Advisory Committee on Pesticides Annual Report 2001

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Section F: Other items considered during the year ventilation and that the exposure of people re-entering treated premises would be acceptable. The <strong>Committee</strong> agreed that such products would need the following label: EXCLUDE ALL UNPROTECTED PERSONS AND ANIMALS DURING TREATMENT AND FOR AT LEAST 1 HOUR AFTER TREATMENT IS COMPLETED. ENSURE THERE IS A PHYSICAL BARRIER TO PREVENT CONTACT BY UNPROTECTED PERSONS AND ANIMALS UNTIL TREATED SURFACES ARE VISIBLY DRY. ENSURE ADEQUATE VENTILATION BEFORE REOCCUPATION. The <strong>Committee</strong> also agreed that HSE should assess the individual applications and annually review the reports of the Pesticides Incidents Appraisal Panel for any incidents relating to this reduction in re-entry time. Pesticide exposure and Parkinson’s disease – review of the literature The <strong>Committee</strong> considered a review of the literature covering epidemiological investigations of pesticides in relation to Parkinson’s disease, and also an evaluation of mechanistic studies that have explored the potential of specific pesticides to induce Parkinson’s disease in experimental animals. 81 The <strong>Committee</strong> agreed that a more detailed specialist assessment of the epidemiology relating to Parkinson’s disease and pesticides should be carried out. Pesticide Incident Report 2000/2001: report on HSE’s Field Operations Directorate’s investigations 1 April 2000–31 March 2001 The <strong>Committee</strong> noted the content of the report into pesticide complaints investigated by the Field Operations Directorate of HSE between 1 April 2000 and 31 March 2001. The Pesticide Incident Report for 2000/2001 was published on 13 November 2001. The report provided an analysis of incidents and complaints involving pesticides investigated by HSE’s Field Operations Directorate and the enforcement action taken. Summaries of complaints alleging ill health were included, with details of the outcome of assessments by the Pesticides Incidents Appraisal Panel (PIAP). In addition, a series of case studies was included to encourage the prior notification of pesticide use and the accurate
<strong>Advisory</strong> <strong>Committee</strong> on Pesticides Annual Report 2001 measurement of wind speed. One case illustrated the continuing issue of ‘parallel imports’ where non-approved products had been imported into the UK. During 2000–2001, 170 incidents had been investigated and this represented a 33 percent fall compared with the previous year. There was, however, no discernible long-term trend. Seventy-one allegations of ill health had been made and these ranged from reports of general ill health to specific symptoms presented to GPs. There had been a 14 percent reduction in allegations of ill health compared with the previous year and this was the lowest number of reports for ten years. Decisions in a number of cases were pending and many of these resulted from the previous year’s investigation of incidents on the Isle of Wight. The <strong>Committee</strong> noted that the Chair of PIAP wrote to individual complainants to explain the panel’s decision in relation to their cases. 82 The frequency of incidents not associated with alleged ill health had also fallen in the last year. There had been no significant change in the incidence of complaints classified according to sector of use, work activity or method of application. As in previous years, most complaints were associated with agricultural use and the majority of these with the use of conventional crop boom sprayers. The <strong>Committee</strong> noted an increasing number of complaints related to the use of knapsacks, particularly from users concerned about leakage during use. Over the last year, there had been 12 prosecutions in connection with pesticides, most of these cases being heard in magistrates’ courts. Average fines were in the order of £1000. Ninety-eight enforcement notices had been issued, representing a reduction of approximately one-third compared with the previous year. The effect of the foot and mouth disease outbreak was considered to be marginal since it had affected only the last five weeks of the reporting year. As in previous years, the <strong>Committee</strong> commented on the usefulness of the report and asked that HSE endeavour to include information on the type of boom sprayers involved in incidents, since a variety were available. Proposed representations procedure At present there is no mechanism in the pesticide approval system allowing companies to make formal representation with respect to recommendations to Ministers made by the regulatory authorities directly or via the ACP. In September 2001, the <strong>Committee</strong> was invited to consider the content of a proposed consultation paper outlining proposals for a non-statutory mechanism for representations. This would apply to new active substances
Page 1 and 2:
Department for Environment, Food an
Page 3 and 4:
Department for Environment, Food an
Page 5 and 6:
Advisory C
Page 7 and 8:
Advisory C
Page 9 and 10:
Advisory C
Page 11 and 12:
Advisory C
Page 13 and 14:
Advisory C
Page 15 and 16:
Advisory C
Page 17 and 18:
Advisory C
Page 19 and 20:
Advisory C
Page 21 and 22:
Advisory C
Page 23 and 24:
Advisory C
Page 25 and 26:
Advisory C
Page 27 and 28:
Advisory C
Page 29 and 30:
Advisory C
Page 31 and 32:
Advisory C
Page 33 and 34:
Advisory C
Page 35 and 36:
Advisory C
Page 37 and 38:
Advisory C
Page 39 and 40: Advisory C
Page 89: Advisory C
show all

Advisory Committee on Pesticides Annual Report 2001

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?