U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE | AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE | NATIONAL ORGANIC PROGRAM

Organic Integrity from Farm to Table, Consumers Trust the Organic Label.

The USDA Organic Seal: 

Gold Standard Around the World

The USDA organic seal represents a comprehensive 

organic standard, a rigorous verification system, 

and a set of effective enforcement mechanisms that 

safeguards the integrity of organic food products. 

The USDA organic standards protect natural 

resources, support biodiversity, ensure improvement 

of soil and water quality, prohibit the use of GMOs, 

provide for animal welfare, prohibit antibiotics 

in livestock production, ensure pasture based 

management for all ruminant livestock, and require 

biological based pest management for crops, 

livestock and food processing operations. 

Organic agricultural products are inspected and verified from the farm to 

the market. Certifiers ensure that all organic standards are met; conducting 

inspections, collecting and analyzing samples, and ensuring corrective actions 

are implemented for continuous improvement. Comprehensive inspections 

ensure that organic products, whether sold in local markets or through a long 

supply chain from overseas markets, comply with the same organic principles. 

Effective protection of organic integrity includes appropriate penalties for 

violations. The Agricultural Marketing Service’s (AMS) National Organic Program 

has levied more than half a million dollars in civil penalties in the last four 

years for egregious violations of the organic standards. We worked with the 

US Department of Justice to convict three criminals for defrauding the organic 

community and consumers. 

The USDA organic control system is the most comprehensive and effective 

in the world. The United States is also the world’s largest organic market. The 

USDA oversees more than 500,000 organic farmers who are part of certified 

organic grower groups that provide organic coffee, cacao, bananas, tea and 

other products to the US market. The majority of these farms are small farms 

making less than $5,000 per year (equivalent currency). Their organic sales are 

an important component to their livelihood and the economic health of their 

communities. 

Table of Contents

1 USDA Organic Seal: Gold 

Standard Around the World 

2 Organic Labeling at Farmer’s 

Markets 

4 Using the USDA Organic Seal 

5 Organic Sunset Process and 

Advisory Board Management 

5 National List Update

6 Update from the National 

Organic Standards Board Meeting

7 NOSB Petitioned Substance 

Recommendations 

9 Other NOSB Recommendations, 

Reports, and Updates 

10 NOSB Chair Update

11 Sunset Review and Renewal 

Process 

13 Organic Hydroponics and 

MOSES Conference 

14 New Training Modules and 

Organic Integrity Update 

15 Handbook and Web Updates 

16 Technical Assistance 

Partnerships and Awards

Visit the NOP online at www.ams.usda.gov/nop Join us on Twitter: @USDA_AMS | #USDAorganic

May 2014 Newsletter
USDA Organic Seal: The Gold Standard, cont’d

Organic Training and Outreach

Over the last few months, the Agricultural Marketing Service has provided training to U.S. accredited certifying agents, 

the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), and Latin American certifiers and government officials. All of the 

training slides and handouts are available on the NOP’s Training Information web page at http://1.usa.gov/QbCtuG. 

These trainings cover many aspects of the USDA organic requirements and are also an opportunity for NOP to listen 

and learn from the organic community. At the U.S. accredited certifier training, we learned about new efforts to share 

information about materials review and heard of innovative initiatives to make certification more sound and sensible. 

At the NOSB training, we discussed how the NOSB is governed under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. 

At the Latin American training, we heard about the challenges foreign certifiers face in meeting multiple accreditation 

requirements. Most Latin American certifiers provide certification to both the European and the USDA organic 

standards, as the US and Europe are the world’s largest organic markets. Though the organic standards between the 

US and Europe are nearly identical, the certification process has distinct differences. Both systems are effective in 

protecting organic integrity, but certifiers are challenged to reconcile both systems on the same farming operation. 

Latin American certifiers in Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, and Costa Rica also have to contend with their own country’s 

organic regulatory requirements in addition to complying with US and European requirements. It makes for a 

challenging and not always sound and sensible system for organic smallholders in foreign countries. 

The Latin American organic training in Costa Rica was the first training AMS has provided in Spanish. There were over 

50 participants representing certifiers and government agencies from Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Panama, Costa 

Rica, Guatemala, and Mexico. We plan on providing additional foreign organic training in order to protect organic 

integrity as well as build the capacity of organic systems around the world. We would like to see organic agriculture 

thrive not only in the U.S., but also in foreign countries so organic farmers can supply their local and regional organic 

markets as they continue to expand and prosper. 

Sincerely, 

Miles V. McEvoy, NOP Deputy Administrator

Organic Labeling at Farmer’s Markets 

Farmer’s markets and Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) operations are great 

places for customers who are interested in locally sourced products to find and 

purchase organic products. Many of these customers appreciate knowing how and 

where the products that they purchase were grown, and the organic certification 

status of the farmers. 

Farmers and vendors who use the word “organic” to describe their products or 

practices in the marketplace must comply with the USDA organic regulations. The 

Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA) states that no person may affix a label to, or 

provide other marketing information concerning, an agricultural product if that 

label or information implies, directly or indirectly, that such product is produced and 

handled using organic methods, except in accordance with the OFPA.

