Food and Drug Administration Pesticide Program
This is the tenth annual report summarizing the results of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) pesticide residue monitoring program. The nine previous reports, eight of which were published in the Journal of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists/Journal of AOAC International, presented results from Fiscal Years (FY) 1987 through 1994, and the ninth, which was published on FDA's World Wide Web site, presented the results from FY 1995. This current report includes findings obtained during FY1996 (October 1, 1995 through September 30, 1996) under regulatory and incidence/level monitoring. Selected Total Diet Study findings for 1996 are also presented. Results in this and earlier reports continue to demonstrate that levels of pesticide residues in the U.S. food supply are well below established safety standards.
Three federal government agencies share responsibility for the regulation of pesticides (1). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registers (i.e., approves) the use of pesticides and sets tolerances (the maximum amount of a residue that is permitted in or on a food) if use of that particular pesticide may result in residues in or on food (2). Except for meat, poultry, and certain egg products, for which the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is responsible, FDA is charged with enforcing tolerances in imported foods and in domestically produced foods shipped in interstate commerce. FDA also acquires incidence/level data on particular commodity/pesticide combinations and carries out its market basket survey, the Total Diet Study. For six years, USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), through contracts with participating states, has carried out a residue testing program directed primarily at raw agricultural products. FSIS and AMS report their pesticide residue data independently.
Under this approach to pesticide residue monitoring, FDA samples individual lots of domestically produced and imported foods and analyzes them for pesticide residues to enforce the tolerances set by EPA. Domestic samples are collected as close as possible to the point of production in the distribution system; import samples are collected at the point of entry into U.S. commerce. Emphasis is on the raw agricultural product, which is analyzed as the unwashed, whole (unpeeled), raw commodity. Processed foods are also included. If illegal residues (above EPA tolerance or no tolerance for that particular food/pesticide combination) are found in domestic samples, FDA can invoke various sanctions, such as a seizure or injunction. For imports, shipments may be stopped at the port of entry when illegal residues are found. "Detention without physical examination" (previously called automatic detention) may be invoked for imports based on the finding of one violative shipment if there is reason to believe that the same situation will exist in future lots during the same shipping season for a specific shipper, grower, geographic area, or country.
Domestic and import food samples collected are classified as either "surveillance" or "compliance". Most samples collected by FDA are the surveillance type; that is, there is no prior knowledge or evidence that a specific food shipment contains illegal pesticide residues. Compliance samples are taken as follow-up to the finding of an illegal residue or when other evidence indicates that a pesticide residue problem may exist.
Factors considered by FDA in planning the types and numbers of samples to collect include review of recently generated state and FDA residue data, regional intelligence on pesticide use, dietary importance of the food, information on the amount of domestic food that enters interstate commerce and of imported food, chemical characteristics and toxicity of the pesticide, and production volume/pesticide usage patterns.
To analyze the large numbers of samples whose pesticide treatment history is usually unknown, FDA uses analytical methods capable of simultaneously determining a number of pesticide residues. These multiresidue methods (MRMs) can determine about half of the approximately 400 pesticides with EPA tolerances, and many others that have no tolerances. The most commonly used MRMs can also detect many metabolites, impurities, and alteration products of pesticides (3).
Single residue methods (SRMs) or selective MRMs are used to determine some pesticide residues in foods (3). An SRM usually determines one pesticide; a selective MRM measures a relatively small number of chemically related pesticides. These types of methods are usually more resource-intensive per residue. Therefore, they are much less cost effective than MRMs.
The lower limit of residue measurement in FDA's determination of a specific pesticide is usually well below tolerance levels, which generally range from 0.1 to 50 parts per million (ppm). Residues present at 0.01 ppm and above are usually measurable; however, for individual pesticides, this limit may range from 0.005 to 1 ppm. In this report, the term "trace" is used to indicate residues detected, but at levels below the limit of quantitation (LQ).
Personnel in FDA field offices interact with their counterparts in many states to increase FDA's effectiveness in pesticide residue monitoring. In many cases, Memoranda of Understanding or more formal Partnership Agreements have been established between FDA and various state agencies. These agreements provide for more efficient monitoring by broadening coverage and eliminating duplication of effort, thereby maximizing federal and state resources allocated for pesticide activities. These arrangements vary from data sharing, joint planning, and state collection of samples for FDA examination, to FDA/State division of collection, analytical, and enforcement follow-up responsibilities for individual commodities or products of particular origin (i.e., imported vs. domestic products).
FDA also acquires and uses state-generated pesticide residue data to complement its own and other federally sponsored residue programs. Through 1996, FDA supported a contract with Mississippi State University (MSU) for the "Foodcontam" database, a compilation of state-collected residue data.
In addition to monitoring foods for human consumption, FDA also samples and analyzes domestic and imported feeds for pesticide residues. FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) directs this portion of the Agency's monitoring via its Feed Contaminants Compliance Program. Although animal feeds containing violative pesticide residues may present a potential hazard to a number of different categories of animals (e.g., laboratory animals, pets, wildlife, etc.), the major focus of CVM's monitoring is on feeds for livestock and poultry, animals that ultimately become, or produce, foods for human consumption.
FDA participates in several international agreements in an effort to minimize incidents of violative residues and remove trade barriers. A standing request for information from foreign governments on pesticides used on their food exported to the U.S. exists, a provision of the Pesticide Monitoring Improvements Act. FDA annually supplies foreign countries with reports on FDA's regulatory monitoring coverage and the findings in foods imported from their respective countries, as well as a personal computer database in which coverage and findings are summarized by country/commodity/pesticide combination.
Under the auspices of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the United States, Mexico, and Canada have established a NAFTA Technical Working Group on Pesticides (TWG). The NAFTA Pesticide TWG now serves as the focal point for all pesticide issues that arise among the three NAFTA countries. The TWG reports directly to the NAFTA Sanitary and Phytosanitary Committee.
One of the major goals of the TWG is to ensure that pesticide registrations and tolerances/maximum residue limits in the three countries are harmonized to the extent practical, while strengthening protection of public health and the environment. A number of projects have been undertaken by the TWG to identify differing residue limits in the NAFTA countries and to determine what steps might be taken to harmonize the limits. While this is a difficult process, the TWG envisions eventual movement toward a "North America" pesticide registration and tolerance system so that citizens of all three countries can be assured of the safety and legality of foods produced in any one of the NAFTA countries. FDA's activities on the TWG complement its ongoing bilateral cooperation with its counterparts in Mexico and Canada.
Beyond the North American agreements, FDA continues to collaborate with New Zealand to implement a "residue compliance assurance program." New Zealand, historically having excellent compliance with U.S. pesticide tolerances, is implementing a plan whereby their government would provide assurances that selected commodities exported to the United States would be in full compliance with U.S. tolerances.
