letters are sent to the importer and the local authority at the destination of the imported produce, and due to the time lapse between sampling and availability of laboratory results, non-compliant consignments are never detained and the measures required in Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 regarding rejection of consignments and protection of human health are not taken Conclusions There is a system of risk-based and targeted controls for pesticide residues in place at the import point of the visited London airport. Due to the lack of cooling facilities and delayed availability of laboratory results, measures required by Articles 18 and 19 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 cannot be taken, and the control duties cannot be carried out effectively, as required by Article 4(2)(c) and (d) of the Regulation Sampling Legal requirements Commission Directive 2002/63/EC establishes methods of sampling for the official control of pesticide residues. Article 11(7) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires that samples must be handled and labelled in such a way as to guarantee their legal and analytical validity Findings 7

12 The mission team observed a sampling procedure at the point of import at a London airport by 2 inspectors of the London Borough of Hillingdon, and sampling at a wholesale market in Birmingham by a HMI inspector. At the London airport, a lot of kg of yard-long beans was sampled. The lot comprised 20 boxes, and the beans were packed in bunches of 250 grams. The inspector opened 3 randomly selected boxes to take primary samples, whereas table 1 of the Annex of Commission Directive 2002/63/EC requires taking 5 primary samples from a lot of kg. The sample was correctly labelled and sealed, and a detailed sampling record was completed. In addition, the inspector took photos from the label. Cool boxes for the sample were available. The sample is normally delivered to the designated laboratory ("Public Analyst") by courier service on the next day and redirected to another laboratory where it normally arrives after two days. In Birmingham, a lot of 432 kg of pears and another lot of 550 kg of grapes were sampled from small market stalls within the wholesale market. Primary samples were correctly selected, the sample was correctly labelled and sealed, and a sampling record was completed, including general information about the nature and origin of the lot. The standardised sampling form, which is provided by CRD, contains a box for batch number and bar code, but it was not completed by the sampling officer. The sample is normally delivered to the laboratory by courier service on the next day Conclusions The requirements for sampling of Commission Directive 2002/63/EC were generally followed, although the minimum number of primary samples required by the Directive was not met at the point of import. The information regarding traceability of the lot, recorded especially by the sampling officers in London Hillingdon allows taking effective follow-up measures if necessary Reporting Legal requirements Article 30(3) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 requires Member States to publish, on an annual basis, all results of national residue monitoring on the Internet. Article 31 of the Regulation requires Member States to submit the results of official controls on pesticide residues to the Commission, the European Food Safety Authority, and the other Member States Findings In line with Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, the results of the national control programme are communicated annually to the European Commission by the CRD. As required by the Regulation, the data are also published at the website of the Pesticide Residues Committee: However, the results of pesticide residue samples taken by local authorities are not included in the reports. The FSA have started a project (Food Surveillance System) for the electronic reporting of 8

13 data in xml format from local authorities, which may allow more specific reporting of control data. The programme is expected to be finalised in The FSA stated that roll-out in Scotland and Northern Ireland is 96 % and 100 %, respectively, but there has been limited roll-out in England with only around 7 % of local authorities having access Conclusions The competent authorities generally report and publish the results of the national control programme for pesticide residues in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, but the results of pesticide residue samples taken by local authorities are not included. 5.3 CONTROLS OF ILLEGAL PESTICIDES Legal requirements Article 17 of Directive 91/414/EEC requires Member States to officially check the use of plant protection products to see whether they comply with the requirements of the Directive Findings Illegal use and illegal pesticides are checked by the Rural Payments Agency under their cross compliance inspections at farmers who receive a direct payment from the EU. Domestic producers are also checked by inspectors of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) following complaints or tip-offs, and by the national control programme for pesticide residues. Data from the national control programme are systematically checked for illegal and unauthorised uses, and 34 suspected illegal uses were identified since Infringements of pesticide MRLs are followed up at growers by the CRD Enforcement team, and results of the investigation of the individual cases were made available to the mission team. The suspected illegal uses were followed up through letters to the FBOs concerned and through site visits. Where illegal use was confirmed, enforcement action was taken. Co-ordination of controls takes place through the Enforcement Liaison Group Conclusions Illegal use and illegal pesticides are checked by the Rural Payments Agency, by HSE inspectors and by the CRD enforcement team, and there is a co-ordination group for these controls. 5.4 LABORATORIES FOR PESTICIDE RESIDUE ANALYSIS Legal requirements Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires that competent authorities only 9

