Page 1 of 10 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE 

BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

 

In re: 

Finca Maravilla 

 

Guayas, Ecuador 

 

 

 

Administrator’s Decision 

APL-35-20

 

 

 

This Decision responds to an appeal (APL-035-20) of a Notice of Noncompliance and 

Proposed Suspension of National Organic Program (NOP) certification issued to Finca Maravilla 

(Maravilla) of Guayas, Ecuador by Quality Certification Services (QCS), an USDA-accredited 

certifying agent. The operation has been deemed not in compliance with the Organic Foods 

Production Act of 1990 (Act)1

 and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) organic 

regulations.2

BACKGROUND 

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

and/or handling operations to the USDA organic regulations (7 C.F.R. Part 205). Certifying 

agents also initiate compliance actions to enforce program requirements, as described in section 

205.662, Noncompliance procedure for certified operations. Persons subject to the Act who 

believe they are adversely affected by a noncompliance decision of a certifying agent may appeal 

1

 7 U.S.C. 6501-6522 

2

 7 C.F.R. Part 205 
Page 2 of 10 

such decision to the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) pursuant to §205.680 

Adverse Action Appeals Process – General, and § 205.681, Appeals of the USDA organic 

regulations. 

FINDINGS OF FACT 

1. On March 22, 2016, Maravilla was certified organic for crops, specifically bananas, by QCS. 

2. On October 7, 2019, QCS issued a Notice of Noncompliance and Proposed Suspension. 

3. On January 24, 2020, QCS issued a Notice of Unsuccessful Mediation regarding Maravilla’s 

October 24, 2019 request for mediation. 

4. On February 24, 2020, Maravilla filed an Appeal. 

DISCUSSION 

The USDA organic regulations at 7 CFR §205.103, Recordkeeping by certified 

operations, state that, “(a) A certified operation must maintain records concerning the 

production, harvesting, and handling of agricultural products that are or that are intended to be 

sold, labeled, or represented as “100 percent organic,” “organic,” or “made with organic 

(specified ingredients or food group(s)). (b) Such records must: ... (2) Fully disclose all 

activities and transactions of the certified operation in sufficient detail as to be readily 

understood and audited; ... (4) Be sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the Act and the 

regulations in this part...” 

The organic regulations at §205.105, Allowed and prohibited substances, methods, and 

ingredients in organic production and handling, state that, “To be sold or labeled as “100 percent 

organic,” “organic,” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s)),” the product 

must be produced and handled without the use of: (a) Synthetic substances and ingredients, 
Page 3 of 10 

except as provided in §205.601 or §205.603...” The specific synthetic substances on the 

National List which are allowed for use in organic crop production are identified at §205.601. 

The organic regulations at §205.201, Organic production and handling system plan, state 

that, “(a) The producer or handler of a production or handling operation ... must develop an 

organic production or handling system plan that is agreed to by the producer or handler and an 

accredited certifying agent... An organic production or handing system plan must include: (1) A 

description of practices and procedures to be performed and maintained...; (2) A list of each 

substance to be used as a production or handling input...(3) A description of the monitoring 

practices and procedures to be performed and maintained...(4) A description of the 

recordkeeping system implemented to comply with the requirements...(5) A description of the 

management practices and physical barriers established to prevent commingling of organic and 

nonorganic products on a split operation and to prevent contact of organic production and 

handling operations and products with prohibited substances...” 

The organic regulations at §205.202, Land requirements, state that, “Any field or farm 

parcel from which harvested crops are intended to be sold, labeled, or represented as “organic,” 

must: ...(b) Have had no prohibited substances, as listed in §205.105, applied to it for a period of 

3 years immediately preceding harvest of the crop; ...” 

The organic regulations at §205.203, Soil fertility and crop nutrient management practice 

standard, state that, “(a) The producer must select and implement tillage and cultivation practices 

that maintain or improve the physical, chemical, and biological condition of soil and minimize 

soil erosion. (b) The producer must manage crop nutrients and soil fertility through rotations, 

cover crops, and the application of plant and animal materials. (c) The producer must manage 

plant and animal materials to maintain or improve soil organic matter... (e) The producer must 
Page 4 of 10 

not use: (1) Any fertilizer or composted plant and animal material that contains a synthetic 

substance not included on the National List of synthetic substances allowed for use in organic 

crop production...” 

The organic regulations at §205.205, Crop rotation practice standard, state that, “The 

producer must implement a crop rotation including but not limited to sod, cover crops, green 

manure crops, and catch crops that provide the following functions that are applicable to the 

operation: (a) Maintain or improve soil organic matter content...” 

The organic regulations at §205.400, General requirements for certification, state that, 

“(a) A person seeking to receive or maintain organic certification under the regulations in this 

part must: (a) Comply with the Act and applicable organic production and handling regulations 

of this part; (b) Establish, implement, and update annually an organic production or handling 

system plan that is submitted to an accredited certifying agent... (c) Permit on-site inspections 

with complete access to the production or handling operation, including noncertified production 

and handling areas, structures, and offices by the certifying agent... (d) Maintain all records 

applicable to the organic operation for not less than 5 years beyond their creation and allow 

authorized representatives of the ...certifying agent access to such records during normal 

business hours for review and copying to determine compliance with the Act and the regulations 

in this part...(f) Immediately notify the certifying agent concerning any: (1) Application, 

including drift, of a prohibited substance to any field, production unit, site, facility, livestock, or 

product that is part of an operation...” 