Most farms and businesses that grow, handle, or process organic products must 

be certified, with only a few exceptions. Producers and handlers that sell less than 

$5,000 per year of organic products are exempt from certification. These operations 

may choose to obtain certification but they are not required to be certified. 

2
Requirements for Exempt Organic Producers

Farms that are exempt from certification and want to sell organic products still must comply with organic 

requirements, including:

Not planting any seeds that had synthetic treatments, such as fungicides or 

insecticides.

Using organic seeds unless organic seeds were not commercially available. 

Only using seedlings and transplants that have been grown organically 

using only approved organic potting mixes and inputs. 

Applying only fertilizer, pest, disease and weed management inputs that 

have either been approved by EPA, the Organic Materials Review Institute, 

or by a USDA accredited certification agency, and are allowed under the 

USDA organic regulations. 

Implementing a soil building crop rotation on the farm, where annual crops 

of the same type are not grown in succession in the same field. 

Not applying manure to fields growing crops for human consumption any 

sooner than 90 days before harvest for crops that are not in contact with 

soil (e.g. sweet corn), or 120 days before harvest for crops that are in contact 

with soil (e.g. root crops, tomatoes, peppers, etc.). 

Ensuring that compost containing manure meets the requirement of having a carbon to nitrogen ratio of 

between 25 to 1 and 40 to 1, has had a temperature maintained of 130 to 170 0 F for 15 days and has been 

turned 5 times, or, if in a static vessel, had this temperature maintained for 3 days. 

Managing all mammalian livestock organically from the last third of their mother’s gestation to the day of 

slaughter. All poultry has been managed organically from the second day of life. Organic management 

includes providing certified organic feed. 

Providing all livestock with access to the outdoors, with ruminants receiving 30% of their nutrition from 

pasture during a minimum 120 day grazing season. All animal health products and feed supplements have 

either been approved by the Organic Materials Review Institute or by a USDA accredited certification agency 

and are allowed under the USDA organic regulations. 

How much does certification cost?

Fees charged for certification vary among certifying agents due to the size and complexity of the farm operation, 

the costs of inspection, and other factors. Certifiers provide information on their fee structures upon request. USDA 

Organic Certification Cost Share Programs reimburse certified organic operations for as much as 75 percent—up to 

a maximum of $750 a year—of certification costs. The 2014 Organic Cost Share Programs will launch soon! Contact 

your State Department of Agriculture for more information on the reimbursement process. 

Want to file a complaint? 

If you are concerned that an organic product isn’t meeting the USDA standards, or that an operation is making an 

organic claim without certification, submit a complaint to the USDA. We investigate every complaint we receive, 

and if we find any problems, we take action. If a farm or business violates the USDA organic regulations, penalties 

may include civil penalties up to $11,000 per violation and/or suspension or revocation of an operation’s organic 

certificate. Suspected violations of the organic regulations may be reported to the USDA. Send an email to 

NOPCompliance@ams.usda.gov or call the National Organic Program at 202-720-3252. 

Organic Labeling at Farmer’s Markets, cont’d 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• 

•

3
Get Approval for USDA Organic Seal Use!

To avoid costly errors, 

certified organic producers 

and handlers wishing to 

display the USDA organic 

seal need to contact their 

certifying agent and 

request a review of the 

label or marketing material 

before printing. 

Other organizations - including interest groups, 

educational groups, marketing or advertising agencies, 

or members of the general public - who want to use the 

USDA organic seal in media of any type should contact 

the National Organic Program at (202) 720-3252 to 

verify acceptable uses of the USDA organic seal.

Examples of organic seal use that the 

USDA has approved in the past include: 

• Using the seal next to an article that accurately 

describes what the organic standards are. 

• Placing the seal next to a list of confirmed certified 

organic operations (list must be kept current for the 

seal to be used). 

• Using the seal in an academic, newsletter, or 

outreach article that provides technical assistance for 

readers seeking to understand organic certification or 

compliant production and handling practices. 

With the cooperation of producers, certifying agents, 

and the public, the USDA organic seal will continue to 

represent agricultural products certified in accordance 

with the USDA organic regulations as a gold standard in 

the world of organic agricultural products. 

The USDA organic seal is an official mark of the USDA 

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). Since it was first 

published with the implementation of the National Organic 

Program – Final Rule, the seal has appeared on millions 

of labels, advertisements, and marketing materials. It has 

become a highly sought-after labeling mark in the world of 

agricultural products. 

The USDA organic seal is protected by federal regulation 

at 7 CFR Part 205. 311, which states that the seal “...may 

be used only for raw or processed agriculture products...” 

Without USDA’s permission, the seal should only be used 

in direct association with certified organic agricultural 

products. 

AMS allows certified operations and USDA-accredited 

certifiers considerable flexibility in placing the seal on 

product labels and marketing material. The USDA organic 

seal is commonplace in stores and a broad range of media 

used to promote organic products. Certifiers must approve 

all labels and should carefully review all marketing material 

used by their clients in association with certified products.