A complementary approach to regulatory monitoring, incidence/level monitoring is used to increase FDA's knowledge about particular pesticide/commodity combinations by analyzing certain foods to determine the presence and levels of selected pesticides. In 1996, a survey of triazine herbicides in various commodities, which had been initiated in 1995, was completed.
Results of the statistically based monitoring survey for fresh apples and processed rice, which was initiated in 1994, has been published (4). This is the second of two FDA surveys of this type; the first covered domestic and imported pears and tomatoes (5). These statistically based surveys were initiated to determine whether FDA data acquired under regulatory monitoring are statistically representative of the overall residue situation for a particular pesticide, commodity, or place of origin. In FDA's surveillance sampling for pesticide residues, sampling bias may occur by weighting sampling toward such factors as commodity or place of origin with a past history of violations or large volume of import shipments. In addition, the total number of samples of a given commodity analyzed for a particular pesticide each year may not be sufficient to draw specific conclusions about the residue situation for the whole volume of that commodity in commerce. Therefore, the objective of these statistically based surveys is to determine whether violation rates, frequency of occurrence of residues, and residue levels obtained from such a sampling regimen differ from those obtained through FDA's traditional surveillance approach.
The Total Diet Study is another major element of FDA's pesticide residue monitoring program (6). In its previous annual pesticide reports, FDA provided Total Diet Study findings for 1987-1995 (7a, 7b). More detailed information, including estimated dietary intakes of pesticide residues covering June 1984-April 1986 (8) and July 1986-April 1991 (9), has been published. In September 1991, FDA implemented revisions to the Total Diet Study that were formulated in 1990 (10). These revisions primarily consisted of collection and analysis of an updated and expanded number (to 261) of food items, addition of six age/sex groups (for a total of 14), and revised analytical coverage. Details of that revision are published (11, 12).
In conducting the Total Diet Study, FDA personnel purchase foods from supermarkets or grocery stores four times per year, once from each of four geographic regions of the country. The 261 foods that comprise each market basket represent over 3500 different foods reported in USDA food consumption surveys; for example, apple pie represents all fruit pies and fruit pastries. Each collection is a composite of like foods purchased in three cities in a given region. The foods are prepared table-ready and then analyzed for pesticide residues (as well as radionuclides, industrial chemicals, toxic elements, trace and macro elements, vitamin B6, and folic acid). The levels of pesticides found are used in conjunction with USDA food consumption data to estimate the dietary intakes of the pesticide residues.
In 1996, 10,374 samples (9,881 surveillance and 493 compliance) were analyzed under regulatory monitoring. Of these, 5,062 were domestic and 5,312 were imports.
Figure 1 shows the percentage of the 4960 domestic surveillance samples by commodity group with no residues found, nonviolative residues found, and violative residues found. (A violative residue is defined in this report as a residue which exceeds a tolerance or a residue at a level of regulatory significance for which no tolerance has been established in the sampled food.) As in earlier years, fruits and vegetables accounted for the largest proportion of the commodities analyzed in 1996; those two commodity groups comprised 63.5% of the total number of domestic surveillance samples. In 1996, no violative residues were found in more than 99% of all domestic surveillance samples (a similar percentage to those of the past several years).
Appendix A contains more detailed data on domestic surveillance monitoring findings by commodity, including the total number of samples analyzed, the percent samples with no residues found, and the percent violative samples. Of the 4960 domestic surveillance samples, 64.4% had no detectable residues and less than 1% had violative residues. In the largest commodity groups, fruits and vegetables, 46.1% and 64.2% of the samples, respectively, had no residues detected. 1.3% of the fruit samples and 1.1% of the vegetable samples contained violative residues (Figure 1). In the milk/dairy products/eggs group, 97.4% of the samples had no residues detected, and no violative residues were found. Forty-four samples of baby foods/formula were analyzed (see category Other). This included 28 vegetable, 10 cereal, 2 fruit juice, and 4 formula samples. None of the samples had violative residues.
Findings by commodity group for the 4921 import surveillance samples are shown in Figure 2. Fruits and vegetables accounted for 83.6% of these samples. Overall, no violative residues were found in 97.4% of the import surveillance samples (96.5% in 1994 and 96.8% in 1995).
Appendix B contains detailed data on the import surveillance samples. Of the 4921 samples analyzed, 64.4% had no residues detected, and less than 3% violative residues. Fruits and vegetables had 57.0 and 63.0%, respectively, with no residues detected. The fruit group and the vegetable group had less than 3% each with violative residues. No residues were found in 94.6% of the dairy products/eggs group and 87.9% of the fish/shellfish group, and no violative residues were found in either of those groups.
Pesticide monitoring data collected under FDA's regulatory monitoring approach in 1996 are available to the public as a computer database. This database summarizes FDA 1996 regulatory monitoring coverage and findings by country/commodity/pesticide combination. The database also includes the monitoring data by individual sample from which the summary information was compiled. Information on how to obtain this database as well as those for 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995 is provided at the end of this report.
Domestic. In 1996, domestic surveillance samples were collected from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and American Samoa. The largest numbers of samples were collected from the states in which agriculture is a major industry.
Import. Samples representing food shipments from 91 countries were collected. (Origin of some additional samples was unspecified.) Table 1 lists numbers of samples (surveillance and compliance) collected from each country. Mexico, as usual, was the source of the largest number of samples, reflecting the volume and diversity of commodities imported from that country, especially during the winter months.
In 1996, 102 domestic and 391 import compliance samples were collected and analyzed (Table 2). Because compliance samples are collected when a pesticide residue problem is known or suspected, violation rates are expectedly higher than those for surveillance samples: 7.8% for domestic (12% in 1995) and 11.5% for imports (11% in 1995). The corresponding violation rates for surveillance samples were 0.9% for domestic and 2.6% for imports.
Most of the 1996 compliance samples were collected as follow-up to violative surveillance samples. These included follow-up samples from the same shipment as the violative surveillance sample, follow-up samples of the same commodity from the same grower or shipper, and audit samples from shipments presented for entry into the United States with a certificate of analysis (i.e., shipments subject to detention without physical examination).
Table 3 lists the 397 pesticides that were detectable by the methods used; the 92 pesticides that were actually found are indicated.
FDA conducts ongoing research to expand the pesticide coverage of its monitoring program. This research includes testing the behavior of new or previously untested pesticides through existing analytical methods, and development of new methods to cover pesticides that cannot be determined by methods currently used by FDA. The research encompasses both U.S.-registered pesticides and foreign-use pesticides that are not registered in the United States. The list of pesticides detectable for 1996 (Table 3) reflects the addition of a number of pesticides whose recovery through the analytical methods used was demonstrated as a result of ongoing research.
