National Organic Standards Board 

Compliance, Accreditation & Certification Subcommittee (CACS)

Oversight Improvements to Deter Fraud: 

Modernization of Supply Chain Traceability Spring 2022 Discussion Document

February 14, 2022

Introduction: 

The NOSB and the CACS subcommittee, in particular, appreciate the level of community engagement 

received regarding the Fall 2021 discussion document focusing on the Modernization of Supply Chain 

Traceability. Since the Fall 2021 NOSB meeting, the Board has looked to identify opportunities to lay a 

strong foundation for what we all hope will become a continuously improving traceability system. The 

overall goal is to have organics be able to claim the title of the most traceable food system in America 

and the world one day. The organic seal derives trust from the consumer due to the assumption that the 

organic supply chain is transparent. As one commenter from the Fall meeting mentioned, “the NOSB 

makes the important point that we need key information regarding traceability and volume cataloged, 

and we need this to be readily accessible.” 

More consistent data reporting across the supply chain is a priority for the NOSB. Reflecting in oral and 

written comments at the Fall meeting, commenters indicated some steps that the community and the 

USDA can take in short order to enhance traceability efforts. In this discussion document, we highlight 

two key elements that are a low burden to the community and can aid in deterring fraud: 1) reporting 

acres per crop on a certified operation’s certificate and 2) a universal bill of lading. Based on the 

Strengthening Organic Enforcement (SOE) proposed rule, it appears acres reporting on organic 

certificates would not be required as part of the final SOE rule. 

Reporting Acres per crop: 

Protecting integrity is foundational, and one commenter asked the question regarding the proposed rule 

on Strengthening Organic Enforcement (SOE), “Will the final rule require mandatory data reporting to 

NOP by crop type, acreage, and location; and number of animals by livestock type and location, at least 

on an annual basis to the Organic Integrity Database (OID)? A requirement for certifying agents to report 

production area certified by crop/livestock and location, on at least an annual basis, to the OID is one of 

the most impactful single actions that can be taken to increase the integrity in the global organic control 

systems.” The commenter goes on to ask, “will the OID provide for global use? If not, then we 

recommend investing in some additional system that gives organic operations and certifying agents 

access to the same type of information about certified operations around the world that are operating 

under equivalency arrangements and selling products into the United States.” The NOSB agrees with 

both comments from the community. 

Is this currently being done? 

As one commenter stated, “Currently, certifiers report acreage data from certified operations to the 

USDA’s Organic Integrity Database (OID), but that data is incomplete because reporting acreage data is 

not mandatory for certifiers and is not reported in a consistent way by all certifiers.” The commenter 

goes on to say that they “believe the NOP should make product and acreage reporting mandatory for 

certifiers.” 

At present, SOE appears to be poised to require the reporting of acres by crop into the OID. However, 

this information will not be public-facing in the OID. Since the NOP considers acres “confidential 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents April 2022 Page 19 of 152
business information”, It is understood that disclosure of acreage by crop will only be available to 

certifiers, leaving buyers and inspectors of organic crops, two of the key reporters of fraud, in the dark. 

 

Why is reporting acres by crop important?

It is long acknowledged that fraud in organics is most often exposed by individuals reporting red flags to 

certifiers and the NOP. With this acknowledgment, the NOSB implores the USDA to elevate the ability of 

organic inspectors and buyers of organic crops to identify, in real-time, volume of sales. One means of 

doing this is to list the number of acres per crop on the organic certificate. Some innovative organic 

certifiers, specifically Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association (OEFFA) and Organic Crop 

Improvement Association (OCIA), have already undertaken the practice of listing the number of acres 

per crop on organic certificates. In real-time, inspectors reviewing purchase records where this 

information is disclosed can identify any inconsistencies between sales levels and production capacity. 

Furthermore, buyers of organic crops will be able to cross-check if the operations from whom they are 

buying have the ability to produce the volume of crops purchased. At the aggregation point, reasonably 

considered the first most risky point in the supply chain, aggregators of crops from multiple producers 

would supply all organic certificates to the inspector who can quickly check if the capacity of the 

supplying operations could support the buying levels. 

The NOSB calls on the organic certifier community to report crops by acreage across all certifiers. 

Furthermore, the NOSB implores the NOP to make acreage reporting on organic certificates mandatory 

for all certifiers of all operations certified to the NOP, both foreign and domestic. 

Reporting product and acreage data and displaying it on the organic certificate is a low burden and 

provides additional opportunities to identify red flags in the organic supply chain. Fraud Prevention 

Plans are being discussed amongst the community. Greater transparency can be achieved with 

incremental steps within the certified operations if size and certified organic products grown are 

captured in the OID, visible to certifiers, and displayed on the certified operation’s organic certificate. 

With acres displayed on the certificate, needed insight can be provided to inspectors, handlers, 

importers, and brokers to help identify potential fraud in the supply chain. Under current organic 

certificates, most certifiers list the crops an operation is certified to grow in a given year, but not the 

number of acres. To not “lose the forest for the trees,” auditing an operation’s entire production 

capacity, not just a single field, would allow buyers and inspectors to identify concerning sales levels 

more effectively and efficiently than auditing just a single field. One commenter from the Fall stated, 

“Additionally, accurate operation-level organic acreage data that is segregated by crop would assist in 

conducting high-level, big picture mass balance audits, in addition to those performed during 

inspections, to determine if the output from a specific region matches production levels or is an 

indication of fraudulent activity.” 

