This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

53299 

Vol. 71, No. 175 

Monday, September 11, 2006 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 205 

[Docket Number TM–04–01FR] 

RIN 0581–AC35 

National Organic Program (NOP); 

Amendments to the National List of 

Allowed and Prohibited Substances 

(Crops and Processing) 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule would amend 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 

(USDA) National List of Allowed and 

Prohibited Substances (National List) 

regulations to reflect recommendations 

submitted to the Secretary of 

Agriculture (Secretary) by the National 

Organic Standards Board (NOSB) from 

November 15, 2000, through March 3, 

2005. Consistent with the 

recommendations from the NOSB, this 

final rule adds thirteen substances, 

along with any restrictive annotations, 

to the National List. This final rule also 

amends the mailing address for where to 

file a Certification or Accreditation 

appeal. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule becomes 

effective September 12, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob 

Pooler, Agricultural Marketing 

Specialist, Telephone: (202) 720–3252; 

Fax: (202) 205–7808. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On December 21, 2000, the Secretary 

established, within the NOP [7 CFR part 

205], the National List regulations 

(§§ 205.600 through 205.607). The 

National List identifies synthetic 

substances and ingredients that are 

allowed and nonsynthetic (natural) 

substances and ingredients that are 

prohibited for use in organic production 

and handling. Under the authority of the 

Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 

(OFPA), as amended, (7 U.S.C. 6501 et 

seq.), the National List can be amended 

by the Secretary based on proposed 

amendments developed by the NOSB. 

Since established, the National List has 

been amended three times, October 31, 

2003 (68 FR 61987), November 3, 2003 

(68 FR 62215), and October 21, 2005 (70 

FR 61217). 

This final rule amends the National 

List to reflect recommendations 

submitted to the Secretary by the NOSB 

from November 15, 2000, through 

March 3, 2005. Between the specified 

time period, the NOSB has 

recommended that the Secretary add 

four substances to § 205.601 and eleven 

substances to § 205.605 of the National 

List regulations. This final rule also 

amends the mailing address for where to 

file a Certification or Accreditation 

appeal pursuant to § 205.681(d). 

II. Overview of Amendments 

The following provides an overview 

of the amendments made to designated 

sections of the National List regulations: 

Section 205.601 Synthetic Substances 

Allowed for Use in Organic Crop 

Production 

This final rule amends the following 

inert ingredient to § 205.601 of the 

National List regulations: 

Glycerine oleate (Glycerol 

monooleate) (CAS # 37220–82–9)—for 

use only until December 31, 2006. 

This final rule amends the following 

seed preparation to § 205.601 of the 

National List regulations: 

Hydrogen chloride (CAS # 7647–01– 

0)—for delinting cotton seed for 

planting. 

This final rule amends the following 

slug and snail bait to § 205.601 of the 

National List regulations: 

Ferric phosphate (CAS # 10045–86– 

0). 

Section 205.605 Nonagricultural 

(Nonorganic) Substances Allowed as 

Ingredients in or on Processed Products 

Labeled as ‘‘Organic’’ or ‘‘Made With 

Organic (Specified Ingredients or Food 

Group(s))’’ 

This final rule amends § 205.605(a) of 

the regulations by adding the following 

substances: 

Egg white lysozyme (CAS # 9001–63– 

2). 

L-Malic acid (CAS # 97–67–6). 

Microorganisms—any food grade 

bacteria, fungi, and other 

microorganisms. 

This final rule also amends 

§ 205.605(b) of the regulations by adding 

the following substances: 

Activated charcoal (CAS #s 7440–44– 

0; 64365–11–3)—only from vegetative 

sources; for use only as a filtering aid. 

Cyclohexylamine (CAS # 108–91–8)— 

for use only as a boiler water additive 

for packaging sterilization. 

Diethylaminoethanol (CAS # 100–37– 

8)—for use only as a boiler water 

additive for packaging sterilization. 

Octadecylamine (CAS # 124–30–1)— 

for use only as a boiler water additive 

for packaging sterilization. 

Peracetic acid/Peroxyacetic acid (CAS 

# 79–21–0)—for use in wash and/or 

rinse water according to FDA 

limitations. For use as a sanitizer on 

food contact surfaces. 