In 1996, 10 states contributed data to the Foodcontam program. Wisconsin, which had participated during 1995, did not participate in 1996, resulting in one fewer state. These 10 states submitted data on 6,520 samples from their regulatory food quality programs, down 3,955 compared to the number in 1995. Table 4 lists the 10 states, the number of samples for each, and the number and percentage of samples with positive and "significant" findings. In this program, a significant finding indicates a residue that exceeds federal or state regulatory limits, is not covered by a tolerance for the particular chemical/commodity combination, or denotes some unusual finding(s). For the 6,520 samples reported, 1.9% (126 samples) contained significant residues.
The 1996 Foodcontam report was the final one. The contract under which FDA has supported the data compilation for 10 years has been completed and will not continue in the future.
In 1996, FDA collected and analyzed 513 domestic feed samples (506 surveillance, 7 compliance) and 86 import feed samples (76 surveillance, 10 compliance) for pesticides. Of the 506 domestic surveillance samples, 308 (60.9%) had no pesticide residues detected and 5 (1.0%) contained violative residues (Table 5). The latter involved two samples with pirimiphos-methyl and one sample each with dieldrin, chlorpyrifos, and chlorpyrifos-methyl. Of 76 import surveillance samples, 57 (75.0%) had no pesticide residues detected and 4 (5.3%) contained violative residues of chlorpyrifos, malathion, and/or captan.
In the 198 domestic surveillance feed samples in which one or more pesticides weredetected, a total of 290 residues were detected (221 quantifiable and 69 trace). Malathion, chlorpyrifos-methyl, diazinon, chlorpyrifos, and pirimiphos-methyl were the most frequently found and accounted for 90.0% of all residues detected. The findings in samples with quantifiable residues are displayed in Table 6.
In summary, no residues were found in over 64% of both domestic and import surveillance samples (Figure 3) analyzed under FDA's regulatory monitoring approach in 1996. Less than 1% of domestic and less than 3% of import surveillance samples had residue levels that were violative. The findings for 1996 demonstrate that pesticide residue levels in foods are generally well below EPA tolerances, corroborating results presented in earlier reports (7a, 7b). Ten states contributed data on 6,520 samples to the Foodcontam database. Among these, 26.1% contained measurable residues and 1.9% contained significant residues. Animal feed samples (513 domestic, 86 import) were analyzed. Over 60% of the domestic surveillance samples and 75% of the import surveillance samples contained no residues.
The triazines are one of the most widely used classes of herbicides, and EPA has established tolerances for them on many commodities. Interest in triazines has increased recently because of potential leaching of the herbicides and their degradation products into ground and surface water. Residues of these chemicals have rarely been detected in foods, although FDA has routinely looked for the parent compounds.
Recently, FDA's Southeast Regional Laboratory in Atlanta developed a method capable of determining 19 triazine herbicides and 4 metabolites (13). Average recoveries ranged from 81 to 106% for the parent herbicides and 60 to 88% for the metabolites. The method was validated by the Minneapolis District Laboratory (14) and used to analyze a number of food samples in 1995 and 1996. In 1996, this method was used to analyze 103 samples (56 domestic samples from 9 states and 47 import samples from 9 countries) (Table 7). Residues were found in six domestic samples, all of simazine in oranges. Four samples had trace amounts and two samples had 0.03 and 0.01 ppm, respectively. None was violative. No triazine residues were detected in the import samples.
Apples. The original goal of the project was to collect 1600 samples of apples (800 domestic and 800 import). Actually, 769 domestic and 1062 imported samples were collected and analyzed using both MRMs and SRMs. (These numbers are not included in the counts under Fruits in Appendixes A and B.) The incidence of residues was 85% for domestic and 86% for imported apples. Benomyl, a widely used fungicide, was found with greatest frequency in domestic apples, while diphenylamine was found most often in imported apples. One domestic and 4 imported samples contained violative residues of pesticides for which there are no U.S. tolerances on apples. The statistically weighted violation rates for domestic and imported apples were 0.30% (0.13 unweighted) and 0.41% (0.38 unweighted), respectively (4).
Rice. About 575 domestic and 800 imported samples were scheduled for collection. A total of 598 domestic and 612 imported samples were collected and analyzed using both MRMs and SRMs. (Numbers are not included in Appendixes A and B.) The incidence of residues was 56% in domestic and 12% in imported rice. Malathion had the greatest frequency of occurrence in both groups of rice. Eight domestic and nine imported samples were violative, all as a result of the use of pesticides for which there are no U.S. tolerances on rice. The statistically weighted violation rates for domestic and imported rice were 0.43% (1.3 unweighted) and 1.1% (1.5 unweighted), respectively (4).
Although there may be specific differences between results obtained from regulatory monitoring and statistically based monitoring of domestic and imported apples and rice, in general, the results are in agreement, as was the case in similar monitoring of domestic and imported pears and tomatoes (5). These two studies of four commodities corroborate the low levels of pesticide residues found in FDA's regulatory monitoring and demonstrate that FDA's regulatory monitoring provides a reasonably reliable estimate of pesticide residues in the U.S. food supply.
A survey of triazine herbicides in various commodities was carried out. Few residues were found, and none were violative. Results of the statistically based study for apples and rice show that, as in FDA's regulatory monitoring, the levels of most pesticide residues found in these two commodities are generally well below U.S. tolerances, and few violative residues are found.
The Total Diet Study is unique in that it determines pesticide residues in foods prepared for consumption (6). Of the nearly 300 chemicals that can be determined by the analytical methods used, 99 pesticide and pesticide-related chemicals were found in the foods analyzed in the three collections reported here. To measure the low levels of pesticides found in the Total Diet Study foods, the analytical methods used are modified to permit measurement at levels 5-10 times lower than those normally used in regulatory monitoring. In general, residues present at or above 1 part per billion can be measured.
Table 8 lists the 20 most frequently found residues (thosefound in >2% of the samples), the total number of findings, and the percent occurrence in the three market baskets (778 food items)analyzed in 1996. The three most frequently observed chemicals, p,p'-DDE, malathion, and chlorpyrifos-methyl, repeat a pattern observed for the past several years. The levels of these pesticides, as well as the others listed in Table 8, were well below regulatory limits.
Information obtained through the Total Diet Study is used to estimate dietary intakes of pesticides; these intakes are then compared with established standards. Food consumption data to be used in estimating dietary intakes for the revised food list have only recently been finalized. Therefore, dietary intake information for the market baskets collected since 1991 will be reported separately.
