NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

+ + + + +

NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS BOARD

+ + + + +

PUBLIC COMMENT WEBINAR

+ + + + +

TUESDAY

APRIL 21, 2020

+ + + + +

The Board met telephonically at 12:00 

p.m., Steve Ela, Chair, presiding.

PRESENT

STEVE ELA, Chair

SCOTT RICE, Vice Chair

JESSE BUIE, Secretary

SUE BAIRD

ASA BRADMAN

JERRY D'AMORE

RICK GREENWOOD

KIM HUSEMAN

MINDEE JEFFERY

DAVE MORTENSEN

EMILY OAKLEY

NATE POWELL-PALM

A-DAE ROMERO-BRIONES

DAN SEITZ

WOOD TURNER
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

STAFF PRESENT

MICHELLE ARSENAULT, NOSB Advisory Board 

Specialist, National Organic Program

DAVID GLASGOW, Associate Deputy Administrator, 

National Organic Program

DEVON PATTILLO, Materials Specialist, National 

Organic Program

ANGELYQUE PEGUES, Management Analyst, National 

Organic Program

JENNIFER TUCKER, Ph.D., Deputy 

Administrator, National Organic Program; 

Designated Federal Official

SHANNON NALLY YANESSA, Assistant Director, 

Standards Division, National Organic 

Program

PENNY ZUCK, Accreditation Manager, National 

Organic Program
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

12:00 p.m.

MS. ARSENAULT: Welcome. You are 

listening to the first public comment webinar for 

the Board meeting, the National Organic Standards 

Board meeting. So if you logged onto the wrong 

place and you don't want to be here, now is your 

time to leave.

So welcome. We are having two public 

comment webinars this week, and then the actual 

Board meeting will be next week. So you're welcome 

to join us, we'll add the access information to 

the website soon for the Board meeting portion of 

the meeting.

If you're online right now, you should 

see an instruction slide on the screen. Hopefully 

you can see that. It's a, has login information. 

And if you -- one second, I am getting a reminder 

here to start the recording. Thank you, Devon.

So if you're online you should see the 

instruction slide, and if you're only on the phone 

with us, I'm just going to summarize a little bit 

of what's on the instruction slide. 

If you ever have technical problems, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

you can go to Zoom.com and click the support button, 

which should be in the upper righthand corner, and 

the contact us button. And you can usually call 

them or live chat with them, with the caveat that 

Zoom is really busy these days, just so you know.

A transcriptionist is on the line with 

us. She's transcribing both the webinars and will 

be transcribing the meeting next week as well. 

The transcript will be ready -- a full transcript 

will be posted to the NOP website and will be 

available about two weeks after the Board meeting 

concludes. We have to make it accessible, by 

federal law, before we can post that document, so 

it delays it a little bit.

So for today, we're going to ask that 

people please mute your mic until it's your turn 

to talk. And then we can unmute you from our end 

and probably better that we do that. And if you're 

unmuting yourself, we're unmuting you, we're just 

going to toggle back and forth all day long. So 

but we'll figure out, I promise.

If you're on a phone that does not have 

a mute button, you can hit star 6, and that works 

like a toggle. So star 6 to mute, star 6 to unmute, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in case we do have issues.

Speakers had to sign up to address the 

Board, and so we're going to call on them when it's 

their turn to speak. And Steve Ela, the Board 

Chair, will be calling on speakers for their 

testimony. And only the 15 NOSB members who are 

on the line with us are allowed to ask questions 

of a speaker. So no audience questions during the 

webinar portion, or the meeting actually.

So, and we ask that speakers please 

state your name and affiliation clearly at the 

start of your comments to ensure that the 

transcriptionist can hear and associate the 

correct name with your comment. 

We are timing people today. For you 

regulars, you know we always use a comment timer. 

Commenters have three minutes. And in about ten 

seconds, I'm going to demonstrate to you what the 

speaker timer sounds like. Hopefully you can hear 

it well through the speakers, it's pretty loud. 

