Notification of MOA General Office on 1st Pesticide Supervision & Random Inspection 2012

Issued by General Office of Ministry of Agriculture

To competent departments of agriculture of all the provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities, and Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps,

In accordance with the requirements of theNotification of MOA General Office on Pesticide Supervision & Random Inspection(Nong Ban Nong 2012 No.16), as for July 20, the supervision & random inspection results of the 1st batch of pesticide have been submitted by all localities, and are hereby notified as follows:

I. General Information

The 1strandom inspection was organized and conducted by agricultural administrative authorities of 30 provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities, and Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps. In total, 1,662 pesticide labels were inspected and 1,561 pesticide samples were randomly inspected, including 871 insecticides, 375 fungicides and 302 herbicides, and involving crop chemicals for vegetable, fruit tree, tea plant, paddy rice, wheat, corn, cotton and soybean, etc.

II. Results

1. Product quality. Of 1,561pesticide samples, 1,420 passed inspection with a pass rate of 91.0%. Among those pesticides, 767 of 871 insecticide samples passed inspection with a pass rate of 88.1%; 347 of 375 fungicide samples passed inspection with a pass rate of 92.5%; and 293 of 302 herbicide samples passed inspection with a pass rate of 97.0%.

By application crops, there were 513 vegetable chemicals with a pass rate of 91.4%; 330 fruit tree chemicals with a pass rate of 93.3%; 38 tea plant chemicals with a pass rate of 89.5%; 264 paddy rice chemicals with a pass rate of 89.4%; 169 wheat chemicals with a pass rate of 91.1%; 103 corn chemicals with a pass rate of 87.4%; 74 cotton chemicals with a pass rate of 87.8%; and 19 soybean chemicals with a pass rate of 84.2%.

Of the 141 substandard samples, 56 or 39.7% samples did not contain active ingredients (or one of the active ingredients); 73 or 51.8% samples contained insufficient active ingredients, among which 28 or 38.4% had one or all active ingredients lower than 50% of standard level; and 41 or 29.1% samples contained unregistered pesticide ingredients, among which 11 contained high toxic pesticides. See Annex 1 for the list of substandard-quality products.

2. Product label. Of 1,662 product labels, 1,406 passed inspection with a pass rate of 84.6%. Of the 256 substandard labels, 74 or 28.9% were with counterfeit, falsified, expired or without registration certificates; 64 or 25.0% were substandard in labeling pesticide name, amount of active ingredient or formulations; 102 or 39.8% expanded application scope; 44 or 7.8% were substandard in labeling toxicity; 83 or 32.4% were substandard in labeling safety interval and other instructions; and 103 or 40.2% were substandard in labeling trademarks, etc. See Annex 2 for the list of substandard-label products.

III. Opinions of Disposal

1. Confirming substandard products. Agricultural administrative authorities of all localities should intensify efforts in inspection of pesticide products on the market within the jurisdiction, inform business operators of substandard products issued in this notification, immediately release bans on selling products with detected problems; and require operators to recall substandard products upon sales records in order to prevent damages to agricultural production.

2. Investigating and dealing with illegal manufacturers and operators in a strict way. The agricultural administrative authorities at the location of substandard product sellers should seriously handle the cases in accordance with thePesticide Administration Regulations, carefully track the sources of substandard products, and promptly inform competent departments to take investigation and disposal actions. The agricultural administrative authorities at the location of substandard label enterprises should work with other competent authorities to carry out inspections, and take prompt rectification and correction activities, or file the cases of alleged irregularities according to law. If the circumstances are serious, applications should be submitted to MOA and other competent authorities to revoke pesticide registration certificates or other permits according to law. Agricultural administrative authorities of all provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities should submit disposal reports to Department of Crop Production, MOA before September 20.

3. Strengthening tracking supervision of major enterprises. Since 2009, a number of manufacturers have been repeatedly found serious problems with their products during supervision and random inspection campaigns, including Hebei Cangzhou Zhongtian Chemical Co., Ltd., Shanxi Linfen Hailan Industrial Co., Ltd., Henan Zhoukou Jinshi Chemical Co., Ltd., Henan Saerfu Agro-chemical Co., Ltd., Shandong Jinan Jindi Pesticide Co., Ltd., and Jinan Yanshan Sanfeng Industrial Co., Ltd., etc. During this supervision and random inspection campaign, a number of business operators have been found to sell two or more kinds of fake and substandard pesticides, including Heilongjiang Daqing Datong Xuri Agro-input Outlet, Heilongjiang Daqing Datong Miaozhuang Chemical Fertilizer Outlet, Means of Production & Agro-product Department of Guangdong Guangzhou Huadu Shiling Supply & Marketing Cooperative, Gaungdong Fengshun Junfa Agro-input Outlet, Hainan Lingshui Dafengshou Seed & Pesticide Outlet, Ningxia Zhongwei Xinfunong S&T Co., Ltd., Ningxia Tianrui Plant Conservation Co., Ltd. Nongle Vege & Crop Hospital, Ningxia Yinchuan Xingqing Zhangzheng Yangguang Daxin Agro-input Outlet, and Xinjiang Wensu Agricultural S&T Extension Center Outlet No.6., etc. The agricultural administrative authorities at the location of above enterprises should take them as major supervision targets, strengthen tracking supervision of their manufacturing and operating activities, enhance random inspection of their pesticide products, and deal with illegal acts strictly according to law.