Use DAFM’s Plant Protection Products Registers for authorised products on the Irish market. The official index links the product database, labels, minor-use approvals and withdrawal information. For an application record, keep the product’s PCS number distinct from the applying person’s PU number and the location/LPIS reference. [1][2]
Open the right official resource
| Task | Official route |
|---|---|
| Search by product name | DAFM product search |
| Investigate an active substance | DAFM active-substance search |
| Locate a specimen label | DAFM product labels |
| Investigate a minor-use approval | DAFM EAMU index |
| Find withdrawal/use-up information | DAFM recently withdrawn products |
These are separate resources in DAFM’s register structure. Use the route that answers the particular research question instead of treating a general search result as a complete authorisation document. [1][3][4]
Distinguish product, person and place
DAFM’s completed crop instructions use PCS for the product, PU for the DAFM-registered applying person and location/LPIS for the treatment place or land parcel. They identify the latest BISS application as a source for the location/LPIS reference. [2]
| Identifier in the treatment workflow | What it identifies |
|---|---|
| PCS number | Product used |
| PU number | Applying professional user, owner or contractor |
| Location/LPIS reference | Treatment place or land parcel |
| Sprayer certificate number | Application equipment certificate |
The meanings above follow DAFM’s completed-record guidance. Keep them in separate fields when preparing a workbook or importing an existing record. [2]
For an office enquiry, state which identity is unresolved. A question about an applying person belongs with the professional-user evidence, while a query about a product authorisation belongs with the product documentation. The professional-user guide covers training and registration; the sheet guide explains the completed application row.
Product-name search: preserve the exact identity
DAFM’s product-search page provides a product selector and search action. It describes the database as containing registered plant protection products and being updated regularly. [3]
Begin with the full product name from the actual pack or the document being investigated. Preserve any suffix or formulation description in your working note. Compare the identity returned by the official resource with the product under review before extracting conditions from a label.
Keep a dated research note identifying the product, PCS where established and documents consulted. Save the relevant official document or retain its complete source reference. This makes the authorisation investigation retrievable after the search session has ended.
A similar trade name is a reason to compare the identifiers carefully. Do not substitute an active-substance name for the marketed product in your application record. Retain the actual product identity so a later reviewer knows which document you used.
Active-substance search answers a different question
DAFM supplies a separate active-substance search. It allows the substance to be selected before searching. The route is distinct from the product-name selector. [4]
Use a substance enquiry to organise product research around that substance, then return to the particular product and authorised use under consideration. Keep the resulting product identities distinguishable in your working notes. Avoid transferring conditions from one product’s document to another merely because a substance appears in both.
For a sequence review, retain any label restriction that refers to a substance group or class along with the treatment history. The interval guide illustrates a class-related SDHI restriction in one named specimen label. Use the relevant actual authorisation when assessing your own job. [5]
Locate and read the product label
DAFM’s register index links its product-label collection. The GPPP guidance explains that the approved label contains the authorisation conditions needed for use and that some approved off-label scenarios have separate documents. [1][6]
For your research file, identify the product name, PCS and label description. Locate the crop or situation, target use, dose, application number, timing, method and protection conditions relevant to the proposed question. Retain the applicable table row with its headings so a number does not lose its reference unit or crop context.
Use the full document when investigating an exception. A search result or isolated excerpt can omit the paragraph that qualifies the apparent permission. Keep your research note tied to the document you actually read and identify any separate approval used for the case.
A specimen label is a reading example
The DAFM-hosted Elatus Era label, PCS 05379, provides an illustration of product-specific conditions. It sets earliest cereal timing at GS31, earliest combining-pea/field-bean timing at GS51 and prohibits handheld application. Those conditions belong to that named document. [5]
Use this specimen-label exercise to practise the lookup. Identify the product and PCS, find the crop-specific row and locate the method restriction. Retain the relevant passages with the document title. The exercise makes no product recommendation and supplies no authorisation for a different product or crop.
When the question concerns harvest, repetition or developmental timing, follow the interval guide. When it concerns a surface-water buffer, follow the STRIPE guide and keep the product-specific conditions in the same evidence file.
Minor-use approvals have their own instructions
DAFM’s EAMU page lists separate food-crop and non-food-crop documents labelled March 2026. Its instruction section links individual approval documents. The department says the instruction-sheet directions must be followed and that off-label EAMU use is entirely at the user’s risk. [7][8]
Start from the actual product and the minor-use question. Retain the relevant approval document and read its scope, crop or situation and conditions with the product information. Keep the approval reference alongside the label in the research file so a colleague does not assume the ordinary label contains the complete case.