Sodium acid pyrophosphate (CAS # 

7758–16–9)—for use only as a leavening 

agent. 

Tetrasodium pyrophosphate (CAS # 

7722–88–5)—for use only in meat 

analog products. 

Section 205.681 Appeals 

This final rule amends § 205.681(d)(1) 

of the regulations by updating the 

mailing address for where to file a 

Certification or Accreditation appeal as 

follows: Administrator, USDA, AMS, 

c/o NOP Appeals Staff, Stop 0203, 

Room 302-Annex, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250– 

0203. 

III. Related documents 

Seven notices and one proposed rule 

(70 FR 54660, September 16, 2005) were 

published regarding the meetings of the 

NOSB and its deliberations on 

recommendations and substances 

petitioned for amending the National 

List. Substances and recommendations 

included in this final rule were 

announced for NOSB deliberation in the 

following Federal Register Notices: (1) 

65 FR 64657, October 30, 2000, 

(Peracetic acid); (2) 66 FR 48654, 

September 21, 2001, (Ammonium 

hydroxide, Cyclohexlamine, and 

Octadecylamine); (3) 67 FR 19375, April 

19, 2002, (Diethylaminoethanol); (4) 67 

FR 54784, August 26, 2002, (Activated 

charcoal); (5) 68 FR 23277, May 1, 2003, 


bjneal on PROD1PC71 with RULES
53300 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 175 / Monday, September 11, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

(Egg white lysozyme, Glycerine oleate, 

L-Malic acid, Microorganisms, Sodium 

acid pyrophosphate and 

Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol); (6) 69 FR 

18036, April 6, 2004, (Hydrogen 

Chloride, and Tetrasodium 

pyrophosphate); and (7) 70 FR 7224, 

February 11, 2005, (Ferric phosphate). 

IV. Statutory and Regulatory Authority 

The OFPA, as amended (7 U.S.C. 6501 

et seq.), authorizes the Secretary to 

make amendments to the National List 

based on proposed amendments 

developed by the NOSB. Sections 

6518(k)(2) and 6518(n) of OFPA 

authorizes the NOSB to develop 

proposed amendments to the National 

List for submission to the Secretary and 

establishes a petition process by which 

persons may petition the NOSB for the 

purpose of having substances evaluated 

for inclusion on or deletion from the 

National List, respectively. The National 

List petition process is implemented 

under § 205.607 of the NOP regulations. 

The current petition process (65 FR 

43259) can be accessed through the NOP 

Web site at http://www.ams.usda.gov/ 

nop. 

A. Executive Order 12866 

This action has been determined to be 

not significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866, and therefore, has not 

been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget. 

B. Executive Order 12988 

Executive Order 12988 instructs each 

executive agency to adhere to certain 

requirements in the development of new 

and revised regulations in order to avoid 

unduly burdening the court system. 

This final rule is not intended to have 

a retroactive effect. 

States and local jurisdictions are 

preempted under § 2115 of the OFPA (7 

U.S.C. 6514) from creating programs of 

accreditation for private persons or State 

officials who want to become certifying 

agents of organic farms or handling 

operations. A governing State official 

would have to apply to USDA to be 

accredited as a certifying agent, as 

described in § 2115(b) of the OFPA (7 

U.S.C. 6514(b)). States are also 

preempted under §§ 2104 through 2108 

of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6503 through 

6507) from creating certification 

programs to certify organic farms or 

handling operations unless the State 

programs have been submitted to, and 

approved by, the Secretary as meeting 

the requirements of the OFPA. 

Pursuant to § 2108(b)(2) of the OFPA 

(7 U.S.C. 6507(b)(2)), a State organic 

certification program may contain 

additional requirements for the 

production and handling of organically 

produced agricultural products that are 

produced in the State and for the 

certification of organic farm and 

handling operations located within the 

State under certain circumstances. Such 

additional requirements must: (a) 

Further the purposes of the OFPA, (b) 

not be inconsistent with the OFPA, (c) 

not be discriminatory toward 

agricultural commodities organically 

produced in other States, and (d) not be 

effective until approved by the 

Secretary. 