As an official seal, AMS is responsible for monitoring seal 

use, and making sure that the seal is not used in a way that 

would negatively impact the value, integrity, or security of 

the seal as a marketing tool for certified organic products. 

Only Use USDA Organic Seal to 

Market Certified Organic Products

The USDA organic seal may never be used to misrepresent 

non-organically produced products as organic. Violations 

of this regulation are subject to civil penalties of up to 

$11,000 per violation. The USDA organic seal may NOT be 

used:

• In any displays or on labels for products not certified 

organic to the USDA organic regulations.

• On broad display in stores or advertisements that in a 

way that misrepresents non-organically produced products 

as organic. 

• By uncertified operations, or operations that have been 

suspended or revoked from organic certification. 

Using the USDA Organic Seal

Want to become an organic insider?

Sign up to receive email updates from the NOP 

http://bit.ly/NOPOrganicInsider

The NOP Organic Insider

USDA National Organic Program

Everyone in the organic community plays a role 

in protecting the USDA organic seal. Marketing 

language and claims associated with the seal 

must be truthful and accurate. 

4
Organic Sunset Process and Advisory Board Management 

The USDA is receiving many questions about recent 

changes related to the National Organic Standards 

Board (NOSB), the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 

(USDA) citizen advisory committee on organics. 

Last September, USDA published a Federal Register 

Notice that revised the sunset process. The revised 

process ensures that the NOSB will fully review all 

materials allowed on the National List of Allowed and 

Prohibited Materials List every 5 years. Removing 

any items from the National List is only done with 

the support of a 2/3 majority of the NOSB. This is 

consistent with the requirements of the Organic Foods 

Production Act of 1990. 

The revision to the sunset process was made to 

protect organic farmers, handlers, and consumers 

by ensuring an effective and timely process. The 

revised sunset process increased public engagement 

by having two meetings instead of one to review 

substance up for sunset review. More public comment 

opportunities allow more farmers, processors, 

consumers, and organic groups to provide their input 

on proposed changes to the list of materials used in 

organic production. 

At the Spring NOSB public meeting in San Antonio, 

Texas we heard many concerns about the revised 

process. We want to assure the public that the revised 

sunset process complies with the Organic Foods 

Production Act requirements which states that the 

NOSB to fully review substances every 5 years. The 

revision ensures that the NOSB will thoroughly review 

all substances and recommend removal when the 

substance no longer meets the organic criteria 

specified in the Organic Foods Production Act. 

Previously, all NOSB recommendations for removal 

have been with the support of at least 2/3 of the 

NOSB members. Examples include sulfur dioxide for 

rodent control, forms of pectin, forms of lecithin, 

forms of silicon dioxide, and hops. We expect the 

NOSB will continue to recommend removals under 

the revised sunset process.

The USDA has also clarified how it ensures an open 

public meeting with opportunities for the public to 

address the board. For example, the National Organic 

Program’s Deputy Administrator, Miles McEvoy, is the 

Designated Federal Office responsible for making 

sure that NOSB meetings are run smoothly and 

effectively. At the Spring NOSB meeting, the Deputy 

Administrator opened the meeting and ensured 

the public was able to comment on the board’s 

proposals. This is a normal part of how federal 

advisory boards are managed, and supports the 

public meeting process. 

USDA strongly supports organic agriculture, and is 

responsible for establishing a level playing field for 

all organic farms and businesses. Public participation 

and comments are vital to USDA’s work in organics. 

We encourage all members of the public to take part 

in future formal comment opportunities. All public 

comment periods are announced in the Organic 

Insider email service; sign up at: 

http://bit.ly/NOPOrganicInsider. 

National List Update The following new petitions have been posted on the 

NOP website and sent to the NOSB for review:

• Allyl isothiocyanate, 205.601

• Propylene carbonate, 205.601 (inert ingredient)

• Aluminum sulfate, 205.601 and 205.603

• Triethyl citrate, 205.605

• Whole algal flour, 205.606, petition addendum

The following new technical reports have been posted 

on the NOP website and sent to the NOSB for review:

• Vaccines, Aquaculture

• Sulfurous acid, Crops, Sunset 2015

• Aqueous potassium silicate, Crops, Sunset 2015

• Sodium carbonate peroxyhydrate, Crops, Sunset 2015 View petitions and technical reports

www.ams.usda.gov/NOPNationalList

5
The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) held its public meeting April 29- May 2, 2014, in San Antonio, TX. The 

meeting began with a report by the NOP on NOSB administration, including a review of the Organic Foods Production 

Act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and the AMS-commissioned NOSB assessment. The NOP also presented an 

update on petitioned materials, a review of the National List Petition Process and the Sunset Process, a summary of the 

rulemaking process, and an update of its activities and priorities for fiscal year 2014.

