REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON MRL IN TEA

1
REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON MRL IN TEA

• BY
• T C CHAUDHURI
• Jt. Coordinator, Working Group on MRL in TEA,
• IGG on TEA, FAO

2
References of works to WG on MRL

• Recalling the relevant MINUTES of 19th IGG ,
  Delhi, May 2010 on MRL,
• Para 20 The Group
• Para 21 Tea should be compliant with
  regulations..
• Para 22 (i) Immediate Action Plan..
• (ii) Strategy review.
• Para 23 Global Harmonization in MRL
  regulations..

3
AGENDA

• Immediate Action Plan
• Submissions on pesticide MRLs in Tea
• Position of Field Trial data
• Identification of Compounds for field trials,
  also developing IPM
• Reviewing of WG Strategy
• (i) Progress on the Action plan
• Investigating residue in tea brew

4
ACTIONS TAKEN on MRL

• Reviewed on Status of Pesticide use globally on
  tea
• Establishing Uniform Protocol for data generation
  
• Prioritized Compounds and generated residue data
• Commutation of available data and submission to
  Codex
• Data bank used in harmonization of MRL in many
  tea importing countries and at national level
• More compounds are targeted for data generation
• Country regulations on MRL are updated
• Tea brew data for residue generated
• IPM in place

5
ACTIONS TAKEN on MRL

• Reviewing of WG Strategy
• A side line meeting of the Strategy Group was
  held at the time of 1st Annual North American Tea
  Conference on 21st Sept 2010 at Niagara Falls to
  develop ACTION PLANS
• To agree on vision for MRLs
• To identify major issues facing tea industry
• To agree the goals to tackle identified issues
• Annex 2 Action plans, goals are circulated

6
Annex 2 Identification of issues and goals
(Minutes of Canada meeting)
7
Annex 2 Identification of issues and goals
(Minutes of Canada meeting)
8
Annex 2 Identification of issues and goals
(Minutes of Canada meeting)
9
Annex 2 Identification of issues and goals
(Minutes of Canada meeting)
10
Annex 2 Identification of issues and goals
(Minutes of Canada meeting)
11
Annex 2 Identification of issues and goals
(Minutes of Canada meeting)
12
Annex 2 Identification of issues and goals
(Minutes of Canada meeting)
13
Annex 2 Identification of issues and goals
(Minutes of Canada meeting)
14
Q. 1. Pesticides with residue data in last 4
years
15
Q. 2. Current Pesticide use in tea
16
Q.3. Regulatory position of pesticide use
17
Q.4. Position of IPM
18
Q.5. Pesticide Related issues

• Need for Harmonization of MRL with different
  agencies like EU, CODEX.
• Harmonization of MRL with tea imported countries.
• Constraint in sudden change of MRL status and
  loss of authorization

19
Q.6 Exchange of MRL data
20
Q.7 Latest regulatory position on MRL in tea
21
SUMMARY

• Most of the tea producing countries are now
  equipped with residue lab and man power to
  generate residue data on tea.
• Voluminous residue data have been generated by
  China, India, Sri Lanka. Others are attempting to
  equip in the near future.
• Generic pesticides are gradually withdrawn,
  substituting by new generation compounds.
• Pesticide load on tea have reduced in the recent
  years by adopting IPM measures.
• Bio-control measures like herbal, microbial
  formulations are now widely used in tea.
  Entomopathogens, pheromons are also being tried
  successfully.

22
SUMMARY

• 6. Rotational use of different pesticides and
  bio-agents for controlling pests and diseases are
  integral part of IPM in most of the countries.
• 7. Information on pesticides use in tea in
  different countries with MRL are now available as
  transparent information.
• 8. National Regulators for MRL are active to
  update approved lists with MRL.
• 9. Tendency to generate residue data both on dry
  tea and brew is growing.

23
CONSTRAINTS

• Lack of harmonization is confusing the producers
  and the trade.
• For healthy growth of the tea trade, impediments
  like new regulations for MRL in the importing
  countries are creating confusion, also cost of
  production is increasing.
• Exchange of information on MRL supported by
  realistic field data base is required.
• More active participation of producers and
  importers in functioning of this WG is needed.

24
CONCLUSION

• Ongoing programmes of data generation, submission
  to National Regulators and to CODEX should
  continue.
• Countries not well equipped with data base and
  infrastructure may strengthen their venture to
  support the industry scientifically.
• Exchange of information on residue and prompt
  compilation of database will help IGG Working
  Group.
• Existing programmes should continue after
  formulation of action plans as per identified
  areas listed in Annex-2 of the Strategy Group
  Meeting held in Canada in September, 2010.

25
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

• THANKS are due to co-operations of scientists
  from the Producing Consuming countries.
• I acknowledge support from IGG secretariat,
  particularly from Mr. K. Chang and my co-chair Ms
  K. Donnelly.
• Thankful to Indian Groups from TRA, UPASI-TRF and
  the Authorities from the MOCI, GOI, Tea Board,
  particularly, Mr. M. R. Sharma and Ms R. Sen, DC,
  and Tea industry for full support.

26

Thank You