14 designate laboratories that operate and are assessed and accredited in accordance with the standards EN ISO/IEC and EN ISO/IEC Article 33 of the Regulation requires Member States to designate National Reference Laboratories (NRL) for each Community reference laboratory, and specifies tasks for the NRL. Regulation (EC) No 2076/2005 allows competent authorities to designate a non accredited laboratory until the end of 2009, provided it has initiated and is pursuing the accreditation procedure and provides satisfactory guarantees that quality control schemes for the analyses it conducts for the purpose of official controls are in place. Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 requires that the methods of analysis of pesticide residues shall comply with the criteria set out in the relevant provisions of Community law relating to official controls for food and feed, and that all laboratories analysing samples for the official controls on pesticide residues participate in the Community proficiency tests for pesticide residues organised by the Commission Findings There are 4 laboratories designated for analysis of pesticide residues in samples of plant origin by CRD. Two of them are designated as NRLs for pesticide residues. All four laboratories are accredited as required by Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. The mission team visited a private laboratory in Wolverhampton designated for official pesticide residue analysis. Resources The laboratory has good facilities and is staffed with laboratory management, 12 routine analysts (second or third level education), and 2 staff for method development. The staff are suitably qualified and regularly trained. The laboratory is equipped with several singlequad GC-MSDs and two triplequads one GC-MS/MS and one LC-MS/MS. Further equipment is available, but not used routinely for pesticide residue analysis. Analysis The laboratory analyses official samples for pesticide residue analysis within the national control programme, samples of local authorities, and a very substantial number of private samples. The laboratory routinely uses a multi-residue method with detection by both LC-MS/MS and GC-MSD (modified QuEChERS method, EN 15662), and a single residue method for determination of dithiocarbamates based on GC-MSD determination of CS2. The current analytical screen comprises around 240 analytes. Sample preparation starts usually immediately after receipt of a sample and a frozen homogenate is stored for 6 month for possible duplicate analysis under suitable conditions. The observed turn-around time for analysis of routine samples is approximately 10 working days. For urgent samples, a turn-around time of 3 days was observed in some cases. Quality control procedures The methods for pesticide residue analysis have been accredited by the national Accreditation Body UKAS in The quality control system is well structured, organised and documented. It is based on the SANCO Method Validation and Quality Control Procedures for Pesticide Residues Analysis in Food and Feed (SANCO 2007/3131), which are published at: 10

15 Approximately 150 substances are included in the scope of accreditation, but validation data for the additional 90 substances in the analytical scope are currently being prepared. The modified QuEChERS method has been validated for a number of representative matrices at 2 concentration levels and with 5 replicates. Routine recovery checks are done at different levels and in adequate frequency (one spike per 10 samples and at least one spike per day at the lowest calibration level (LCL) of 0.01 mg/kg. Pesticide standards for preparation of calibration solutions are purchased as pure individual compounds where available. There are 3 levels of standard solutions with different shelf life individual stock solutions (6 month), mixed intermediate solutions (3 months) and working mixtures (2-3 weeks). Cucumber extract is generally used as matrix for 4 point matrix-matched calibration, except samples within the national control programme where the same matrix as the sample is used. All analytes are included in the routine calibration. For GC analyses, reporting levels at the LCL are routinely checked with 3 representative pesticides. However, the mission team observed that some of the reporting levels at 0,01 mg/kg for GC amenable pesticides, stated in the test reports, did not fulfil the requirement for signal-to-noise ratio of the SANCO Method Validation and Quality Control Procedures. Confirmation of positive samples is based on library comparison of full electron ionisation (EI) spectra in case of GC-MSD analysis and on the ratio of 2 transitions for LC-MS/MS analysis. Analysis of another test portion is performed for MRL exceedances. The laboratory regularly participates in EU proficiency tests with excellent results in the last two years Conclusions Substantial laboratory resources are available in the visited laboratory, which allow for the analysis of a high number of samples with a broad analytical screen. The low LODs generally ensure the determination of pesticide residues at the default MRL of 0.01 mg/kg established by Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, Directive 2006/125/EC and Directive 2006/141/EC, but not all reported LOQs are sufficiently supported by quality control data. The laboratory is accredited as required by Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 and has mostly implemented the SANCO Method Validation and Quality Control Procedures (SANCO 2007/3131). It has participated in the Community proficiency tests for pesticide residues as required by Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. NRLs have been designated as required by Article 33 of Regulation (EC) No 882/ RAPID ALERT SYSTEM FOR FOOD AND FEED Legal requirements Article 50 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 requires Member States to immediately 11

