United States Department of Agriculture

Agricultural Marketing Service

Science & Technology

Pesticide Data Program

Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

iii

Contents

Page No.

Preface .......................................................... vii

Executive Summary .................................................. ix

Section I

Introduction ........................................................ 1

Section II

Sampling Protocol ....................................................... 5

Section III

Laboratory Operations .................................................... 7

Section IV

Sample Results and Discussion ............................................. 10

Appendices ....................................................... 16

Appendix A Sample Origin by Grower, Packer, or Distributor

Appendix B Quality Assurance Program Elements

Appendix C Distribution of Residues Detected by Pesticide

Appendix D Frequency of Occurrences at Various Concentration Ranges for

 Selected Pesticide/Commodity Pairs

Appendix E National Estimates for Concentration Percentiles vs. Tolerance

Appendix F Cumulative Distributions of Residue Concentrations for Selected

 Commodity/Pesticide Pairs

Appendix G Number of Non-Detected Residues by Pesticide/Commodity Pairs

Appendix H Percentage of Samples vs. Number of Residues Detected per Sample
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

v

List of Figures and Tables

Figures

Page No.

Figure 1 Overview of PDP Management and Operations ....................... 2

Figure 2 Participating States and Their Geographical Distribution Areas ............ 3

Figure 3 Pesticides in PDP .............................................. 4

Figure 4 Commodity Origin by Grower, Packer or Distributor ................... 8

Tables

Table 1 Samples Collected Per Commodity by Each Participating State ............ 7

Table 2A Number of Samples and Residues Detected, by Commodity

 (Includes Post-Harvest Applications) ............................ 11

Table 2B Number of Samples and Residues Detected, by Commodity

 (Excludes Post-Harvest Applications) ........................... 12
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

vii

Preface

In 1991, the United States Department of PDP continues to focus on the National Academy of

Agriculture (USDA) was charged with implementing a Sciences’conclusions as shown in the 1993 report

program to collect data on pesticide residues in food. Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children. In

USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) was this report, the Academy recommends that food

appointed to undertake the creation and monitoring programs target foods highly consumed by

implementation of such a program, currently known as children, and that methods used be standardized,

the Pesticide Data Program (PDP). PDP has been in validated, and subject to strict quality control and

operation since May 1991 and has published its quality assurance programs. Consequently, during

findings for calendar years 1991, 1992, and 1993. 1994, canned and frozen sweet corn and sweet peas

This is the summary for calendar year 1994. were selected for inclusion in the program.

PDP’s data on pesticides in selected commodities The States participating in PDP deserve special

strengthen the Government's ability to respond to food recognition for their contributions to the program. 

safety and marketing concerns, to protect public Sample collectors’ vigilance and commitment allow

health, and to provide the Environmental Protection AMS to adjust sampling protocols in response to

Agency (EPA) with data needed to assess the actual changing trends in commodity distribution. 

dietary risk posed by pesticides. Laboratory staff have formulated recommendations to

EPA registers pesticides under a statutory standard PDP also thanks Phillip Kott of USDA's National

that requires balancing the benefits of a pesticide use Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Edward Zager

against its potential risks to human health and the of EPA, John Jones of the Food and Drug

environment. In making risk estimates, EPA uses a Administration (FDA), and the staff at the Federal

stepwise approach to minimize resource expenditures. laboratories providing their services to the program. 

As an initial worst case assessment, EPA assumes that

all acres of all crops are treated with all pesticides for The 1993 PDP summary elicited comments from

which they have a registered use. EPA also assumes our readers, mostly on the need to explore other

that residues in treated crops are present at the avenues of communicating our findings to the general

maximum allowable level. A theoretical risk based on public. Suggestions included making the summary

these worst case assumptions may significantly exceed “less technical" and more appealing to general

the actual risk of pesticide residues in the food supply audiences, and expanding our participation in public

and jeopardize the registration of pesticides important outreach programs.

to American agriculture. Further refinements to the

risk assessment are done if needed. These stepwise In preparing the 1994 annual summary, we

refinements include the use of percent of crop treated; continued our efforts to improve our communication

statistical analyses of field data; considerations of the strategies, and welcome your input. Please send your

effects of washing, cooking, processing, storage, etc.; comments and suggestions to the Residue Branch, 

and use of monitoring data, if available and reliable. Centreville Road, Suite 200, Manassas, VA 20110.

This is where PDP data are pivotal. PDP’s sampling

procedures were designed to capture actual residues in

the food supply as close as possible to the time of

consumption, thereby significantly upgrading the

statistical reliability and extent of information needed

for risk assessment.

increase productivity and improve methodologies. 
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

viii

Data presented in this summary were collected and Florida Department of Agriculture and

processed through the efforts of the following: Consumer Services

U.S. Department of Agriculture 3125 Conner Boulevard

Science and Technology Division

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA Florida Department of Agriculture and

14th and Independence Avenue, S.W. Consumer Services

Room 3507, South Building Chemical Residue Laboratory

Post Office Box 96456 500 3rd Street, Northwest

Washington, DC 20090-6456 Winter Haven, FL 33880

Director: William J. Franks, Jr. Michigan Department of Agriculture

Phone: (202) 720-5231 Fax: (202) 720-6496 Laboratory Division

Deputy Director: Robert L. Epstein 1615 South Harrison Road

Phone: (202) 720-2158 East Lansing, MI 48823-5224

Residue Branch New York Department of Agriculture and Markets

Science and Technology Division Food Laboratory

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA State Campus, Building #7

8700 Centreville Road, Suite 200 Albany, NY 12235

Manassas, VA 22110

Chief: Martha Lamont Consumer Analytical Laboratory

Phone: (703) 330-2300 Fax: (703) 330-6110 8995 East Main Street

Participating State Agencies

California Department of Food and Agriculture Brenham Pesticide Lab

California Department of Pesticide Regulation 200 East Horton Street

Colorado Department of Agriculture Brenham, TX 77834

Florida Department of Agriculture and

 Consumer Services Washington State Department of Agriculture

Michigan Department of Agriculture Chemical and Hop Lab

New York Department of Agriculture and Markets 2017 South First Street

North Carolina Department of Agriculture Yakima, WA 98903

Ohio Department of Agriculture

Texas Department of Agriculture Participating Federal Laboratories

Washington State Department of Agriculture

Participating State Laboratories Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

California Department of Food and Agriculture 3505 25th Avenue, Building 9

Division of Inspection Services Gulfport, MS 39501

Center for Analytical Chemistry

3292 Meadowview Road United States Department of Agriculture

Sacramento, CA 95832 Agricultural Marketing Service

Chemical Residue Laboratory, Building #3

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1650

Ohio Department of Agriculture

Reynoldsburg, OH 43068

Texas Department of Agriculture

United States Department of Agriculture

National Monitoring and Residue Analysis Laboratory

Science and Technology Division, Eastern Laboratory

645 Cox Road

Gastonia, NC 28054
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

ix

Executive Summary

The Pesticide Data Program (PDP) was that EPA uses to determine the residue levels in foods 

implemented by the United States Department of and estimate exposure to consumers. Without actual

Agriculture (USDA) in May 1991 to collect data on residue data, initial risk assessments are based on the

pesticide residues in foods. The data are used by the theoretical maximum amounts of pesticide use and

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for its risk may overstate dietary exposure. A theoretical risk

assessment process, and for the reregistration and based on these worst case assumptions may

special review of pesticides. PDP has issued significantly exceed the actual risk of pesticide

summaries of data for calendar years 1991, 1992, and residues in the food supply and jeopardize the

1993. This summary contains PDP findings for registration of pesticides important to American

calendar year 1994. agriculture. Where needed, EPA conducts further

During 1994, pesticides monitored by PDP included information that includes monitoring data, if available

insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, and growth and reliable. This is where PDP data are pivotal. 

regulators in fresh and processed fruits and vegetables. PDP data, which are collected as close to the point of

Pesticides and commodities were chosen for inclusion consumption as possible, follow statistically reliable

in the program based on EPA's data needs and sampling protocols, thereby upgrading their usefulness

USDA's food consumption surveys. for risk assessment. 

PDP planning and policy are coordinated through an PDP samples are collected without regard for

Executive Steering Committee consisting of commodity origin or variety, and generally reflect what

representatives of USDA, EPA, and the Food and is available to the consumer throughout the year. 

Drug Administration (FDA). USDA representatives PDP's sampling protocol takes into account the

to the committee include: Agricultural Marketing different volumes of produce distributed annually by

Service (AMS), National Agricultural Statistics each sampling site, thus removing a potential source of

Service (NASS), Economic Research Service (ERS), bias for estimates of residues. 

and Agricultural Research Service (ARS). PDP's

financial and administrative issues are handled by the Samples collected during 1994 consisted of 13

Science and Technology Division of AMS. The commodities: apples, bananas, broccoli, carrots,

Residue Branch oversees database operations and day- celery, grapes, green beans, lettuce, oranges, peaches,

to-day sampling and technical procedures. potatoes, sweet corn, and sweet peas. Sweet corn and

PDP operations are managed through cooperative canned or frozen), were added to the program in April. 

agreements with nine States, which are responsible for All other PDP samples were fresh. Samples collected

sample collection and analysis. Seven of the originated from 39 States and 17 foreign countries. 

participating States (California, Florida, Michigan, Of the 7,589 samples collected, 1,260 (16.6 percent)

New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington) collected were imported, with bananas, grapes, peaches, and

and analyzed samples during 1994. Two of the States green beans accounting for most imports. Overall, the

(Colorado and North Carolina) collected samples but pesticide residues detected in sampled commodities

shipped them to one or more of the other participating continue to be at low levels, substantially below

laboratories for analysis. Together, these nine States currently established tolerances.

represent approximately 50 percent of the Nation's

population. PDP continuously strives to improve methodologies

PDP was designed to provide information on the data are available to EPA and other Federal and State

levels of pesticide residues found on agricultural agencies charged with regulating and setting policies

commodities in order to improve the quality of data on the use of pesticides.

refinements to the risk assessment by using additional

sweet peas, collected as processed products (either

for the collection, testing, and reporting of data. PDP
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

1

Pesticide Data Program (PDP)

 Annual Summary CalendarYear 1994

This summary presents PDP data for calendar year 1994, and consists of the following four sections: 

Introduction, Sampling Protocol, Laboratory Operations, and Sample Results and Discussion.

I. Introduction

To implement the Pesticide Data Program (PDP),

the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)

utilized the expertise available in four of its agencies: 

the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), the

National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), the

Economic Research Service (ERS), and the

Agricultural Research Service (ARS). AMS was

selected as the lead agency to coordinate and

implement the various facets of the residue program

and manage all program operations. NASS provides

statistically reliable data on chemical usage at the

State level and collects economic input data that link

chemical usage with economic characteristics. ERS

analyzes AMS and NASS data to understand producer

behavior and determine the impact various production

practices and policies might have on the Nation's

agricultural production, food supply, and consumers. 

ARS conducts nationwide surveys of individual food

intake and household use and is developing a Food

Grouping System to translate data on foods as

consumed into forms that can be linked with pesticide

residue data.

AMS selected its Science and Technology Division

to oversee PDP’s policy planning and program

direction. The Division’s Residue Branch coordinates

and manages day-to-day program activities with the

participating State and Federal facilities.

Figure 1, Overview of PDP Management and

Operations, describes the program’s three major

components - sample collection, laboratory analysis,

and database management. PDP sampling and/or

analytical operations are performed by nine States

(California, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, New York,

North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, and Washington)

through agreements with their respective State

agencies. Accordingly, a significant part of PDP's

financial resources (75 percent) goes directly to the

States for operating expenses. An additional 10

percent of PDP funding is given to USDA laboratory

facilities to support State testing activities. These

laboratories perform analyses requiring selective

residue methods which the States agreed were best

conducted by Federal laboratories.

Figure 2 shows the States participating in the

program, which together represent about 50 percent of

the Nation's population. Also shown are nine other

States (Alaska, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts,

Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Vermont, and

Wyoming) where a significant amount of produce is

directly marketed from the participating States. 

Although these additional States are not active

program participants, PDP data will apply to a portion

of their population as well.

AMS works closely with EPA to select the

commodities and pesticides to be placed in PDP. 

Commodities chosen for inclusion are those most

often consumed by the American public, with

emphasis on those consumed by infants and children. 

Thirteen commodities (apples, bananas, broccoli,

carrots, celery, grapes, green beans, lettuce, oranges,

peaches, potatoes, sweet corn, and sweet peas) were

sampled and analyzed in 1994. Three of these

commodities were in the program for only part of the

year. Celery, introduced in February 1992, was

removed from the program in March 1994. 