Pursuant to § 2120(f) of the OFPA (7 

U.S.C. 6519(f)), this final rule would not 

alter the authority of the Secretary 

under the Federal Meat Inspection Act 

(21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Poultry 

Products Inspections Act (21 U.S.C. 451 

et seq.), or the Egg Products Inspection 

Act (21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.), concerning 

meat, poultry, and egg products, nor any 

of the authorities of the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services under the 

Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act 

(21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.), nor the authority 

of the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide 

and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et 

seq.). 

Section 2121 of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 

6520) provides for the Secretary to 

establish an expedited administrative 

appeals procedure under which persons 

may appeal an action of the Secretary, 

the applicable governing State official, 

or a certifying agent under this title that 

adversely affects such person or is 

inconsistent with the organic 

certification program established under 

this title. The OFPA also provides that 

the U.S. District Court for the district in 

which a person is located has 

jurisdiction to review the Secretary’s 

decision. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires agencies 

to consider the economic impact of each 

rule on small entities and evaluate 

alternatives that would accomplish the 

objectives of the rule without unduly 

burdening small entities or erecting 

barriers that would restrict their ability 

to compete in the market. The purpose 

is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of 

businesses subject to the action. Section 

605 of the RFA allows an agency to 

certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an 

analysis, if the rulemaking is not 

expected to have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

Pursuant to the requirements set forth 

in the RFA, the Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS) performed an economic 

impact analysis on small entities in the 

final rule published in the Federal 

Register on December 21, 2000 (65 FR 

80548). The AMS has also considered 

the economic impact of this action on 

small entities. The impact on entities 

affected by this final rule would not be 

significant. The effect of this final rule 

would be to allow the use of additional 

substances in agricultural production 

and handling. This action would relax 

the regulations published in 7 CFR part 

205 and would provide small entities 

with more tools to use in day-to-day 

operations. The AMS concludes that the 

economic impact of this addition of 

allowed substances, if any, would be 

minimal and entirely beneficial to small 

agricultural service firms. Accordingly, 

USDA certifies that this rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Small agricultural service firms, 

which include producers, handlers, and 

accredited certifying agents, have been 

defined by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) 

as those having annual receipts of less 

than $6,500,000 and small agricultural 

producers are defined as those having 

annual receipts of less than $750,000. 

This final rule would have an impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The U.S. organic industry at the end 

of 2001 included nearly 6,949 certified 

organic crop and livestock operations. 

These operations reported certified 

acreage totaling more than 2.09 million 

acres of organic farm production. Data 

on the numbers of certified organic 

handling operations (any operation that 

transforms raw product into processed 

products using organic ingredients) 

were not available at the time of survey 

in 2001; but they were estimated to be 

in the thousands. By the end of 2004, 

the number of certified organic crop, 

livestock, and handling operations 

totaled nearly 11,400 operations. Based 

on 2003 data, certified organic acreage 

increased to 2.2 million acres. 

U.S. sales of organic food and 

beverages have grown from $1 billion in 

1990 to an estimated $12.2 billion in 

2004. Organic food sales are projected to 

reach $14.5 billion for 2005; total U.S. 

organic sales, including nonfood uses, 

are expected to reach $15 billion in 

2005. The organic industry is viewed as 

the fastest growing sector of agriculture, 

representing 2 percent of overall food 

and beverage sales. Since 1990, organic 

retail sales have historically 

demonstrated a growth rate between 20 

to 24 percent each year. This growth 

rate is projected to decline and fall to a 

rate of 5 to 10 percent in the future. 

In addition, USDA has accredited 96 

certifying agents who have applied to 


bjneal on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 175 / Monday, September 11, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 53301 

USDA to be accredited in order to 

provide certification services to 

producers and handlers. A complete list 

of names and addresses of accredited 

certifying agents may be found on the 

AMS NOP Web site, at http:// 

www.ams.usda.gov/nop. AMS believes 

that most of these entities would be 

considered small entities under the 

criteria established by the SBA. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

No additional collection or 

recordkeeping requirements are 

imposed on the public by this final rule. 

Accordingly, OMB clearance is not 

required by section 350(h) of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 

U.S.C. 3501, et seq., or OMB’s 

implementing regulation at 5 CFR part 

1320. AMS is committed to compliance 

with the Government Paperwork 

Elimination Act (GPEA), which requires 

Government agencies in general to 

provide the option of submitting 

information of transaction business 

electronically to the maximum extent 

possible. 