Over 3.5 days, the NOSB discussed 33 proposals, discussion documents and reports, and heard comments from 

approximately 100 members of the public on a wide range of issues. In addition to oral testimony, the Board also 

received approximately 2,000 written public comments, which were discussed and considered as part of NOSB 

deliberations. A summary of the NOSB’s subsequent votes is provided below. The final recommendations from the San 

Antonio meeting will be posted at www.ams.usda.gov/NOSBMeetings. 

Note: NOSB is an advisory body to the Secretary of Agriculture. NOSB recommendations are not NOP policy unless the NOP 

issues final rules, final guidance, final instructions, or a policy memorandum that adopts the NOSB recommendations. They 

are not part of the USDA organic regulations unless such action is taken.

Petitioned Substances. The NOSB responded to several petitions to amend the National List of Allowed and 

Prohibited Substances (National List). This section of the USDA organic regulations identifies exemptions to the 

following general rule in organic crop and livestock production: synthetic substances are prohibited unless specifically 

allowed and natural substances are allowed unless specifically prohibited. In organic processed products, all nonorganic ingredients must be specifically allowed. “Motion failed” indicates that less than two thirds of the NOSB 

members voted to make the change in question, meaning that NOSB did not provide a recommendation to amend 

the USDA organic regulations for that substance. See table on the following two pages for voting outcomes. 

Update from National Organic Standards Board Meeting 

NOSB Training: February 2014 

On February 4-5, AMS and the National Organic Program held training for the NOSB in Washington, DC. NOSB 

members represent all segments of the organic community, come from all parts of the United States, and bring 

diverse perspectives and interests. Topics covered at the training included: The Organic Foods Production Act, 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, revised sunset process, rulemaking life cycle, best practices for developing 

recommendations, and annual ethics and conflict of interest refresher training. After the meeting, the NOP sent a 

memo to the NOSB summarizing key themes from the training. Training slides are available on the NOP website; visit 

the NOSB Meetings page at http://1.usa.gov/1l7sQsA and select February 4-5, 2014 - Training.

6
Substance Section Action Considered by NOSB NOSB Recommendation

Vinasse §205.601 Classify certain forms of vinasse 

as nonsynthetic. Include this 

information in NOP’s Guidance 

on Materials for Organic Crop 

Production (NOP 5034-1).

Motion passed. Certain forms of vinasse are 

nonsynthetic. NOP should specify this in 

its Guidance on Materials for Organic Crop 

Production (NOP 5034-1).

Laminarin §205.601 Classify laminarin as nonsynthetic. Referred back to Crops Subcommittee for 

additional work. 

Streptomycin §205.601 Allow to control fire blight in 

apples and pears only until 

October 21, 2017.

Motion failed. The current allowance for 

streptomycin will expire on October 21, 2014. 

Resolution: The National Organic Standards 

Board is committed to the phase out of this 

material. Between now and the expiration date 

the Board urges growers and certifiers to include 

in organic systems plans an annual increase 

in the extent and/or number of alternative 

practices and materials that are trialed for 

controlling fire blight. In addition, the board 

strongly advocates to USDA a high priority 

for increased support for research into these 

alternative practices and materials.

Magnesium oxide §205.601 Allow in organic crop production 

with a restrictive annotation.

Motion passed. Allow magnesium oxide in 

organic crop production with the following 

restrictive annotation: for use only to control the 

viscosity of a clay suspension agent for humates. 

Ammonium 

hydroxide

§205.605(b) Allow in organic handling as a 

boiler water additive. 

Referred back to Handling Subcommittee for 

additional work. 

Glycerin §205.605(b) Remove from National List (i.e. no 

longer allow non-organic glycerin). 

Referred back to Handling Subcommittee for 

additional work.

Acidified Sodium 

chlorite

§205.603 Allow in organic livestock 

production as a pre and post teat 

dip treatment. 

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee for 

additional work.

Methionine in 

organic poultry 

feed

§205.603 Amend current listing to allow the 

maximum average pounds per ton 

of poultry feed to be calculated 

over the life of the flock. 

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee for 

additional work.

Biologics: Vaccines §205.611 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

animal production with restrictive 

annotation. 

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed. 

Chlorine §205.611 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

animal production with restrictive 

annotation.

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

Tocopherols §205.611 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

animal production with restrictive 

annotation.

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

NOSB Petitioned Substance Recommendations

7
Substance Section Action Considered by NOSB NOSB Recommendation

Vitamins §205.611 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

animal production.

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

Minerals §205.611 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

animal production.

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

Micronutrients §205.609 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

plant production with restrictive 

annotation. 

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

Carbon Dioxide §205.609 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

plant production with restrictive 

annotation.

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

Chlorine §205.609 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

plant production with restrictive 

annotation.

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

Lignin Sulfonate §205.609 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

plant production with restrictive 

annotation.

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

Vitamins B1, B12, H §205.609 Allow for use in organic aquatic 

plant production.

Referred back to Livestock Subcommittee 

until NOP issues a proposed rule on organic 

aquaculture standards and NOSB receives 

additional technical information as needed.