Canned/frozen sweet corn and sweet peas were

introduced in April 1994 and will continue to be tested
 Statistically reliable sampling plan

 Data used to make national inferences

 Collected near consumer level

 Represent about 50% of U.S. population

 Commodities consumed most by infants 

 and children

 Origin of product retained 

 Post-harvest fungicides & minor use 

 registration

 Standard Operating Procedures

Laboratory Analysis

Management and Operations

 Provide the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with 

 are used for dietary risk assessments and to address

 pesticide reregistration and special reviews

 Address the recommendations of the National Academy

 of Sciences report Pesticides in the Diets of Infants 

 and Children 

 

Sample Collection

 Samples prepared as if for consumption

 State-of-the-art instrumentation used

 Detection at very low levels 

 QA based on EPA Good Laboratory

 Practices 

 Confirmation of detected pesticides

 Multiple residue detection methodology

 Standard Operating Procedures

Database Management

Main Objectives

Executive Steering Committee

 USDA EPA

- AMS FDA

- NASS

- ERS

- ARS

Participating States - 1994 USDA Laboratories - 1994

 Customized query capability

 Electronic transmission of data

 Standardized data summaries

 Science and Technology Division / Residue Branch

 California

 Colorado

 Florida

 Michigan

 New York

 North Carolina

 Ohio

 Texas

 Washington

 AMS Eastern Laboratory, Gastonia, NC

 APHIS, NMRAL, Gulfport, MS

Figure 1. Overview of PDP Management and Operations

 high-quality data on pesticide residues in food. The data

Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

2
Hawaii

Figure 2. Participating States and Their Geographical Distribution Areas

Wyoming

Colorado

New 

Mexico

Ohio

North 

Carolina

Washington

California

Texas

Alaska

Michigan

Massachusetts

Vermont

Connecticut

New Jersey

Florida

New York

Nevada

States Where Produce is Directly

Participating States

Marketed from Participating States

Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

3

through part of 1996. The pesticides EPA suggests data for over 400 pesticide and commodity

for monitoring consist mainly of those whose combinations whose uses are legal under the Federal

toxicities and estimated dietary exposures indicate the Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). 

need for more refined exposure estimates. The list is Data are also collected for other pesticide and

revised periodically to address EPA’s data needs. commodity combinations with pending use

Figure 3 provides a list of all the pesticides included other provisions of FIFRA. In many of these cases,

in PDP during 1994. these uses are granted to alleviate the lack of effective

Although EPA continues to be the main recipient of vegetables). Consequently, PDP data might also be

PDP data, over the past year PDP has received used for re-registration of pesticides for minor use

requests for data from other agencies seeking to crops.

promote American agricultural products in

international markets. PDP data have also been PDP has also provided information to the Codex

solicited by chemical companies surveying use and Alimentarius Commission, which operates under the

residues of their products. Currently, PDP collects auspices of the United Nations. The information 

registrations, or where uses have been granted under

pesticides registered for minor use crops (fruits and
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

4

Figure 3. Pesticides in PDP

Screened by Multiresidue Methods (MRMs)

 EPA Requested Pesticides - 37 Other Pesticides - 30

Acephate Lindane Allethrin MCPA

Aldicarb + sulfone & sulfoxide Malathion Anilazine Methiocarb + sulfoxide

Atrazine Methamidophos Azinphos ethyl Myclobutanil

Azinphos methyl Methidathion Benfluralin o-Phenylphenol

Carbaryl + 1-Napthol Methomyl Captan Omethoate

Carbofuran + 3-OH Carbofuran Methoxychlor Chlorpropham Ovex

Chlorothalonil Mevinphos Cypermethrin Parathion

Chlorpyrifos Oxamyl Dacthal (DCPA) Phosalone

Diazinon Parathion methyl DDT + DDD + DDE Phosmet

Dichlorvos (DDVP) Permethrin cis & trans Demeton + sulfone Thiabendazole

Dicloran Phorate + sulfone & sulfoxide Demeton-S Trifluralin

Dicofol Phosphamidon Dieldrin Vinclozolin

Disulfoton + sulfone & sulfoxide Propargite Dimethoate

Endosulfan I, II & sulfate Quintozene (PCNB) Diphenylamine

Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) Diuron

Ethion Pentachloroaniline (PCA) Ethoprop

Fenamiphos + sulfone & Pentachlorobenzene (PCB) Imazalil

 sulfoxide Terbufos + sulfone & O-analog Linuron

Iprodione Thiodicarb (methomyl metabolite)

Screened by Selective Residue Methods (SRMs)

EPA Targeted Pesticides - 4

2,4-D, Benomyl, Formetanate, and Abamectin
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

5

provided was on extraneous residues in foods consumer. This has been corroborated by comparing

(environmental contaminants), pesticide residue the composition of PDP samples with import data

stability data, and PDP’s Proficiency Check Sample compiled by the Economic Analysis Branch, AMS

Program. Fruit and Vegetable Division.

Modifications to PDP’s information management Adjustments to the protocol for 1994 included: (1)

system, which allows for customized query capability, developing and implementing a method of transwere introduced in 1994 to accommodate program shipping samples between State laboratories; (2)

expansion and a rapidly growing database. Program revising the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to

expansion also made it necessary to accelerate provide additional information for State sampling

implementation of electronic transmission of data to managers and collectors; and (3) modifying the

reduce, and eventually eliminate, the use of hard sampling protocol to include two processed

(paper) copies. Laboratory sites transmit data to the commodities--canned and frozen sweet corn and sweet

central database using standardized reporting formats. peas. 

To obtain data as close to the point of consumption ê Statistical Sampling Procedures 

as possible, samples are collected at distribution

points just before release to supermarkets and grocery Participating States are responsible for compiling

stores. Sampling at these locations allows for residue and maintaining lists of sites used for sample

measurements that include fungicides and growth collection. Since PDP strives to collect samples as

regulators, and takes into account degradation of close to the consumer as possible, while maintaining

pesticides while in storage. Participation of PDP sample origin, most of the sites for fresh fruits and

sampling sites is voluntary, which sets it apart from vegetables are either terminal markets or large chain

State and Federal enforcement programs. Over 650 store distribution centers. Both of these locations

potential sites grant access and provide information to serve as the last stopover before produce reaches

sample collectors. Their cooperation makes it possible retailers and, ultimately, consumers. This provides a

to adjust sampling protocols in response to better picture of actual dietary exposure to pesticide

fluctuations in food distribution. residues by taking into account pesticide degradation

PDP differs markedly from regulatory monitoring these locations also provides information on postprograms (tolerance enforcement) which require quick harvest application of fungicides and growth

turnaround time for analysis of enforcement samples. regulators.

Under tolerance enforcement, the sampled commodity

may be detained at the distribution facility while Processed samples are collected at distribution

awaiting sample results. PDP places emphasis on centers or large warehouses. To provide PDP with data

searching for residues at the lowest detectable levels, on both canned and frozen sweet corn and peas,

rather than on quick sample turnaround; therefore, collection of the two types of processed commodity

analysis of PDP samples may take 1 to 2 months, and were alternated monthly. 

does not affect commodity distribution.

II. Sampling Protocol

PDP’s statistically reliable sampling protocol allows

for making nearly unbiased estimates of pesticide

residues for commodities collected in the participating

States and makes it possible to quantify the accuracy

of the estimates for the Nation as a whole. The

protocol also reflects the relative proportion of

imported versus domestic produce available to the

that occurs during transit and storage. Sampling at

After establishing their site lists, States are required

to provide AMS and NASS with annual volume

information for each site (quantity of commodity

distributed in 1 year). This information is used to

“weight” the site to determine the probability for

selection. For example, a site that distributes 100,000

pounds of produce annually might be given a weight

of “10,” and a site that distributes 10,000 pounds

might be weighted “1.” The probabilityproportionate-to-size method of site selection would

then result in the larger site (distributing 100,000
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

6

pounds) being 10 times more likely to be selected for by their State, unless they were unable to do so. For

sampling than the smaller site (distributing 10,000 the pilot program, testing of commodities was divided

pounds). Participating States are required to work between the Michigan and Washington laboratories,

with NASS to develop their statistical procedures for (Colorado does not test samples for PDP), with

site weighting and selection. States are also given the approximately half the commodities going to the

option of having NASS perform their quarterly site Michigan laboratory for analysis and the other half

selection for them. The number of sampling sites and going to the Washington laboratory. For example, all

the volume of produce distributed by the sites varies apple samples (2 from Colorado, 6 from Michigan,

greatly from State to State. and 4 from Washington), which combined make a set

State population figures are used to assign the analysis. Likewise, all 12 banana samples collected by

number of fruit and vegetable samples scheduled for these three States were sent to the Michigan laboratory

collection per commodity each month. For 1994, for analysis, and so on. The main objectives of this

these numbers were: California-14, Colorado-2, pilot were to increase output of samples at the testing

Florida-7, Michigan-6, New York-9, North Carolina- facilities and reduce the cost of analysis per sample. 

4, Ohio-6 Texas-8, and Washington-4; for an annual The pilot program was successful at accomplishing

total of 720 per commodity. Sample size was both objectives, and has since been adopted

approximately 5 pounds for each applicable testing voluntarily by other participating States.

facility. 

ê Quarterly Sampling Plans

Sampling plans, which were prepared by the States through the use of “Sample Information Forms.” 

on a quarterly basis, included sampling dates, sites, These forms are used by the sample collectors to

and commodities for collection during each month of record all pertinent sample information, such as: (1)

the quarter. Although sites could only be sampled the State where the sample was collected; (2) the date

once per month for the same commodity, States were of collection; (3) the 3-digit code for the sampling site;

allowed to collect two different commodities at the and (4) the commodity code. These four pieces of

same site on the same date. This “pairing” of information are combined to form a unique “sample

commodities reduced the number of sampling dates identification number” for recording in the PDP

and, therefore, the cost of sample collection. States database. Other information included on the form is:

were also instructed to collect all samples of the same (1) whether the sample is domestic or imported and, if

commodity on one sampling date, or, if needed, within imported, the country of origin; (2) the name of the

two consecutive dates. Collection of commodities was sampling site, grower, packer, or distributor; and (3) a

randomly assigned to various weeks of the month, list of potential or known post-harvest applications. 

prior to selecting specific sampling dates within the The Sample Information Forms are also used to keep

week. Since sampling sites were selected for the entire track of any missing samples that are not collected,

quarter, States were allowed to assign the sites to lost in transit, or damaged and unable to be analyzed

particular months based on geographic location. when received at the laboratory.

ê Trans-shipping of Samples Sampling managers in the participating States have

In October 1994, Colorado, Michigan, and sample administration; collection, packing, and

Washington began a trans-shipping pilot program, shipping procedures; and documentation. These

whereby all samples of one commodity, collected by SOPs, which are updated as needed, are provided to

these three States, were combined for analytical testing sample collectors, and used as a guide for determining

by one State laboratory. Up until this time, each State compliance during sampling reviews. 

laboratory tested all of the PDP commodities collected 

of 12, were sent to the Washington laboratory for

ê Chain-of-Custody

Chain-of-custody for PDP samples is documented

been given SOPs for PDP sampling, which cover
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

7

ê Synopsis on Sample Collection samples collected during 1994 originated from 39

A total of 7,589 samples of fresh and processed

fruits and vegetables were collected during 1994. As

shown in Table 1, the number of samples collected per

State was: California - 1,646, Colorado - 264, Florida

- 846, Michigan - 793, New York - 1,171 , North

Carolina - 531, Ohio - 794, Texas - 1,054, and

Washington - 490. These figures are less than the

total number of assigned samples for 1994 due to the

unavailability of product at either the original or

alternate sampling site, which is often due to the

commodity growing season.

Figure 4 shows the total number of samples per

commodity and the percentage of each that were either

domestic, imported, or of unknown origin.

Appendix A provides a more detailed breakdown of

sample origin by State or Country. As indicated,

States and 17 foreign countries.

III. Laboratory Operations

Ten laboratories (eight State and two Federal)

performed analyses for PDP during 1994. These

laboratories are equipped with advanced technical

instrumentation capable of detecting residues at very

low levels. The laboratory staff receives intensive

training and must demonstrate analytical proficiency

on an ongoing basis. Scientists continuously test new

technologies and develop new techniques to improve

the levels of detection. Major changes in methodology

are evaluated, and their soundness demonstrated and

documented in accordance with PDP Standard

Operating Procedures.

Table 1. Samples Collected Per Commodity by Each Participating State

 Commodity

State AP BN BR CE CR CS GB GR LT OG PC PO PS Total

California 155 142 163 40 164 69 147 152 159 156 93 156 50 1646

Colorado 24 23 24 6 23 18 19 24 24 24 13 24 18 264

Florida 83 67 75 21 83 57 58 77 80 77 41 78 49 846

Michigan 72 63 69 18 71 53 63 71 72 72 48 68 53 793

New York 107 102 103 26 105 79 89 103 99 106 65 107 80 1171

North Carolina 48 48 47 12 48 36 48 48 48 48 24 48 28 531

Ohio 72 72 68 18 71 52 62 70 71 72 44 71 51 794

Texas 93 95 95 23 93 66 82 94 94 95 61 95 68 1054

Washington 48 44 42 12 45 34 31 45 44 43 19 47 36 490

Total 702 656 686 176 703 464 599 684 691 693 408 694 433 7589

Commodities

AP - Apples GR - Grapes

BN - Bananas LT - Lettuce 

BR - Broccoli OG - Oranges

CE - Celery (Jan. - Mar.) PC - Peaches

CR - Carrots PO - Potatoes

CS - Sweet Corn (Apr. - Dec.) PS - Sweet Peas (Apr. - Dec.)