And at the end of your three minutes, the timer 

will beep.

So hopefully everyone can hear that all 

right. And that will indicate the end of your 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

comment, and we ask that you just please finish 

your sentence, and then Steve Ela will, the Board 

Chair will open it up to questions from Board 

members.

Now I'm going to turn the mic over to 

the National Organic Program's Deputy 

Administrator, Jennifer Tucker. Jenny. 

Hopefully your mic is unmuted, let me --

DR. TUCKER: Okay, good morning, 

everybody, or afternoon, depending on where you 

are. Michelle, can you hear me?

MS. ARSENAULT: We can hear you, yes, 

thank you.

DR. TUCKER: Great. So first of all, 

thank you, Michelle, that was a great kickoff. 

Hi, everybody, this is Jenny Tucker, Deputy 

Administrator of the National Organic Program. 

Welcome to all our National Organic Standards Board 

members. I'd particularly like to acknowledge our 

five new Board members, who are actually beginning 

their very first public meeting with us today.

So that's Nate Powell-Palm, Kimberly 

Huseman, Gerald D'Amore, Mindee Jeffery, and Wood 

Turner. So welcome.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And to all of our Board members, we 

thank you for your insights, your engagement, and 

your flexibility as we identified new ways to 

connect for this meeting.

To our public commenters today, thank 

you as well. The public comment process is a vital 

part of the Board's and the Program's work. These 

webinars have become a standard part of the NOSB 

meeting over the past few years, or smoothing the 

transition this time. We thank all of you for 

signing up to have your voices heard.

I also want to thank our audience, there 

are a lot of you out there, and you always serve 

as important witnesses to this public meeting 

process, and we're grateful that you are here.

This webinar today opens a series of 

virtual webinars that will occur over four days 

through next Thursday, April 30. Meeting access 

information for all meeting segments will be posted 

on the NOSB meeting page on the NOSB -- on the AMS 

website. And transcripts for all segments will 

be posted once they are completed.

This meeting, like other meetings of 

the National Organic Standards Board, will be run 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

based on the Federal Advisory Committee Act and 

the Board's Policy and Procedures Manual. I will 

act as the Designated Federal Officer for all 

meeting segments.

To close, I want to thank the National 

Organic Program team for their amazing work in 

getting us here today, Michelle Arsenault, Devon 

Pattillo, Shannon Nally Yanessa, and David 

Glasgow.

I also want to thank Steve Ela, Chair 

of the Board, who's going to lead the webinar. 

Steve, you are a wonderfully collaborative 

partner, and I am truly grateful.

I'm now going to hand off the mic to 

Shannon Nally Yanessa, who is our Standards 

Division Director, who's going to do a roll call 

of NOSB members and NOP staff. So thank you very 

much to all.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. Just 

wanted to do a sound check. Michelle, can you hear 

me?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yup, I can hear you, 

thank you.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Great, okay, thank 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

you.

MS. ARSENAULT: And I just wanted to 

remind Board members to unmute themselves so 

Shannon can hear you when she's taking roll call. 

And as a reminder, you can just, if you're muted, 

you can just hold the space bar down to talk and 

then release it when you're done.

Thanks, Shannon.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Sure, you're 

welcome. Good afternoon, all. So I will start 

with the Board members in alphabetical order. Sue 

Baird.

MS. BAIRD: Yes, I'm here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. Asa 

Bradman.

MS. ARSENAULT: Asa, if you're 

talking, we can't hear you. But I see you on there.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Okay, we'll keep 

going then. Jesse Buie.

MR. BUIE: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. Jerry 

D'Amore.

MR. D'AMORE: Here as well.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. Steve 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Ela.

MR. ELA: I am here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Great, thank you. 

Rick Greenwood. 

MS. ARSENAULT: Rick is on the line as 

well. 