NOSB Petitioned Substance Recommendations, cont’d

The NOSB provided an overview of the following substances due for sunset review by 2015: 

Substances currently allowed in organic crop production (along with any restrictive annotations): Sulfurous 

Acid (§205.601(j)); Sodium Carbonate Peroxyhydrate (§205.601(a)); and Aqueous Potassium Silicate (§205.601(e) and 

§205.601(i)).

Substances currently allowed in organic handling (along with any restrictive annotations and commercial 

availability requirements): Gellan gum (§205.605(a)); Marsala (§205.606(g)); Sherry (§205.606(g)); and Tragacanth 

Gum (§205.606(x)).

In its discussion on these substances, the NOSB summarized public comments about whether these substances 

continue to meet the OFPA criteria for allowance in organic production and handling. The NOSB will consider public 

comment, technical information, and its discussion from the spring 2014 meeting to complete its review of these 

substances at the fall 2014 meeting, including any proposals to remove the substances from the National List.

2015 Sunset Substance Review

8
Guidance on Retail Certification: The NOSB recommended that NOP clarify several sections of the regulations 

regarding retail operations (e.g., the requirement for an “exempt” versus an “excluded” retail establishment). The NOSB 

also requested that the NOP provide more education and outreach to the retail sector. 

Updates to the Petition Guidelines & Technical Report Process: The NOSB recommended revisions to the 

guidelines for submitting National List petitions and requesting technical reviews. This effort seeks to clarify 

instructions for petitioners, clarify and standardize the petition review process for the NOSB, and provide greater 

transparency to the public about the process. The NOSB also recommended revising the National List Petition 

guidelines to no longer accept Confidential Business Information as part of petition submissions. 

Research Priorities: The NOSB submitted a current list of research priorities that would support the organic sector. 

Priorities on this list include: organic aquaculture, aquatic biodiversity, herd health, pastured poultry and Salmonella, 

commercial availability assessments for section 205.606 substances, consumer demand data, fate of GE plant material 

in compost, reduction of GMO content in breeding lines, chlorine alternatives, sulfuric acid alternatives, parasite 

control, reduction of mastitis and pneumonia in organic livestock. The NOSB provides this information for stakeholders 

and USDA to consider as funding priorities are set for the upcoming year. 

Discussion Documents: The NOSB discussed two discussion documents at this meeting: one about how certifying 

agents implement the crop pest, weed, and disease management provision at section 205.206(e), and another seeking 

comment about whether polyalkylene glycol monobutyl ether (PGME), a boiler water additive, is used in direct contact 

with organic processed products. The NOSB will develop a proposal on the application of section 205.206(e) for the fall 

2014 meeting and will use the information on PGME to determine whether the NOSB needs to review and provide a 

recommendation about its allowance on the National List. 

Updates and Reports

• The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is prohibited in the production and handling of organic products, 

including seeds. The NOSB provided a report on the status of seed purity in organic production and GMOs. As part 

of this report, the NOSB summarized the public comments from the last two NOSB comment periods (fall 2013 and 

spring 2014) on seed purity standards, presence of GMOs in seed, and testing. 

• The NOSB provided an update about the progress of the proposed review process for ancillary substances. The 

NOSB Handling Subcommittee will conduct a trial run of this process using microorganisms, a substance due for 

sunset review by 2016. 

• The NOSB provided a brief update about the Sound and Sensible initiative. This included a summary of feedback 

from the community about the NOP’s implementation of the Sound & Sensible principles. 

• The Vaccines Made with Excluded Methods Working Group provided an overview of how one certifying agent 

has sought documentation from vaccine manufacturers to confirm vaccines used in organic livestock production are 

produced without the use of excluded methods. 

• The Inerts Working Group provided an update about its ongoing work to implement a process for review of inert 

substances in pesticide formulations.

For additional information about the meeting, please visit www.ams.usda.gov/NOSBMeetings.

Other NOSB Recommendations, Reports, and Updates 

Save the Date! Fall 2014 NOSB Meeting 

Week of October 27 | Louisville, Kentucky

9
Welcome New NOSB Chair Dr. Jean Richardson 

In May 2014, the NOSB elected Dr. Jean Richardson as its new Chair. Jean was appointed 

to the NOSB in January 2012 in one of the three “Consumer/Public Interest” positions. 

Jean is Professor Emerita, University of Vermont, where she taught Environmental Studies 

and Environmental Law. She currently works with her family to produce certified organic 

maple syrup, and is an independent inspector of organic farms and processors, as well as 

providing consultation on rural land use planning and serving as a Justice of the Peace.

Jean’s research included work on the impact of long distance transportation of air 

pollution on dioxin uptake in dairy feeds and milk, and a major rural development project, 

Environmental Partnerships in Communities (EPIC), which included considerable research on pasture management. 

The ten year EPIC project which Jean directed also provided extensive technical assistance to farmers on pasture 

management and on sustainable livestock systems, encouraging new farmer-run organizations which continue today. 