GB - Green Beans
Grapes

(684 Samples)

Green Beans

(599 Samples)

Peaches

(408 Samples)

Sweet Corn

(464 Samples)

Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994 

8

Figure 4. Commodity Origin by Grower, Packer, or Distributor

 (Percentage of Domestic vs. Imported)

A. Fresh Commodities

B. Processed Commodities*

* For processed commodities, percentages were mainly derived from packer and/or distributor information
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994

9

PDP participating laboratories monitored 71 facility. As required under EPA’s GLPs, the QAU

compounds (plus metabolites where applicable), 41 of operates independently from laboratory staff and

which were specifically requested by EPA. Of these, reports directly to the State administrative manager

37 are detectable by multiresidue methods (MRMs) and the Residue Branch. Preliminary QA/QC review

and 4 can be detected only by single or selective procedures are performed on-site by each laboratory's

residue methods (SRMs). Since SRMs are resource QAU. Final review procedures are performed by

intensive, this type of analysis was performed only at Residue Branch staff, who are responsible for

selected laboratories for specific commodities as collating and reviewing data for conformance with

indicated below: SOPs. Additionally, Branch staff monitor the

Laboratories Performing SRMs

1. APHIS, NMRAL, Gulfport, MS

Pesticide: Benomyl

Commodities: Apples, Bananas, Broccoli,

Carrots, Grapes, Green Beans,

Oranges, Peaches, and Sweet

Corn

2. AMS Eastern Laboratory, Gastonia, NC

Pesticide: Abamectin

Commodities: Oranges

Pesticide: Formetanate

Commodities: Apples, Oranges, and Peaches

3. APHIS, NMRAL, Gulfport, MS and

 Selected State Laboratories

Pesticide: 2,4-D

Commodities: Apples, Grapes, Oranges,

Peaches, Peas, Potatoes, and

Sweet Corn

In addition to the EPA-requested pesticides,

laboratories tested for approximately 30 other

compounds that are detectable by MRMs. For a

complete list of pesticides, see Figure 3 in

Section I.

ê Quality Assurance Program

The main objectives of the quality assurance/quality

control (QA/QC) program are to ensure the reliability

of PDP data and the performance equivalency of the

participating laboratories. Direction for PDP's

Quality Assurance Program is provided by the Residue

Branch, through SOPs based on EPA's Good

Laboratory Practices (GLPs). However, for day-today quality assurance oversight, PDP relies on the

Quality Assurance Unit (QAU) at each participating

participants' performance through proficiency

samples, QAU quarterly internal reviews, and on-site

visits. Additional information on PDP's quality

assurance program is provided in Appendix B.

ê Sample Preparation

Laboratories are permitted to refrigerate fresh

incoming samples of the same commodity for up to 72

hours, to allow for different sample arrival times from

the collection sites. Frozen and canned commodities

can be held in storage (freezer or shelf) until the entire

sample set is ready to be homogenized. 

Upon arrival at the testing facility, samples are

visually examined for acceptability and discarded if

determined to be inedible (decayed, extensively

bruised). Accepted samples are then prepared

emulating the practices of the average consumer, to

more closely represent actual exposure to residues. 

Fresh samples are prepared as follows: (1) apples and

peaches are washed and cored; (2) bananas and

oranges are peeled; (3) broccoli, celery, and lettuce are

washed and the inedible portions removed; (4) green

beans and grapes are washed and stems removed; and

(5) carrots and potatoes are washed. For processed

commodities, the entire contents of the sample is

homogenized--including any liquid present.

Samples are homogenized using choppers and/or

blenders and separated into analytical portions

(aliquots) for analysis. If testing cannot be performed

immediately, the entire analytical set (sample set plus

all quality control samples) is frozen at -40E C, or

lower, according to PDP's QA/QC requirements. 

Surplus aliquots, not used for the initial testing, are

retained frozen in the event that replication of analysis

or verification testing is needed.
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994

10

ê Sample Analysis pesticide/commodity pairs with residue detections in at

Variations of the Luke extraction procedures

developed by FDA are used by Florida, Michigan,

New York, Ohio, and Texas. California and

Washington use the multiresidue method developed by

the California Department of Food and Agriculture. 

These two methods were determined to produce

equivalent data for PDP analytical purposes. Residues

are extracted from samples using organic solvents

followed by various cleanup procedures. Selective

residue methods, used for 2,4-D, benomyl,

formetanate, and abamectin, were independently

validated by the laboratory(ies) performing analysis.

Various types of chromatography are used for the

initial identification and quantitation of pesticides. 

Confirmation is accomplished by mass spectrometry

or by alternate detection systems, depending on the

concentration reported. Limits of detection for various

selective detectors are lower than those achieved by

mass spectrometry detectors. Confirmation is deemed

necessary due to the complexity of commodity

matrices and the low concentration levels of detected

residues. The confirmatory analysis provides an extra

measure of confidence in the identification of both the

pesticide residue and its concentration.

IV. Sample Results and Discussion

ê Sample Results

During 1994, pesticide residue detections overall

continued to be at low levels, substantially below

tolerances, as illustrated in Appendices C, D, E, and F. 

A tolerance is the maximum allowable quantity of a

pesticide residue for a particular commodity.

Appendix C shows the distribution of detected

residues per pesticide per commodity. Also shown are

the minimum and maximum concentrations detected,

tolerances, and samples for which there is no tolerance

established or for which the concentration detected

exceeds the tolerance. Non-detected residues are

discussed in a separate section.

The graphs in Appendix D show the percentages of

occurrences at 9 separate concentration ranges

(including a range for non-detected) for

least 25 percent of the samples. 

ê National Estimates

One objective of PDP is to use the data collected by

the nine participating States, which represent

approximately 50 percent of the Nation’s population

(see Figure 2, Section I), to project national estimates

of pesticide residues for the commodities included in

the program. Some of these national estimates are

shown in Appendices E and F. Although the

availability of certain commodities may vary,

depending on the season, PDP sampling procedures

require that the same number of samples be collected

each month. As a result, the relative sample

composition for these seasonal commodities may not

exactly match product availability throughout the year. 

Availability of peaches is the most pronounced

example of this (limited availability in April and

November, including both domestically grown and

imported peaches). According to independent USDA

data (Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Arrival Totals for 22

Cities-FVAS-3 Calendar Year 1994, published in

1995 by Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS,

Washington, DC) approximately 90 percent of all

peaches available for consumption in 1994 arrived at

wholesalers during the May-September time period. 

However, during this 5-month time period, PDP

collected only 64 percent of the yearly total, or 26

percent less than what USDA’s figures indicate was

nationally available. This percentage is still

substantially higher than the 42 percent scheduled for

collection if peaches had been readily available

throughout the year. Consequently, the fact that

peaches are not always available actually provides an

automatic adjustment to the monthly sample numbers,

causing them to more closely represent national

availability. To further adjust for the remaining

difference in actual sample numbers versus

availability, the sampling data have been weighted to

reflect U.S. wholesale arrivals. For more information

on the weighting process used to determine national

estimates, and on the statistical attributes of those

estimates, refer to Kott, P.S., 1996, Estimating

Pesticide Residues in Selected Fruits and Vegetables

for the 1994 Pesticide Data Program; National

Agricultural Statistics Service; Washington, DC.
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994

11

Appendix E focuses on the 58 commodity/pesticide factor, is also shown. This demonstrates that, in most

pairs with detectable residues in at least 10 percent of cases, the levels of detected residues are a small

the samples tested. A range of values for the fraction of the tolerances for the listed

estimated national mean (or average) level of residue commodity/pesticide pairs.

concentration for each pair is provided. The lower

value for the range was determined by treating a Appendix F displays the estimated distributions of

sample without detectable residues as if it had a eight pesticide/commodity pairs in graphical form, as

residue concentration equal to zero. The upper value well as providing the range of values estimated for the

for the range was determined by treating such a mean. These graphs visually demonstrate that the

sample as if it had a residue concentration equal to the overwhelming majority of pesticide testing results, and

limit of detection. In addition, Appendix E also the respective average value (mean), are at low

provides national estimates for the 50th, 75th, and concentrations.

90th percentiles for each of the pairs. The ratio of the

90th percentile to the tolerance, as a normalization

Table 2A. Number of Samples and Residues Detected, by Commodity

(Includes Post-Harvest Applications)

Total Samples % of Samples Different Total

Samples with Pesticides with Pesticides Residues Residue

Commodity Analyzed Detected Detected Detected Detections

Fresh:

 Apples 702 669 95 29 2461

 Bananas 656 362 55 2 407

 Broccoli 686 179 26 12 198

 Carrots 703 484 69 23 838

 Celery 176 169 96 16 453

 Grapes 684 514 75 29 1145

 Green Beans 599 367 61 28 841

 Lettuce 691 368 53 17 687

 Oranges 693 597 86 18 1133

 Peaches 408 378 93 30 1132

 Potatoes 694 540 78 24 840

Processed:

 Sweet Corn 464 2 <1 2 2

 Sweet Peas 433 42 10 8 54

Number of Samples Analyzed = 7,589

Number of Samples with Pesticides Detected = 4,671

Percent with Pesticide Detections = 61.5%

Total Number of Residue Detections = 10,191

Total Number of Different Residues Detected = 62
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994

12

ê Post-Harvest Applications dicloran (carrots and peaches) and imazalil (citrus). 

Before PDP began collecting data, most available

information on pesticide use in the United States was

limited to pesticides applied to sustain agricultural

production (pre-harvest applications). Little was

known about pesticides applied to preserve the

product after harvest (post-harvest applications). 

PDP’s database has since become one of the most

comprehensive sources of post-harvest pesticide use

patterns because samples are collected at points where

such uses have already taken place. Most post-harvest

applications are confined to fungicides (to control

mold and fungus) and growth regulators (to prevent

sprouting). PDP compounds with mostly post-harvest

applications are the fungicides diphenylamine, ophenylphenol, thiabendazole, and the growth regulator

chlorpropham. Other compounds with post-harvest

uses on selected commodities are the fungicides 

Consequently, residues from these pesticides can be

assumed to result from post-harvest applications. To

illustrate the impact of post-harvest uses, detections

including and excluding residues of these compounds

are listed in Tables 2A and 2B respectively. As shown

in these tables, all 407 residues detected in bananas

resulted from post-harvest applications. Significant

differences in the number of residue detections are also

shown for apples, oranges, potatoes, and, to a lesser

extent, peaches and celery. As these tables indicate,

the 5 fungicides listed above, along with

chlorpropham, accounted for 3,074 detections (30

percent of the number of residue detections). The

pesticide most frequently found (1,315 detections) was

the fungicide thiabendazole, representing about 13

percent of all detections. 

Table 2B. Number of Samples and Residues Detected, by Commodity

 (Excludes Post-Harvest Applications -- Chlorpropham, Dicloran on carrots and peaches, 

Diphenylamine, Imazalil on citrus, o-Phenylphenol, and Thiabendazole)

Total Samples % of Samples Different Total

Samples with Pesticides with Pesticides Residues Residue

Commodity Analyzed Detected Detected Detected Detections

Fresh:

 Apples 702 619 88 25 1571

 Bananas 656 0 0 0 0

 Broccoli 686 179 26 12 198

 Carrots 703 482 69 19 824

 Celery 176 159 90 15 362

 Grapes 684 510 75 26 1114

 Green Beans 599 360 60 26 832

 Lettuce 691 366 53 16 681

 Oranges 693 236 34 15 288

 Peaches 408 375 92 27 955

 Potatoes 694 178 26 20 238

Processed:

 Sweet Corn 464 1 <1 1 1

 Sweet Peas 433 41 9 7 53 

Number of Samples Analyzed = 7,589

Number of Samples with Pesticides Detected = 3,506

Percent with Pesticide Detections = 46.2%

Total Number of Residue Detections = 7,117

Total Number of Different Residues Detected = 56
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994

13

ê Environmental Contaminants ê Non-Detected Residues

DDT, DDD, and DDE

A total of 7,589 samples were screened for DDT

and its metabolites--DDD and DDE. Use of DDT has

been prohibited in the United States since 1972. 

However, due to the persistence of this chemical in the

environment, residues of this insecticide, and/or its

metabolites, were found in approximately 5.5 percent

of all samples tested. Residues were found primarily

in root crops and none were above the allowable levels

established by FDA.

ê Single/Selective Residue Screens

2,4-D

A total of 4,086 samples were tested for 2,4-D. 

Commodities tested were apples, grapes, oranges,

peaches, peas, potatoes and sweet corn. 

Approximately 2 percent of the samples tested were

found to contain residues, all well below tolerance

levels. No 2,4-D residues were detected in sweet corn.

ABAMECTIN

A total of 687 samples of oranges were tested for

abamectin. No residues were detected in any of the

samples tested.

BENOMYL

A total of 5,526 samples of apples, bananas,

broccoli, carrots, grapes, green beans, oranges,

peaches, and sweet corn were tested for benomyl. 

Approximately 5.3 percent were found to contain

residues of benomyl, all at levels below the established

tolerances. No benomyl residues were detected in any

of the banana, broccoli, or carrot samples.

FORMETANATE

A total of 1,770 samples of apples, oranges, and

peaches were tested for formetanate. Approximately 6

percent of the samples were found to contain residues

of this compound, all at levels below the established

tolerance.