For several years, FDA has collected and analyzed a number of baby foods in addition to those covered under the Total Diet Study. Between 1991 and 1996, this adjunct to the Total Diet Study included 23 different food items (14 fruit juices or fruits, 4 fruit desserts, 4 grain products, and 1 vegetable). Table 9 lists the 18 most frequently found pesticide residues in three collections of these 23 foods (69 samples total) in 1996. Levels found were in the low part per billion (ppb) range.
In 1996, the types of pesticide residues found and their frequency of occurrence in the Total Diet Study were generally consistent with those given in previous FDA reports (7a, 7b). The pesticide residue levels found were well below regulatory standards. An adjunct survey of baby foods in 1991-1996 also provided evidence of only small amounts of pesticide residues in those foods.
A total of 10,374 samples of domestically produced food and imported food from 92 countries was analyzed for pesticide residues in 1996. Of these, 9,881 were surveillance samples, which are collected when there is no evidence of a pesticide problem. No residues were found in 64.4% of both domestic surveillance and import surveillance samples. The higher violation rates in the 493 compliance samples reflect the fact that they are collected and analyzed when a pesticide problem is suspected.
In the final year during which state residue data were collected in the Foodcontam database, 10 states contributed data on 6,520 samples. Among these, 26.1% contained measurable residues and 1.9% contained significant residues. FDA collected and analyzed animal feed samples (513 domestic, 86 import) for pesticides. Over 60% of the domestic surveillance samples and 75% of the import surveillance samples contained no residues.
A survey of fruits analyzed for residues of triazine herbicides was performed. Few residues were found, and none were violative. Results of the statistically based study for apples and rice show that, as in FDA's regulatory monitoring, the levels of most pesticide residues found in these two commodities are generally well below U.S. tolerances, and few violative residues are found.
Most of the Total Diet Study findings for 1996 were generally similar to those found in earlier periods; details of findings will be published separately. An adjunct survey of baby foods in 1991-1996 also provided evidence of only small amounts of pesticide residues in those foods.
This report was compiled through the efforts of the following FDA personnel: Bernadette M. McMahon, Mark S. Wirtz, and Charles H. Parfitt (Division of Pesticides and Industrial Chemicals), Byron O. Bohannon and Young H. Lee (Division of Programs and Enforcement Policy), Office of Plant and Dairy Foods and Beverages; Sharon A. Macuci (Division of Information Resources Management), Office of Management Systems, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Washington, DC., Randall Lovell, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Rockville, MD, Sheila K. Egan, James L. Daft, and David Graham, Kansas City District, Lenexa, KS.
The database containing the data from which this report was derived is also available from FDA's World Wide Web site, at http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/list.html. FDA pesticide monitoring data collected under the regulatory monitoring approach in 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995 are available for purchase on personal computer diskettes from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161 (telephone 703-487-4650); order numbers are: 1992, PB94-500899; 1993, PB94-501681; 1994, PB95-503132; and 1995, PB96-503156.
(1) Yess, N.J. (1995) U.S. Food and Drug Administration monitoring of pesticide residues in foods. Pestic. Outlook 6, 28-31.
(2) Code of Federal Regulations (1996) Title 40, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, Parts 180, 185, and 186.
(3) Pesticide Analytical Manual Volume I (3rd Ed., 1994 and subsequent revisions) and Volume II (1971 and subsequent revisions), Food and Drug Administration, Washington, DC (available from National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161).
(4) Roy, R.R., Wilson, P., Laski, R.R., Roberts, J.I., Weishaar, J.A., Bong R.L., & Yess N.J. (1997) Monitoring of domestic and imported apples and rice by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Pesticide Program. J. AOAC Int. 80, 883-894.
(5) Roy, R.R., Albert, R.H., Wilson, P., Laski, R.R., Roberts, J.I., Hoffman, T.J., Bong R.L., Bohannon, B.O., & Yess, N.J. (1995) U.S. Food and Drug Administration Pesticide Program: Incidence/Level Monitoring of Domestic and Imported Pears and Tomatoes. J AOAC Int 78, 930-940.
(6) Pennington, J.A.T., Capar, S.G., Parfitt, C.H., & Edwards, C.W. (1996) History of the Food and Drug Administration's Total Diet Study (Part II), 1987-1993. J. AOAC Int. 79, 163-170.
(7a) Food and Drug Administration (1995) Food and Drug Administration pesticide program - residue monitoring - 1994. J. AOAC Int. 78, 117A-143A (and earlier reports in the series).
(7b) Food and Drug Administration (1996) Food and Drug Administration pesticide program - residue monitoring - 1995. Available from FDA's World Wide Web site at HTTP://VM.CFSAN.FDA.GOV.
(8) Gunderson, E.L. (1995) Dietary intakes of pesticides, selected elements, and other chemicals: FDA Total Diet Study, June 1984-April 1986. J. AOAC Int. 78, 910-921.
(9) Gunderson, E.L. (1995) FDA Total Diet Study, July 1986-April 1991, dietary intakes of pesticides, selected elements, and other chemicals. J. AOAC Int. 78, 1353- 1363.
(10) Pennington, J.A.T. (1992) Total Diet Studies: the identification of core foods in the United States food supply. Food Addit. Contam. 9, 253-264.
(11) Pennington, J.A.T. (1992) The 1990 revision of the FDA Total Diet Study. J. Nutr. Educ. 24, 173-178.
(12) Pennington, J.A.T. (1992) Appendices for the 1990 revision of the Food and Drug Administration's Total Diet Study. PB92-176239/AS, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.
(13) Pardue, J.R. (1995) Multiresidue method for the chromatographic determination of triazine herbicides and their metabolites in raw agricultural products. J. AOAC Int. 78, 856-862.
(14) Bong, R., Kramer, J., Heaney, L., & Murphy, L. (1995) Validation of a multiresidue method for triazine herbicides in various food commodities. Lab. Inf. Bull. 3998, Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD.