The organic regulations at §205.401, Application for certification, state that, “A person 

seeking certification of a production or handling operation under this subpart must submit an 

application for certification to a certifying agent. The application must include the following 
Page 5 of 10 

information: (a) An organic production or handling system plan...(b) The name of the person 

completing the application...and, when the applicant is a corporation, the name...of the person 

authorized to act on the applicant’s behalf..” 

Certifier QCS states that the May 28, 2019 inspection revealed numerous 

noncompliances in Maravilla’s operation, including the use of prohibited substances on its 

banana crops, missing and inadequate records, ineffective soil management practices, and not 

allowing the inspector access to the accounting system records. 

 Appellant Maravilla states that it is attempting to recover physical and digital records lost 

during a flood of the offices; and questions the time between the sampling of bananas, banana 

leaves, and soil and weeds, and the laboratory results. Maravilla further contends that errors 

could have occurred due to 5 different farms being inspected in a short time frame. 

A review of the evidence shows that QCS noted several noncompliances constituting 

violations of several provisions of the organic regulations. QCS found the buffer zones around 

Maravilla’s organic banana crops were unclear and its maps also do not identify the uses of 

adjacent land and buffer zones pursuant to 7 CFR §205.202. These regulations require distinct, 

defined boundaries and buffer zones to prevent the unintended application of a prohibited 

substance or contact with a prohibited substance. QCS was asked about the buffer zone 

noncompliance and if it existed at the time of Maravilla’s initial certification. QCS stated that 

the buffer zone noncompliance was not for an inadequacy in the size of the proposed buffer 

zones, rather for the failure to properly manage the buffer zones. 

Specifically, QCS stated that banana bunches are covered in plastic bags to protect them 

during the maturation process while on the tree and different colors are used to distinguish 

between organic and conventional production. However, the inspector found conventional 
Page 6 of 10 

colored covers in the organic buffer zones. Also, corbertinas, a type of tie around the top of 

covers used only in conventional production, were found in the buffer zones. 

While Maravilla’s maps didn’t identify the uses of adjacent lands, Maravilla’s Organic 

System Plan (OSP) of February 19, 2018, the most recent submitted to QCS, lists the adjacent 

land plots by name, their acreage, and their production, i.e. conventional or otherwise. It is not 

uncommon for commodities grown in buffer zones to be designated as conventional 

commodities in case of contamination from neighboring conventional production. However, the 

failure to provide an updated OSP to QCS on an annual basis is also a violation of the organic 

regulations, though it was not noted in the adverse action notice. 

Further, the inspector also observed the application of fertilizer which burned the weeds 

in the banana crops and saw small balls of different colors on the soil. Maravilla also couldn’t 

produce any invoices or purchase records for the inputs to enable the inspector to determine 

exactly what fertilizer had been applied, and there were no practices in place to avoid possible 

contamination of the organic crops. Further, the Inspection Report of May 28, 2019 states that all 

inputs in use or intended for use aren’t identified in the OSP as required per 7 C.F.R. §205.401, 

and the application of inputs to crops is not adequately documented. 

The inspection also found spots of bare soil with clear evidence of herbicide application, 

contrary to 7 CFR §205.203 and 7 CFR §205.205, which require soil fertility and crop nutrient 

management practices and crop rotation practices that maintain or improve the physical, 

chemical and/or biological condition of the soil, and maintain or improve soil organic matter 

content. Maravilla’s records didn’t show the application of the herbicide and therefore, it 

couldn’t be determined exactly what had been used. Maravilla was found to have inadequate 

safeguards in place to prevent contamination of the organic crops from prohibited substances 
Page 7 of 10 

applied to adjacent conventional lands and did not notify QCS of the application of any 

prohibited substance. The inspector also found Maravilla failed to maintain cleaning-sanitation 

records for the , despite verifying in its OSP that it 

would maintain equipment cleaning records. 

Therefore, QCS collected samples of bananas, banana leaves, and soil and weeds within 

the banana crop, not in a buffer area, as documented on the Sample Collection Checklist and 

Chain of Custody. The Groen Agro Control laboratory report of June 13, 2019 for the bananas 

shows that no resides were detected, and this was reiterated on the Pest Residue Test Results 

Notification. However, the testing of the banana leaves revealed the presence of several 

prohibited substances. Specifically, the June 26, 2019 Groen Agro Control laboratory report and 

the Banana Leaves Pest Residue Test Results Notification show the following substances 

detected, all of which are prohibited in organic production: Difenoconazol, Epoxiconazol, 

Fenpropimorph, Fenpropidin, Fluopyram, Propiconazol, Pyrimethanil, Spiroxamine, 

Tebuconazole, Tridemorph, and Triadimenol. The presence of these substances on the banana 

leaves is justification for a suspension of Maravilla’s certification as it substantiates the presence 

of prohibited substances. 