Approximately 38 percent of the samples analyzed

had no detectable levels of pesticide residues. If postharvest applications of pesticides are excluded, the

percentage becomes approximately 54. Non-detected

residues could also happen because a pesticide was not

applied, because it dissipates rapidly, or for various

other reasons. Appendix G shows the number of nondetected residues by pesticide/commodity pair. The

appendix shows pairs with established tolerances and

pairs with no tolerances tested at EPA’s request

(abamectin in oranges and atrazine in all PDP

commodities). There were other pesticide/commodity

pairs with non-detected residues which were not

included in Appendix G because they did not meet the

criteria given above (i.e., established tolerances or

EPA requested) or because they were analyzed by

fewer than five PDP laboratories. 

Four pesticides--abamectin, atrazine, fenamiphos,

and terbufos were not detected in any of the samples

tested. Abamectin undergoes rapid photolysis and

degradation by soil microorganisms. Atrazine,

depending on soil conditions, is very likely to degrade

to its metabolites, which are not extractable by any

multiresidue screening methods (testing for atrazine

metabolites would require using a single analyte

screening method). Fenamiphos dissipates fairly

quickly and likely was not present at detectable levels

at the time samples were collected. Terbufos is not

widely used in any of the two commodities for which it

is registered.

ê Multiple-Residue Detections

The PDP database provides information that EPA

can use in evaluating the incidence of multiple

residues. These multiple residues may derive from

various sources, such as applications of more than one

pesticide on a crop during a growing season, possible

spray drift, or persistent environmental residues. The

multiple-residue information is particularly useful in

responding to the 1993 National Research Council

report Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children,

which recommended that coordinated recording of

multiple-residue scans would make possible more

accurate evaluation of exposure distributions for

multiple chemicals.
Pesticide Data Program - Annual Summary Calendar Year 1994

14

The distribution of multiple residues in PDP’s needed. FDA enforcement action on PDP samples

database is included as Appendix H. Any exposure generally is not a viable option due to the time lag

assessment of individual or multiple residues depends from sample collection to data reporting. Presumptive

on the actual levels of the residues detected. PDP tolerance violations for 1994 data are indicated in

1994 data indicate that the total pesticide level in a Appendix C.

sample is independent of the number of residues

detected. In other words, very low residue levels may ê Synopsis

be present in situations where more than one residue is

detected. Furthermore, there is no relationship

between the number of residues and presumptive

tolerance violations. 

ê Presumptive Tolerance Violations 

Tolerances are defined under Section 408 of the included insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, and

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act as the growth regulators. Also detected were DDT and its

maximum quantity of a pesticide residue allowable on metabolites, although their presence is almost certainly

a raw agricultural commodity. Tolerances are due to existing environmental contamination, not the

established by EPA for pesticides used on food crops. result of recent prohibited crop application. 

A violation occurs when a residue is found which

exceeds the tolerance level or when a residue is found Approximately 83 percent of samples tested were

for which there is no tolerance for that particular crop. domestic, and 16.6 percent were imported (0.4 percent

With the exception of meat, poultry, and egg products, were of unknown origin). Of all samples tested, 1.3

for which USDA is responsible, tolerances for all percent were reported as presumptive tolerance

other foods are enforced by FDA. When agencies with violations, although most of these were for residues

regulatory enforcement authority collect samples for where no tolerance was established. It was also

tolerance enforcement purposes, they must adhere to a observed that, for certain commodities, post-harvest

quick turnaround time and chain of custody protocols applications contribute significantly to the number of

which allow them to detain the sampled lot until residues detected. Overall, levels of residues detected

results are available. PDP is not an enforcement were substantially below tolerances.

program. Consequently, emphasis is placed on

searching for residues at the lowest detectable levels-- For more information on the Pesticide Data

not on quick turnaround time--and sample collection Program, contact William J. Franks, Jr., Director,

does not interfere with commodity distribution. AMS Science and Technology Division, at (202) 720-

Therefore, when samples are reported to have residues 5231; or Robert L. Epstein, Deputy Director, at (202)

for which no tolerance is established or which exceed 720-2158, or by facsimile at (202) 720-6496. For

the tolerance, they are designated as “presumptive more copies of the PDP summaries, contact Martha

tolerance violations” and reported as such to FDA Lamont, Chief of the Residue Branch, at (703) 330-

regional and headquarters offices. This is done in 2300, or by facsimile at (703) 330-6110. Messages 

accordance with a Memorandum of Understanding may be sent electronically to: 1)William_J_Franks

between USDA and FDA for the purpose of @usda.gov; 2) Robert_L_Epstein@usda.gov; and

pinpointing areas where closer surveillance may be 3) Martha_N_Lamont@usda.gov.

In 1994, a total of 7,589 samples were analyzed

using MRMs. As stated before, analysis using SRMs

was performed in certain commodities only. 

Accordingly, 687 samples were tested for abamectin;

5,526 were tested for benomyl; 4,086 were tested for

2,4-D; and 1,770 for formetanate. Pesticides detected

gggggg

June 1996

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in its programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex,

religion, age, disability, political beliefs, and marital or familial status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who

require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA Office of

Communications at (202) 720-2791.

To file a complaint, write the Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250, or call (202) 720-7327 (voice) or

(202) 720-1127 (TDD). USDA is an equal employment opportunity employer.
Appendix A

Sample Origin by Grower, Packer, or Distributor

Appendix A gives the number of samples per State or country of origin and the

number of samples of unknown origin. Where available, origin of fresh commodities is

determined by grower or packer information. For processed commodities, origin is

determined primarily by packer or distributor.

As shown in Appendix A, samples collected during 1994 originated from 39

States and 17 foreign countries.
APPENDIX A. SAMPLE ORIGIN BY GROWER, PACKER, 

OR DISTRIBUTOR (Number of Samples per State/Country)

No. of % of

Part 1. AP BN BR CE CR CS GB GR LT OG PC PO PS Domestic Total

States = 39 Domestic Samples

Alabama 1 3 4 <0.1

Arizona 17 11 9 18 11 1 3 70 0.9

Arkansas 1 1 <0.1

California 58 610 121 399 129 116 367 610 516 185 116 115 3342 44.0

Colorado 1 4 31 1 9 2 3 4 52 107 1.4

Connecticut 1 1 <0.1

Deleware 1 1 1 3 <0.1

Florida 2 35 44 11 162 2 23 124 5 28 13 449 5.9

Georgia 2 49 1 22 1 5 80 1.0

Idaho 16 1 15 1 118 15 166 2.2

Illinois 2 37 3 1 1 5 33 82 1.0

Indiana 1 1 <0.1

Kentucky 1 1 <0.1

Maine 3 6 5 16 4 34 0.5

Maryland 3 3 1 1 1 9 0.1

Massachusetts 7 3 10 0.1

Michigan 64 1 1 112 15 11 2 5 3 2 39 14 269 3.5

Minnesota 1 53 20 45 119 1.6

Missouri 3 1 4 <0.1

Montana 1 1 <0.1

Nevada 4 4 <0.1

New Jersey 9 3 7 1 19 2 1 42 0.6

New Mexico 6 6 <0.1

New York 56 7 2 15 45 21 4 8 9 3 51 36 257 3.4

North Carolina 9 2 3 37 1 1 1 6 5 65 0.9

North Dakota 5 5 <0.1

Ohio 9 1 4 27 1 1 18 5 66 0.9

Oklahoma 2 11 2 10 25 0.3

Oregon 7 3 22 1 48 24 105 1.4

Pennsylvania 11 10 3 1 2 7 34 0.5

South Carolina 3 4 1 20 3 31 0.4

Tennessee 13 18 8 39 0.5

Texas 7 8 13 26 27 17 1 4 17 2 25 29 176 2.3

Utah 1 2 2 5 <0.1

Vermont 4 4 <0.1

Virginia 13 3 2 3 21 0.3

Washington 386 10 1 20 3 11 3 9 1 13 93 4 554 7.3

West Virginia 2 2 <0.1

Wisconsin 36 23 44 103 1.4

No. of Domestic 671 0 670 173 673 454 494 391 689 687 281 688 426 6297 --

% of Total (nearest %) 96 0 98 98 96 98 82 57 99 99 69 99 98 83.0

Page 1 of 2
APPENDIX A. (cont'd) SAMPLE ORIGIN BY GROWER, PACKER, 

OR DISTRIBUTOR (Number of Samples per State/Country)

No. of % of

Part 2. AP BN BR CE CR CS GB GR LT OG PC PO PS Import Total

Countries = 17 Imported Samples

Australia 6 6 <0.1

Brazil 2 2 <0.1

Canada 4 1 23 6 1 1 1 6 5 48 0.6

Chile 4 258 126 388 5.1

Colombia 109 109 1.4

Costa Rica 144 144 1.9

Ecuador 141 141 1.9

Guatemala 89 89 1.2

Honduras 70 70 0.9

Israel 1 1 <0.1

Mexico 38 14 3 3 83 32 1 174 2.3

New Zealand 13 13 0.2

Nicaragua 3 3 <0.1

Panama 46 46 0.6

South Africa 8 1 9 0.1

Thailand 1 1 <0.1

Venezuela 2 2 <0.1

Unknown Country 14 14 0.2

No. of Import 31 656 15 3 26 8 84 291 2 6 127 6 5 1260 --

% of Total (nearest %) 4 100 2 2 4 2 14 42 <1 1 31 1 1 16.6

No. of % of

Part 3. AP BN BR CE CR CS GB GR LT OG PC PO PS Unknown Total

Unknown Origin

No. of Unknown Origin 1 4 2 21 2 2 32 --

% of Total (nearest %) 0 0 <1 0 <1 <1 4 <1 0 0 0 0 <1 0.4

GRAND TOTALS = 702 656 686 176 703 464 599 684 691 693 408 694 433 7589

Commodities

AP - Apples GR - Grapes

BN - Bananas LT - Lettuce

BR - Broccoli OG - Oranges

CE - Celery PC - Peaches

CR - Carrots PO - Potatoes

CS - Sweet Corn PS - Sweet Peas

GB - Green Beans

Page 2 of 2
Appendix B

Quality Assurance Program Elements

PDP’s Quality Assurance (QA) program covers all aspects of data gathering, from

sample collection to data reporting. QA protocols for sampling are designed to protect

sample integrity from the time of collection to the time of delivery to the testing facilities. 

QA protocols for testing comprise all laboratory operations from the time of sample

receipt to the time data are reported to PDP’s central database. As described in this

appendix, the QA program has five elements: 1) Standard Operating Procedures; 2)

On-site reviews; 3) Proficiency Check Samples; 4) Quality Control Procedures; and

5) Method Performance and Confirmation Procedures.
APPENDIX B. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM ELEMENTS

1. Standard Operating Procedures - Written SOPs are in place to provide uniform administrative, sampling,

and laboratory procedures. SOPs are revised annually to accommodate changes in the program. Before

submission, data are reviewed by each Quality Assurance Unit for completeness and adherence to PDP

requirements.

2. On-Site Reviews - On-site reviews are performed to determine compliance with SOPs. Improvements in

sampling, chain of custody, recordkeeping, and laboratory procedures are made as a result of the on-site

reviews.

3. Proficiency Check Samples - All facilities are required to participate in PDP's Check Sample Program. 

Check samples are issued to laboratories performing analysis with multiresidue methods and/or single/

selective residue methods. Periodically, one to four prepared commodities, containing pesticide(s) of known

quantities, are sent to the participating laboratories and tested under the same conditions as routine samples. 

The resulting data are used to determine performance equivalency among the testing laboratories, and to

evaluate individual laboratory performance. During 1994, PDP laboratories received 3 proficiency sample

sets consisting of 9 samples for multiresidue screening, and 5 sets consisting of 15 samples for

single/selective residue screening.

4. Quality Control Procedures - PDP operating procedures for quality control (QC) are intended to assess

method and analyst performance during sample preparation, clean-up, extraction, and, where applicable,

derivatization. To maximize sample output and decrease the QC/sample ratio, samples are analyzed in

analytical sets, which include the sample set and the following components.

a. Reagent Blank: An amount of distilled water, equivalent to the natural moisture content of the

commodity, is run through the entire analytical process to determine glassware cleanliness and

system integrity.

b. Matrix Blank: A previously analyzed sample of the same commodity, which contains either very

low concentrations of known residues or no detectable residues, is divided into two portions. The first

portion is used to give background information on naturally occurring chemicals, and the second one

is used to prepare a matrix spike.

c. Matrix Spike(s): Prior to extraction, a portion(s) of matrix blank is spiked with marker pesticides to

determine the accuracy of the analyst and instrument performance. Marker pesticides are

compounds selected from different pesticide classes (organochlorines, organophosphates,

carbamates), which have physical and chemical characteristics similar to those in the class they

represent. The use of marker pesticides to monitor recoveries is a modification of PDP’s previous

requirements that called for spiking with all pesticides. Because of the large number of pesticides in

the program, spiking with all compounds required several spike mixtures (to avert coelution

problems), which, in turn, resulted in lengthy run times. 

d. Process Control Spike: A compound of physical and chemical characteristics, similar to those

of the pesticides being tested, is used to evaluate the analytical process on a sample-by-sample

basis. Each of the analytical set components, except the reagent and matrix blanks, is spiked with

process controls.

e. Storage Spikes: If a sample set is going to be frozen as a homogenate for more than 72 hours

prior to analysis, analysts are required to prepare storage spikes. Storage spikes provide information

on whether degradation has occurred while the sample was frozen, and are prepared in the same

manner as matrix spikes. However, they do not replace the requirement to run a fresh matrix spike

at the time of analysis.