DAFM says EAMU instruction sheets can also be obtained from Teagasc offices, Bord Bia or a local adviser. Retain the official approval identity when material is supplied through an advisory contact. [7]
For an orchard, vineyard or horticultural enquiry, describe the specific crop and use you are investigating. Use that description to locate the applicable evidence instead of generating a general crop permission from the existence of an EAMU index.
Follow withdrawal and use-up information separately
DAFM’s withdrawn-products page lists products whose use-up period expires during 2026 and a separate list of registrations that expired or were revoked during 2025. These are distinct document categories on the official page. [9]
Keep the product’s identity and the relevant status document together. Distinguish the date of a registration action from any separately stated sale or use-up provision in the product material you are investigating. Do not assign one universal period to all withdrawn products.
For the store file, identify the product and document that explains its status. Retain the disposal or return paperwork for the actual transaction. DAFM’s end-user requirements specify the receiving company, product, date and quantity for those records. [10]
If an old diary contains a product no longer in the current working catalogue, preserve its identity in the historical application. A current status investigation and the record of a past treatment are different tasks. Keep the underlying historical operator note available when investigating the earlier event.
The register does not replace the container in the record
DAFM’s completed crop instructions say to take the recorded product name from the container used, not an invoice. For the PCS number, they explicitly say not to obtain it from an invoice or the PRCD website. The point is to identify the actual pack used in that application. [2]
Keep two connected but distinguishable documents: the application evidence identifying the container, and the authorisation research describing the permitted use. If the identities differ, resolve the discrepancy with the operator or supplier rather than replacing the application entry with a convenient search result.
In a contractor handover, ask for the product and PCS actually used. Preserve the provider’s original report and attach the clarification if a name is incomplete. The local-authority guide explains the wider council records package where a contractor performs the work.
Keep a reproducible research trail
Use a compact lookup note with the question, product name, identifier, crop/situation, official document title, source address and access date. Retain the relevant page or section with its headings and qualifications. Give a colleague enough information to locate the same authorisation evidence without repeating the whole investigation.
For several similar products, create separate entries rather than merging them under an active-substance heading. Record any unresolved transcription question with the document or person able to answer it. Preserve the answer alongside the application or authorisation file it clarifies.
The Irish hub connects product identity with record content, people and inspections. Use the app guide to test whether a digital diary preserves the exact name, PCS and supporting references when a treatment is repeated or exported.
Read an approval index without mistaking it for the approval
DAFM’s EAMU food-crop instruction page lists individual product names, PCS numbers and dated approval documents. For example, the visible index includes separate entries for different products and document dates. Use the index to locate the particular instruction sheet, then retain the sheet relevant to the use you are investigating. [8]
Give the lookup note a precise question: product identity, crop, pest or situation and proposed method. Keep the answer tied to the official document that addresses that case. A product appearing in the index does not by itself explain every crop or use condition in the underlying approval.
When material is supplied by an adviser, retain the approval title and identifier in the file. If the attachment contains several crops, keep the relevant row with its headings and footnotes. Ask a focused question about any unresolved wording, identifying the paragraph or table entry rather than requesting a general assurance that the product is approved.
Preserve formulation and identifier details during data entry
Create a product directory with the full marketed name and the PCS copied from the actual container for the recorded application. DAFM’s completed crop instructions require that container source for both identity fields. Retain the original operator evidence when someone in the office prepares the directory entry. [2]
Use an internal reference only as an additional organising aid. Keep its correspondence to the full product identity visible. If an older spreadsheet has shortened names, prepare a cross-reference based on the original documents rather than assigning identifiers solely by resemblance to the current search list.
For a software import, use a sample containing a name suffix, a numeric-looking identifier and a historical product entry. Compare the exported result with the original file and the supporting container evidence. Keep the test copy separate from genuine application records so the exercise cannot be mistaken for actual product use.
Examine a label table with its surrounding restrictions
The Elatus Era specimen label contains a conditions table and a separate “Other Specific Restrictions” section. The latter includes earliest crop stages, the cereal SDHI application limit and the restriction on handheld equipment. Preserve the surrounding instructions when extracting a crop row. [5]
For a document-reading exercise, mark the crop or situation, individual dose, treatment count, latest timing and subsequent restrictions. Keep the unit and per-crop reference with each number. Read the descriptive text that qualifies the table, including the method and resistance-management sections relevant to the question being assessed.