E. Discussion of Comments Received 

Twenty-nine (29) comments were 

received on proposed rule TM–04–01. 

In general, comments favored amending 

the National List with the proposed 

substances identified in the proposed 

rule. However, there were some 

commenters that raised concerns with 

proposed restrictions to the use of 

substances being added to § 205.605(b) 

and the expiration date attached to the 

use of ammonium hydroxide. A few 

commenters, suggested technical 

changes to the CAS numbers for 

glycerine oleate. These same 

commenters asserted that tetrasodium 

pyrophosphate and sodium acid 

pyrophosphate should not be added to 

the National List. We also received a 

comment asking the USDA to ‘‘clarify 

that the category of ’microorganisms’’

also includes food grade by-products 

derived from microorganisms that 

exhibit similar characteristics or 

functions as the microorganism.’’

Changes Made Based on Comments 

The following changes are made 

based on comments received. 

First, Restriction to Use of Substances 

on § 205.605(b). The proposed rule 

restricted the use of synthetic 

substances being added to § 205.605(b). 

It restricted the synthetic substances to 

the handling of agricultural products 

labeled ‘‘made with organic (specified 

ingredients or food group(s)) and 

prohibited the use of the proposed 

synthetic substances in handling 

agricultural products labeled as 

‘‘organic.’’ Commenters, however, were 

largely opposed to restricting the use of 

the proposed synthetic substances to 

products labeled as ‘‘made with organic 

(specified ingredients or food group(s)). 

The proposed rule restricted the use 

of these substances because of the final 

judgment and order in the case of 

Harvey v. Johanns, issued on June 9, 

2005, by the United States District 

Court, District of Maine. The district 

court ruled that 7 CFR 205.600(b) and 

205.605(b) of the National List 

regulations are contrary to the OFPA 

and exceed the Secretary’s rulemaking 

authority to the extent that they permit 

the addition of synthetic ingredients 

and processing aids in handling and 

processing of agricultural products 

which contain a minimum of 95 percent 

organic content and which are eligible 

to bear the USDA seal. Due to this ruling 

by the district court, the USDA 

determined that any new additions to 

the National List would have to comply 

with the court’s order. 

However, in October 2005, Congress 

voted to amend § 6517 of the OFPA to 

permit the use of certain synthetic 

substances in organic handling. 

Therefore, we agree with the 

commenters and have removed the 

restrictive language from substances 

being added to § 205.605(b) of the 

National List. 

Second, Glycerine Oleate CAS #. In 

proposing glycerine oleate for addition 

to the National List, the proposed rule 

identified the substance with the 

following CAS #s: 111–03–5, 25496–72–

4, and 37220–82–9. Commenters stated 

that the listing of CAS #s 111–03–5 and 

25496–72–4 are incorrect and not 

necessary because they now appear on 

the EPA’s List 4A. Inert substances that 

appear on the EPA’s List 4a are already 

permitted for use in organic crop 

production under the National List 

regulations. 

We agree with the commenters and 

have removed the CAS #s 111–03–5 and 

25496–72–4 from the listing of glycerine 

oleate. 

Third, Ammonium Hydroxide 

Expiration Date. Based on the 

recommendation from the NOSB in 

October 2001, ammonium hydroxide 

was proposed for inclusion on the 

National List with an expiration date of 

October 21, 2005. Most commenters 

supported the inclusion of ammonium 

hydroxide on the National List and 

requested that the expiration date be 

amended to acknowledge the three years 

that the NOSB had intended to allow 

the use of the substance. Some 

commenters expressed the view that 

ammonium hydroxide should not be 

added to the National List. They 

asserted that processors have managed 

without use of the substance in the last 

four years and suggest that there are a 

number of alternatives to ammonium 

hydroxide for boiler maintenance. 

We have taken into account the 

concerns of the commenters. However, 

the expiration date recommended by the 

NOSB for the use of ammonium 

hydroxide has lapsed. As a result, 

ammonium hydroxide is not being 

added to the National List at this time. 

To be reconsidered for inclusion on the 

National List, the NOSB will have to 

submit a new recommendation to the 

Secretary to amend the National List to 

permit the use of ammonium hydroxide. 

