In re: 

( ( 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE 

BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR 

Natural Food Ce1tifiers (NFC) 

Spring Valley, NY 

) 

) 

) 

Administrator's Decision 

APL-001-17 

This Decision is in response to an appeal APL-001-17, filed by Natural Food Certifiers 

(NFC), a U.S. Depaitment of Agriculture (USDA)-accredited certifying agent. NFC appealed a 

Notice of Proposed Suspension of Accreditation issued by the USDA, Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS), National Organic Program (NOP), which concluded that NFC was not in 

compliance with the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (Act)1 and the USDA organic 

regulations. 2 

BACKGROUND 

The Act authorizes the Secretary to accredit agents to certify crop, livestock, wild crop, 

and/or handling operations pursuant to the USDA organic regulations (7 C.F.R. Part 

205). Accreditation of certifying agents is done by the NOP, which also initiates compliance 

actions to enforce program requirements. Noncompliance procedures for certifying agents are set 

forth in §205.665 of the USDA organic regulations. Persons subject to the Act who believe that 

they are adversely affected by a noncompliance decision of the NOP may appeal such decision to 

the AMS Administrator, pursuant to §205.680 and §205.681 of the USDA organic regulations. 

I 7 U.S.C. 6501-6522 2 7 C.F.R. Patt 205 

1 
( 

FINDINGS OF FACT 

1. NFC is currently a USDA-accredited certifying agent, based in Spring Valley, NY. NFC 

was accredited as a USDA organic certifier on October 8, 2002. 

2. On December 15-18, 2015, NOP auditors conducted a mid-term assessment ofNFC's 

accreditation system. 

3. On May 9, 2016, the NOP issued NFC a Notice of Noncompliance due to identifying two 

(2) outstanding noncompliances from a previous assessment, as well as seventeen (17) 

new noncompliances during the mid-term assessment. Some of the findings described in 

the Notice of Noncompliance included: 

• NFC was conducting certification inspections without receiving updated organic 

system plans; NFC did not issue notices of noncompliance to operations for 

failing to submit updated organic system plans(§ 205.406(a); § 205.402(a)(l)). 

• NFC issued organic certificates with missing or incorrect inf01mation (§ 205.404). 

• Annual performance evaluations of inspectors and the NFC Director were 

incomplete (§205 .501(a)(6)). 

• NFC has no training program for staff or contracted staff and the NFC Director 

admitted to being unfamiliar with some NOP requirements, particularly 

concerning international trade verification and inspector field evaluations 

(§205.501(a)(5)). 

• At a witness inspection during the audit, the inspector did not verify all parts of 

the organic system plan (§205.403(c)(2)). 

• NFC is not carrying out its procedures for different certification activities: label 

review, material reviews, tracking of deadlines for operations to respond to 

2 
( 

requests or notices. NFC is not carrying out all provisions of the USDA organic 

regulations (§205.501(a)(3)). 

4. On June 7, 2016, NFC submitted corrective actions to the NOP. On June 21, 2016, the 

NOP requested modifications to NFC's co1Tective actions because sixteen (16) of the 

seventeen (17) actions submitted were deemed inadequate to bring the certifier into 

compliance. NFC did not submit corrective actions for the two previous noncompliances. 

5. On July 4, 2016, NFC submitted revised conective actions to the NOP. 

6. On September 1, 2016, the NOP issued NFC a Notice of Proposed Suspension of 

Accreditation because the corrective actions submitted for eighteen (18) noncompliances 

were either incomplete or did not sufficiently address the noncompliance. 

7. On October 3, 2016, NFC submitted an appeal, which was accepted as timely. 

DISCUSSION 

The NOP cited nineteen (19) noncompliances based on the 2015 mid-term accreditation 

assessment ofNFC. Two of these noncompliances carried over from earlier assessments in 2010 

and 2012. Despite multiple opportunities, NFC has failed to resolve most of the noncompliances 

found in 2015: when this appeal was initiated, nineteen (19) noncompliances remained 

outstanding. 