5. Method Performance and Confirmation Procedures - Laboratories are required to determine the limits of

detection (LOD) and limits of quantitation (LOQ) for each commodity/pesticide pair. LODs depend on matrix,

analyte, and detector used, and range from 0.001 to 0.150 ppm. (Information on specific LODs and LOQs is

available upon request.) Confirmation by mass spectrometry, or a suitable alternate detection system, is

required for all initial determinations. If a detected residue does not have a tolerance, or it exceeds the

established tolerance, the sample is reanalyzed in duplicate from the frozen homogenate, along with the

appropriate blanks and a spike of the residue at the suspected level. 

Page 1 of 1
Appendix C

Distribution of Residues Detected by Pesticide

Appendix C shows residue detections for all pesticide/commodity pairs tested,

including minimum and maximum concentrations reported and whether a tolerance is

established for each pair. 

 Of the 7,589 samples analyzed, 88 samples (1.2 percent) contained 88 residues

where no tolerance was established and 4 residues exceeded the tolerance. 

Presumptive violations were reported in 21 samples (1.7 percent) of imported

commodities and in 67 samples (1.1 percent) of domestic commodities. Established

tolerances for PDP’s commodity/pesticide pairs cover several orders of magnitude--

from as low as 0.05 ppm for chlorpyrifos/peaches, to as high as 100 ppm for

captan/lettuce. The highest level detected was 60 ppm for iprodione/grapes. Four of

the samples contained two residues each for which no tolerance was established by

EPA. Most of the detections (60 percent) were at levels between the Limit of Detection

(LOD) and Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) and were reported as “below quantifiable

levels.” 

In some cases, a tolerance may or may not apply, depending on whether certain

conditions are met. For example, residues of o-phenylphenol which were detected in

14 potato samples could have resulted from paper packaging materials. If such had

been the case, they would have been covered under food additive tolerances. Since

there was no evidence that the potato samples found to contain o-phenylphenol had

come in contact with this type of packaging material, PDP reported them to FDA as

presumptive tolerance violations. Similarly, residues of methamidophos in green beans

are covered by a tolerance only if residues of acephate are also present. Of the 127

green beans samples found to contain residues of methamidophos, 121 were found in

combination with acephate. Only six samples had methamidophos residues where

acephate was not present and were reported as presumptive violations. There were

also two samples where the 3 ppm acephate plus methamidophos tolerance expression

was exceeded.
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

1. 2,4-D

Apples 683 2 0.3 0.010 0.032 5

Grapes 658 1 0.2 0.015 0.015 0.5

Oranges 682 33 4.8 0.005 0.020 5

Peaches 396 1 0.3 0.005 0.005 0.2

Potatoes 677 29 4.3 0.005 0.13 0.2

Sweet Peas 431 3 0.7 0.005 0.028 1.0

Total 69

2. Acephate

Celery 176 73 41.5 0.005 1.3 10

Grapes (V-1) 669 1 0.1 0.006 0.006 NT

Green Beans (X-2) 591 132 22.3 0.005 3.3 3

Lettuce 691 88 12.7 0.005 0.25 10

Potatoes (V-1) 694 1 0.1 0.005 0.005 NT

Total 295

3. Aldicarb (parent)

Aldicarb Sulfone (metabolite)

Green Beans (V-1) S1 479 1 0.2 0.013 0.013 NT

 Total 1

Aldicarb sulfoxide (metabolite)

Green Beans (V-1) S1 590 1 0.2 0.076 0.076 NT

Oranges 683 1 0.1 0.025 0.025 0.3

Total 2

4. Azinphos methyl

Apples 687 291 42.4 0.015 0.29 2.0

Grapes 669 17 2.5 0.020 0.47 5.0

Green Beans 590 4 0.7 0.020 0.040 2.0

Peaches 396 79 19.9 0.020 0.72 2.0

Total 391

Page 1 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

5. Benomyl (analyzed as carbendazim)

Apples 701 72 10.3 0.050 0.35 7.0

Grapes 675 33 4.9 0.050 0.79 10.0

Green Beans 582 76 13.1 0.050 1.6 2.0

Oranges 686 5 0.7 0.050 0.084 10.0

Peaches 399 108 27.1 0.050 2.0 15.0

Sweet Corn 455 1 0.2 0.084 0.084 0.2

Total 295

6. Captan

Apples 677 109 16.1 0.010 1.4 25

Carrots 552 9 1.6 0.020 0.020 2

Grapes 662 208 31.4 0.010 2.5 50

Green Beans 472 2 0.4 0.020 0.12 25

Peaches 392 53 13.5 0.010 0.95 50

Potatoes 608 1 0.2 0.020 0.020 25

Total 382

7. Carbaryl

Apples 686 144 21.0 0.007 1.2 10

Broccoli 679 1 0.1 0.007 0.007 10

Grapes 669 12 1.8 0.020 0.54 10

Green Beans 591 26 4.4 0.007 1.4 10

Oranges 683 52 7.6 0.007 0.16 10

Peaches 396 62 15.7 0.020 2.3 10

Sweet Peas 433 4 0.9 0.060 0.43 10

Total 301

8. Carbofuran (parent)

Green Beans (V-3) 528 3 0.6 0.010 0.030 NT

Oranges 558 1 0.2 0.030 0.030 2.5

Potatoes 603 2 0.3 0.030 0.067 1

Total 6

3-Hydroxycarbofuran (metabolite)

Grapes (X-1) 577 1 0.2 0.34 0.34 0.2

Potatoes 585 1 0.2 0.035 0.035 1

Total 2

Page 2 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

9. Chlorothalonil

Broccoli 631 2 0.3 0.013 0.094 5

Celery 176 119 67.6 0.002 0.59 15

Green Beans 589 99 16.8 0.005 1.1 5

Lettuce (V-1) 637 1 0.2 0.005 0.005 NT

Peaches 355 1 0.3 0.010 0.010 0.5

Total 222

10. Chlorpropham

Apples (V-2) 687 2 0.3 0.007 0.007 NT

Carrots 687 4 0.6 0.029 0.033 0.1

Potatoes 693 419 60.5 0.010 16 50

Total 425

11. Chlorpyrifos

Apples 687 132 19.2 0.003 0.27 1.5

Broccoli 679 11 1.6 0.005 0.025 1

Carrots (V-2) 687 2 0.3 0.005 0.005 NT

Celery (V-4) 176 4 2.3 0.005 0.045 NT

Grapes 669 34 5.1 0.005 0.11 0.5

Lettuce (V-1) 691 1 0.1 0.010 0.010 NT

Oranges 683 32 4.7 0.005 0.023 1.0

Peaches 396 15 3.8 0.005 0.030 0.05 *

Potatoes (V-1) 694 1 0.1 0.024 0.024 NT

Total 232

12. Cypermethrin

Lettuce 98 1 1.0 0.10 0.10 10.0

Peaches (V-1) 66 1 1.5 0.62 0.62 NT

 Total 2

13. Dacthal (DCPA)

Broccoli 679 150 22.1 0.003 0.13 5

Celery (V-4) 176 4 2.3 0.007 0.027 NT

Green Beans 591 27 4.4 0.009 0.13 2

Lettuce 691 36 5.2 0.007 0.24 2

Total 217

Page 3 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

14. DDT (parent)

Carrots 420 22 5.2 0.010 0.056 3 ##

Lettuce 423 1 0.2 0.013 0.013 0.5 ##

Potatoes 496 19 3.8 0.010 0.013 1 ##

Total 42

DDD (metabolite)

Carrots 404 9 2.2 0.002 0.015 3 ##

Total 9

DDE (metabolite)

Broccoli 679 3 0.4 0.011 0.033 0.5 ##

Carrots 672 256 38.1 0.003 0.16 3 ##

Celery 176 14 8.0 0.004 0.012 0.5 ##

Grapes 669 1 0.1 0.004 0.004 0.05 ##

Green Beans 591 4 0.7 0.010 0.013 0.2 ##

Lettuce 691 21 3.0 0.004 0.026 0.5 ##

Peaches 396 1 0.3 0.011 0.011 0.2 ##

Potatoes 694 66 9.5 0.004 0.027 1 ##

Total 366

15. Diazinon

Apples 687 9 1.3 0.005 0.12 0.5

Carrots 687 34 4.9 0.005 0.078 0.75

Celery 176 8 4.5 0.005 0.027 0.7

Grapes 669 12 1.8 0.005 0.15 0.75

Green Beans 591 2 0.3 0.005 0.012 0.5

Lettuce 691 27 3.9 0.005 0.16 0.7

Peaches 396 30 7.6 0.005 0.029 0.7

Sweet Peas 433 1 0.2 0.005 0.005 0.5

Total 123

16. Dichlorvos (DDVP)

Green Beans 591 1 0.2 0.012 0.012 0.5 @@

 Total 1

Page 4 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

17. Dicloran

Carrots 687 7 1.0 0.010 0.37 10

Celery 176 91 51.7 0.005 1.3 15

Grapes 669 27 4.0 0.005 0.59 10

Green Beans 591 9 1.5 0.010 0.47 20

Lettuce 691 6 0.9 0.008 0.15 10

Peaches 396 149 37.6 0.005 11 20

Potatoes 694 4 0.6 0.005 0.15 0.25

Total 293

18. Dicofol

Apples 687 26 3.8 0.019 3.7 5

Grapes 669 22 3.3 0.008 1.8 5

Oranges 683 10 1.5 0.008 0.049 10

Peaches 396 1 0.3 0.38 0.38 10

Total 59

19. Dieldrin

Carrots 65 1 1.5 0.005 0.005 0.1

Potatoes 36 4 11.1 0.003 0.023 0.1

 Total 5

20. Dimethoate (see Omethoate)

Apples 687 81 11.8 0.004 0.44 2

Broccoli 673 11 1.6 0.002 0.016 2

Grapes 669 77 11.4 0.004 0.36 1

Green Beans 591 47 8.0 0.004 0.96 2

Lettuce 691 83 12.0 0.003 1.4 2

Oranges 683 12 1.8 0.004 0.010 2

Peaches (V-1) 396 1 0.3 0.006 0.006 NT

Potatoes 694 1 0.1 0.005 0.005 0.2

Sweet Peas 433 31 7.2 0.004 0.054 2

Total 344

21. Diphenylamine

Apples 629 438 69.6 0.013 5.4 10

Grapes (V-1) 537 1 0.2 0.034 0.034 NT

Total 439

Page 5 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

22. Disulfoton (parent)

Carrots (V-1) S2 687 1 0.1 0.035 0.035 NT

Total 1

Disulfoton sulfone (metabolite)