She also taught as an Adjunct Professor at the Vermont Law School, Environmental Law Center, and in the 1970’s and 

80’s, she and her first husband ran an electric fence franchise, and sheep farm.

Jean has extensive state, national, and international experience over several decades, including: Environmental 

planning and policy in the Lake Baikal region of Russia; A founding Director of the Institute for Sustainable 

Communities, providing former Soviet Bloc countries with templates for environmental policy and law; Founding 

Director of the New England Environmental Policy Center which now provides Agricultural Mediation; Appointed by 

President Clinton to the Joint Public Advisory Committee in the Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC) in 

NAFTA where she took a leadership role in developing the language and policy for Citizen Submissions; Facilitated 

establishment of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) in North America, and negotiated the certification standards for 

the New England forests; Appointed by Governor Dean of Vermont to the State Environmental Appeals Board and by 

Governor Shumlin to the District Environmental Commission on which she currently serves.

Jean holds a B.S. from the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England; and an M.S. and Ph.D. in Biogeography from 

the University of Wisconsin, Madison. She lives in an old house on a trout stream surrounded by sugar maple trees, a 

small orchard, berries, vegetable gardens, perennial beds, and thousands of daffodils in spring.

“I feel privileged to have been elected by such a diverse group of incredibly hard working professional people. 

We all believe passionately in the integrity of the organic label and yet we have different ideas on how to adapt 

to the changing face of organic agriculture, processing and handling as the industry expands and the NOP 

faces changing demands on its resources. My leadership style is to build consensus whenever possible and work 

collaboratively with all stakeholder groups and with the NOP in order to ensure sustainable organic systems."

 - Jean Richardson 

Many Thanks to Outgoing Chair, Mac Stone 

A Message from AMS Administrator Anne Alonzo: “I would like to thank outgoing National 

Organic Standards Board Chair Mac Stone for his service. Mac is a true friend to the organic 

community – all of us at USDA appreciate his expertise, guidance, and commitment.”

And, a message from Mac, who will serve as NOSB Sectretary for the upcoming term: “The 

members of the NOSB represent a diversity of interests including organic producers, handlers, 

environmentalists, and consumer representatives. Organic stakeholders are passionate about 

organic standards and are always looking for ways to improve the standards. “ On the new 

Sunset process, Mac shared, “The board will ensure that under the revised sunset process all 

materials on the National List will be thoroughly reviewed and recommended for removal 

when warranted.” 

10
What is “Sunset”?

The USDA organic regulations allow most natural 

substances in organic farming, and prohibit most synthetic 

substances. The National List, part of these regulations, 

lists the exceptions to this basic rule and includes: 

• Synthetic substances that are allowed in organic 

agriculture (examples: boric acid, newspaper)

• Natural substances that are not allowed in organic 

agriculture (examples: arsenic, strychnine)

• All non-organic substances allowed in processed 

organic products

Once a substance has been added to the National List, 

the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), a citizen 

advisory committee appointed by the Secretary of 

Agriculture, must review the substance every 5 years. 

This is called the “sunset review process.” Through this 

process, the NOSB can recommend to USDA that it remove 

substances from the National List based on adverse impact 

on human health or the environment, or other criteria in 

the Organic Foods Production Act. 

After the NOSB completes its sunset review, the USDA 

must renew or remove the substances on the National List 

to complete the sunset process.

The Need for Improvement

Sunset review and renewal cycles have occurred since 

2005. Over time, drawbacks to the process became clear: 

• Substance reviews were only discussed in a single 

public meeting. 

• Synthetic substances in use by organic businesses 

could be removed from the list with only 2/5 of NOSB 

votes cast, fewer than required for a “decisive” vote 

under the Organic Foods Production Act. 

• Each sunset required three separate rulemaking 

actions.

Improving the Process

Given these drawbacks, in September 2013, the USDA 

published a revised sunset review and renewal process: 

• There are now two public comment opportunities 

before the NOSB completes its sunset review of each 

substance. 

• Any change to the National List, either through a 

petition or through sunset, must be supported by 

a 2/3 majority of the NOSB (a “decisive vote” in the 

Organic Foods Production Act) to be recommended 

to the USDA. 

• The change allows USDA to more effectively renew 

and remove substances from the National List. 

Responding to Questions from the Public

In developing this revised process, the USDA reviewed 

past sunset evaluations. In the past, when the NOSB 

has voted to remove substances from the National 

List based on new evidence or new alternative 

substances, it has always voted with a 2/3 vote majority 

to recommend the removal. Examples include sulfur 

dioxide for rodent control; forms of pectin, lecithin, and 

silicon dioxide; and hops. 

Recommendations to the USDA are never made by 

subcommittees. Recommendations only come to the 

USDA after the full NOSB has voted in a public meeting, 

and only when the NOSB passes an item with a 2/3 

majority vote. 

USDA strongly supports organic agriculture, and is 

responsible for establishing a level playing field that 

protects all organic farms and businesses. Public 

participation and comments are vital to USDA’s work in 

organics, and we encourage all members of the public 

to take part in formal comment opportunities. 