In its appeal, NFC asse1is that the May 9, 2016 Notice ofNoncompliance and the 

September 1, 2016 Notice of Proposed Suspension and Co1Tective Action Report lack detail and 

specifics on the alleged violations. The record in this case shows this to be inaccurate. Both the 

Noncompliance Report, which accompanied the Notice of Noncompliance, and the Corrective 

Action Report, which accompanied the Notice of Proposed Suspension, provide a detailed 

account of the noncompliance findings, corrective actions submitted, and whether these were 

3 
( ( 

adequate to resolve the noncompliance. Specifically, the NOP advised NFC that a) some 

noncompliances were unaddressed; b) that the corrective actions were incomplete; c) that all 

components of the noncompliance must be addressed in the corrective action; and d) that a 

preventative action and supp01ting documents as evidence were needed (when applicable). 

NFC's appeal states it took corrective actions during the on-site audit and continued to 

take further corrective actions after the audit. NFC submitted responses to eighteen (18) 

noncompliances with the appeal. AMS reviewed these responses and made the following 

determinations. While NFC has taken some positive steps to address some of the 

noncompliances, such as hiring a Document Manager and Administrative Assistant, developing 

checklists, and outsow-cing performance reviews, there are issues that were not addressed. 

Outstanding issues include: (1) no template for a notice of noncompliance, and no evidence that 

these notices are issued when warranted; (2) NFC did not implement its own proposed conective 

action to implement a web-based recordkeeping system to conect its file management and 

versioning issues; and (3) there was no conective action submitted for the findings of 

unfamiliarity with NOP policies regarding international trade. Further, there was no evidence to 

demonstrate that NFC could verify compliance with international trade anangements, except for 

the EU equivalency arrangement. 

In addition, AMS notes that, despite extensive noncompliance findings during the 2015 

audit, NFC has not attended any annual certifier training offered by the NOP from 2013 through 

2017. While attending the training is not a regulatory requirement, the consistent lack of 

attendance futther illustrates NFC's lack of demonstrated investment in remaining cw-rent with 

program requirements. 

4 
( 

CONCLUSION 

The record in this case demonstrates that NFC has not complied with requirements to 

maintain accreditation, as described in§ 205.50l(a). Attempts to correct noncompliances were 

inadequate, and NFC has failed to demonstrate that it has the organizational capacity to correctly 

apply the USDA organic regulations. The corrective actions that NFC submitted prior to the 

appeal did not address all components of each noncompliance, nor do they provide a description 

of the actions taken to prevent a reoccurrence of the noncompliance or documentary evidence to 

show implementation of corrective actions. NFC has attempted to resolve some issues through its 

appeal. However, the number, scope, and recurrent incomplete responses to the noncompliances 

demonstrate that NFC is not yet fully compliant. AMS finds that the NO P's Notice of Proposed 

Suspension of Accreditation was appropriate. 

DECISION 

NFC's organic accreditation is to be suspended. Attached to this formal Administrator's 

Decision is a Request for Hearing form. NFC has 30 days to request an administrative hearing 

before an Administrative Law Judge. IfNFC does not request a hearing in that period, this 

Decision will be implemented and the NOP will suspend NFC's organic accreditation. 

In accordance with §205.665(g)(l) of the USDA organic regulations, "A certifying agent 

whose accreditation is suspended by the Secretary under this section may at any time, unless 

otherwise stated in the notification of suspension, submit a request to the Secretary for 

reinstatement of its accreditation. The request must be accompanied by evidence demonstrating 

correction of each noncompliance and corrective actions taken to comply with and remain in 

compliance with the Act and the regulations in this part." 

5 
( ( 

Done at Washington, D.C., on this 7-·tJ, 

dayof <.JlA.-\'i) , 2017. 

Bruce Summers 

Acting Administrator 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

6 

-