United States Department of Agriculture 1400 Independence Avenue S.W. NOP 5020-1

Agricultural Marketing Service Room 2646-South Building Page 1 of 5

National Organic Program Washington, DC 20250

NOP 5020-1 Response to Comments Natural Resources and Authorized Distribution: Public

Biodiversity Conservation 

Response to Comments

Natural Resources and Biodiversity Conservation

This document summarizes comments submitted to the National Organic Program (NOP) in 

response to the draft guidance, “Natural Resources and Biodiversity Conservation for Certified 

Organic Operations” (NOP 5020). The public was notified in a Federal Register notice (79 FR

248) on December 29, 2014 of the availability of this draft guidance on the NOP website and 

solicited comments for sixty days. 

 CHANGES MADE IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

Change the title of the guidance to include Accredited Certifying Agents (ACAs), 

Operations, and New Applicants for organic certification. Many commenters pointed out that 

while the notice in the Federal Register and the language in the guidance itself make it clear that 

this guidance applies to all certifiers, certified organic operations, and new applicants for 

certification, the title of the guidance only mentions certified operations. NOP felt that the title 

did not need to include the stakeholders as long as the guidance itself is clear, which it is. In the 

final guidance, we have simplified the title to Guidance: Natural Resources and Biodiversity 

Conservation.

Terminology should be consistent. Many commenters suggested using the word “activities” in 

place of “practices” in the guidance to be more in line with Natural Resources Conservation 

Services (NRCS) terminology. For example Conservation Stewardship Programs refer to 

“activities” which include “plans, practices, and enhancements.” Commenters felt that the use of 

“activities” is more appropriate in the context of this guidance. Several commenters felt that 

NOP should work with NRCS to ensure that the terminology used is consistent and also more 

broadly understood throughout the world (e.g., using “grasslands” in place of “prairies” and 

other examples). In the final guidance, we have made minor edits to Appendix A and have also 

included footnotes with links to terms and definitions per recommendations from commenters.

We have replaced “practices” with “activities” in the guidance. While the only definitions listed 

in the body of the guidance are those that are already in the USDA organic regulations at 7 CFR 

205, other common terms have been defined in the footnotes. 

Remove reference to handling operations in the guidance or expand the examples of 

conservation activities for handling operations. Many commenters expressed concern that 

handling operations are not identified anywhere in the guidance document except for several 

examples at the end of Appendix A. One commenter suggested removing reference to handling 

operations altogether and addressing these types of operations in a separate guidance. NOP has 

considered the applicability of §205.200 to handling operations. §205.200 states “Production

practices ... must maintain or improve the natural resources of the operation...” The definition of 

“natural resources” only includes “production operation.” Production, by definition at §205.2, is 

not handling. Handling operations and their certifiers should determine whether handling 
United States Department of Agriculture 1400 Independence Avenue S.W. NOP 5020-1

Agricultural Marketing Service Room 2646-South Building Page 2 of 5

National Organic Program Washington, DC 20250

NOP 5020-1 Response to Comments Natural Resources and Authorized Distribution: Public

Biodiversity Conservation 

operations directly affect biodiversity and take action as appropriate (and as required). However, 

NOP believes such situations are atypical. Reference to handlers has been removed from the 

final guidance. 

Clarify expectations for implementation of conservation practices. Several commenters 

pointed out that this guidance needs to be very clear about NOP’s expectations for producers to 

implement conservation practices above those that are required by the other sections of the 

standards, notably §205.203(b), requiring crop rotations, cover crops, and the application of plant 

and animal materials, and §205.203(c), requiring producers to maintain or improve soil organic 

matter content without causing contamination of crops, soil or water. Some comments suggested

the guidance should clarify that in order to maintain or improve all the natural resources as 

defined under §205.2, including soil, water, wetlands, woodlands, and wildlife, and conserve 

biodiversity, a comprehensive approach to natural resource management is necessary and goes 

beyond maintaining soil or water quality. One certifier suggested a revision to the 2nd bullet of 

the guidance under “Role of Certified Organic Operations.” In response, we updated this section 

of the guidance to include reference to § 205.2, the definition of Natural resources of the 

operation. Certified operations are required to implement measures that support natural resource

conservation and biodiversity in addition to maintaining soil or water quality.

Include reference to NRCS’ Conservation Stewardship Program. Many commenters 

suggested also including reference to the NRCS Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) in the 

USDA NRCS example activities provided under Section 3 (Policy and Procedures – Role of 

Certified Organic Operations). NOP agrees that the CSP offers many activities (plans, practices, 

and enhancements) that benefit organic operations. CSP has been mentioned in the final 

guidance.