|
Mexico |
1752 |
Taiwan (Formosa) |
44 |
|
|
Chile |
409 |
Philippines |
42 |
|
|
Canada |
329 |
Unspecified |
37 |
|
|
Netherlands (Holland) |
238 |
Japan |
36 |
|
|
Guatemala |
186 |
France |
35 |
|
|
Thailand |
175 |
Argentina |
30 |
|
|
China, Peoples Rep. |
172 |
Australia |
29 |
|
|
Italy |
164 |
Brazil |
27 |
|
|
Costa Rica |
141 |
Jamaica |
27 |
|
|
India |
123 |
Hong Kong |
24 |
|
|
Spain (inc. Canary Islands) |
123 |
Germany, Federal Rep. |
22 |
|
|
Dominican Republic |
107 |
United Kingdom |
21 |
|
|
Ecuador |
91 |
Lebanon |
20 |
|
|
Peru |
79 |
South Africa |
20 |
|
|
Israel |
70 |
Poland |
18 |
|
|
Colombia |
67 |
Venezuela |
18 |
|
|
Panama |
67 |
Morocco |
17 |
|
|
Turkey |
59 |
El Salvador |
15 |
|
|
Indonesia |
51 |
Pakistan |
15 |
|
|
Greece |
49 |
Nicaragua |
13 |
|
|
Korea, Rep. Of (South Korea) |
49 |
Denmark |
12 |
|
|
Honduras |
47 |
Trinidad & Tobago |
11 |
|
|
Belgium |
44 |
Viet-Nam, Rep. Of |
11 |
|
|
New Zealand |
44 |
|
Afghanistan Algeria Austria Bahamas Belize Bermuda Bolivia Br. Virgin Is. Bulgaria Czech Republic Egypt Fiji Finland Ghana Grenada Guyana Haiti Hungary Ireland Ivory Coast Kenya Korea, Dem. Peoples |
Malagasy Rep. Malawi Malaysia Moldova Nigeria Norway Oman Papua New Guinea Portugal (inc. Azores) Russia Saudi Arabia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovenia Sri Lanka (Ceylon) St. Lucia Surinam Sweden Switzerland United Arab Emirates Uruguay Yugoslavia Zambia |
|||
| a Surveillance plus compliance samples. | ||||
|
Commodity Group |
Total No. of Samples |
Samples without Residues, % |
Samples Violative, % |
Domestic |
|
|
|
|
Grains and Grain Products |
6 |
50.0 |
0.0 |
|
Milk/Dairy Products/Eggs |
6 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
Fish/Shellfish |
8 |
62.5 |
0.0 |
|
Fruits |
33 |
30.3 |
12.1 |
|
Vegetables |
41 |
43.9 |
9.8 |
|
Other |
8 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
Total |
102 |
49.0 |
7.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
Import |
|
|
|
|
Grains and Grain Products |
74 |
59.5 |
0.0 |
|
Milk/Dairy Products/Eggs |
4 |
75.0 |
0.0 |
|
Fish/Shellfish |
9 |
88.9 |
0.0 |
|
Fruits |
118 |
57.6 |
22.0 |
|
Vegetables |
128 |
57.8 |
14.1 |
|
Other |
58 |
87.9 |
1.7 |
|
Total |
391 |
63.4 |
11.5 |
|
Acephate*
Acetochlor Acrinathrin Alachlor Aldicarb* Aldrin Allethrin Allidochlor Alpha-cypermethrin Ametryn Aminocarb Amitraz Anilazine Aramite Atrazine Azinphos-ethyl Azinphos-methyl* Bendiocarb Benfluralin Benodanil Benomyl/carbendazimc Benoxacor Bensulide Benzoylprop-ethyl 6-Benzyladenine BHC* Bifenox Bifenthrin* Binapacryl S-Bioallethrin Biphenyl* Bitertanol* Bromacil Bromophos Bromophos-ethyl Bromopropylate Bromoxynil Bufencarb Bulan Bupirimate Butachlor Butralin Butylate Cadusafos Captafol* Captan* Carbaryl* Carbofuran* Carbophenothion Carbosulfan Carboxin Chlorbenside Chlorbromuron Chlorbufam Chlordane* Chlordecone Chlordimeform* Chlorethoxyfos Chlorfenapyr Chlorfenvinphos Chlorflurecol methyl ester Chlorimuron ethyl ester Chlornitrofen Chlorobenzilate 3-Chloro-5-methyl-4-nitro-1H-pyrazole Chloroneb Chloropicrin* Chloropropylate Chlorothalonil* Chloroxuron Chlorpropham* Chlorpyrifos* Chlorpyrifos-methyl* Chlorthiophos Clomazone Coumaphos Crotoxyphos Crufomate Cyanazine Cyanofenphos Cyanophos Cycloate Cycluron Cyfluthrin Cymoxanil Cypermethrin* Cyprazine Cyproconazole DCPA* DDT* Deltamethrin Deltamethrin, trans Demeton* Desmetryn Dialifor Di-allate N,N-Diallyl-dichloroacetamide Diazinon* Dichlobenil Dichlofenthion Dichlofluanid Dichlone 4-(Dichloroacetyl)-1-oxa-4-azapiro[4.5]decane 2,6-Dichlorobenzamide Dichlorvos* Diclobutrazol Diclofop-methyl Dicloran* Dicofol* Dicrotophos Dieldrin* Diethatyl-ethyl Dilan Dimethachlor Dimethametryn Dimethipin Dimethoate* Dinitramine Dinobuton Dinocap Dioxabenzofos Dioxacarb Dioxathion Diphenamid Diphenylamine* Dipropetryn Disulfoton Diuron Edifenphos Endosulfan* Endrin* EPN* Esfenvalerate* Etaconazole Ethalfluralin Ethephon Ethiofencarb Ethion* Ethofumesate Ethoprop Ethoxyquin* Ethylenebisdithiocarbamates*d Etridiazole Etrimfos Famphur Fenamiphos Fenarimol Fenbuconazole Fenfuram Fenitrothion* Fenoxaprop ethyl ester Fenoxycarb Fenpropathrin* Fenpropimorph Fenson Fensulfothion Fenthion Fenvalerate* Fipronil Flamprop-M-isopropyl Flamprop-methyl Fluazifop butyl ester Fluchloralin Flucythrinate Flusilazole Fluvalinate Folpet* Fonofos* Formothion Fosthiazate Fuberidazole Furilazole Gardona Heptachlor* Heptenophos Hexachlorobenzene* Hexaconazole* Hexazinone Hexythiazox |
Imazalil*