Fourth, Non-Inclusion of 

Tetrahydrofurfyl Alcohol (THFA). The 

NOSB recommended the inclusion of 

THFA to the National List, with the 

restriction that it could only be used 

until December 21, 2006. THFA was 

petitioned for use in organic crop 

production as an inert pesticidal 

ingredient. Under the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act (FIFRA), the EPA had registered 

THFA as a List 3 inert (Inerts of 

Unknown Toxicity). However, the EPA 

is currently evaluating THFA for 

reassessment under the Food Quality 

Protection Act (FQPA) and has 

identified risks of concern that require 

the use of THFA as an inert ingredient 

in pesticide products to be significantly 

limited. Based on consultations with the 

EPA concerning the future use of THFA, 

the Secretary has been advised to 

withhold listing THFA as an allowed 

substance on the National List. Due to 

potential risk issues associated with 

THFA’s use in crop production, the 

Secretary will wait until the EPA has 

concluded its reassessment of the 

substance before reconsidering its 

inclusion to the National List. The 

EPA’s proposed rulemaking for 

proposed action on THFA can be found 

in the Federal Register, 71 FR 18689 

(April 12, 2006). 

Changes Requested But Not Made 

First, Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate. 

The NOSB recommended the use of 

sodium acid pyrophosphate at its May 

2003, meeting in Austin, TX. After the 

May meeting, the NOP requested that 

the NOSB submit documentation that 

would reflect how the recommended 

substance met the evaluation criteria 

specified in §§ 6517 and 6518 of the 

OFPA, before the recommended 

substance would be considered by the 

Secretary for proposed rulemaking. The 

NOSB submitted the documentation as 

requested by the NOP. The NOP, in 

turn, reviewed and used the 

documentation to draft a proposed rule 


bjneal on PROD1PC71 with RULES
53302 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 175 / Monday, September 11, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

for adding sodium acid pyrophosphate 

to the National List. 

In response to the proposed rule, a 

few commenters stated that the NOP did 

not make all supporting documentation 

(the NOSB decision sheet checklist and 

a supplemental technical review used 

by the NOSB to evaluate sodium acid 

pyrophosphate) available to the public 

for consideration in developing 

comments regarding the addition of 

sodium acid pyrophosphate to the 

National List. They asserted that sodium 

acid pyrophosphate should be tabled 

until all supporting information for 

sodium acid pyrophosphate is made 

available to the public. 

The NOSB decision sheet checklist 

and supplemental technical review for 

sodium acid pyrophosphate were not 

posted on the NOP Web site during the 

public comment period for the proposed 

rule TM–04–01. However, all 

documents related to the review of 

substances for inclusion on the National 

List are always available to the public 

through the NOP office. If the public is 

aware that such a document is not 

available on the NOP Web site, a request 

may always be submitted to the NOP to 

receive the related documents. Taking 

into account the commenters’ position 

regarding easy accessibility to materials 

review documents, we do not believe 

their position warrants the NOP 

deferring final action on the substance. 

Evidence has not been submitted that 

would suggest sodium acid 

pyrophosphate violates the evaluation 

criteria specified in the OFPA. 

Second, Tetrasodium Pyrophosphate. 

A few commenters opposed the addition 

of tetrasodium pyrophosphate on the 

National List because of reasons that 

were expressed in an earlier proposed 

rule (68 FR 27941, May 22, 2003). 

Commenters had stated that the use of 

tetrasodium pyrophosphate conflicts 

with § 205.600(b)(4) of the NOP 

regulations. They also stated that the 

annotation associated with tetrasodium 

pyrophosphate is too vague. 

The NOP disagrees with the 

commenters. The NOP specifically 

referred tetrasodium pyrophosphate 

back to the NOSB, as a result of 

receiving such comments in response to 

the May 2003, proposed rule. The NOP 

charged the NOSB with determining 

whether the proposed use of 

tetrasodium pyrophosphate conflicts 

with § 205.600(b)(4) of the NOP 

regulations. Through further review and 

deliberation at their April 2004, meeting 

in Chicago, IL, the NOSB determined 

that the proposed use of tetrasodium 

pyrophosphate did not conflict with 

§ 205.600(b)(4) of the NOP regulations. 