Carrots (V-1) S2 86 1 1.2 0.037 0.037 NT

 Total 1

23. Endosulfans

Apples 687 96 14.0 0.004 0.23 2.0

Broccoli 679 5 0.7 0.003 0.036 2.0

Carrots 673 16 2.4 0.005 0.024 0.2

Celery 176 1 0.6 0.005 0.005 2.0

Grapes 669 55 8.2 0.004 0.32 2.0

Green Beans 591 169 28.6 0.005 1.3 2.0

Lettuce 691 145 21.0 0.005 0.88 2.0

Oranges (V-10) 683 10 1.5 0.005 0.005 NT

Peaches 396 21 5.3 0.005 0.12 2.0

Potatoes 694 84 12.1 0.005 0.12 0.2

Total 602

24. Esfenvalerate

Green Beans 289 4 1.4 0.020 0.11 2.0

 Total 4

Fenvalerate

Green Beans 436 3 0.7 0.038 0.038 2.0

Peaches 277 2 0.7 0.080 0.080 10.0

 Total 5

25. Ethion

Apples 687 6 0.9 0.005 0.60 2.0

Oranges 683 24 3.5 0.002 0.047 2.0

Total 30

26. Formetanate

Apples 702 19 2.7 0.050 0.25 3

Oranges 669 70 10.5 0.085 1.3 4

Peaches 399 17 4.3 0.085 0.85 5

Total 106

Page 6 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

27. Imazalil

Bananas (X-1) 640 77 12.0 0.012 0.36 0.20

Oranges 683 360 52.7 0.012 0.74 10.0

Total 437

28. Iprodione

Apples (V-5) 687 5 0.7 0.014 0.55 NT

Carrots 673 167 24.8 0.010 0.37 5.0

Celery (V-1) 176 1 0.6 0.030 0.030 NT

Grapes 669 245 36.6 0.010 1.6 60.0

Green Beans 591 13 2.2 0.014 1.8 2.0

Peaches 396 270 68.2 0.014 17 20.0

Potatoes 694 1 0.1 0.088 0.088 0.5

Total 702

29. Lindane

Grapes 669 1 0.1 0.005 0.005 1

Peaches 396 2 0.5 0.010 0.71 1

Total 3

30 Linuron

Carrots 105 33 31.4 0.005 0.11 1

Potatoes 178 1 0.6 0.012 0.012 1

Total 34

31. Malathion

Lettuce 691 2 0.3 0.019 0.047 8

Total 2

32. Methamidophos

Broccoli 630 3 0.5 0.020 0.056 1.0

Celery 176 45 25.6 0.004 0.082 1

Grapes (V-1) 669 1 0.1 0.004 0.004 NT

Green Beans @ (V-6) 591 127 21.5 0.004 2.0 NT

Lettuce 691 41 5.9 0.004 0.042 1.0

Potatoes 694 5 0.7 0.006 0.026 0.1

Total 222

Page 7 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

33. Methidathion

Oranges 683 32 4.7 0.004 0.030 2.0

Total 32

34. Methomyl

Apples 687 26 3.8 0.013 0.12 1

Broccoli 679 5 0.7 0.015 0.070 3

Celery 176 7 4.0 0.013 0.099 3

Grapes 669 58 8.7 0.013 1.3 5

Green Beans 591 21 3.6 0.013 0.70 2

Lettuce 691 35 5.1 0.013 1.5 5

Peaches 395 1 0.3 0.033 0.033 5

Sweet Peas 433 2 0.5 0.025 0.025 5

Total 155

35. Methoxychlor

Apples 687 121 17.6 0.010 1.0 14

Peaches 396 2 0.5 0.23 1.4 14

Sweet Peas 433 1 0.2 0.055 0.055 14

Total 124

36. Mevinphos

Broccoli 675 1 0.1 0.033 0.033 1.0

Celery 176 4 2.3 0.003 0.021 1.0

Grapes 669 3 0.4 0.007 0.24 0.5

Lettuce 691 77 11.1 0.002 0.46 0.5

Peaches 396 1 0.3 0.010 0.010 1.0

Total 86

37. Myclobutanil

Apples 687 3 0.4 0.025 0.079 0.5

Grapes 669 134 20.0 0.013 0.26 1.0

Peaches 396 1 0.3 0.033 0.033 2.0

Total 138

Page 8 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

38. Omethoate (see Dimethoate)

Apples 577 62 10.7 0.005 0.12 2

Broccoli 556 3 0.5 0.005 0.020 2

Grapes 576 66 11.5 0.003 0.14 1

Green Beans 462 32 6.9 0.005 0.13 2

Lettuce 490 25 5.1 0.005 0.050 2

Oranges 587 5 0.9 0.008 0.016 2

Sweet Peas 365 11 3.0 0.005 0.023 2

Total 204

39. Oxamyl

Apples 687 23 3.3 0.014 0.32 2

Celery 176 29 16.5 0.014 0.28 3

Total 52

40. Parathion

Apples 663 2 0.3 0.005 0.005 1

Carrots 647 10 1.5 0.003 0.030 1

Grapes 645 4 0.6 0.005 0.025 1

Peaches 382 1 0.3 0.003 0.003 1

Total 17

41. Parathion methyl

Apples 687 45 6.6 0.004 0.083 1

Carrots 687 6 0.9 0.004 0.020 1

Celery 176 1 0.6 0.005 0.005 1

Grapes 669 14 2.1 0.005 0.50 1

Oranges 683 1 0.1 0.004 0.004 1

Peaches 396 117 29.5 0.004 0.29 1

Total 184

42. Permethrins

Apples 687 1 0.1 0.038 0.038 0.05

Broccoli 679 3 0.4 0.016 0.35 1.0

Celery 176 51 29.0 0.008 0.93 5.0

Green Beans (V-3) 591 3 0.5 0.072 0.18 NT

Lettuce 693 97 14.0 0.008 5.6 20.0

Peaches 396 14 3.5 0.016 0.37 5.0

Total 169

Page 9 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

43. o-Phenylphenol

Apples 356 64 18.0 0.014 0.61 25

Carrots 308 1 0.3 0.014 0.014 20

Oranges 352 64 18.2 0.010 0.12 10

Peaches 177 20 11.3 0.017 0.036 20

Potatoes (V-14) 358 14 3.9 0.017 0.46 NT **

Sweet Corn (V-1) 245 1 0.4 0.017 0.017 NT

Sweet Peas (V-1) 219 1 0.5 0.017 0.017 NT

Total 165

44. Phorate (parent)

Phorate sulfone (metabolite)

Potatoes 265 6 2.3 0.005 0.17 0.5

Total 6

Phorate sulfoxide (metabolite)

Potatoes 202 4 2.0 0.015 0.16 0.5

Total 4

45. Phosalone

Apples 430 1 0.2 0.010 0.010 10.0

Total 1

46. Phosmet

Apples 687 53 7.7 0.010 0.53 10

Grapes 669 3 0.4 0.017 0.13 10

Peaches 396 60 15.2 0.010 0.86 10

Total 116

47. Phosphamidon

Apples 488 21 4.3 0.003 0.11 1

Total 21

48. Propargite

Apples 687 221 32.2 0.018 2.8 3

Grapes 669 35 5.2 0.033 0.89 10

Peaches 396 86 21.7 0.033 3.0 7

Total 342

Page 10 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

49. Quintozene (PCNB, parent)

Carrots (V-2) 687 2 0.3 0.007 0.007 NT

Green Beans 591 20 3.4 0.005 0.012 0.1

Potatoes 694 4 0.6 0.005 0.038 0.1

 Total 26

Hexachlorobenzene (HCB, impurity)

Carrots (V-2) 687 2 0.3 0.005 0.005 NT

Total 2

Pentachlorobenzene (PCB, metabolite)

Potatoes 694 7 1.0 0.003 0.009 0.1

 Total 7

Pentachloroaniline (PCA, metabolite)

Carrots (V-3) 51 3 5.9 0.005 0.015 NT

 Total 3

50. Thiabendazole

Apples 686 386 56.3 0.013 6.1 10

Bananas 640 330 51.6 0.013 0.40 0.4 ***

Carrots 678 2 0.3 0.013 0.037 10

Grapes 669 3 0.4 0.013 0.30 10.0

Oranges 683 421 61.6 0.005 1.3 10

Peaches (V-9) 396 8 2.0 0.013 0.44 NT

Potatoes 694 165 23.8 0.008 3.3 10.0

Total 1315

51. Trifluralin

Carrots 535 250 46.7 0.005 0.31 1.0

Celery 67 1 1.5 0.013 0.013 0.05

Green Beans 432 1 0.2 0.013 0.013 0.05

Potatoes 475 1 0.2 0.014 0.014 0.05

Total 253

Page 11 of 12
APPENDIX C. DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUES DETECTED

BY PESTICIDE

Number No. of % of Minimum Maximum

of Samples Samples with Samples with Value Value Tolerance

Pesticide Screened Detections Detections Detected, ppm Detected, ppm Level, ppm

52. Vinclozolin

Grapes 668 76 11.4 0.007 0.74 6.0

Green Beans # (V-5) 479 14 2.9 0.008 0.32 NT

Peaches 391 7 1.8 0.007 3.0 25.0

Total 97

 Total No. of Different Residues Detected: 62

 Total No. of Samples Analyzed: 7589

 Total No. of Residues Detected: 10191

KEY

 S1 Metabolic products of Aldicarb. 

 S2 Metabolic products of Disulfoton.

 (V) Residue was found where no tolerance was established by EPA. Following V are the number of occurrences.

 (X) Residue was found which exceeds EPA tolerance. Following X are the number of occurrences.

 NT No tolerance level was set for that pesticide / commodity pair.

 @ All other residues were detected in combination with acephate, for which a tolerance exists.

 @@ Dichlorvos is also a breakdown product of Naled. Except for lettuce, tolerances shown are listed under Naled.

 # All other residues detected were exempted under FIFRA Section 18 (crisis exemptions).

 ## Numbers shown for DDT and metabolites (DDD & DDE) are Action Levels established by FDA.

 * Temporary tolerance (01/28/94 - 01/28/96), previous tolerance (01/01/94-01/28/94 = 0.01 ppm).

 ** May be subject to Food Additive Tolerance due to packaging materials.

 *** Tolerance applies to banana pulp only.

Page 12 of 12
Appendix D

Frequency of Occurrences at Various Concentration Ranges for

Selected Pesticide/Commodity Pairs

This appendix shows pesticide/commodity pairs with detections in at least 25

percent of the samples tested. Residue detections are grouped in 8 different

concentration ranges, from a low of 0.001 ppm to a high of 10 ppm. Also shown is a

range for non-detects, which are determinations below the limit of detection of the

reporting laboratory and are not necessarily below 0.001 ppm. 

The graphs depict the number of samples tested, the number and percentage of

samples with detections for each individual pair and the minimum and maximum

concentrations detected. For example, as seen in page 9 of this appendix, for

parathion-methyl/peaches, 70.5 percent of samples had no detectable residues, 2.5

percent had residues between 0.001 and 0.009 ppm, 9 percent had residues between

0.010 and 0.025 ppm, 7.8 percent had residues between 0.026 and 0.050 ppm, 6.3

percent had residues between 0.051 and 0.099 ppm, 3.8 percent had residues between

0.10 and 0.50 ppm. No residues were detected at or above 0.51 ppm. 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 1 of 12

Acephate / Celery

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

176 samples tested

73 detections (41.5%)

min .005 ppm - max 1.3 ppm

Tolerance 10 ppm

Azinphos Methyl / Apples

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

687 samples tested

291 detections (42.4%)

min .015 ppm - max .29 ppm

Tolerance 2.0 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 2 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Benomyl / Peaches

399 samples tested

108 detections (27.1%)

min .05 ppm - max 2.0 ppm

Tolerance 15.0 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Captan / Grapes

662 samples tested

208 detections (31.4%)

min .010 ppm - max 2.5 ppm

Tolerance 50 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 3 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Chlorothalonil / Celery

176 samples tested

119 detections (67.6%)

min .002 ppm - max .59 ppm

Tolerance 15 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Chlorpropham / Potatoes

693 samples tested

419 detections (60.5%)

min .01 ppm - max 16 ppm

Tolerance 50 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 4 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

DDE / Carrots

672 samples tested

256 detections (38.1%)

min .003 ppm - max .16 ppm

Tolerance 3 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Dicloran / Celery

176 samples tested

91 detections (51.7%)

min .005 ppm - max 1.3 ppm

Tolerance 15 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 5 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Dicloran / Peaches

396 samples tested

149 detections (37.6%)

min .005 ppm - max 11 ppm

Tolerance 20 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Diphenylamine / Apples

629 samples tested

438 detections (69.6%)

min .013 ppm - max 5.4 ppm

Tolerance 10 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 6 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Endosulfans / Green Beans

591 samples tested

169 detections (28.6%)

min .005 ppm - max 1.3 ppm

Tolerance 2.0 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Imazalil / Oranges

683 samples tested

360 detections (52.7%)

min .012 ppm - max .74 ppm

Tolerance 10.0 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 7 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Iprodione / Grapes

669 samples tested

245 detections (36.6%)

min .010 ppm - max 1.6 ppm

Tolerance 60.0 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Iprodione / Peaches

396 samples tested

270 detections (68.2%)

min .014 ppm - max 17 ppm

Tolerance 20.0 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 8 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Linuron / Carrots

105 samples tested

33 detections (31.4%)

min .005 ppm - max .11 ppm

Tolerance 1 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Methamidophos / Celery

176 samples tested

45 detections (25.6%)

min .004 ppm - max .082 ppm

Tolerance 1 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 9 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Parathion Methyl / Peaches

396 samples tested

117 detections (29.5%)

min .004 ppm - max .29 ppm

Tolerance 1 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Permethrins / Celery

176 samples tested

51 detections (29.0%)

min .008 ppm - max .93 ppm

Tolerance 5.0 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 10 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Propargite / Apples

687 samples tested

221 detections (32.2%)

min .018 ppm - max 2.8 ppm

Tolerance 3 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Thiabendazole / Apples

686 samples tested

386 detections (56.3%)

min .013 ppm - max 6.1 ppm

Tolerance 10 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 11 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Thiabendazole / Bananas

640 samples tested

330 detections (51.6%)

min .013 ppm - max .40 ppm

Tolerance 0.4 ppm

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Thiabendazole / Oranges

683 samples tested

421 detections (61.6%)

min .005 ppm - max 1.3 ppm

Tolerance 10 ppm

 
FOR SELECTED PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS*

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 25 Percent of Samples)

APPENDIX D. (cont'd) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES AT VARIOUS CONCENTRATION RANGES

Page 12 of 12

ND ** .001-.009 .010-.025 .026-.050 .051-.099 .10-.50 .51-1.0 1.1-9.9 10-above

0

20

40

60

80

Concentration Ranges (ppm)

Percentage of Occurrences

Trifluralin / Carrots

535 samples tested

250 detections (46.7%)

min .005 ppm - max .31 ppm

Tolerance 1.0 ppm

* Pesticides found in less than 25 percent of the samples are not included

** These determinations are below the limit of detection of the reporting laboratory, and are not necessarily below .001 ppm.

 
Appendix E

National Estimates for Concentration Percentiles vs. Tolerance

Appendix E shows 58 pesticide/commodity pairs with detections in at least 10

percent of the samples tested. Concentrations detected are arranged in percentiles. 

The 90th percentile is compared to the tolerance established for each

pesticide/commodity pair.

The meaning of a percentile can be most easily explained through an example. 

For the bananas-thiabendazole pair, the 50th percentile is estimated to be 0.013 ppm. 