16 notify any information relating to the existence of a serious direct or indirect risk to human health deriving from food, to the Commission under the rapid alert system. Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 lays down that Articles 53 and 54 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 on emergency measures shall apply where pesticide residues or MRLs covered by this Regulation may endanger human or animal health requiring immediate action Findings In the case of non-compliant samples within the national control programme that exceed the acute reference dose for the active substance, the laboratories immediately inform the CRD, who forwards the information to the FSA, the contact point for the RASFF system. Non-compliant samples taken by Local Authorities are notified to the FSA by the laboratories through the Public Analyst and LA. The FSA perform a dietary risk assessment, on basis of the SANCO Draft Guidance Document on Notification criteria for pesticide residue findings to the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), SANCO/3346/2001. When a possible risk to the consumer is identified, the FSA informs the EU RASFF. Clear procedures are available at FSA, and there was evidence of rapid communication, once the cases were notified to the FSA. However, the mission team observed cases where results of targeted import control samples were only notified to the FSA more than one month after sampling. Twelve notifications related to pesticide residues were sent to the European Commission in 2009 until the time of the mission. In 2008, seven notifications had been sent, and 21 in Conclusions Procedures and responsibilities for the UK RASFF in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 are well defined. The risk assessment follows the Draft Guidance Document SANCO/3346/2001. Evidence from recent cases proves the systematic operation of the RASFF system, but timely information was not always achieved. 5.6 FOLLOW-UP OF PREVIOUS MISSIONS Legal requirements Article 45(5)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires Member States to take appropriate follow-up action in the light of the recommendations resulting from Community controls Findings The UK country profile contains three recommendations from the previous mission DG(SANCO)/7562/2005, where action by the CAs is not completed yet. 12

17 Recommendations of DG(SANCO)/7562/ The competent authorities should establish a co-ordinated and comprehensive control plan and associated procedures for all control inspectors involved in the marketing and use of plant protection products, in accordance with Article 17 of Council Directive 91/414/EEC. The competent authority should provide the appropriate documentation necessary to carry out the controls. 2. The competent authorities should ensure effective monitoring for pesticide residues in accordance with Council Directives 76/895/EEC and 90/642/EEC. In particular, the competent authorities should consider providing comprehensive guidance and training in sampling techniques, co-ordinating the activities of all authorities involved in pesticide residue monitoring, substantially increasing the range of pesticide substances being sought, so as to better reflect those substances being marketed and used and substantially shortening the time-span between sampling and reporting of the analytical results. 3. The competent authorities should ensure that all analytical results for pesticide residues in products of plant origin are reported in accordance with Articles 4(3) and 7(3) of Council Directives 90/642/EEC and 86/362/EEC respectively. Follow-up in DG(SANCO)/ In progress. Significant steps were made through the Enforcement Liaison group, but a co-ordinated control plan was stated to be a long-term objective. In progress. Significant improvements have been made regarding guidance and training for sampling, for co-ordination of activities and for increasing the range of pesticide substances sought. However, according to the CA, reporting of the results within one month after sampling is only achieved for 10 % of the samples. Action still required. The CRD stated that they currently do not have access to the pesticide control data of local authorities, but hope to get access to data through the Food Surveillance System project of FSA in the future Conclusions Action is still required for one of the remaining recommendations from mission DG(SANCO)/7564/2005. Significant steps were made to address two other recommendations, and implementation is still in progress. 13

