UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE 

BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR 

) 

In re: )

 ) 

Everlaan Organics, ) Administrator’s Decision

 Dba Maple Organics ) APL-062-23

 ) 

Surrey, British Columbia, Canada ) 

This Decision responds to an Appeal (APL-062-23) of a Notice of Denial of 

Reinstatement of Certification under the National Organic Program (NOP) issued to Everlaan 

Organics, dba Maple Organics (Everlaan) of Surrey, British Columbia, Canada by the NOP of 

the U.S Department of Agriculture’s, Agricultural Marketing Service. 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, or a 

1

 7 U.S.C. 6501-6522 

2

 7 C.F.R. Part 205 

Page 1 of 11 
 

noncompliance decision of the NOP may appeal 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 July 16, 2021, Everlaan’s organic handling certification was suspended by USDA 

accredited certifying agent Oregon Tilth Certified Organic (OTCO). 

2. On or about July 14, 2022, Everlaan applied to USDA accredited certifying agent ProCert Organic Systems Ltd. (Pro) for reinstatement of its handling certification. 

3. On August 17, 2022, Pro issued a Notice of Noncompliance to Everlaan citing to 

numerous noncompliances regarding recordkeeping and labels. 

4. On November 29, 2022, Pro issued a Notice of Noncompliance to Everlaan citing to 

continued noncompliances regarding incorrect and unapproved labels, claiming 

uncertified product as organic on its website, and failing to confirm its co-packer is 

certified. 

5. On March 20, 2023, Pro issued a Notice of Noncompliance to Everlaan citing to 

continued recordkeeping and labelling noncompliances. 

6. On June 6, 2023, Pro wrote NOP’s Accreditation Division, recommending that 

Everlaan’s certification not be reinstated due to several noncompliances remaining 

unresolved. 

7. On August 17, 2023, NOP issued a Notice of Denial of Reinstatement of Certification to 

Everlaan, stating that numerous noncompliances previously cited by OTCO and the 

subject of noncompliance notices issued by Pro remain unresolved. 

Page 2 of 11 
 

8. On September 7, 2023, Everlaan filed an Appeal. 

REGULATORY CITATIONS 

The USDA organic regulations at 7 C.F.R. §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: (1) Be adapted to the particular 

business that the certified operation is conducting; (2) Fully disclose all activities and 

transactions of the certified operation in sufficient detail as to be readily understood and audited; 

(3) Be maintained for not less than 5 years beyond their creation; and (4) Be sufficient to 

demonstrate compliance with the Act and the regulations in this part.” 

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 handling system plan must include: (1) 

A description of practices and procedures to be performed and maintained, including the 

frequency with which they will be performed; ... (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 ... (6) Additional information deemed necessary 

by the certifying agent to evaluate compliance with the regulations ...” 

The organic regulations at §205.300, Use of the term, “organic,” state that, “(a) The term, 

“organic,” may only be used on labels and in labeling of raw or processed agricultural products, 

Page 3 of 11 
including ingredients, that have been produced and handled in accordance with the regulations in 

this part. The term, “organic,” may not be used in a product name to modify a nonorganic 

ingredient in the product.” Additionally, the organic regulations at §205.301, Product 

composition, state that, “...(b) Products sold, labeled, or represented as “organic.” A raw or 

processed agricultural product sold, labeled, or represented as “organic” must contain ... not less 

than 95 percent organically produced raw or processed agricultural products.” Further, the 

organic regulations at §205.303, Packaged products labeled “100 percent organic” or “organic,” 

state that, “(a) Agricultural products in packages described in §205.301(a) and (b) may display, 

on the principal display panel, information panel, and any other panel of the package and on any 

labeling or market information concerning the product, the following: ... (2) For products 

labeled “organic,” the percentage of organic ingredients in the product ...” 

The organic regulations at §205.311, USDA Seal, state that, “(a) The USDA seal 

described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section may be used only for raw or processed 

agricultural products described in paragraphs (a), (b), (e)(1), and (e)(2) of §205.301. (b) The 

USDA seal must replicate the form and design of the example in figure 1 ...” 

The organic regulations at §205.400, General requirements for certification, state that, “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 in this part; 

(b) Establish, implement, and update annually an organic production or handling system plan 

that is submitted to an accredited 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 Secretary ... and the certifying agent access to such records ... (e) Submit 

the applicable fees charged by the certifying agent; and (f) Immediately notify the certifying 

Page 4 of 11 
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; and (2) Change in 

a certified operation or any portion of a certified operation that may affect its compliance with 

the Act and the regulations in this part.” 

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 

information: (a) An organic production or handling system plan, as required in §205.200; ... (d) 

Other information necessary to determine compliance with the Act and the regulations in this 

part.” 