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Okay. Kim 

Huseman.

MS. HUSEMAN: Hello, I'm present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. Mindee 

Jeffery.

MS. JEFFERY: Good morning, everyone.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Good morning. 

Dave Mortensen.

MS. ARSENAULT: Dave is not going to be 

with us until later.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: He's calling in, 

okay.

MS. ARSENAULT: Thank you.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Yeah. Emily 

Oakley.

MS. OAKLEY: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. Nate 

Powell-Palm.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. POWELL-PALM: Good morning, 

present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Good morning. 

Scott Rice.

MR. RICE: Good morning, present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. A-Dae 

Romero-Briones.

MS. ARSENAULT: I'm not seeing A-Dae 

logged in at the moment. Sorry, thank you, 

Shannon.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Okay. Dan Seitz.

DR. SEITZ: I'm present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you, and Wood 

Turner.

MR. TURNER: Good morning, I'm here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Good morning. 

Thank you. And now I'm going to go over the 

National Organic Program staff. Michelle 

Arsenault.

MS. ARSENAULT: Here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Jennifer Tucker.

DR. TUCKER: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: David Glasgow.

MR. GLASGOW: I'm here.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Devon Pattillo.

MR. PATTILLO: Present, thanks.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Angelyque Pegues.

MS. PEGUES: I'm here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: And Penny Zuck.

MS. ZUCK: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: All right, thank 

you all. And now I'm going to hand the mic over 

to Steve Ela, who is the Chair --

MR. ELA: Thank you.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Of the National 

Organic Standards Board.

MR. ELA: Great, thank you very much, 

Shannon and Jenny. I'm assuming you all can hear 

me. Welcome, everybody, to this public comment 

webinar. As we start I want to just say a couple 

quick things. 

I want thank everybody for being 

willing to both do this webinar, like we have in 

the past, for all the oral commenters that were 

supposed to appear in person for being willing to 

do this via webinar as well. 

We really appreciate all the public 

comments. And we know it's been a bit of a scramble 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to move this from an in-person meeting to a virtual 

meeting. But I particularly want to thank the NOP 

staff for really working to make this work.

And of course all of you as our 

stakeholders for giving us input and your public 

comments, or either written or oral. We know it's 

a very crazy time where many people have lots of 

competing demands other than the NOSB, and so all 

the comments are greatly appreciated.

I also really want to recognize the new 

members. This is a difficult way for them to start 

where they don't actually get to be in person. 

But again, Jerry D'Amore, Kim Huseman, Mindee 

Jeffery, Nate Powell-Palm, and Wood Turner, we 

appreciate having you on the Board and we're 

excited to have your input.

With that, I want to just note that 

these webinars are, follow our public comment 

policy from our PPM manual. In general, the way 

we're going to work this is these will only be 

speakers who signed up during our registration 

period. 

I will be -- call upon you in the order 

of the schedule. Each speaker will have three 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

minutes, and we will have time for questions from 

the NOSB members. And I will take those questions 

in order as best as I can.

If any of the Board members do not have 

their hand up or I can't see it, please feel free 

to jump in and note that you want to ask a question.

Everyone that is giving a comment must 

give their name and affiliation for the record. 

We do not allow for proxy speech, proxy speakers. 

And of particular importance as always, any 

individuals providing public comment shall refrain 

from making any personal attacks or remarks that 

might impugn the character of any individual. 

If that does happen, I will jump in and 

ask to continue without that. And if it happens 

again, we will cut you off. So we want to keep 

this very up and up and with great respect for 

everybody that is commenting.

I will announce the speaker coming up 

and the next speaker after that so that the, 

everybody can be ready, and it will also give our 

staff time to look up the phone numbers and have 

people ready as we go down the list.