Another commenter stated, “acreage data must be collected, if we don’t have a system of good 

production data, any OLS (Organic Link System) will fail. Crops should be listed on the certificate or in 

the Organic Integrity Database, or both, with more specificity. The OID is a very important tool for 

inspectors and certifiers, and we greatly value it”. 

Listing an operation’s acres by crop will be a significant aid to inspectors and other supply chain 

participants in the effort to identify fraud before it becomes pervasive. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents April 2022 Page 20 of 152
Universal Bill of Lading: 

To draw parallels when considering standardization of key data, it is important to consider the pending 

Origin of Livestock rule. With the pending Origin of Livestock rule, the certification community will 

necessarily be innovating their forms and auditing requirements to satisfy the requirements outlined in 

the rule. This is a potential opportunity for certifiers to collaborate and draft best practices so that on all 

dairy operation inspectors know to ask consistent questions no matter the record-keeping system. Also, 

inspectors can expect specific data, so rigorous audits on the origin of livestock can be completed. In 

turn, this same spirit of collaboration could reasonably be applied to a “universal bill of lading” for all 

agricultural commodities. 

The expectation of what information is essential to confirm traceability can vary from one certifier to 

the next. “Sufficient in detail and readily understood and audited” can be a point of inconsistency in the 

certification process, especially for growers who are transitioning or are new to organic. One way to 

embrace the bespoke nature of record-keeping is to consistently require key reporting information in 

transactions between operations where bulk goods change form and lots of bulk goods are aggregated. 

For example, the provenance of organic grain may be lost if the grower operation provides key 

information to their buyer and if the buyer does not record that information in transaction documents 

that move down the supply chain. For this reason, we call on the organic community to require 

inspectors and reviewers to confirm that the following data points are identified on transaction 

documents from grower to buyer/aggregator: 

● unique lot number

● crop year grown

● date of transaction

● crop 

● buyer name

● seller name 

Why is a universal bill of lading important? 

Record keeping is unique from operation to operation, which is notable, as it allows record-keeping to 

be maximally well suited to each operation. 

As one commenter in the fall mentioned, “Keep in mind that it is the responsibility of the operation to 

demonstrate the integrity and robustness of their record-keeping system to inspectors and certifiers. 

Site-specific and adaptable record-keeping systems do not excuse or allow operators to keep poor 

records. If records are not sufficient in detail to be readily understood and audited and sufficient to 

demonstrate compliance, as required by 7 CFR 205.103, the inspector will note the issue of concern for 

the certifier to address.” 

Additionally, a commenter added, “right now, record-keeping systems vary widely across production 

and handling operations, with systems often specifically suited to the type of operation. Choosing any 

one system for all operators to adopt will inevitably be more or less burdensome for each operator 

depending on a host of variables.” 

We, as a board, agree with this comment; however, there are core pieces of information that are or 

should be “standardized” that can move the community collectively in the same direction. With the 

implementation of SOE, certifiers are aware that additional scrutiny will be placed on assessing whether 

record-keeping by an operation is sufficiently auditable. As a community, greater cooperation amongst

the certification community assessing what is “sufficient” will be a significant step forward to building a 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents April 2022 Page 21 of 152
more robust traceability system. The NOSB calls on the certification community to embrace consistent 

key data reporting on transaction documents. 

In Closing: 

As one commenter mentioned, “The integrity and future success of the organic system are dependent 

on the awareness, collaboration, and cooperation of everyone involved--the regulators, the certifiers, 

and the certified operations. Similarly, the prevention, detection, and eradication of fraud must be a 

cooperative effort, endorsed and implemented.” Both acreage reporting by crop and universal bills of 

lading are viewed as fundamental steps for increased consistency in the community, ultimately aiding in 

increased transparency. Both are minimally burdensome to certified organic operations and certifiers 

while offering the potential to be significant contributors to improving fraud detection and building a 

consistent, transparent, traceable system. 

Questions: 

1. Should acreage by crop be included on organic certificates?

2. In addition to total certified acres should acres per crop also be included on the organic 

certificate and be public-facing in the Organic Integrity Database? 

3. How can the community better educate inspectors and certified operators on what is 

sufficiently auditable record-keeping? (e.g., organic learning center, etc. )

4. What opportunities are there for stakeholders to collaborate in creating additional resources 

(e.g., forms, etc.) for use by organic operations that incorporate key data elements?

5. How can the NOP assist certifiers in issuing non-compliances for insufficient record keeping? 

Vote in Subcommittee:

Motion to accept the discussion document on Oversight Improvements to Deter Fraud: Modernization 

of Organic Supply Chain Traceability - Spring 2022

Motion By: Amy Bruch

Seconded By: Nate Powell-Palm 

Yes: 5 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents April 2022 Page 22 of 152