DISCUSSION 

Everlaan was originally certified organic for handling by OTCO; and processes numerous 

personal healthcare/skincare products including oils, balms, and rubs. Everlaan was suspended 

on July 16, 2021 for 30 days. Subsequently, on July 14, 2022, Everlaan submitted an application 

and a request for reinstatement of its handling certification to Pro. Pro informed NOP that it 

reviewed Everlaan’s application and request, which included Everlaan’s response to 

noncompliances previously cited by OTCO. However, finding numerous noncompliances still 

exist, Pro issued a Notice of Noncompliance to Everlaan on August 17, 2022. Specifically, Pro 

stated that Everlaan’s records didn’t identify the organic status of products, namely if said 

products are organic or not; and the Organic System Plan (OSP), Master Ingredient List, and 

Master Product List are incomplete. Pro also stated that labels of received ingredients used in 

processing do not all identify if the ingredients are organic or not; and Everlaan didn’t maintain 

the current organic certificates of all suppliers. Pro also found that Everlaan has used labels that 

Page 5 of 11 
weren’t approved by a certifier; and represented, labeled, and sold products as organic prior to 

said products being approved and added to Everlaan’s certificate. However, it is noted that no 

documentation supporting said sales was submitted. 

On November 29, 2022, Pro issued a second Notice of Noncompliance, stating that 

although Everlaan had submitted a response to the prior noncompliance notice, unresolved 

noncompliances remained. Pro cited to revised labels still being noncompliant; that label proofs 

ingredient panels don’t match the ingredients listed on the respective product profiles; and that 

no co-packer certificate(s) were submitted to show where product was being processed prior to 

and during Everlaan’s application process. While Everlaan had previously indicated the identity 

of a co-packer, no confirmation of such was provided. 

On February 2, 2023, Pro conducted an inspection of Everlaan, and found continued 

noncompliances. These included non-complaint labels; sales documents that didn’t indicate the 

organic status of sold goods; the inability to verify direct customer transactions; and products on 

its website marked as organic, which weren’t certified as organic. Pro then issued a third Notice 

of Noncompliance to Everlaan on March 20, 2023, citing to the noncompliances found at the 

inspection. Further, Pro stated that Everlaan needed to submit proof that its co-packer is certified 

organic; a traceability exercise failed due to the documentation not stating the organic status of 

products; inconsistencies in documentation, i.e., documentation stating a product is 100% 

organic, but conflicting documentation stating 75 – 95% organic; and Everlaan failed to maintain 

records for 5 years from date of creation. 

Everlaan submitted a response to the March 20, 2023 noncompliance notice on April 6, 

2023. Everlaan stated that it would remove all unapproved products from its website and remove 

the organic seal from unapproved products; maintain records for 5 years; update its invoices, 

Page 6 of 11 
shipping documents, and other records to reflect the organic status of products; and separate 

approved labels from those not yet approved, to ensure unapproved labels aren’t used. 

However, after reviewing Everlaan’s responses to cited noncompliances, Pro wrote 

NOP’s Accreditation Division recommending that Everlaan’s certification not be reinstated. Pro 

stated that it had obtained the Notice of Suspension issued by OTCO on July 16, 2021, and that 

none of the noncompliances cited by OTCO had been resolved. OTCO had cited to numerous 

recordkeeping noncompliances; products weren’t identified as organic in purchase documents; 

labels on incoming ingredients didn’t reference ‘organic’ anywhere on the labels; mass balance 

exercises were unsuccessful; and the Master Ingredient List, Master Product List, and Product 

Formulation Sheet don’t accurately list products, suppliers, or formulations. Further, OTCO had 

found that Everlaan hadn’t updated labels found to be noncompliant; certificates of ingredient 

suppliers weren’t maintained; and hadn’t submitted an OSP approved by its certifier. Pro also 

stated that Everlaan hadn’t submitted a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) per OTCO’s 

request to show how Everlaan’s recordkeeping system maintained numerous documents, how 

products were developed and submitted for approval, and how supplier certificates would be 

maintained. Pro cited to the noncompliance notices it issued to Everlaan and stated that they 

weren’t fully resolved either. Pro also stated that at a tradeshow in September 2022, Everlaan 

maintained a booth which displayed the NOP organic seal and showed labels citing to OTCO in 

the certifier statement, after Everlaan had been suspended by OTCO. Lastly, Pro noted that it 

had conducted an unannounced inspection of an Everlaan co-packer on June 22, 2023, and found 

that the co-packer had cancelled its contract with Everlaan on April 12, 2023. The co-packer 

stated to Pro that Everlaan had kept changing formulas without proper follow up. 

Page 7 of 11 
Taking the above into consideration, NOP’s Accreditation Division issued a Notice of 

Denial of Reinstatement of Certification on August 17, 2023. NOP stated that Everlaan hadn’t 

submitted evidence that the previously cited noncompliances had been corrected. Everlaan 

submitted an Appeal on September 7, 2023, stating that it had taken corrective actions for all 

noncompliances, and submitted its April 6, 2023 response, discussed above, with its Appeal. As 

stated in the April 6, 2023 letter, Everlaan said it would remove all unapproved products from its 

website; remove the organic seal from unapproved labels and products; update its documentation 

to reflect the organic status of products and ingredients; and maintain records for 5 years. 