This means that PDP estimates that at least 50 percent of bananas available to U.S.

consumers had thiabendazole residues of 0.013 ppm or less, while at least 50 percent

had residues of 0.013 ppm or more (since more than 1 percent of bananas can, in

principle, have residues of exactly 0.013 ppm, the phrase “at least” is included in the

description). Similarly, the 75th percentile (or the upper quartile) for this pair is

estimated to be 0.075 ppm, which means that at least 75 percent of bananas had

residues of 0.075 ppm or less, while at least 25 percent had residues of 0.075 ppm or

more. Finally, the 90th percentile (or the last decile) is estimated to be 0.17 ppm,

meaning that at least 90 percent of all bananas had thiabendazole residues of 0.17

ppm or less, while at least 10 percent had residues of 0.17 ppm or more.

When calculating the national estimates, PDP sampling data were weighted to

more accurately reflect U.S. wholesale arrivals. This weighting had the most profound

effect for the pair peaches/azinphos methyl (see page 3 of this appendix), for which

detectable residues were found in 19.9 percent of the samples. Although over 90

percent of all peaches reached wholesalers during the May through September 1994

period, only approximately 6 percent of those samples contained detectable residues of

azinphos methyl. In contrast, about 45 percent of the remaining peaches available (for

the periods January-April 1994 and October-December 1994) had detectable levels of

azinphos methyl. When the sampling data were weighted to accurately reflect U.S.

arrivals, slightly less than 9 percent of the total product available for consumption in

1994 was estimated to have detectable residues, resulting in no azinphos methyl

values for the 90th percentile. Seasonal effects, on a smaller scale, were also

observed for grapes, where dimethoate, omethoate, and vinclozolin were detected in

approximately 11.5 percent of the samples tested. Nevertheless, when the sampling

data were adjusted to accurately reflect U.S. availability of import versus domestic

product, the level of residue detections fell below 10 percent, also resulting in no value

for the 90th percentile (see page 2). 
APPENDIX E. NATIONAL ESTIMATES FOR 

CONCENTRATION PERCENTILES vs. TOLERANCE

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 10 Percent of Samples)

% of Ratio of 

Commodity Samples with Mean ** Percentiles 90th Percentile

 Pesticide Detections Lower Upper 50th 75th 90th to Tolerance

1. Apples

 Azinphos-methyl 42.4 0.029 0.043 * 0.042 0.092 0.046

 Benomyl 10.3 0.016 0.061 * * 0.05 0.007

 Captan 16.1 0.017 0.024 * * 0.031 0.001

 Carbaryl 21.0 0.031 0.052 * * 0.088 0.009

 Chlorpyrifos 19.2 0.005 0.009 * * 0.013 0.009

 Dimethoate 11.8 0.005 0.011 * * 0.005 0.002

 Diphenylamine 69.6 0.502 0.506 0.15 0.81 1.3 0.130

 Endosulfans 14.0 0.004 0.008 * * 0.008 0.004

 Methoxychlor 17.6 0.030 0.042 * * 0.096 0.007

 Omethoate 10.7 0.003 0.018 * * 0.006 0.003

 O-Phenylphenol 18.0 0.018 0.032 * * 0.049 0.002

 Propargite 32.2 0.126 0.161 * 0.11 0.45 0.150

 Thiabendazole 56.3 0.440 0.466 0.058 0.55 1.2 0.120

2. Bananas

 Imazalil 12.0 0.008 0.037 * * 0.033 0.165

 Thiabendazole 51.6 0.054 0.091 0.013 0.075 0.17 0.425

3. Broccoli

 DCPA 22.1 0.003 0.008 * * 0.014 0.003

4. Carrots

 DDE 38.1 0.009 0.013 * 0.009 0.029 0.010

 Iprodione 24.8 0.015 0.036 * 0.009 0.058 0.012

 Linuron 31.4 0.009 0.011 * 0.006 0.029 0.029

 Trifluralin 46.7 0.024 0.036 * 0.038 0.072 0.072

5. Celery

 Acephate 41.5 0.043 0.047 * 0.035 0.13 0.013

 Chlorothalonil 67.6 0.063 0.065 0.029 0.061 0.19 0.013

 Dicloran 51.7 0.121 0.124 0.037 0.15 0.36 0.024

 Methamidophos 25.6 0.003 0.007 * 0.003 0.011 0.011

 Oxamyl 16.5 0.015 0.044 * * 0.051 0.017

 Permethrins 29.0 0.024 0.034 * 0.025 0.079 0.004

Page 1 of 3
APPENDIX E. (cont'd) NATIONAL ESTIMATES FOR 

CONCENTRATION PERCENTILES vs. TOLERANCE

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 10 Percent of Samples)

% of Ratio of 

Commodity Samples with Mean ** Percentiles 90th Percentile

 Pesticide Detections Lower Upper 50th 75th 90th to Tolerance

6. Grapes

 Captan 31.4 0.046 0.053 * * 0.11 0.002

 Dimethoate 11.5 0.004 0.009 * * *** ***

 Iprodione 36.6 0.071 0.088 * 0.060 0.25 0.004

 Myclobutanil 20.0 0.017 0.037 * * 0.067 0.067

 Omethoate 11.5 0.004 0.015 * * *** ***

 Vinclozolin 11.4 0.010 0.017 * * *** ***

7. Green Beans

 Benomyl 13.1 0.041 0.085 * * 0.12 0.060

 Chlorothalonil 16.8 0.015 0.021 * * 0.028 0.006

 Endosulfans 28.6 0.042 0.047 * 0.007 0.16 0.081

 Methamidophos 21.5 0.022 0.026 * * 0.066 0.066

8. Lettuce

 Acephate 12.7 0.004 0.010 * * 0.006 0.001

 Dimethoate 12.0 0.005 0.010 * * 0.004 0.002

 Endosulfans 21.0 0.009 0.014 * * 0.024 0.012

 Mevinphos 11.1 0.006 0.020 * * 0.005 0.010

 Permethrins 14.0 0.053 0.067 * * 0.055 0.003

9. Oranges

 Formetanate 10.5 0.051 0.096 * * 0.06 0.015

 Imazalil 52.7 0.056 0.071 * 0.087 0.17 0.017

 O-Phenylphenol 18.2 0.005 0.019 * * 0.016 0.002

 Thiabendazole 61.6 0.121 0.154 0.041 0.18 0.32 0.032

Page 2 of 3
APPENDIX E. (cont'd) NATIONAL ESTIMATES FOR 

CONCENTRATION PERCENTILES vs. TOLERANCE

(Pairs with Residue Detections in at Least 10 Percent of Samples)

% of Ratio of 

Commodity Samples with Mean ** Percentiles 90th Percentile

 Pesticide Detections Lower Upper 50th 75th 90th to Tolerance

10. Peaches

 Azinphos-methyl 19.9 0.009 0.031 * * *** ***

 Benomyl 27.1 0.038 0.081 * * 0.139 0.009

 Captan 13.5 0.021 0.030 * * 0.038 0.001

 Carbaryl 15.7 0.067 0.089 * * 0.18 0.018

 Dicloran 37.6 0.418 0.422 * 0.32 1.4 0.070

 Iprodione 68.2 0.559 0.568 0.17 0.6 1.2 0.060

 o-Phenylphenol 11.3 0.003 0.014 * * 0.013 0.001

 Parathion Methyl 29.5 0.021 0.024 * 0.029 0.064 0.064

 Phosmet 15.2 0.018 0.033 * * 0.035 0.003

 Propargite 21.7 0.119 0.155 * 0.038 0.4 0.057

11. Potatoes

 Chlorpropham 60.5 0.940 0.952 0.053 1.2 3.4 0.068

 Endosulfans 12.1 0.002 0.007 * * 0.004 0.019

 Thiabendazole 23.8 0.108 0.143 * * 0.4 0.040

(*) The percentile value is estimated to be below the Limit of Detection (LOD).

(**) The Mean is estimated with a range of values. The lower bound is calculated with non-detections valued at zero.

 The upper bound is calculated with non-detections valued at the level of detection for that test.

Page 3 of 3
Appendix F

Cumulative Distributions of Residue Concentrations for Selected

Commodity/Pesticide Pairs

In Appendix F, the concentrations detected (in parts per million) are plotted

against the estimated national percentiles for eight pesticide/commodity pairs. The

distributions of residues for all PDP pesticide/commodity pairs have this same curved

shape. The highest percentile graphed in the appendix is the 99th, which is often

considerably lower than the highest concentration detected in the sample (refer to the

value shown in each graph’s legend). Inclusion of the highest concentration would

cause graph distortion, which would obscure concentrations in the low ranges. The

tolerance for the pesticide/commodity pair is also indicated in the legend of each graph.

The large dots show the percentage of the commodity at, or below, a given level of

residue concentration. For example, an estimated 65 percent of bananas available to

U.S. consumers in 1994 had thiabendazole residue concentrations of 0.050 ppm or

less. The solid lines, tailing the large dots, depict percentile values. Thus, the

estimated 75th percentile of thiabendazole for bananas is 0.075 ppm. The lowest value

of these solid lines indicates the estimated percentage of the commodity available to

U.S. consumers with no detectable residues. For thiabendazole in bananas, this is

48.4 percent. The shaded bar denotes the range of values estimated for the mean.
Estimated National Percentiles

Concentration - (parts per million)

Apples / Azinphos-methyl

Appendix F. Cumulative Distributions of Residue

Concentrations for Selected Commodity/Pesticide Pairs

50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

0.0

0.03

0.06

0.09

0.12

0.15

0.18

0.21

0.24

0.0

0.03

0.06

0.09

0.12

0.15

0.18

0.21

0.24

• • •

• • • •• ••••• ••••• •• •

••

•••••

•••

••• ••••••••• •••••••••••• •

•• ••

•

•

•

•

•

•

• LEGEND

 Tolerance is 2 ppm

 Highest Level Detected is 0.29 ppm

MEAN

Estimated National Percentiles

Concentration - (parts per million)

Apples / Diphenylamine

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

0.3

0.6

0.9

1.2

1.5

1.8

2.1

2.4

2.7

3.0

3.3

0.3

0.6

0.9

1.2

1.5

1.8

2.1

2.4

2.7

3.0

3.3

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•• LEGEND

 Tolerance is 10 ppm

 Highest Level Detected is 5.4 ppm

MEAN
Estimated National Percentiles

Concentration - (parts per million)

Bananas / Thiabendazole

Appendix F.(cont’d) Cumulative Distributions of Residue

Concentrations for Selected Commodity/Pesticide Pairs

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

0.0

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.0

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

••••••••••••••••••••• •• ••••• ••••• ••••••• •••••••••••••• ••••••••••

•• •••• • •• •••

•

• •

•

•

••

••

••

•

•

•

•

•

•

• LEGEND

 Tolerance is 0.4 ppm

 Highest Level Detected is 0.4 ppm

MEAN

Estimated National Percentiles

Concentration - (parts per million)

Carrots / Trifluralin

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

0.0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

•

••• •• •••••••• •••

••• ••• ••• ••• •••••• ••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••

•••••

• •••••••••

••••

••

••

•••

••

•

•

•

• LEGEND

 Tolerance is 1 ppm

 Highest Level Detected is 0.31 ppm

MEAN
Estimated National Percentiles

Concentration - (parts per million)

Green Beans / Endosulfans

Appendix F.(cont’d) Cumulative Distributions of Residue

Concentrations for Selected Commodity/Pesticide Pairs

70 75 80 85 90 95 100

0.0

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.55

0.0

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.55

•••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••

••••

••••••••••••

••

••••••••

••••••••••

•

••

••

•

•••••

•••••

•

•

•••

•

•••

•

•

•

• LEGEND

 Tolerance is 2 ppm

 Highest Level Detected is 1.28 ppm

MEAN

Estimated National Percentiles

Concentration - (parts per million)

Oranges / Thiabendazole

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

•••••••••••••••••••••• •• •••••••••• •••••••••••••••••• • • •• • • • ••• •• • ••• • •••

••••••••

••

•

••••

••

••

••

•

•••

•

••

•

•

••

•

•

•

•

••

••

• LEGEND

 Tolerance is 10 ppm

 Highest Level Detected is 1.3 ppm

MEAN
Estimated National Percentiles

Concentration - (parts per million)

Peaches / Iprodione

Appendix F.(cont’d) Cumulative Distributions of Residue

Concentrations for Selected Commodity/Pesticide Pairs

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • •••••• ••••• •••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • ••• ••••••••

•

•

•

•

• LEGEND

 Tolerance is 20 ppm

 Highest Level Detected is 17 ppm

MEAN

Estimated National Percentiles

Concentration - (parts per million)

Potatoes / Chlorpropham

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •• •••••••

•

••

••••

•••

•

•••

•••

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

••

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• LEGEND

 Tolerance is 50 ppm

 Highest Level Detected is 16 ppm

MEAN
Appendix G

Number of Non-Detected Residues by Pesticide/Commodity Pairs

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

Appendix G gives the number of samples per commodity for which no pesticide

residues were detected (non-detected) by the participating laboratories. Only

pesticides with registered uses (i.e., established tolerances) and pesticides specifically

requested by EPA (atrazine and abamectin) are included. The appendix also shows

the range of limits of detection for each pesticide.