18 6 OVERALL CONCLUSION For the control of pesticide residues, there is a risk-based, clear and transparent multi-annual national control programme in place, using accredited laboratories with appropriate equipment and methods. However, the controls mostly rely on sampling at the point of supply to the consumers and enforcement measures, in particular for non-compliant imported produce, need strengthening. 7 CLOSING MEETING A closing meeting was held on 1 May 2009 with CRD and FSA. At this meeting, the main findings and conclusions of the mission were presented by the inspection team. The representatives of the competent authorities offered some initial comments. The competent authorities expressed their reservations on the view of the FVO mission team that surveys on pesticide residues carried out by local authorities are part of official controls and that results of such surveys should be reported to the European Commission as part of the official controls carried out. 8 RECOMMENDATIONS No The competent authorities of the United Kingdom are invited to send to the Commission, within 25 working days of receipt of the report, an action plan in response to the recommendations. This action plan should clearly set out the manner and deadline by which the competent authorities will address each recommendation. The competent authorities are recommended to: Recommendation Take samples within the national control programme for pesticide residues as close to the point of supply as is reasonable to allow for any subsequent enforcement action to be taken, as required by Article 27(1) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Submit the results of official controls for pesticide residues by local authorities to the Commission, as required by Article 31(1) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. This should include results of surveys. When non-compliance is identified at other FBOs than the big supermarket chains, the competent authority shall take appropriate action to ensure that the operator remedies the situation, in accordance with Article 54 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. In case of suspicion of non-compliance, place produce from Third Countries under official detention until the result of official control is obtained, as required by Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 882/ Ensure that appropriate cooling facilities are available for storage of detained 14

19 No. 6 7 Recommendation produce during analysis, in accordance with Article 4(2)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. Ensure access to rapid laboratory analysis, in particular for targeted samples taken at import point, so that official control can be carried out effectively, in accordance with Article 4(2)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. Take appropriate enforcement action for non-compliant produce from Third Countries, as required by Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. The competent authority's response to the recommendations can be found at: 15

20 ANNEX 1 - LIST OF LEGISLATION REFERENCED IN THE REPORT Reference OJ Ref. Detail Directive 91/414/EEC Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 Directive 2002/63/EC Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 Regulation (EC) No 2076/2005 OJ L 230, , p OJ L 31, , p OJ L 187, , p OJ L 139, , p. 1, Corrected and re-published in OJ L 226, , p. 3 OJ L 165, , p. 1, Corrected and re-published in OJ L 191, , p. 1 OJ L 70, , p OJ L 338, , p Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety Commission Directive 2002/63/EC of 11 July 2002 establishing Community methods of sampling for the official control of pesticide residues in and on products of plant and animal origin and repealing Directive 79/700/EEC Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 February 2005 on maximum residue levels of pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin and amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC Commission Regulation (EC) No 2076/2005 of 5 December 2005 laying down transitional arrangements for the implementation of Regulations (EC) No 853/2004, (EC) No 854/2004 and (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Regulations (EC) No 853/2004 and (EC) No 854/

21 Reference OJ Ref. Detail Directive 2006/125/EC Directive 2006/141/EC Regulation (EC) No 1213/2008 OJ L 339, , p OJ L 401, , p OJ L 328, , p Commission Directive 2006/125/EC of 5 December 2006 on processed cereal-based foods and baby foods for infants and young children (Codified version) Commission Directive 2006/141/EC of 22 December 2006 on infant formulae and follow-on formulae and amending Directive 1999/21/EC Commission Regulation (EC) No 1213/2008 of 5 December 2008 concerning a coordinated multiannual Community control programme for 2009, 2010 and 2011 to ensure compliance with maximum levels of and to assess the consumer exposure to pesticide residues in and on food of plant and animal origin 17