Conservation Plans should not take the place of the Organic System Plan (OSP). One 

certifier expressed concern with the language in the guidance that enables the operation to 

reference or provide evidence of a conservation plan developed in conjunction with NRCS 

instead of developing a separate OSP section for natural resources. The certifier explained that 

NRCS plans can vary significantly by farm in scope and detail and would likely be inconsistent 

from one farm to the next. In addition, it was explained that NRCS plans can be extensive 

(certifiers may not have the expertise to review and enforce the full plan), they may not be 

current, and plans often only identify the deficiencies that need action and not the conservation 

activities already being taken by the operator. Finally, the comment stated that this option only 

works for domestic operations, and ideally all certified operations should be encouraged to work 

with third party conservation organizations. In response, we have amended Section 3 (Policies 

and Procedures, Role of Certified Organic Operations) to state that the OSP may refer to a 

current conservation plan and/or contract developed in conjunction with NRCS or other 

conservation agency or non-governmental organization (NGO), as part of their OSP, to meet the 

requirements of 7 CFR § 205.200. In addition, we have added a footnote to the final guidance

that brings attention to the Conservation Activity Plan (CAP) 138 and Resource Inventory 
United States Department of Agriculture 1400 Independence Avenue S.W. NOP 5020-1

Agricultural Marketing Service Room 2646-South Building Page 3 of 5

National Organic Program Washington, DC 20250

NOP 5020-1 Response to Comments Natural Resources and Authorized Distribution: Public

Biodiversity Conservation 

Supplements documents which, when submitted together, are adequate to address the full OSP 

requirements for domestic operations.

Clarify how benefits from conservation activities on adjacent land can be accrued. Many 

commenters pointed out that the certified organic operator and certifier sections mention 

accruing benefits from conservation activities on adjacent land but that each section explains the 

concept differently. Commenters requested that NOP clarify the criteria upon which operations 

receive credit for activities on adjacent land. We have adjusted the language in the relevant

sections of the guidance so that they are consistent with one another. There must be direct benefit

to the certified organic land as a result of conservation activities undertaken on adjacent lands. 

However, the intent of the guidance was to recognize that conservation measures implemented 

on non-certified portions of the land may benefit organic fields as well. The adjacent land must 

be under the control of the certified operator and inspectors must have access to those areas to 

verify compliance. Changes and clarification are reflected in the final guidance. 

Clarify that Appendix A is only a list of example practices. Several commenters noted that it 

is not clear that the practices listed in Appendix A are only examples and do not represent an 

exclusive list of practices that must be carried out in order to meet NOP requirements. 

Commenters suggested alternative language to clarify that the list of activities on Appendix A is 

not exhaustive and that there are many other activities, depending on site-specific conditions,

that operations can use to reach the same compliance goal. We agree and have amended the 

wording to illustrate that Appendix A is a list of some, but not all, practices that can be used to 

maintain or improve the natural resources of an operation.

Requirements for agricultural conversion of Highly Erodible Land (HEL) and wetlands 

should be consistent with NRCS requirements. One commenter suggested that HEL and 

wetlands may be used for agriculture when NRCS approves a conservation plan. The reference 

has been changed to be consistent with NRCS requirements. 

 CHANGES REQUESTED BUT NOT MADE 

Concerns about the potential for increased inspection time, costs and record-keeping 

burden. Several commenters were concerned inspections will be longer, the record-keeping 

burden will be higher, and associated noncompliances will increase as a result of this guidance. 

The guidance applies to biodiversity requirements that are already a part of the USDA organic 

standards. Such requirements have been subject to inspections and necessitated record-keeping 

since the USDA organic regulations came into effect. The intention of this guidance is to 

decrease redundancy and streamline compliance efforts related to the USDA organic standards 

and third party conservation programs. The CAP 138 was developed as a collaborative effort 

between NOP and NRCS to assist transitioning organic producers with their organic 

conservation plan. The CAP 138 has three sections: (1) Resource Inventory; (2) Erosion Control 

Inventory; and (3) Summary Record of Planned NRCS Conservation Practices. Section 1, the 

Resource Inventory, collects information on the operation’s natural resources and conservation 
United States Department of Agriculture 1400 Independence Avenue S.W. NOP 5020-1

Agricultural Marketing Service Room 2646-South Building Page 4 of 5

National Organic Program Washington, DC 20250

NOP 5020-1 Response to Comments Natural Resources and Authorized Distribution: Public

Biodiversity Conservation 

practices. It addresses the operation’s management of natural resources related to soil, water, and 

wildlife habitat. The CAP 138 can serve as a guide for new applicants, as well as currently 

certified operations, when addressing biodiversity requirements in OSPs. In addition, many 

certifiers have developed their own OSP questionnaire that asks the producers questions related 

to conservation measures. Maintaining and improving natural resources and biodiversity 

conservation are long term efforts. Operations may be beginning the certification process at 

different conservation levels and will apply solutions in different ways. The annual organic 

inspection provides a snapshot of the current activities, and a comprehensive assessment for 

compliance with §205.200 is a multi-year process. The purpose of this guidance is to give 

operators and certifiers examples of activities that would fulfill the requirements of §205.200. 

