sign in sign up
<<
Home , Food safety

SAFETY INFORMATION PAPERS Corn Refiners Association, Inc.

QUESTION: Pesticides are commonly used in the field and during storage to protect growing and harvested corn from pest damage. What procedures are followed to minimize the risk that food ingredients from the corn wet-milling industry will contain residual pesti- cides that might pose a significant risk in food products?

Summary n Modern management practices have enabled farmers to feed a growing world population, grow crops in otherwise unproductive locales and climates, extend growing seasons, maintain crop quality and prolong post-harvest storage. n Pesticide use on field and post-harvest stored corn is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protec- tion Agency (EPA). Pesticide use requirements are enforced by EPA and state pesticide regulatory authorities. EPA establishes tolerances for pesticide residues in food. The U.S. Food & Administration (FDA) monitors and enforces tolerances for pesticides in food. n Field corn entering corn wet-milling plants may have been exposed to a variety of crop protection materials. The corn wet-milling process consists of a series of exhaustive washing, refining (ion exchange and carbon), filtration and evaporation unit processes. These processes are designed to be effective in reducing residual pesticides to non-detectible levels in finished products. As re- ported in USDA’s 1998 Pesticide Data Program Annual Summary, no pesticide residues were detected in any of 298 high fructose corn syrup samples collected across the country. n Corn Refiners Association, Inc. (CRA) member companies monitor corn wet-milling-based food ingredients for residual pesticides so that their products conform to regulatory requirements.

1. Pesticide Regulation Agricultural crops are under attack each year from 80,000 plant diseases, 30,000 weed varieties, 1,000 nematode species and more than 10,000 types of . Unchecked, these combatants can destroy crops in a matter of hours or days. It is estimated worldwide that 45% of crop production is lost to these pests annually.

Chemical pest control has enabled farmers to dramatically increase crop yields, produce crops profit- ably in inhospitable locations, extend growing seasons, maintain crop quality and prolong post-harvest storage.

Readers are advised that information contained herein (“Content”) is intended for general educational and informational purposes only. The Corn Refiners Association, Inc. (“CRA”) makes no warranty, express or implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the Content, and in no event shall CRA or its employees be liable for any damage of any kind resulting from the viewing or use of the Content. References to any specific commercial products, processes, or services by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, do not constitute any standard set or enforced in any way by CRA or imply any endorsement or recommendation by CRA. Any technical questions regarding the Content should be referred to CRA or to member companies. This document was prepared for CRA by White Technical Research Group (217.795.4437).

1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 950 • Washington, DC 20006-5805 • (202) 331-1634 • Fax (202) 331-2054 PAGE 2 FOOD SAFETY INFORMATION PAPERS

The term “pesticide” applies to a broad class of crop protection chemicals, encompassing: n insecticides, used to control flying or crawling insects; n rodenticides, used to control rodents; n , used to control weeds and undesirable plants; n fungicides, used to control fungi and plant diseases; n nematicides, used to control nematodes (e.g., cutworms); n antimicrobials, used to control (e.g., , , and fungi); n plant growth regulators, used to accelerate or retard plant growth; n growth regulators, used to affect insect growth rates; and n biopesticides, naturally occurring compounds with pesticide properties.

Pesticides that are proven to have no unreasonable adverse effects for specific applications are granted a license or ‘registration’ by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), permitting their distribu- tion, sale and use. EPA is required by law to re-register pesticides that were originally registered before November 1, 1984 to ensure they meet current standards. EPA’s registration program places a high priority on registering pesticides that pose lower risks to human health or the environment than currently registered pesticides.

Before a pesticide can be registered for use on a food crop, EPA must set a ‘tolerance’ value. Toler- ance is the maximum that may remain on the crop or in processed from the crop. Where a tolerance is in effect for a pesticide on a raw commodity, the carryover of a residue of the pesticide from the raw commodity to a processed food is permissible provided that the residue in the processed food does not exceed the raw product tolerance and has been removed to the extent possible in good manufacturing practice. In addition to setting tolerances for new pesticides, EPA is required to reassess pre-1996 pesticide tolerances to ensure they meet stringent new standards under the Food Qual- ity Protection Act of 1996.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) monitors pesticide residues, and enforces pesticide tolerances, in all foods except , poultry and eggs. If illegal pesticide residue levels are discovered, FDA may enjoin or seize shipments, or pur- Table 1: Herbicides and insecticides sue criminal penalties. FDA and state au- approved for field use. thorities work together to promote T olerance (ppm) cooperative sampling and information ex- change. 2t,4-D 2 for post-harves Anlachlor 0.2 for corn grai 2. Field Use Pesticides Anmetryn 0.25 for corn grai Antrazine 0.25 for corn grai Major corn herbicides and insecticides approved for field use in leading corn-pro- Bnentazon 0.05 for corn grai ducing states and states with corn refining Bnromoxynil 0.1 for corn grai plants are listed in Table 1. Pesticides listed Bnutylate 0.1 for corn grai reflect those in most frequent use in Ala- Dnicamba 0.5 for corn grai bama, California, Colorado, Illinois, Indi- EsPTC 0.1 for grain crop ana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, Gslyphosate 0.1 for grain crop North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Mnetolachlor 0.1 for corn grai

