Key takeaway
What This Development Means
EFSA has released updated guidance for 2026 chemical monitoring data collection, explaining how to report food and feed sample results to the EU using the SSD2 data model and outlining validation expectations for ChemMon.
What does EFSA’s 2026 reporting guidance cover?
The guidance is intended for reporting to EFSA samples analysed for chemicals. It focuses on how to use the Standard Sample Description (SSD2) data model to submit analytical results from food and feed control activities that monitor pesticide residues, residues of veterinary medicinal products, contaminants, food additives and food flavourings.
Why does this matter for laboratories and competent authorities?
EFSA indicates the document complements and updates aspects of its general SSD2 and Data Exchange guidance for chemical monitoring. For data providers, clearer expectations on technical and legislative requirements and validation can reduce rejection rates, improve comparability across countries, and make year-on-year datasets more reliable for EU-level monitoring and analysis.
Source basis: EFSA Supporting Publications, “Chemical monitoring reporting guidance: 2026 data collection” (January 2026)
EFSA has published updated reporting guidance intended to be used for the 2026 data collection of chemical monitoring results, signalling a continued push towards more consistent, higher-quality submissions across EU food and feed control programmes.
The guidance is positioned as a practical document for reporting samples analysed for chemicals. It focuses on how to use the Standard Sample Description (SSD2) data model for submission of analytical results taken during control activities. EFSA explicitly frames the scope broadly, covering monitoring for pesticide residues, residues of veterinary medicinal products, contaminants, food additives and food flavourings.
What Is Changing For 2026 Submissions
Although the EU’s legal requirements and national sampling plans vary, the value of a shared reporting model is that it standardises how results are described once they are generated. EFSA notes that the 2026 reporting guidance does not replace its general SSD2 guidance or its Guidance on Data Exchange (GDE2). Instead, it complements and updates specific aspects relevant to chemical monitoring (ChemMon) data.
For data providers, that “ChemMon-specific” focus is important. Reporting guidance tends to evolve as new analytical approaches, residue definitions and data quality checks emerge. When that happens, fields that were optional in practice can become essential for validation, and documentation expectations can tighten around how results, units and sample descriptors are encoded.
Implications For Laboratories, Authorities And Supply Chains
In operational terms, the organisations most affected are those responsible for producing and submitting datasets: official laboratories, competent authorities and national data management teams. The guidance emphasises clarity on technical and legislative requirements, as well as data quality validation, which can translate into fewer resubmissions and more comparable datasets across countries.
For food and feed businesses, the knock-on effect is indirect but meaningful. More standardised, validated monitoring data supports EU-level risk analysis and compliance checking, and can influence where enforcement attention is focused, which products are prioritised for sampling, and how emerging issues are detected.
Summary
EFSA’s 2026 chemical monitoring reporting guidance reinforces the importance of disciplined data preparation, not just laboratory analysis. Organisations that submit ChemMon datasets should review SSD2 mappings and validation routines early, so that 2026 submissions align with EFSA’s expectations for completeness and consistency across regulated chemical monitoring programmes.
Related Articles
EU Lawmakers Challenge Pydiflumetofen Approval Over Pesticide Persistence And Safety Data Gaps
The pydiflumetofen debate highlights the EU’s wider struggle to balance pesticide risk management, agricultural resilience and chemical safety. While the Commission says no critical EFSA concern blocks approval, MEPs warn that persistence, groundwater uncertainty and unresolved data gaps could create long-term risks for regulators, farmers, water utilities and consumers.
PFAS Pesticides Face Rising Regulatory Scrutiny Over TFA Groundwater Risks
PFAS pesticides are facing increasing regulatory scrutiny rather than uniform global restrictions. EU non-renewals, Danish withdrawals and ongoing reviews and legal actions highlight growing concern over TFA and groundwater risks. Stakeholders should monitor developments, assess exposure and prepare for evolving compliance requirements.
Glyphosate Regulation Calls Intensify After Seattle Public Health Statement
The Seattle Statement intensifies calls for stricter glyphosate regulation, citing strong evidence of cancer and systemic health risks. It urges immediate policy action, improved risk assessment, and reduced pesticide reliance, signalling significant compliance and innovation challenges across the chemicals and agricultural sectors.