Sunset Review and Renewal Process

11
Sunset Review and Renewal Process (continued)

Picturing the Revised Sunset Process

The following graphic shows the revised sunset review 

and renewal process. The process is managed by the 

USDA Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) and the 

National Organic Program, and was published in a 

September 2013 Federal Register Notice. 

What Happens Next 

At the Spring 2014 NOSB meeting, the NOSB used this 

process to discuss substances coming up for sunset 

review. The cycle will continue with subcommittee 

review of sunset materials in advance of public 

comments before the Fall 2014 NOSB public meeting. 

12
Organic hydroponics is a method of growing plants using 

mineral nutrient solutions, in water, without soil. Terrestrial 

plants may be grown with their roots in the mineral 

nutrient solution only or in an inert medium, such as perlite, 

gravel, biochar, or coconut husk. Some organic farms use 

hydroponic growing methods to produce organic crops 

under the USDA organic regulations. These producers use 

the same fertilizers and pest control practices as other 

organic farmers – primarily natural fertilizers and pest control 

methods. Organic hydroponic production is allowed as long 

as the producer can demonstrate compliance with the USDA 

organic regulations. 

Accredited certifying agents are certifying organic 

hydroponic operations based on the current organic 

regulations and the operation’s Organic System Plan. In the 

future, the NOP may provide additional guidance regarding 

organic hydroponic production and how the regulations 

apply to such methods.

The National Organic Advisory Board (NOSB) completed 

final recommendations on crop production in containers 

and enclosures (e.g. greenhouses) in 2010. The NOSB’s 2010 

recommendation included a provision for not allowing 

organic hydroponic production. The NOP continues 

to work on evaluating and implementing a backlog of 

older NOSB recommendations including the greenhouse 

recommendation. Any proposed changes based on the 

NOSB’s greenhouse recommendation that would affect 

organic hydroponic operations would involve opportunities 

for public comment.

Organic Hydroponics

NOP Attends MOSES Conference

NOP Deputy Administrator Miles McEvoy and co-founder of 

the Veterans Sustainable Agriculture Training program, Karen 

Archipley at Archie’s Acres, a certified organic hydroponics 

operation.

NOP staff members Valerie Schmale and 

Lynnea Schurkamp represented the 

Agricultural Marketing Service at the 25th 

Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education 

Service (MOSES) Conference in La Crosse, 

Wisconsin from February 27 – March 2, 2014. 

MOSES is the country’s largest annual 

conference on organic and sustainable 

farming, and it drew over 3,400 attendees 

this year. The conference offered us a 

unique opportunity to educate prospective 

businesses about organic certification 

and other applicable USDA programs and 

services, such the USDA’s Organic Literacy 

Initiative. 

13
Organic Integrity Update

Fraudulent organic certificates

http://bit.ly/fraud-certs

Suspected violation complaints

NOPCompliance@ams.usda.gov 

Distribution of Incoming Complaints 

(October 1, 2013-March 31, 2014)

Compliance and Enforcement Actions

From October 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014, AMS issued five penalties 

to willful violators totaling $36,000. We also took 62 initial 

enforcement actions against suspected violators, including: eight 

Notices to Cease and Desist; 20 Notices of Warning; and 19 referrals 

to certifying agents, State Programs, and Foreign governments.

The NOP has conducted the following audits 

Since December 1, 2013:

• Vermont Organic Farmers – Richmond, VT

• Utah Department of Agriculture – Salt Lake City, UT

• Department of Plant and Industry, Clemson University – 

Pendleton, SC

• Georgia Crop Improvement Association – Athens, GA

• Tse-Xin Organic Certification Corporation – Taipei, Taiwan, China

• Istituto per la Certificazione Etica e Ambientale – Bologna, Italy

• BioAgriCert – Bologna, Italy

Peer Reviews

The NOP and European Union are currently conducting peer 

reviews of each others systems to support the U.S.-EU organic 

equivalency arrangement. In addition, the NOP is currently 

engaging in a Peer Review by the American National Standards 

Institute. Both reviews will be completed by fall 2014, and the 

reviews will be posted on the NOP website. 

New Training Modules Available

Certifier Training 

NOP partnered with the Accredited Certifiers Association (ACA) for 

its annual certifier training program in San Diego on February 19-

21, 2014. The goal of the training was to ensure consistency among 

all of our accredited certifying agents, and continue to demonstrate 

the importance of Sound and Sensible principles in organic 

certification. 

Certifier Training in Spanish 

On March 20-21, 2014, over 50 participants from Latin American 

countries gathered in Costa Rica for the National Organic Program’s 

Spanish language certifier training. The training was well-received, 

and the 17 training modules are posted, in Spanish, on the NOP 

website. 

All training slides are available on our training page at 

http://1.usa.gov/QbCtuG . 

NOP Accreditation Manager Betsy Rakola 

presents training in Costa Rica. 