Prepared by WHITE Technical Research GROUP 217/795-4437 11/16/00 FOOD SAFETY INFORMATION PAPERS PAGE 3

Table 1: Herbicides and insecticides Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin. approved for field use – continued. Use and application vary from state-to-state, Herbicide T olerance (ppm) depending on indigenous pest types, crop

Pnaraquat 0.05 for corn grai varieties, growing conditions and agronomics. Pnendimethalin 0.1 for corn grai Pnropachlor 0.1 for corn grai Accompanying each pesticide is the tol- Snimazine 0.25 for corn grai erance limit set by EPA. Tolerance data Tnrifluralin 0.05 for corn grai were extracted from the National Pesticide Vnernolate 0.1 for corn grai Information Retrieval System (NPIRS), a database jointly administered by Purdue Insecticide T olerance (ppm) University and EPA. Data are revised peri- Cnarbofuran 0.2 for grai odically due to ongoing registration, re-reg- 0.1 for corn; 3.0 for oil; istration and tolerance assessments; values 1.0 for soapstock should be checked against the NPIRS da- Fnonofos 0.1 for corn grai tabase for currency. All pesticide tolerances are issued as regulations by EPA and codi- Tnerbufos 0.05 for corn grai fied in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Parts 180 to 186. Further information on each pesticide is available from EPA fact sheets and Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS).

3. Storage Pesticides The pesticides listed in Table 2 have been approved for post-harvest treatment of stored corn. They include a variety of insecticides and insect growth regulators. Pesticide class, target and EPA tolerances are provided for each pesticide.

Data resources found at the end of this report should be consulted for up-to-date information.

Table 2: Pesticides approved for treatment of stored corn. Pesticide Class T arget T olerances

Aectellic Idnsecticid Armyworms, banana borers, Japanese & see 8 ppm for corn; corn beetles, carrot flies, caterpillars, chinch 40 ppm for milled corn bugs, corn rootworms, onion flies, rust mites, fractions (except flour); scale, sod webworms, wireworms 88 ppm for corn oil Cehlorpyrifos I,nsecticid Ants, boll weevils, bollworms, chinch bugs 0.1 ppm for field corn; cockroaches, corn rootworms, cutworms, 3 ppm for corn oil; leafhoppers, mealy bugs, mosquitoes, peach 1 ppm for corn soapstock tree borers, silverfish, spiders, thrips, ticks, webworms, white flies Mhethoprene Insect growt No tolerance for field corn; regulator 10 ppm for corn, corn meal, grits & hominy Piperonyl Insecticide 20 ppm for post-harvest butoxide corn; 10 ppm for milled corn fractions Peyrethrin Ionsecticid Aphids, Mexican bean beetles, Colorado potat 3 ppm for post-harvest beetles, cabbage worms, flea beetles, flies, corn; 1 ppm for milled leafhoppers, loopers, lice, mealy bugs, cereal grain fractions; mosquitoes, sod webworms, thrips 1 ppm for processed foods

Prepared by WHITE Technical Research GROUP 11/16/00 217/795-4437 PAGE 4 FOOD SAFETY INFORMATION PAPERS

4. Pesticide Residues on Corn-Derived Food Ingredients The U.S. Department of (USDA) began the Pesticide Data Program (PDP) in 1991 to provide information on actual pesticide dietary exposure, food consumption and pesticide usage. PDP is now a critical component of the 1996 Protection Act, which directs the Secretary of Agri- culture to provide improved pesticide residue data collection, including guidelines for the use of compa- rable analytical and standardized reporting methods and increased sampling for foods most highly consumed by infants and children.

In 1998, PDP analyzed 298 high fructose corn syrup samples (HFCS-55) for the 109 pesticides listed in Table 3. Samples were collected at 17 plants representing over 95% of HFCS-55 production. Partici- pating refineries were sampled once, twice or three times per month based on plant production capacity. One-quart size samples were drawn from plant storage containers and sent to the New York State Labo- ratory for analysis.

The corn wet-milling and refining process can consist of a series of exhaustive washing, refining (ion exchange and carbon), filtration and evaporation unit processes. These processes can be effective in reducing residual pesticides to non-detectible levels in finished products, as confirmed in USDA’s 1998 Pesticide Data Program Annual Summary:

“residues which may have been present in the raw agricultural commodity were either eliminated or reduced to non-detectable levels by the [corn wet-milling] process employed in manufacturing [high fructose] corn syrup.”

No pesticide residues were detected in any of the 298 samples analyzed.