Samples were also collected of the soil and weeds around the banana plants where the 

inspector observed the application of a substance which burned the weeds, and the Groen Agro 

Control laboratory report of June 12, 2019 shows the presence of Paraquat at 2.2 ppm. Paraquat 

is a prohibited pesticide in organic crop production. The second Groen Agro Control report 

dated June 20, 2019, for soil and weed samples shows Glifosato, Glufosinato, and AMPA 

(Aminomethylphosphonic acid) all at <0.5 ppm. These substances are also prohibited in organic 

(b) (4)
Page 8 of 10 

production. Pest Residue Test Results Notification sheets reiterate the findings for the banana 

soil and weeds. 

Maravilla didn’t contest the finding of the multiple prohibited substances in its Appeal. 

Rather, Maravilla only complained that while the cited samples were taken at the May 28, 2019 

inspection, the results were delayed with lab reports dated in June 2019, and QCS didn’t issue 

the Notice of Noncompliance and Proposed Suspension until October 7, 2019, prior to which 

Maravilla continued to export the bananas to the United States and European Union. The time 

between the inspection and sampling and the lab report appears reasonable. However, while the 

lapse between the issuance of the lab reports and the issuance of the adverse action notice was 

longer, this is not grounds for negating the laboratory findings of prohibited substances on the 

banana leaves and banana soil and weeds. Further, Maravilla hasn’t offered any alternative 

explanation for how the prohibited substances came to be on the banana leaves and banana soil 

and weeds, and only suggests that errors could have occurred in the sampling. 

QCS’ inspection also found other noncompliances. The inspector found discrepancies 

between the harvest records and sales records, i.e. for week 37 (2018). Maravilla’s records 

showed boxes harvested but sales records showed boxes sold, and for week 20 

records were maintained. Further, the inspector wasn’t given access to accounting system 

records to determine the actual income of the operation and also couldn’t determine the 

destination of fruit produced and sold. Overall, the inspector noted that Maravilla’s records don’t 

fully disclose all transactions and activities so as allow the inspector to determine Maravilla’s 

compliance with the organic regulations. These failures to maintain records and provide access 

to the inspector constituted violations of the recordkeeping requirements at 7 CFR §205.103 and 

the general requirements for certification under 7 CFR §205.400. 

(b) (4) (b) 

(4)

(b) (4)
Page 9 of 10 

QCS also noted that Maravilla’s OSP lists Maravilla as being (b) 

(4) hectares, while 

Ecuador’s Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Aquaculture and Fisheries lists the farm as (b) 

(4)

res; while this difference is minor, it further illustrates the recordkeeping challenges by the 

tion. Finally, QCS contended there was also a violation of the organic regulations at 7 CFR 

.401, because Maravilla listed a different responsible person in its OSP than requested 

ication. However, such a change is not a violation of the organic regulations. 

CONCLUSION 

The USDA organic regulations assure consumers that products with the USDA organic 

eet consistent, uniform standards. Key to these standards is that products with the USDA 

ic seal are produced and handled in accordance with the organic regulations. However, the 

nce substantiates that Maravilla violated the organic regulations at 7 CFR §205.103; 7 CFR 

.105; 7 CFR §205.201; 7 CFR §205.202; 7 CFR §205.203; 7 CFR §205.205; 7 CFR 

.400; and 7 CFR §205.401. Banana leave samplings and banana plant soil and surrounding 

 samplings, collected during the May 28, 2019 inspection of Maravilla revealed the 

nce of numerous prohibited substances. Maravilla also failed to engage in soil fertility and 

gement practices that maintain or improve the physical, chemical and/or biological 

ition of the soil. Maravilla’s failure to maintain records on inputs also prevented QCS from 

mining exactly what inputs were used. Although Maravilla’s noncompliances regarding the 

tenance of various records are correctable, the presence of prohibited substances is not. 

hecta

opera

§205

certif

seal m

organ

evide

§205

§205

weed

prese

mana

cond

deter

main
Page 10 of 10

DECISION

The Appeal is denied, and the Notice of Noncompliance and Proposed Suspension is

affirmed. Maravilla is to be suspended for 3 years from the date of the last sampling for which 

prohibited substances were found, namely, May 28, 2019. Barring the interim use of prohibited 

substances on the land or crops, Maravilla will be eligible for organic certification on May 27,

2022. While it is suspended, Maravilla may not represent, label, or sell its bananas as organic. 

Attached to this formal Administrator’s Decision denying Maravilla’s Appeal is a 

Request for Hearing form. Maravilla has thirty (30) days to request an administrative hearing 

before an Administrative Law Judge. If Maravilla waives the hearing, this Administrator’s 

Decision suspending Maravilla’s certification will become final. 

Done at Washington, D.C., on this _____ 16th

day of ________________, 2020. December

_________________________________

Bruce Summers 

Administrator

Agricultural Marketing Service

BRUCE SUMMERS Digitally signed by BRUCE 

SUMMERS 

Date: 2020.12.16 09:14:25 -05'00'