In response to the concerns of the 

commenters, the NOSB provided that 

the primary use of tetrasodium 

pyrophosphate, as petitioned, is not to 

serve as a preservative, or to ‘‘recreate’’

flavor, color or texture. They 

acknowledged that the substance may 

be used to create texture; however, it is 

not being used to ‘‘recreate’’ texture, as 

is referenced in § 205.600(b)(4) of the 

regulations. 

Third, Microorganisms. A commenter 

requested the NOP to ‘‘clarify that the 

category of ‘microorganisms’ also 

includes food grade by-products derived 

from microorganisms that exhibit 

similar characteristics or functions as 

the microorganism.’’ The NOP does not 

have enough information to address this 

commenter’s concern. His request must 

be evaluated by the NOSB. As a result, 

the NOP instructs the commenter to 

submit a petition to the NOSB that 

would request evaluation of the types of 

substances for which he seeks 

clarification. 

F. Effective Date 

This final rule reflects 

recommendations submitted to the 

Secretary by the NOSB. The thirteen 

substances being added to the National 

List were based on petitions from the 

industry and evaluated by the NOSB 

using criteria in the Act and the 

regulations. Because these substances 

are critical to organic production and 

handling operations, producers and 

handlers should be able to use them in 

their operations as soon as possible. 

Accordingly, AMS finds that good cause 

exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for not 

postponing the effective date of this rule 

until 30 days after publication in the 

Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 205 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Agriculture, Animals, 

Archives and records, Imports, Labeling, 

Organically produced products, Plants, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Seals and insignia, Soil 

conservation. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 205, Subpart G is 

amended as follows: 

PART 205—NATIONAL ORGANIC 

PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 205 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6501–6522. 

■ 2. Section 205.601 is amended by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (h). 

■ b. Revising paragraph (m)(2). 

■ c. Adding a new paragraph (n). 

■ d. Reserving paragraphs (o)–(z). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 205.601 Synthetic substance allowed for 

use in organic crop production. 

* * * * * 

(h) As slug or snail bait. Ferric 

phosphate (CAS # 10045–86–0). 

* * * * * 

(m) * * * 

(2) EPA List 3—Inerts of Unknown 

Toxicity allowed: 

(i) Glycerine Oleate (Glycerol 

monooleate) (CAS #s 37220–82–9)—for 

use only until December 31, 2006. 

(ii) Inerts used in passive pheromone 

dispensers. 

(n) Seed preparations. Hydrogen 

chloride (CAS # 7647–01–0)—for 

delinting cotton seed for planting. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 205.605 is amended by: 

■ a. Adding three materials to paragraph 

(a). 

■ b. Adding seven new substances to 

paragraph (b). 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 205.605 Nonagricultural (nonorganic) 

substances allowed as ingredients in or on 

processed products labeled as ‘‘organic’’ or 

‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients 

or food group(s)).’’

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * 

Egg white lysozyme (CAS # 9001–63–

2) 

* * * * * 

L-Malic acid (CAS # 97–67–6). 

* * * * * 

Microorganisms—any food grade 

bacteria, fungi, and other 

microorganism. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

Activated charcoal (CAS #s 7440–44–

0; 64365–11–3)—only from vegetative 

sources; for use only as a filtering aid. 

* * * * * 

Cyclohexylamine (CAS # 108–91–8)—

for use only as a boiler water additive 

for packaging sterilization. 

Diethylaminoethanol (CAS # 100–37–

8)—for use only as a boiler water 

additive for packaging sterilization. 

* * * * * 

Octadecylamine (CAS # 124–30–1)—

for use only as a boiler water additive 

for packaging sterilization. 

* * * * * 

Peracetic acid/Peroxyacetic acid (CAS 

# 79–21–0)—for use in wash and/or 

rinse water according to FDA 

limitations. For use as a sanitizer on 

food contact surfaces. 

* * * * * 


bjneal on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 175 / Monday, September 11, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 53303 

Sodium acid pyrophosphate (CAS # 

7758–16–9)—for use only as a leavening 

agent. 

* * * * * 

Tetrasodium pyrophosphate (CAS # 

7722–88–5)—for use only in meat 

analog products. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 205.681, paragraph (d)(1) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 205.681 Appeals. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * (1) Appeals to the 

Administrator must be filed in writing 

and addressed to: Administrator, USDA, 

AMS, c/o NOP Appeals Staff, Stop 0203, 

Room 302-Annex, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–

0203. 