5. Pesticide Management by the Corn Wet-Milling Industry As noted above, member companies of the Corn Refiners Association participated in the USDA Pes- ticide Data Program, providing HFCS-55 samples from production plants in different geographical loca- tions. In addition, CRA member companies monitor pesticide residues in commercial products so that they do not exceed approved tolerance levels.

6. Pesticide Data Resources

n U.S. Environmental Protection Agency n U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service n U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pesticide Data Program (PDP) n National Pesticide Information Retrieval System (NPIRS), jointly administered by Purdue Univer- sity and the Environmental Protection Agency n Resources for the Future, a non-governmental research organization n Corn Refiners Association, Inc. member companies

Prepared by WHITE Technical Research GROUP 217/795-4437 11/16/00 FOOD SAFETY INFORMATION PAPERS PAGE 5

Table 3: Pesticides analyzed in HFCS-55 by the 1998 Pesticide Data Program.

Pesticide *LOD (ppm) Pesticide *LOD (ppm) 12-Napthol 0e.00 F0envalerat 0.001-0.09 39-Hydroxycarbofuran 0s.001-0.00 F1onofo 0.00 A5cephate 0r.02 H1eptachlo 0.00 A3cetochlor 0e.001-0.00 H1eptachlor epoxid 0.00 A2lachlor 0B.00 H1exachlorobenzene-HC 0.00 A7ldicarb 0l.00 I4mazali 0.00 A9ldicarb Sulfone 0e.00 I5prodion 0.00 A9ldicarb sulfoxide 0n.00 L1ambda cyhalothri 0.00 A5metryn 0e.01 L0indan 0.01 A2trazine 0n.00 L2inuro 0.00 A3zinphos methyl 0n.040-0.13 M1alathio 0.00 B1HC alpha 0l.00 M0etalaxy 0.001-0.2 B1HC beta 0s.00 M5ethamidopho 0.01 B0ifenthrin 0n.001-0.05 M2ethidathio 0.00 C3aptan 0l.040-0.13 M7ethomy 0.00 C6arbaryl 0r.00 M2ethoxychlo 0.00 C9arbofuran 0n.001-0.00 M1ethoxychlor olefi 0.00 C8arbophenothion 0r.04 M2etolachlo 0.00 C1hlordane cis 0n.00 M3etribuzi 0.00 C1hlordane trans 0E.00 M2evinphos 0.00 C1hlorfenvinphos alpha 0l.00 M5yclobutani 0.00 C1hlorfenvinphos beta 0e.00 O0methoat 0.03 C2hlorpropham 0l.00 O9xamy 0.00 C1hlorpyrifos 0e.00 O3xychlordan 0.00 C1hlorpyrifos methyl 0n.00 O3xyfluorfe 0.00 C3oumaphos 0n.00 P2arathio 0.00 C3oumaphos analog 0l.01 P8arathion methy 0.00 C5yanazine 0n.01 P1endimethali 0.00 C8yfluthrin 0B.00 P1entachlorobenzene-PC 0.00 D2CPA 0s.00 P3ermethrin ci 0.001-0.00 D5DD 0s.001-0.00 P3ermethrin tran 0.001-0.00 D2DE 0e.001-0.00 P2horat 0.00 D1DT 0e.00 P2horate sulfon 0.00 D2emeton-S Sulfone 0e.00 P4hosalon 0.00 D2iazinon 0t.00 P7hosme 0.002-0.00 D1ichlorvos-DDVP 0n.00 P3hosphamido 0.00 D4icloran 0e.00 P1iperonyl butoxid 0.00 D1icofol 0l.00 P1irimiphos methy 0.00 D2ieldrin 0s.00 P8rofenofo 0.00 D3imethoate 0n.001-0.00 P2rometry 0.00 D0isulfoton 0r.01 P3ropachlo 0.004-0.01 D2isulfoton sulfone 0e.00 P8ropargit 0.00 D0iuron 0e.01 P8ropiconazol 0.00 E1ndosulfan I 0B.00 Q3uintozene-PCN 0.001-0.00 E2ndosulfan II 0e.00 S4imazin 0.00 E5ndosulfan sulfate 0s.00 S2ulprofo 0.00 E1sfenvalerate 0e.00 T2ecnazin 0.00 E8thalfluralin 0s.00 T2erbufo 0.00 E1thion 0e.00 T2erbufos sulfon 0.00 E3thoprop 0s.00 T2etrachlorvinpho 0.00 F5enamiphos 0e.00 T0hiabendazol 0.01 F8enamiphos sulfoxide 0l.00 T5riadimeno 0.01 F8enamiphos sulfone 0n.00 T1riflurali 0.00 F3enitrothion 0n.00 V1inclozoli 0.00 F1enthion 0n.00 *LOD = Limits of Detectio

Prepared by WHITE Technical Research GROUP 11/16/00 217/795-4437