Everlaan submitted 27 documents with its Appeal to show its corrective actions. The documents 

are various SOPs, including those for receiving/holding, and cleaning and maintenance of 

production equipment; specifications for raw materials; procedures for process control; and 

templates for documents including an inventory list and cleaning log. 

However, the majority of Everlaan’s SOPs, policies, and procedures have effective dates 

after Pro’s June 6, 2023 recommendation to NOP to deny reinstatement of Everlaan’s 

certification. NOP contacted Pro, which confirmed they hadn’t received and therefore, hadn’t 

reviewed 20 of the 27 documents. Therefore, Pro wasn’t able to determine if said SOPs, 

policies, and procedures correct cited noncompliances and would enable Everlaan to come into 

compliance. Further, NOP’s Accreditation Division confirmed with Pro prior to issuing the 

denial notice, that Everlaan hadn’t resolved all the noncompliances. Additionally, on December 

4, 2023, Everlaan’s website was reviewed and found to show products with the USDA organic 

seal on the labels. These include Lavender Skin Therapy, Cold & Flu Therapy, Joint Therapy, 

and Muscle Therapy. It is also noted that Pro and NOP found that Everlaan hadn’t paid 2 

Page 8 of 11 
 

invoices for certification fees from its prior certifier OTCO. It was confirmed on December 1, 

2023, that the invoices totaling almost $2,000 remain unpaid, and OTCO submitted the invoices. 

CONCLUSION 

Evidence substances that Everlaan has violated the organic regulations at 7 C.F.R. 

§205.103, Recordkeeping by certified operations; 7 C.F.R. §205.201, Organic production and 

handling system plan; 7 C.F.R. §205.300, Use of the term, “organic”; 7 C.F.R. §205.301, 

Product composition; 7 C.F.R. §205.303, Packaged products labeled “100 percent organic” or 

“organic;” 7 C.F.R. §205.311, USDA Seal; 7 C.F.R. §205.400, General requirements for 

certification; and 7 C.F.R. §205.401, Application for certification. Evidence substantiates that 

Everlaan has failed to maintain all records required under the organic regulations; ensure that the 

organic status of ingredients and finished products is noted on all documentation including 

incoming/receiving records, production records, and sales documentation; maintain and submit a 

complete OSP; maintain current and accurate Master Ingredient, Master Product, and 

Formulation documents; maintain records that enable a certifier to conduct successful mass 

balance and traceability exercises; and maintain records for 5 years from their date of creation. 

Further, Everlaan has failed to submit to Pro the requested procedures describing how it will 

maintain records and conduct oversight and monitoring to ensure compliance with the organic 

regulations. 

Evidence also substantiates that Everlaan has used labels without having the labels 

submitted to a certifier for approval and has used the USDA organic seal on unapproved labels 

and for products which aren’t certified. Everlaan has also failed to properly label and identify 

products as to their organic status/percentage of organic ingredients; and ensure that finished 

Page 9 of 11 
products and their labels are consistent with Everlaan’s Master Ingredient List, Master Product 

List, and Formulation Sheets. Evidence substantiates that Everlaan has failed to maintain the 

certificates of all suppliers of alleged organic ingredients and its co-packer; and has used the 

USDA organic seal to represent itself as being organically certified. Everlaan has also failed to 

pay its certification fees to its prior certifier. Further, although Everlaan submitted many SOPs, 

policies, and procedures with its Appeal, these must be reviewed for compliance with the 

regulations, and their implementation must be verified by a certifier to ensure that all cited 

noncompliances have been resolved. Therefore, Everlaan’s suspended certification can’t be 

reinstated at this time. 

DECISION 

Everlaan’s September 9, 2023 Appeal of the August 17, 2023 Notice of Denial of 

Reinstatement of Certification is denied. Everleen is denied reinstatement of its certification, 

and the certification remains suspended. While its certification is suspended, Everlaan may not 

represent, label, or sell any product as organic, and may not represent itself as being organically 

certified. However, pursuant to 7 C.F.R. §205.662(f)(1), Everlaan may apply for reinstatement 

of its certification at any time with any certifying agent, though Everlaan must demonstrate that 

it has corrected all the cited noncompliances. 

Page 10 of 11 
_________________________________ 

Additionally, attached to this formal Administrator’s Decision denying Everlaan’s 

Appeal is a Request for Hearing form. Should it wish to further appeal this decision, Everlaan 

has thirty (30) days to request an administrative hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. 

Done at Washington, D.C., on this _____ 6th 

day of ________________, 2024. January 

Digitally signed by BRUCE

BRUCE SUMMERS SUMMERS 

Date: 2024.01.06 17:19:47 -05'00' 

Bruce Summers 

Administrator 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

Page 11 of 11