As Michelle mentioned, each speaker has 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

three minutes, and the timer will start when the 

speaker begins. When the timer goes off, if you 

would please complete your sentence and end your 

comment when you hear the timer. And then the 

Board members will indicate to me if they have 

questions and I will recognize them in turn. Only 

NOSB members are allowed to ask questions.

So with that, are there any questions 

from the Board? All right, if I don't -- hearing 

none, our first speaker will be Philip LaRocca, 

and we will have Peter Nell following that, and 

then Lynn Coody. So we will start with Philip 

LaRocca.

Phil, could you please state your name 

and affiliation, and then we will start your three 

minutes. And Phil, we're not hearing you, so if 

you're on mute, you will have to unmute yourself. 

Still not hearing you.

MS. ARSENAULT: So I can un --

MR. LAROCCA: I think I got it. Can 

you hear me?

MR. ELA: There we are. We can now, 

thank you, Phil. Please state your name and 

affiliation and then continue.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. LAROCCA: Okay, my name is Phil 

LaRocca, I'm the owner and winemaker of LaRocca 

Vineyards. I'm also the Chairman of the Board for 

CCOF, the California Certified Organic Farmers. 

Also the Vice Chair of COPAC, California Organic 

Product Advisory Committee.

This is my 47th year as an organic 

farmer. I am very comfortable working in dirt, 

I am not at all comfortable working with computers. 

So bear with -- that's why I had a hard time 

unmuting myself.

Anyway, those on the West Coast, good 

morning, those on the East Coast, I guess it's good 

afternoon. I shall be brief with my comments 

because dealing with this is stressing me out.

I support the rule that a three-year 

transition period after the use of a prohibited 

substance in any crop or livestock production, 

including land, under containers inside 

greenhouses if a prohibited substance has been 

used. Talked about that for a while.

Also encouraging strengthening the 

requirements for increased days on pasture and the 

percentage of pasture required for dairy, other 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

livestock.

And three, maintain vigilance on export 

fraud as well as all organic production. We must 

maintain the integrity of the organic seal.

With that said, I would like to say 

thank you to the NOP, the NOSB, all organic 

producers, handlers, processors, consumers. We 

are all involved in this organic culture, and I 

find this to be vital to the wealth and health of 

our planet. As any farmer, whether you're an 

organic farmer or not, recognizes that weak plants 

are those that attract disease and pests. So it 

is with our planet and our bodies. 

As we face this major health crisis, 

it is important that we as a culture, even though 

we may have our differences in our approach, but 

in the end, the integrity of what we do as members 

of this organic community should always win out. 

It is my absolute belief that our hope for a 

healthy world rests in the production and 

consumption of organic food. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Phil. And I just 

want to note that A-Dae is on the line and we had, 

she is unable to mute yourself. So A-Dae, we do 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

know you're there and we will work on that, as well 

as Asa. Are there questions for Philip? I see 

Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Phil. I 

appreciate your comments on the three-year 

transition period, and I had a question. This has 

turned out to be a much more complicated issue than 

I had originally realized. 

I was wondering if you're aware of any 

transplant or seedling production facilities on 

the West Coast or in California in particular that 

might be transitioning or using the same facility 

for organic and conventional seedling production, 

either simultaneously or shortly transitioning 

from conventional to organic, or back and forth.

MR. LAROCCA: I have heard that that 

was taking place, but I don't have any factual 

evidence of anybody doing it. We talked about this 

in CCOF, and as far as we know, none of our certified 

members that grow in containers have done that. 

So we are aware of it and we've put that out to 

all our members that we are keeping a vigilant eye 

on that. 

So as far as I know, we do not have any 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of our members practicing that at this time.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there other Board members 

with questions? I don't see any. So if you do 

have a question, please jump in. 

Philip, I do have one question 

personally, and so I just want to be very clear, 

you support a three-year transition for 

greenhouses pretty much just across the board, is 

that what you're saying?

MR. LAROCCA: Yeah, I do, we -- I've 

had a lot of feedback on this where one of the 

arguments is that, you know, as a longtime organic 

farmer, if we were to transition onto a regular 

farm, it's a three-year period. 