Imazamethabenz methyl ester Iprobenfos Iprodione* Iprodione metabolite isomer* Isazofos Isocarbamid Isofenphos Isoprocarb Isopropalin Isoprothiolane Isoxaben Isoxaflutole Lactofen Lambda-cyhalothrin Lenacil Leptophos Lindane* Linuron* Malathion* Mecarbam* Mephosfolan Merphos Metalaxyl* Metaldehyde* Metasystox thiol Metazachlor Methabenzthiazuron Methamidophos* Methidathion* Methiocarb* Methomyl* Methoprotryne Methoxychlor* 2-Methoxy-5,6-trichloropyridine Metobromuron Metolachlor Metolcarb Metribuzin Mevinphos* Mirex Monocrotophos* Monolinuron Monuron Myclobutanil* Naled* Napropamide Neburon Nitralin Nitrapyrin Nitrofen Nitrofluorfen Nitrothal-isopropyl Norea Norflurazon Nuarimol Octhilinone Ofurace Omethoate* Ovex Oxadiazon Oxadixyl Oxamyl* Oxydemeton-methyl Oxyfluorfen Oxythioquinox Paclobutrazol Paraquat* Parathion* Parathion-methyl* Pebulate Penconazole Pendimethalin Pentachlorobenzene* Pentachlorobenzonitrile Pentachlorophenyl methyl ether* Permethrin* Perthane Phenothrin Phenthoate* Phenylphenol, ortho-* Phorate* Phosalone* Phosmet* Phosphamidon* Phoxim oxygen analog Piperonyl butoxide* Piperophos Pirimicarb Pirimiphos-ethyl Pirimiphos-methyl* Pretilachlor Probenazole Prochloraz Procyazine Procymidone* Prodiamine Profenofos* Profluralin Prolan Promecarb Prometryn Pronamide Propachlor Propanil Propargite* Propazine Propetamphos Propham Propiconazole Propoxur Prothiofos Prothoate Pyracarbolid Pyrazon Pyrazophos* Pyrethrins Pyridaphenthion Pyrimethanil Quinalphos* Quintozene* Quizalofop ethyl ester Ronnel Schradan Secbumeton Simazine* Simetryn Strobane Sulfallate Sulfotep Sulphenone Sulprofos TCMTB Tebuconazole Tebupirimfos Tecnazene TEPP Terbacil Terbufos Terbumeton Terbuthylazine Terbutryn Tetradifon Tetraiodoethylene Tetrasul Thiabendazole* Thiazopyr Thiodicarb Thiometon Thionazin Thiophanate-methyl THPI* Tolylfluanid Toxaphene Tralomethrin Traloxydim Triadimefon* Triadimenol* Tri-allate Triazamate Triazophos Tribufos* Trichlorfon Tricyclazole Tridiphane Trietazine Triflumizole Trifluralin* Triflusulfuron methyl ester Trimethacarb Vamidothion sulfone Vernolate Vinclozolin* XMC |
| a The list of pesticides detectable is expressed in terms of the parent pesticide. However, monitoring coverage and findings may have included metabolites, impurities, and alteration products. | |
| b Some of these pesticides are no longer manufactured or registered for use in the United States. | |
| c The analytical methodology determines carbendazim, which may result from use of benomyl or carbendazim. | |
| d Such as maneb. | |
|
State |
Total # Samples |
# Positive |
% Positive |
# Significant |
% Significant |
|
Arkansas |
277 |
10 |
3.6 |
0 |
0.0 |
|
California |
3210 |
1008 |
31.4 |
39 |
1.2 |
|
Florida |
634 |
223 |
35.2 |
67 |
10.6 |
|
Georgia |
534 |
111 |
20.8 |
6 |
1.1 |
|
Indiana |
142 |
112 |
78.9 |
0 |
0.0 |
|
North Carolina |
321 |
106 |
33.0 |
5 |
1.6 |
|
New York |
416 |
6 |
1.4 |
2 |
0.5 |
|
Oregon |
178 |
6 |
3.4 |
1 |
0.6 |
|
Pennsylvania |
534 |
97 |
18.2 |
4 |
0.7 |
|
Virginia |
274 |
23 |
8.4 |
2 |
0.7 |
|
Total |
6520 |
1702 |
26.1 |
126 |
1.9 |
|
Type of Feed |
Total # Samples |
Without residues |
Violative Samples | ||
|
# |
% |
# |
% | ||
|
Whole/ground grains |
207 |
133 |
64.3 |
2 |
1.0 |
|
Animal by-products |
94 |
63 |
67.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
|
Plant by-products |
89 |
54 |
60.7 |
3 |
3.4 |
|
Mixed feed rations |
77 |
23 |
29.9 |
0 |
0.0 |
|
Hay & hay products |
39 |
35 |
89.7 |
0 |
0.0 |
|
Total |
506 |
308 |
60.9 |
5 |
1.0 |
|
Pesticide |
No. of Samples with Quantifiable Residues |
Residue Found, ppm | |
|
Range |
Median | ||
|
malathion |
115 |
0.010-5.22 |
0.100 |
|
chlorpyrifos-methyl |
38 |
0.010-0.909 |
0.044 |
|
diazinon |
19 |
0.010-0.447 |
0.033 |
|
chlorpyrifos |
17 |
0.010-3.40 |
0.059 |
|
pirimiphos-methyl |
9 |
0.014-2.16 |
0.070 |
|
all others |
23 |
0.007-2.50 |
0.043 |
|
Commodity |
Number of Samples Analyzed | |
| Domestic | Import | |
|
Apples |
17 |
3 |
|
Bananas |
2 |
18 |
|
Grapes |
6 |
14 |
|
Oranges |
18 |
2 |
|
Pears |
10 |
10 |
|
Plums |
3 |
- |
|
Total |
56 |
47 |
|
Pesticideb |
Total No. of Findings |
Occurrence, % |
|
DDT |
140 |
18 |
|
Malathion |
136 |
17 |
|
Chlorpyrifos-methyl |
122 |
16 |
|
Endosulfan |
87 |
11 |
|
Dieldrin |
76 |
10 |
|
Chlorpyrifos |
72 |
9 |
|
Chlorpropham |
45 |
6 |
|
Iprodione |
36 |
5 |
|
Carbarylc |
33 |
4 |
|
Methamidophos |
32 |
4 |
|
Dicloran |
27 |
3 |
|
Thiabendazoled |
27 |
3 |
|
Permethrin |
23 |
3.0 |
|
Dimethoate |
22 |
2.8 |
|
Acephate |
21 |
2.7 |
|
Dicofol |
21 |
2.7 |
|
Lindane |
21 |
2.7 |
|
Diazinon |
19 |
2.4 |
|
BHC |
18 |
2.3 |
|
Toxaphene |
18 |
2.3 |
| a Based on 3 market baskets analyzed in 1996 consisting of 778 items. Only
those found in >2% of the samples are shown.
| ||
| b Isomers, metabolites, and related compounds are not listed separately; they
are covered under the "parent" pesticide from which they arise.
| ||
| c Reflects overall incidence; however, only 93-95 selected foods per market
basket (i.e., 283 items total) were analyzed for N- methylcarbamates.