The GPPP guidance also explains that water volume may be specified as a range and that some crop treatments express dose as a concentration in water. Keep the actual unit and reference quantity when transferring a value into a research note. Do not reduce the instruction to a bare decimal in a product catalogue. [6]
Keep status research separate from historical record repair
A contemporary withdrawal enquiry asks about the status described in the relevant official document. A historical-record correction asks what product was actually applied at the earlier date. Preserve these as different research questions with different supporting documents.
For the historical question, start with the operator note, container information and job correspondence. Ask the supplier or contractor to clarify an incomplete identity where appropriate. Keep the response with the earlier application and explain the correction in the office index. Do not rewrite history by replacing the earlier product with whatever happens to be convenient in the current selector.
For the status question, retain the official withdrawal or use-up document and identify the product entry examined. Record the source address and date read. If several containers have similar names, keep each identity and document relationship distinguishable throughout the enquiry.
Give a colleague a usable lookup result
Prepare a concise cover note stating the original question, exact product identity, crop or situation, official documents read and relevant sections. Attach or reference the full documents used. Keep any unresolved transcription question explicit in the administrative correspondence rather than filling the gap with a guessed number.
Explain the identifier correspondence when the enquiry involves several systems. The treatment entry uses the container’s PCS, the personnel file uses the applying person’s PU and the location directory uses the parcel reference. The equipment certificate is another separate reference. DAFM’s completed example supplies these distinctions. [2]
When the lookup informs a planned job, give the operator the relevant product and location information through the business’s normal process. Preserve the final application report afterwards. The authorisation research and completed treatment then remain connected without confusing a proposed use with the record of work actually carried out.
Read the label identity panel as well as its crop table
The cited Elatus Era specimen label identifies an authorisation holder and a marketing company separately. It also gives the PCS number and describes the formulation and active-substance concentrations. Those document elements help distinguish product identity from the particular crop-use conditions later in the label. [5]
For a lookup note, retain the identity panel with the source document rather than copying only a crop table into an email. If a supplier document uses a marketing name or a shortened business name, compare it with the full product identity. Keep the commercial contact information distinct from the authorisation identifier used in the treatment record.
Use the panel to formulate a precise enquiry when the available papers disagree. Identify whether the difference concerns the marketed product, registration number, document edition, formulation description or supplier name. Attach the relevant pages so the responding organisation can see the discrepancy. Keep its response with the original enquiry.
Prepare a product-directory correction with provenance
When an internal catalogue contains an incomplete entry, begin with the document that created it. Identify the operator note, imported workbook or supplier attachment concerned. Prepare a correction note showing the earlier description, the verified replacement and the evidence supporting the change. Retain that note with the directory history.
Review where the internal entry has been reused. Distinguish historical applications from saved templates for future work, then identify the records that need an administrative clarification. Preserve the underlying account of the actual container used rather than applying a bulk substitution solely because a current search produces a more convenient name.
For an ambiguous handwritten suffix, ask the operator or provider a focused question and retain the answer. For a spreadsheet conversion, compare the imported identifier character by character with the original. Keep leading zeros, punctuation and meaningful suffixes visible in the working evidence. Test an exported copy before relying on a corrected catalogue as the sole lookup source.
Review the lookup with a second person
Give a colleague the question and document index, then ask them to locate the product identity, crop-use row and any separate approval. Have them identify which passage addresses the proposed method or timing question. Record any difficulty in the index and improve the references rather than inserting an unsupported interpretation into the product record.
Use this exercise particularly where one directory serves several business activities. Preserve the difference between a farm crop, an amenity situation and a minor-use enquiry in the lookup note. Retain the corresponding official document for the actual case. A shared catalogue is an organisational aid; the product-specific evidence still supplies the conditions under review.
Distinguish document dates in the research note
Keep the publication or revision date printed in a document separate from the date you accessed it. Preserve the downloaded filename where it helps identify the edition. If the title, filename and internal revision statement differ, retain all three in your research correspondence and describe the discrepancy precisely.
For an attachment received from a colleague, keep the original covering message with the source reference. Identify which edition was used for the lookup rather than assuming the attachment is the latest solely because it arrived today. This gives a successor enough provenance to repeat the investigation and understand the documentary basis of the earlier decision.