14
National Organic Program Handbook + Web Updates

Program Handbook. The National Organic Program Handbook provides a wide variety of policy materials and 

other resources to help organic farms and businesses comply with the USDA organic regulations. In the past several 

months, AMS has updated several of these resources, available at www.ams.usda.gov/NOPProgramHandbook.

Certification Requirements for Handling Unpackaged Organic Products. On January 22, 2014, we issued 

guidance (NOP 5031) to describe certification requirements for operations that handle unpackaged organic 

products. 

Who Needs to be Certified? On February 12, 2014, we issued an instruction (NOP 4009) to clarify certification 

requirements for operations that produce or handle agricultural products to be sold, labeled or represented as 

organic. This instruction reminds certifiers that organic agricultural products must be produced and handled 

exclusively at certified organic farms and handling operations.

Accreditation Policies and Procedures. On February 28, 2014, NOP updated an instruction (NOP 2000) that 

provides general policies and procedures for organizations seeking or maintaining accreditation as NOP certifiers. 

The instruction has been revised with an eye to maximizing the efficiency of the accreditation process and 

integrating Sound and Sensible principles into accreditation activities.

Aquatic Plant Extracts. On March 12, 2014, NOP posted a policy memo (PM 14-1) policy memo to clarify the status 

of aquatic plant extracts under the USDA organic regulations.

Final Guidance: Made With Organic ***. On April 30, 2014, AMS published final guidance describing the 

requirements for products in the “Made with Organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))” labeling category.

Fact Sheets. AMS recently published an updated fact sheet to highlight the 2013 list of certified operations. The 

certified operations list allows buyers, sellers and the public to identify and connect with organic stakeholders across 

the supply chain. AMS also worked with the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau to publish a series of guidance 

documents to help domestic and international organic operations understand and meet the requirements of both 

agencies. Guidance is available for labeling wine, malt beverages and distilled spirits. Find a complete list of fact 

sheets on the NOP Fact Sheet page: http://1.usa.gov/1kPQGr3 

USDA Organic Topics Page. The USDA recently published an Organic Topic page at www.usda.gov/organic. This page 

provides access to the wide range of resources that USDA provides for those in organic agriculture. Check out USDA’s 

updated Organic Agriculture Results fact sheet as well! 

15
Technical Guidance Partnership

Conservation practices are important to organic operations, and good technical resources are valuable to the 

conservation planners who work with organic growers and producers. Several nonprofit organizations and public 

agencies have partnered to bring a series of helpful technical guidance documents to conservation planners who work 

with organic producers. This project is the result of a partnership between the Oregon Tilth Conservation Program, the 

National Center for Appropriate Technology (NCAT), the Xerces Society and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation 

Service (NRCS). It is funded by a grant from Western Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (WSARE). 

The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) Organic Initiative, administered by NRCS, helps producers plan 

and implement conservation practices to support the environmental sustainability of their organic operations. It 

provides financial payments and technical support to producers for conservation practices such as buffers, cover crops 

and pest management. The guidance developed through this partnership will enable the EQIP Organic Initiative to 

be more responsive to and valuable for organic farmers. These new resources will help to bolster technical resources 

for conservation plan development, and increase understanding of organic production practices and certification 

regulations of the NRCS. 

These resources include:

• Resources for Conservation Planning on Organic and Transitioning-to-Organic Farms

• Common NRCS Practices Related to Pest Management on Organic Farms

• Cover Crops in Organic Systems

• Conservation Buffers in Organic Systems

• Nutrient Management

The documents may be downloaded at the Oregon Tilth Website: http://bit.ly/RvASAV

AMS Administrator Awards 

On May 12, 2014, two initiatives led by the National Organic Program (NOP) received awards from AMS Administrator 

Anne Alonzo. 

Organic Literacy Initiative

In 2012, the National Organic Program led the 

development of the “USDA Organic Literacy Initiative,” a 

education and training package about organic agriculture. 

The goal of the training is to increase UDSA employees’ 

knowledge of organic agriculture, so employees across the 

Department have the tools they need to connect organic 

farmers with USDA programs and services. 

Nearly 30,000 USDA employees have completed training 

to increase their understanding of organic agriculture and 

improving USDA’s services to our customers. The Farm 

Service Agency distributed 60,000 “Is Organic an Option for 

Me?” brochures to field offices nationwide.

Access Organic Literacy materials at:

 www.ams.usda.goc/organicinfo 

NOP Appeals Reengineering Project 

In April 2013, the NOP and Compliance and Analysis 

Program successfully completed a reorganization and 

reengineering initiative for the NOP Appeals program, 

aligning appeals more closely with the program, and 

changing the appeals program to increase the use 

of mediation and settlement agreements as tools for 

alternative dispute resolution. 

The changes were designed to improve the 

consistency between NOP accreditation and appeals 

decisions, and support knowledge sharing between 

appeals and NOP staff. This change was carefully 

planned and structured, and was executed in a way 

consistent with the USDA organic regulations. As of 

the beginning of Mqy 2014, there are only 11 open 

appeals; 10 have been open less than 90 days. 

16