| ||
| d Reflects overall incidence; however, only 65-67 selected foods per market basket (i.e., 199 items total) were analyzed for thiabendazole and benomyl. | ||
|
Pesticideb |
Total No. of Findings |
Occurrence, % |
Range, ppm |
||
| Dimethoate | 22 |
32 |
0.0002-0.007 |
||
| Iprodione | 18 |
26 |
0.001-0.095 |
||
| Carbarylc | 15 |
22 |
0.002-0.024 |
||
| Endosulfan | 11 |
16 |
0.0014-0.020 |
||
| Chlorpyrifos | 10 |
14 |
0.0004-0.015 |
||
| Omethoate | 9 |
13 |
0.001-0.005 |
||
| Permethrin | 8 |
12 |
0.002-0.054 |
||
| Malathion | 6 |
9 |
0.001-0.010 |
||
| Chlorpyrifos-methyl | 5 |
7 |
0.004-0.010 |
||
| Dicloran | 5 |
7 |
0.0009-0.002 |
||
| Parathion-methyl | 5 |
7 |
0.0006-0.005 |
||
| Ethylenethiouread | 4 |
6 |
0.004-0.011 |
||
| Thiabendazolee | 4 |
6 |
0.046-0.076 |
||
| Acephate | 2 |
3 |
0.002 (both) |
||
| Benomyle | 2 |
3 |
0.036-0.044 |
||
| Dicofol | 2 |
3 |
0.002 (both) |
||
| Esfenvalerate | 2 |
3 |
0.004-0.021 |
||
| Propargitef | 2 |
3 |
0.013-0.088 |
||
|
| |||||
| a Based on 3 collections consisting of 69 total items. Only those found in >2% of the samples are shown. | |||||
| b Isomers, metabolites, and related compounds are not listed separately; they are covered under the "parent" pesticide from which they arise. | |||||
| c Reflects overall incidence; however, only 17 selected foods per collection (i.e., 51 items total) were analyzed for N-methylcarbamates. | |||||
| d Reflects overall incidence; however, only 13 selected items (i.e., 39 items total) were analyzed for ethylenethiourea. | |||||
| e Reflects overall incidence; however, only 16 selected items (i.e., 48 items total) were analyzed for the benzimidazole fungicides (thiabendazole and benomyl). | |||||
| f Reflects overall incidence; however, only 17 selected foods per collection (i.e., 51 items total) were analyzed for this sulfur-containing compound. | |||||
|
Commodity Group |
Total Samples |
Samples without Residues, % |
Samples Violativea, % |
# over tolerance |
# no tolerance |
|
|
A. Grains and Grain Products |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corn & corn products |
29 | 51.7 | 3.5 | 1 |
|
|
|
Oats & oat products |
27 |
74.1 |
7.4 |
|
2 |
|
|
Rice & rice products |
47 |
80.8 |
2.1 |
|
1 |
|
|
Soybeans & soybean products |
27 |
77.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Wheat & wheat products |
185 |
40.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other grains & grain products |
13 |
38.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Breakfast cereals |
29 |
65.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Bakery products, crackers, etc. |
6 |
33.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
363 |
53.4 |
1.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| B. Milk/Dairy Products/Eggs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cheese & cheese products |
53 |
86.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Eggs |
210 |
97.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Milk/cream & milk products |
518 |
98.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
781 |
97.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| C. Fish/Shellfish |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fish |
377 |
53.6 |
0.5 |
|
2 |
|
|
Shellfish |
141 |
83.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other |
2 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
520 |
61.9 |
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| D. Fruits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blackberries |
7 |
42.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Blueberries |
39 |
76.9 |
5.1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
Cranberries |
13 |
30.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Grapes, raisins |
91 |
65.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Raspberries |
21 |
19.1 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Strawberries |
98 |
9.2 |
2.0 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grapefruit |
16 |
50.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Lemons |
22 |
63.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Oranges |
79 |
32.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other citrus fruit |
4 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apples |
207 |
30.9 |
1.9 |
|
4 |
|
|
Pears |
59 |
54.2 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apricots |
9 |
33.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Avocadoes |
1 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cherries |
22 |
27.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Nectarines |
31 |
16.1 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Peaches |
124 |
16.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Plums |
21 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Bananas, plantains |
7 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Guavas |
7 |
0.0 |
85.7 |
|
6 |
|
|
Kiwi fruit |
11 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Mangoes |
2 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cantaloupe |
74 |
55.4 |
2.7 |
|
2 |
|
|
Honeydew |
18 |
50.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Watermelon |
89 |
88.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other fruits |
1 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apple juice |
56 |
91.1 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Citrus juice |
14 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other fruit juices |
24 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fruit jams/jellies/pastes/toppings |
27 |
59.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
1194 |
46.1 |
1.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| E. Vegetables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corn |
95 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Mung beans and bean sprouts |
7 |
85.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Peas (green/snow/sugar/sweet) |
78 |
83.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
String beans (green/snap/pole/long) |
117 |
65.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other beans & peas & products |
28 |
85.7 |
3.6 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cucumbers |
78 |
69.2 |
1.3 |
|
1 |
|
|
Eggplant |
21 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Okra |
9 |
88.9 |
11.1 |
|
1 |
|
|
Peppers, hot |
20 |
70.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Peppers, sweet |
77 |
42.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Squash/pumpkins |
85 |
56.5 |
3.5 |
1b |
2 |
|
|
Tomatoes |
225 |
58.2 |
0.4 |
|
1 |
|
|
Other fruiting vegetables |
3 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Artichokes |
5 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Asparagus |
15 |
93.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Bok choy & Chinese cabbage |
28 |
82.1 |
3.6 |
|
1 |
|
|
Broccoli |
26 |
92.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cabbage |
72 |
87.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cauliflower |
23 |
95.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Celery |
28 |
17.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Collards |
22 |
54.5 |
4.5 |
|
1 |
|
|
Endive |
21 |
61.9 |
9.5 |
|
2 |
|
|
Lettuce, head |
136 |
46.3 |
3.7 |
|
5 |
|
|
Lettuce, leaf |
78 |
35.9 |
2.6 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
Spinach |
46 |
45.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other leaf & stem vegetables |
46 |
67.4 |
2.2 |
1b |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mushrooms |
14 |
78.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrots |
115 |
60.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Onions/leeks/scallions/shallots |
44 |
90.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Potatoes |
226 |
50.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Sweet potatoes |
34 |
79.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other root & tuber vegetables |
64 |
70.3 |
1.6 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vegetables with sauce |
12 |
91.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Vegetables, dried or paste |
28 |
82.1 |
3.6 |
|
1 |
|
|
Other vegetables/vegetable products |
32 |
71.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
1958 |
64.2 |
1.1 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| F. Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cashews |
1 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Peanuts & peanut products |
38 |
68.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other nuts & nut products |
4 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vegetable oil, crude |
11 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spices & condiments & flavors |
7 |
71.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beverages & water |
3 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Beverage bases |
16 |
18.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Honey & other sweeteners |
17 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baby foods/formula |
44 |
81.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other food products, |