Future NOP accreditation audits will gauge certifiers’ familiarity with the guidance and how it is 

applied.

Expand examples that address climate change mitigations and adaptation. Several 

commenters suggested expanding examples listed on Appendix A to specifically address climate 

change. While this is an important topic, it is beyond the scope of this guidance. The purpose of 

this guidance is to give operators and certifiers examples of activities that would fulfill the 

requirements of 7 CFR § 205.200.

Provide more guidance for producers that only produce organic product in greenhouses. A 

certifier requested that the guidance should include suggestions on how to enhance the natural 

resources and biodiversity within a greenhouse cropping system. Greenhouse operations should 

adopt site specific methods that best integrate cultural, biological and mechanical practices that 

foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity to the extent 

practicable. Greenhouse producers are encouraged to work with conservation programs to 

implement relevant measures related to conservation efforts. 

Wild harvest operations should follow the FairWild Foundation (FWF) standards as best 

practice for biodiversity conservation on wild harvest operations. One commenter suggested 

that NOP incorporate by reference the FWF standards into this guidance as one example of best 

practice for biodiversity conservation in the context of sustainable management of wild 

collection areas under organic control. There are many ways for operations to meet the 

requirements of § 205.200. Some examples are provided for in Appendix A. Wild harvest 

operations may voluntarily elect to follow the FWF standards in order to meet the NOP 

requirements for biodiversity conservation; however the change was not made to the final 

guidance..

Specify NOP’s role in ensuring that the guidance is implemented through certifier training 

and oversight. Several commenters recommended that the guidance explain that NOP will 

address natural resources and biodiversity conservation requirements through training programs 

for ACAs and the monitoring of ACAs on such requirements during NOP’s accreditation 

reviews of ACAs. Commenters requested that NOP add the requirements of § 205.200 to NOP’s 

Review Checklist (NOP 2005-6). NOP intends to address this topic at future annual ACA 
United States Department of Agriculture 1400 Independence Avenue S.W. NOP 5020-1

Agricultural Marketing Service Room 2646-South Building Page 5 of 5

National Organic Program Washington, DC 20250

NOP 5020-1 Response to Comments Natural Resources and Authorized Distribution: Public

Biodiversity Conservation 

trainings. The purpose of this guidance, however, is to give operators and certifiers examples of 

activities that would fulfill natural resource and biodiversity conservation requirements. NOP 

will audit certifiers to gauge their familiarity with the guidance and how it is applied. Continued 

NOP coordination with NRCS and other conservation programs to deliver future ACA trainings 

is also a priority. 

Add to the guidance a 5-year conversion for natural ecosystems and comprehensive 

conservation plans for CRP lands coming out of CRP. Many commenters suggested adding 

an additional bullet regarding the non-conversion of wild lands or high value conservation areas 

(HVCA) to organic agricultural production for 5 years from the date of application for 

certification, in order to lessen the incentive to bypass the three-year conversion period. In 

addition, many commenters suggested including a requirement for lands to have and implement a 

comprehensive conservation plan if the land has been enrolled in the Conservation Reserve 

Program (CRP) whose contract is nearing an end and coming out of the program. While we 

recognize the conservation value of CRP land, this guidance cannot impose regulatory 

requirements beyond the USDA organic regulations and therefore it is beyond the scope of this 

guidance. The purpose of this guidance is to give operators and certifiers examples of activities 

that would fulfill the requirements of 7 CFR § 205.200. However, in response, we have included

several more examples of practices and activities that can be used to maintain or improve the 

natural resources of an operation in Appendix A, including the example that operators of CRP 

lands leaving the federal program and now requesting organic certification request a new 

conservation plan to enable the operation to examine a range of alternative practices that will be 

in the best interest of the land.

Require Highly Erodible Land Conservation (HELC) and Wetlands Conservation (WC) 

self-certification. One certifier suggested that NOP consider incorporating the Highly Erodible 

Land Conservation (HELC) and Wetlands Conservation (WC) compliance requirements of the 

Farm Bill, which is administered by the Farm Services Agency (FSA), NRCS, and the Risk 

Management Agency (RMA), into NOP requirements for organic producers. The implementation 

of HELC and WC requirements specifically protects highly erodible land (HEL) from excessive 

soil erosion, and protects wetlands from conversion. While this guidance cannot impose any new 

requirements on organic operations, NOP agrees that any organically certified land that is found 

to be out of compliance with the HELC and WC program, would be out of compliance with § 

205.200.