A European expert group on the SUD (sustainable use directive 2009/128/EC) met on 14 June 2010 for the first time. CEMA was present.
Presentations, mostly from Member states, dealt with the transposition of the SUD into the national legislation, the development of national action plans and implementation of the provisions of the SUD.
COPA-COGECA secretary general Personen gave its view on a pragmatic approach. The key words for him are integration-practicability-sustainability. A stabile market is needed. On the issue of pesticide use, certain requirements are acceptable as long as farmers are left free how to work out these requirements and that the necessary tools will be provided. To work out the SUD, national action plans are the appropriate way but it should be about risk reduction, not on specific reduction in volumes (focus on quality, not on quantities). Also should farmers and equipment dealers be consulted.
Many member states presented the work in progress. Initiatives on the national action plans are:
· Reduction of use is a main priority. Some countries will try to achieve reductions up to 50 % (France)
· To achieve a reduction the preferred way is by placing taxes on pesticides;
· Some countries would be in favor of having categories of pesticides based on the hazard of the enclosed substances;
· There should be certificates on ‘integrated pest management’ (IPM) where the use of pesticides is minimized by farmers using alternative methods or enhancing the efficiency of use of pesticides. Some supermarkets would already request some sort of IPM certificate. More uniform IPM criteria would be needed.
· Training of farmers would be one of the preferred tools for optimized spray application;
· The used of safeguard zones (buffer strips). Infiltration in the soil will add only marginally to the contamination of the ground water. However run-off would contaminate adjacent areas (forest, nature…) and streams. The use of these buffer strips could be beneficial in many ways: stopping erosion, absorption of pesticides run-off residues, covered with specific flowers it could attract the right predators for certain diseases which may result in lower pesticide use… The preferred width of such strips would be 5-10 m. No EU policy on such buffer strips exists yet (not specifically on pesticide buffering)
There were no discussions on in use inspection of sprayers. However Mr. Roettele from the TOPPSLife project discussed the application technology. He emphasised that key enablers will be equipment/infrastructure. He focussed on two points of concern related to soil contamination being from point sources (filling, cleaning) and diffuse sources (run-off, drift, drainage). But cleaning would be the biggest source due to residuals remaining in the tanks. On this issue the best sprayers would be 50 % better than the standard sprayers. Proposed improvements to equipment would be an obligatory rinse water tank, internal and external cleaning devices, better measurement of the water flow and better filling and container cleaning devices.
A solution against point pollution was presented by Denmark with the principle of the bio bed where even closed systems have being developed.
The expert group is lead by the OPERA REASEARCH CENTER (OPERA is the European Observatory on Pesticide Risk Analysis hosted by the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore from Piacenza Italy) www.opera-indicators.eu . 