3 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
144 |
75.0 |
0.0 |
|||
A-F Total |
4960 |
64.4 |
0.9 |
|
|
|
| a Includes samples with residues over tolerance or action level and samples with residues with no tolerance. | ||||||
| b Residue in sample exceeded an action level rather than a tolerance. | ||||||
|
Commodity Group |
Total Samples |
Samples without Residues, % |
Samples Violativea, % |
# over tolerance |
# no tolerance |
|
|
A. Grains and Grain Products |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corn & corn products |
8 |
87.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Oats & oat products |
5 |
60.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Rice & rice products |
57 |
86.0 |
1.8 |
1b |
|
|
|
Soybeans & soybean products |
3 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Wheat & wheat products |
13 |
38.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other grains & grain products |
16 |
87.5 |
6.2 |
1b |
|
|
|
Breakfast cereals |
15 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Bakery products, crackers, etc. |
36 |
83.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Pasta and noodles |
77 |
75.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
230 |
80.0 |
0.9 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| B. Milk/Dairy Products/Eggs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Butter |
2 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cheese & cheese products |
99 |
99.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Eggs |
27 |
77.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Milk/cream & milk products |
1 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
129 |
94.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| C. Fish/Shellfish |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fish |
86 |
86.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Shellfish |
36 |
94.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other |
2 |
50.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
124 |
87.9 |
0.0 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| D. Fruits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blackberries |
50 |
36.0 |
4.0 |
|
2 |
|
|
Blueberries |
37 |
86.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Grapes, raisins |
169 |
35.5 |
1.2 |
|
2 |
|
|
Raspberries |
71 |
23.9 |
2.8 |
|
2 |
|
|
Strawberries |
46 |
10.9 |
6.5 |
|
3 |
|
|
Other berries |
5 |
80.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grapefruit |
4 |
25.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Lemons |
9 |
77.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Limes |
21 |
81.0 |
4.8 |
|
1 |
|
|
Oranges |
28 |
85.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other citrus fruit |
16 |
75.0 |
6.2 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apples |
57 |
45.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Pears |
61 |
44.3 |
1.6 |
1 |
|
|
|
Other pome fruit |
6 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apricots |
9 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Avocadoes |
14 |
92.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cherries |
21 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Nectarines |
13 |
38.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Olives |
66 |
97.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Peaches |
40 |
45.0 |
7.5 |
|
3 |
|
|
Plums |
30 |
33.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other pit fruit |
2 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bananas, plantains |
268 |
49.2 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Guavas |
3 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Kiwi fruit |
4 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Mangoes |
75 |
94.7 |
1.3 |
|
1 |
|
|
Papaya |
75 |
78.7 |
9.3 |
|
7 |
|
|
Pineapple |
83 |
85.5 |
2.4 |
2 |
|
|
|
Other sub-tropical fruit |
44 |
90.9 |
6.8 |
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cantaloupe |
94 |
20.2 |
5.3 |
|
5 |
|
|
Honeydew |
59 |
8.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Watermelon |
39 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other melons |
16 |
62.5 |
6.2 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other fruits |
13 |
92.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apple juice |
18 |
88.9 |
5.6 |
|
1 |
|
|
Citrus juice |
8 |
87.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other fruit juices |
53 |
92.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fruit jams/jellies/pastes/toppings |
108 |
71.3 |
12.0 |
|
13 |
|
|
Total |
1735 |
57.0 |
2.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| E. Vegetables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corn |
36 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Mung beans and bean sprouts |
18 |
77.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Peas (green/snow/sugar/sweet) |
103 |
52.4 |
16.5 |
1 |
16 |
|
|
String beans (green/snap/pole/long) |
58 |
31.0 |
5.2 |
|
3 |
|
|
Other beans & peas & products |
47 |
76.6 |
2.1 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cucumbers |
72 |
43.1 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Eggplant |
25 |
60.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Okra |
21 |
76.2 |
9.5 |
|
2 |
|
|
Peppers, hot |
256 |
41.4 |
3.1 |
3 |
5 |
|
|
Peppers, sweet |
256 |
63.3 |
0.8 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
Squash/pumpkins |
130 |
37.7 |
0.8 |
|
1 |
|
|
Tomatoes |
342 |
56.1 |
1.2 |
|
4 |
|
|
Other fruiting vegetables |
34 |
73.5 |
2.9 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Artichokes |
32 |
90.6 |
6.2 |
|
2 |
|
|
Asparagus |
105 |
82.9 |
1.9 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
Bamboo shoots |
18 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Bok choy & Chinese cabbage |
22 |
45.5 |
13.6 |
|
3 |
|
|
Broccoli |
35 |
60.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cabbage |
17 |
58.8 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cauliflower |
8 |
87.5 |
12.5 |
|
1 |
|
|
Celery |
17 |
23.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Collards |
1 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Endive |
28 |
96.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Lettuce, head |
15 |
60.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Lettuce, leaf |
44 |
20.4 |
2.3 |
|
1 |
|
|
Radicchio |
11 |
72.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Spinach |
27 |
29.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other leaf & stem vegetables |
60 |
55.0 |
16.7 |
2 |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mushrooms & mushroom products |
77 |
93.5 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrots |
36 |
66.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cassava |
21 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Onions/leeks/scallions/shallots |
39 |
79.5 |
5.1 |
|
2 |
|
|
Potatoes |
76 |
93.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Sweet potatoes |
18 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Water chestnuts |
27 |
92.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other root & tuber vegetables |
42 |
97.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vegetables with sauce |
10 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Vegetables, dried or paste |
141 |
74.5 |
5.0 |
4b |
3 |
|
|
Other vegetables/vegetable products |
53 |
83.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
2378 |
63.0 |
2.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| F. Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cashews |
32 |
68.8 |
3.1 |
|
1 |
|
|
Coconut & coconut products |
8 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Peanuts & peanut products |
21 |
71.4 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other nuts & nut products |
31 |
96.8 |
3.2 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edible seeds |
28 |
92.9 |
3.6 |
1b |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vegetable oil, crude |
4 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Vegetable oil, refined |
25 |
96.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spices & condiments & flavors |
48 |
72.9 |
6.2 |
|
3 |
|
|
Beverages & water |
17 |
94.1 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Beverage bases |
17 |
88.2 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Coffee/tea/wine |
11 |
90.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Cocoa beans & chocolate products |
13 |
92.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Honey & other sweeteners |
51 |
76.5 |
3.9 |
|
2 |
|
|
Baby foods/formula |
2 |
100.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other food products, |
11 |
72.7 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
Nonfood items |
6 |
50.0 |
33.3 |
|
2 |
|
|
Total |
325 |
82.8 |
3.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
A-F Total |
4921 |
64.4 |
2.6 |
|
| |
| | ||||||
| a Includes samples with residues over tolerance or action level and samples with residues with no tolerance. | ||||||
| b Residue in sample exceeded an action level rather than a tolerance. | ||||||