* * * * * 

Dated: September 5, 2006. 

Lloyd C. Day, Administrator, 

Agricultural Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. E6–14923 Filed 9–8–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1290 

[Docket No. FV06–1290–1 FR] 

RIN 0581–AC59 

Specialty Crop Block Grant Program 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule provides regulations 

to implement the Specialty Crop Block 

Grant Program (SCBGP) to enhance the 

competitiveness of specialty crops. This 

action establishes the eligibility and 

application requirements, the review 

and approval process, and grant 

administration procedures for the 

SCBGP. 

The SCBGP is authorized under 

Section 101 of the Specialty Crops 

Competitiveness Act of 2004 (7 U.S.C. 

1621 note). 

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 11, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Trista Etzig, Fruit and Vegetable 

Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., Stop 0243, 

Washington, DC 20250–0243; 

Telephone: (202) 690–4942; Fax: (202) 

690–0102; or e-mail: 

trista.etzig@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Order 12866 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for the 

purposes of Executive Order 12866 by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). 

Public Law 104–4 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L. 

104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State and 

local governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

the Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures by State and local 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1532). When 

such a statement is needed for a rule, 

section 205 of the UMRA generally 

requires federal agencies to identify and 

consider a reasonable number of 

regulatory alternatives and adopt the 

least costly, most cost-effective, or least 

burdensome alternative that achieves 

the objectives of the rule (2 U.S.C. 

1535). 

This rule contains no Federal 

mandates (under the regulatory 

provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for 

State and local governments or the 

private sector of $100 million or more 

in any one year. Therefore, this rule is 

not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. 

Executive Order 12988 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This action is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. This rule will 

not preempt any State or local laws, 

regulations or policies, unless they 

present an irreconcilable conflict with 

this rule. There are no administrative 

procedures which must be exhausted 

prior to any judicial challenge to the 

provisions of this rule. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

This program is listed in the Catalog 

of Federal Domestic Assistance under 

No. 10.169, Specialty Crop Block Grant 

Program. 

Executive Order 12372 

This program is not subject to the 

provisions of Executive Order 12372, 

which requires intergovernmental 

consultation with State and local 

officials. See the Notice related to 7 CFR 

part 3015, subpart V published at 48 FR 

29115 (June 24, 1983). 

Executive Order 13132 

It has been determined that this rule 

does not have sufficient Federalism 

implications to warrant the preparation 

of a Federalism Assessment. The 

provisions contained in this rule would 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

States or their political subdivisions or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The AMS certifies that this rule will 

not have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities as 

defined in the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, Pub. L. 96–534, as amended (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This rule only will 

impact State departments of agriculture 

that apply for grant funds. States 

include the fifty States, the District of 

Columbia, and the Commonwealth of 

Puerto Rico. The States are not small 

entities under the Act. 

Authority for a Specialty Crop Block 

Grant Program 

This program is intended to 

accomplish the goals of increasing fruit, 

vegetable, and nut consumption and 

improving the competitiveness of 

United States specialty crop producers. 

The SCBGP is authorized under section 

101 of the Specialty Crops 

Competitiveness Act of 2004 (7 U.S.C. 

1621 note). Section 101 directs the 

Secretary of Agriculture to make grants 

to States for each of the fiscal years 2005 

through 2009 to be used by State 

departments of agriculture solely to 

enhance the competitiveness of 

specialty crops. 

Background 

The Fruit and Vegetable Program will 

periodically announce that applications 

may be submitted for participation in a 

‘‘Specialty Crop Block Grant Program’’

(SCBGP), which will be administered by 

personnel of the Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS). 

Periodically, funding may be 

appropriated to the Secretary of 

Agriculture to provide specialty crop 

block grants. To the extent that funds 

are available, each year the AMS will 

publish a Federal Register notice 

announcing the program and soliciting 

grant applications. 

Subject to the appropriation of funds, 

each State that submits an application 

that is reviewed and approved by AMS 

is to receive at least $100,000 to 

enhance the competitiveness of 

specialty crops. In addition, each State 

will receive an amount that represents 

the proportion of the value of specialty 

crop production in the state in relation 


bjneal on PROD1PC71 with RULES