The laboratories reported other non-detected residues which are not shown in

this appendix but are available upon request. These include pesticides not expected to

be present (i.e., not registered for use in PDP commodities). These data resulted from

the laboratories’ need to simplify spiking requirements for pesticides analyzed by

multiresidue screens. For example, chlorpropham was tested in all samples although it

is registered for use in only four PDP commodities--carrots, green beans, potatoes, and

sweet peas. The number of non-detected residues for green beans and sweet peas is

given in this appendix. Residues of chlorpropham were detected in carrots and

potatoes; therefore, this information is shown in Appendix C. Non-detected residues

for the remaining nine commodities are not provided in the summary but are available

upon request. Also not included are pesticides tested by fewer than five laboratories.
APPENDIX G. NUMBER OF NON-DETECTED RESIDUES BY PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

No. of Range of LODs for Tolerance

Pesticide Samples Analyzed Non-Detects, ppm Level, ppm

1. 2,4-D

Sweet Corn 459 .003 - .016 0.5

2. Aldicarb & Metabolites

Oranges 588 .004 - .032 0.3

Potatoes 599 .004 - .032 1

3. Atrazine

Apples 687 .003 - .056 NT

Bananas 640 .003 - .056 NT

Broccoli 679 .003 - .048 NT

Carrots 687 .003 - .048 NT

Celery 176 .003 - .048 NT

Grapes 669 .003 - .048 NT

Green Beans 591 .003 - .048 NT

Lettuce 691 .003 - .048 NT

Oranges 683 .015 - .048 NT

Peaches 396 .003 - .048 NT

Potatoes 694 .003 - .048 NT

Sweet Corn 462 .003 - .048 0.25

Sweet Peas 433 .003 - .048 NT

4. Abamectin

Oranges 686 .002 - .002 NT

5. Azinphos Methyl

Broccoli 678 .009 - .033 2.0

Celery 176 .020 - .033 2.0

Oranges 683 .012 - .033 2.0

Potatoes 694 .012 - .033 0.3

6. Benomyl

Bananas 651 .050 - .050 0.2

Broccoli 685 .050 - .050 0.2

Carrots 692 .050 - .050 0.2

Page 1 of 8
APPENDIX G. NUMBER OF NON-DETECTED RESIDUES BY PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

No. of Range of LODs for Tolerance

Pesticide Samples Analyzed Non-Detects, ppm Level, ppm

7. Captan

Broccoli 521 .006 - .040 2

Celery 158 .006 - .014 50

Lettuce 637 .006 - .014 100

Oranges 629 .006 - .040 25

Sweet Corn 397 .006 - .016 2.0

Sweet Peas 398 .006 - .014 2

8. Carbaryl

Bananas 640 .004 - .076 10

Carrots 687 .004 - .076 10

Celery 176 .004 - .076 10

Lettuce 691 .004 - .076 10

Potatoes 694 .004 - .076 0.2

Sweet Corn 462 .004 - .076 5

9. Carbofuran & Carbofuran-3 OH

Bananas 567 .006 - .076 0.1

Sweet Corn 462 .006 - .076 1.0

10. Chlorothalonil

Bananas 527 .003 - .020 0.05

Carrots 558 .003 - .020 1

Potatoes 609 .003 - .020 0.1

Sweet Corn 392 .003 - .008 1.0

11. Chlorpropham

Green Beans 591 .008 - .120 0.3

Sweet Peas 433 .008 - .120 0.3

12. Chlorpyrifos

Bananas 640 .003 - .020 0.01

Green Beans 591 .003 - .020 0.1

Sweet Corn 462 .003 - .011 0.1

Sweet Peas 433 .003 - .011 0.1

13. Dacthal (DCPA)

Potatoes 694 .002 - .008 2

Sweet Corn 462 .002 - .008 0.05

Page 2 of 8
APPENDIX G. NUMBER OF NON-DETECTED RESIDUES BY PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

No. of Range of LODs for Tolerance

Pesticide Samples Analyzed Non-Detects, ppm Level, ppm

14. DDT & Metabolites

Apples 687 .002 - .010 0.1 (1)

Oranges 683 .002 - .008 0.1 (1)

Sweet Corn 462 .002 - .008 0.1 (1)

Sweet Peas 433 .002 - .008 0.2 (1)

15. Diazinon

Bananas 640 .003 - .022 0.2

Broccoli 634 .003 - .022 0.7

Oranges 683 .003 - .012 0.7

Potatoes 694 .003 - .012 0.1

Sweet Corn 462 .003 - .012 0.7

16. Dichlorvos (DDVP)

Apples 687 .002 - .008 0.5 (2)

Bananas 640 .002 - .010 0.5 (2)

Broccoli 630 .002 - .010 1 (2)

Carrots 687 .002 - .010 0.5 (2)

Celery 176 .002 - .008 3 (2)

Grapes 669 .002 - .008 0.5 (2)

Lettuce 691 .002 - .008 1 (2)

Oranges 683 .002 - .008 3 (2)

Peaches 396 .002 - .008 0.5 (2)

Potatoes 694 .002 - .008 0.5 (2)

Sweet Corn 462 .002 - .008 0.5 (2)

Sweet Peas 433 .002 - .008 0.5 (2)

17. Dicofol

Green Beans 591 .005 - .024 5

18. Dimethoate & Omethoate

Celery 176 .002 - .016 2

Page 3 of 8
APPENDIX G. NUMBER OF NON-DETECTED RESIDUES BY PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

No. of Range of LODs for Tolerance

Pesticide Samples Analyzed Non-Detects, ppm Level, ppm

19. Disulfoton

Broccoli 673 .002 - .036 0.75

Green Beans 591 .002 - .036 0.75

Lettuce 691 .002 - .036 0.75

Potatoes 694 .002 - .036 0.75

Sweet Corn 462 .003 - .036 0.3

Sweet Peas 433 .003 - .036 0.75

20. Endosulfans

Sweet Corn 462 .003 - .009 0.2

Sweet Peas 433 .003 - .009 2

21. Ethion

Grapes 669 .001 - .008 2.0

Green Beans 591 .001 - .008 2.0

Peaches 396 .001 - .008 1.0

22. Fenamiphos

Apples 687 .002 - .013 0.25

Bananas 640 .002 - .013 0.10

Grapes 669 .002 - .013 0.10

Oranges 683 .002 - .011 0.60

Peaches 396 .002 - .013 0.25

23. Fenvalerate & Esfenvalerate

Apples 486 .012 - .350 2.0

Broccoli 459 .005 - .440 2.0

Carrots 446 .012 - .340 0.5

Potatoes 495 .005 - .350 0.02

Sweet Corn 420 .012 - .340 0.1

Sweet Peas 395 .012 - .067 1.0

24. Iprodione

Broccoli 679 .008 - .060 25.0

Lettuce 691 .008 - .060 25.0

Page 4 of 8
APPENDIX G. NUMBER OF NON-DETECTED RESIDUES BY PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

No. of Range of LODs for Tolerance

Pesticide Samples Analyzed Non-Detects, ppm Level, ppm

25. Lindane

Apples 687 .003 - .006 1

Broccoli 679 .003 - .006 1

Carrots 687 .003 - .006 0.5 (3)

Celery 176 .003 - .006 1

Green Beans 591 .003 - .006 0.5 (3)

Lettuce 691 .003 - .006 3

Oranges 683 .003 - .006 0.5 (3)

Potatoes 694 .003 - .006 0.5 (3)

Sweet Corn 462 .003 - .006 0.5 (3)

Sweet Peas 433 .003 - .006 0.5 (3)

26. Malathion

Apples 687 .002 - .045 8

Broccoli 679 .002 - .045 8

Carrots 687 .002 - .045 8

Celery 176 .002 - .045 8

Grapes 669 .002 - .045 8

Green Beans 591 .002 - .045 8

Oranges 683 .002 - .045 8

Peaches 396 .002 - .045 8

Potatoes 694 .002 - .050 8

Sweet Corn 462 .002 - .045 2.0

Sweet Peas 433 .002 - .045 8

27. Methidathion

Apples 687 .002 - .015 0.05

Peaches 396 .002 - .015 0.05

Potatoes 694 .002 - .015 0.2

28. Methomyl

Carrots 687 .008 - .076 0.2

Oranges 683 .008 - .076 2

Potatoes 694 .008 - .076 0.2

Sweet Corn 462 .008 - .076 0.1

Page 5 of 8
APPENDIX G. NUMBER OF NON-DETECTED RESIDUES BY PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

No. of Range of LODs for Tolerance

Pesticide Samples Analyzed Non-Detects, ppm Level, ppm

29. Methoxychlor

Broccoli 621 .003 - .030 14

Carrots 673 .003 - .030 14

Grapes 669 .006 - .026 14

Green Beans 591 .006 - .028 14

Lettuce 691 .003 - .026 14

Potatoes 694 .003 - .026 1

Sweet Corn 462 .006 - .026 14

30. Mevinphos

Apples 687 .002 - .096 0.5

Carrots 687 .002 - .096 0.25

Green Beans 591 .002 - .096 0.25

Oranges 683 .002 - .096 0.2

Potatoes 694 .002 - .096 0.25

Sweet Corn 462 .002 - .096 0.25

Sweet Peas 433 .002 - .096 0.25

31. Oxamyl

Bananas 640 .008 - .076 0.3

Carrots 687 .008 - .076 0.1

Oranges 683 .008 - .076 3

Potatoes 694 .008 - .076 0.1

32. Parathion

Broccoli 635 .002 - .013 1

Celery 143 .002 - .013 1

Green Beans 553 .002 - .013 1

Lettuce 655 .002 - .013 1

Oranges 659 .002 - .013 1

Potatoes 670 .002 - .013 0.1

Sweet Corn 462 .002 - .013 1

Sweet Peas 433 .002 - .013 1

Page 6 of 8
APPENDIX G. NUMBER OF NON-DETECTED RESIDUES BY PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

No. of Range of LODs for Tolerance

Pesticide Samples Analyzed Non-Detects, ppm Level, ppm

33. Parathion Methyl

Broccoli 637 .002 - .013 1

Green Beans 591 .002 - .013 1

Lettuce 691 .002 - .013 1

Potatoes 694 .002 - .013 0.1

Sweet Corn 462 .002 - .013 1

Sweet Peas 433 .002 - .050 1

34. Permethrins

Potatoes 694 .005 - .040 0.05

Sweet Corn 462 .005 - .040 0.1

35. Phorate

Green Beans 463 .002 - .044 0.1

Lettuce 540 .002 - .044 0.1

Sweet Corn 420 .001 - .044 0.1

36. Phosmet

Oranges 683 .006 - .024 5

Potatoes 694 .006 - .030 0.1

Sweet Corn 462 .006 - .030 0.5

Sweet Peas 433 .006 - .030 0.5

37. Phosphamidon

Broccoli 459 .002 - .040 0.5

Oranges 448 .002 - .047 0.75

Potatoes 494 .002 - .093 0.1

38. Propargite

Green Beans 586 .010 - .15 20

Oranges 682 .008 - .30 5

Potatoes 687 .014 - .18 0.1

Sweet Corn 462 .020 - .15 0.1

39. Quintozene (PCNB) (Includes PCB & HCB)

Bananas 640 .003 - .007 0.1

Broccoli 679 .003 - .007 0.1

Page 7 of 8
APPENDIX G. NUMBER OF NON-DETECTED RESIDUES BY PESTICIDE/COMMODITY PAIRS

(Pairs with established tolerances and pairs requested by EPA)

No. of Range of LODs for Tolerance

Pesticide Samples Analyzed Non-Detects, ppm Level, ppm

40. Terbufos

Bananas 429 .002 - .030 0.025

Sweet Corn 420 .002 - .030 0.05

41. Trifluralin

Broccoli 491 .003 - .030 0.05

Grapes 423 .003 - .025 0.05

Lettuce 539 .003 - .029 0.05

Oranges 468 .003 - .074 0.05

Peaches 273 .003 - .029 0.05

Sweet Peas 333 .003 - .054 0.05

42. Vinclozolin

Lettuce 636 .004 - .014 10

KEY

 (1) Numbers listed for DDT and metabolites are Action Levels established by FDA.

 (2) Dichlorvos is also a breakdown product of Naled. Except for lettuce, tolerances shown are listed under Naled.

 (3) Numbers listed for this commodity are Action Levels established by FDA

Page 8 of 8
Appendix H

Percentage of Samples vs. Number of Residues

 Detected per Sample

(Fresh and Processed Commodities)

Appendix H shows the percentage of samples per commodity containing 0 to 10

residues per sample. Shown at the bottom of the graph are the overall number of

samples and percentages (of the total number of samples analyzed) for each detection

group. For example, of the 7,589 samples tested, 38.5 had no detectable residues and

36.3 percent had more than one residue.
Page 1 of 1

0.5 0.3 1.2

2.5

5.2

9.2

17.3

25.3

38.5

0.03 0.03

 APPENDIX H. PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES vs. 

NUMBER OF RESIDUES DETECTED PER SAMPLE

(Fresh and Processed Commodities)

 Number of Residues Detected per Sample

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Number of

Samples 2918 1918 1313 700 396 193 89 38 20 2 2

TOTAL NUMBER OF SAMPLES = 7,589