Page 1 of 10 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE 

BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR 

 ) 

A

A

 ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 

 

 

In re: 

Finca Laurita 

 

Guayas, Ecuador 

 

 

 

 

dministrator’s Decision 

PL-36-20

 

This Decision responds to an appeal (APL-036-20) of a Notice of Noncompliance and 

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

(Laurita) 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 21, 2016, Laurita 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 Laurita’s 

October 24, 2019 request for mediation. 

4. On February 24, 2020, Laurita 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 29, 2019 inspection revealed numerous 

noncompliances in Laurita’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 Laurita 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 banana soil and weeds, and the laboratory results. Laurita 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 

Laurita’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 Laurita’s initial certification. QCS stated that the 

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

but 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 Laurita’s 

maps didn’t identify the uses of adjacent lands, Laurita’s Organic System Plan (OSP) of 

February 20, 2019 lists the adjacent land plots by name, their crops and acreage, and whether it is 

conventional or other production. Further, it is not uncommon for commodities grown in buffer 

zones to be designated as conventional commodities in case of contamination from neighboring 

conventional production. 

The inspector also observed the application of inputs in the boundaries of the adjacent 

conventional cocoa fields, with no barriers or buffers to prevent cross-contamination. The 

Inspection Report of May 29, 2019 states that Laurita’s buffer zones are not adequate to prevent 

contamination by prohibited substances from adjacent conventional lands; safeguards to prevent 

contamination from adjacent lands aren’t sufficient; and measures to prevent contamination from 

conventional inputs are not only not adequate but also are not accurately described in the OSP. 

This creates a high risk of contamination of the organic crop. The inspector also observed what 

was presumed to be (brown) fertilizer in the soil which had caused the weeds to dry out, and 

Laurita was found to burn crops other than for disease suppression or seed germination, which 

are the only allowances permitted by the regulations. 

The inspection also found spots of bare soil and other evidence of herbicide application 

including dry weeds, contrary to 7 CFR §205.203 and 7 CFR §205.205, which require soil 

fertility and crop nutrient management practices as well as 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. Laurita’s records didn’t show the application of the 

herbicide and therefore, it couldn’t be determined exactly what had been used. The inspector 
Page 7 of 10 

also found an empty container from the pesticide Dithane on the property. Dithane wasn’t listed 

on Laurita’s OSP or the list of approved input as required per 7 CFR §205.401. Laurita’s records 

and sales invoices for inputs weren’t consistent and therefore, the inspector couldn’t determine 

exactly what had been applied to the banana crop. Laurita’s input applications were also found 

not to be adequately documented, and the inspector found that Laurita isn’t prepared to 

immediately notify QCS of the application of any prohibited substance. The inspector also found 

Laurita failed to maintain cleaning-sanitation records for the (b) (4)

, despite verifying in its OSP that it would maintain equipment cleaning records. 

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 document. 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 

corresponding Pest Residue Test Results Notification show the following substances detected, all 

of which are prohibited in organic production: Epoxiconazol, Fenpropimorph, Fenpropidin, 

Pyrimethanil, Spiroxamine, Tebuconazole, Tridemorph, and Triadimenol. The presence of these 

substances on the banana leaves is justification for a suspension of Laurita’s certification as it 

substantiates the presence of prohibited substances in the production area. 

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

Groen Agro Control laboratory report of June 21, 2019 shows the presence of Paraquat at 5.0 

ppm. Paraquat is a prohibited pesticide in organic crop production. A second Groen Agro 

Control report dated June 20, 2019, for soil and weed samples shows Glifosato, Glufosinato, and 
Page 8 of 10 

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

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

the banana soil and weeds. 

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

Rather, Laurita only complained that while the cited samples were taken at the May 29, 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 

Laurita 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 report and the issuance of the adverse action notice is 

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

banana leaves and banana soil and weeds. Further, Laurita 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. However, the 

Inspection Report of May 29, 2019 also shows the inspector found that Laurita’s OSP doesn’t list 

all inputs being used or intended for use, and input applications submitted by Laurita are not 

adequately documented to be readily understood and auditable. 

QCS’ inspection also found other noncompliances. The inspector couldn’t conduct a 

mass balance exercise due to discrepancies between the harvest records and sales records for 

week 35 (2018). Laurita’s records showed boxes harvested but sales records showed (b) (4)

boxes sold, pointing to the sale of conventional product as organic. Further, the inspector wasn’t 

given access to accounting system records to determine the actual income of the operation and 

couldn’t determine the destination of fruit produced and sold. The inspector found that Laurita’s 

(b) (4)
Page 9 of 10 

records also don’t fully document all activities and transactions so as to be able to determine 

Laurita’s compliance with the regulations, and said records are not maintained for the required 5 

years from creation. 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. 

QCS also contended there was also a violation of the organic regulations at 7 CFR 

§205.401, because Laurita listed a different responsible person in its OSP than requested 

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

purposes of the renewal application is to identify changes in the operations, such as responsible 

contacts. 

CONCLUSION 

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

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

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

evidence substantiates that Laurita violated the organic regulations at 7 CFR §205.103; 7 CFR 

§205.105; 7 CFR §205.201; 7 CFR §205.202; 7 CFR §205.203; 7 CFR §205.205; 7 CFR 

§205.400; and 7 CFR §205.401. Banana leave samplings and banana plant soil and weed 

samplings, taken during the May 29, 2019 inspection of Laurita, revealed the presence of 

numerous prohibited substances. Laurita also failed to engage in soil fertility and management 

practices that maintain or improve the physical, chemical and/or biological condition of the soil. 

Laurita’s failure to maintain records on inputs also prevented QCS from determining exactly 

what inputs were used. Although Laurita’s noncompliances regarding the maintenance of 

various records are correctable, the presence of several prohibited substances is not. 
Page 10 of 10

DECISION

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

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

prohibited substances were found, namely, May 29, 2019. Barring the interim use of prohibited 

substances on the land or crops, Laurita will be eligible for organic certification on May 28, 

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

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

for Hearing form. Laurita has thirty (30) days to request an administrative hearing before an 

Administrative Law Judge. If Laurita waives the hearing, this Administrator’s Decision 

suspending Laurita’s certification will become final. 

Done at Washington, D.C., on this _____ 14th

day of ________________, 2020. December

_________________________________

BRUCE Digitally signed by BRUCE 

SUMMERS 

Date: 2020.12.12 20:02:37 SUMMERS -05'00' Bruce Summers 

Administrator

Agricultural Marketing Service