And a lot of these farmers that are 

going through this three-year period feel cheated 

that somebody can just jump in, put a greenhouse 

on land that, say, had a prohibited material on 

it. And because they're growing in a container 

in a greenhouse, that they can automatically 

receive certification.

A, I don't believe that that should take 

place for the fact that the prohibited material 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

is put on. And B, it's not fair for farmers that 

are growing on ground that have to wait the 

three-year period and other growers don't.

MR. ELA: Any other questions? All 

right, thank you, Philip, we do appreciate your 

comment.

Next up is Peter Nell, and after that 

we'll have Lynn Coody, and then Peggy Miars.

Peter, if you'd state your name and 

affiliation, you're up.

MR. NELL: Good morning, my name is 

Peter Nell, and I work for California Certified 

Organic Farmers, CCOF. CCOF represents over 4,000 

certified organic farmers, processor/handlers, 

certified organic businesses, etc., at the local, 

state and federal level.

We are aware that a petition for novel 

ammonia products is forthcoming and may be -- may 

have already been submitted to the National Organic 

Program for NOSB's review. We encourage the Board 

to prioritize this review, this petition. 

CCOF supports the goal of protecting 

marine species, including fish and marine 

materials. We support the re-listing of aquatic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

plant extracts to the National List of Allowed and 

Prohibited Substances.

As noted in our written comments, over 

880 of our certified organic farmers list aquatic 

plant extracts as plant or soil amendments in their 

organic system plans. Aquatic plant extracts have 

been used by organic farmers for decades, and CCOF 

is unaware of commercially available alternatives 

for these products.

Should the Board recommend de-listing 

aquatic plant extracts in the fall, a significant 

phase-in period would be necessary so that organic 

farmers could make substantial adjustments to 

their longstanding fertility management plans.

Similarly, over 1,000 CCOF members list 

liquid fish products in their OSPs. As noted in 

our previous written comments, CCOF appreciates 

NOSB for taking the time to consider the impacts 

of non-synthetic inputs used in organic 

production. These materials sometimes are not 

given the same attention synthetic materials are 

given as they go through the sunset review process 

and other review.

However, the technical report for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

liquid fish products notes that there are no 

species of wild native fish harvested exclusively 

for the use of liquid fish products. Therefore, 

the question remains on whether an updated 

annotation or additional requirement on liquid 

fish products is warranted for its use in organic 

crop production.

Lastly, I would like to support NOSB's 

continued efforts of creating and updating the 

research priorities. Those are an important tool 

for our universities and other research centers. 

And I'd like to welcome the new members 

of the Board. Thank you, new members, and 

not-as-new, for doing complex, sometimes difficult 

work on behalf of the organic community and 

ensuring we have a robust system in place. Thanks.

MS. ARSENAULT: Steve, if you're 

trying to -- I won't try to unmute you, I'll let 

you try to do it yourself. But if you're talking, 

we can't hear you yet. Thanks, Peter.

We are having a little bit of a delay 

issue. Steve, it looks like you're unmuted.

DR. TUCKER: So until Steve comes on, 

I could invite, as the DFO, questions from Board 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

members.

MR. BRADMAN: This is Asa, can you hear 

me?

MS. ARSENAULT: We can hear you and see 

you, Asa.

MR. ELA: I'm sorry, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: I just wanted to comment 

on the statement about the ammonia product. And 

yes, there is a material that's been petitioned 

aquatic. And that's kind of right now cycling 

through the review process. 

And there'll be, you know, of course 

probably a discussion document and proposal in time 

for public comment and review. But we're kind of 

in the middle of reviewing that document now.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Asa. Sorry about 

toggling my mute in the wrong direction before 

this. Thank you for jumping in, Jenny. Any other 

questions from the Board?

All right, thank you very much, Peter. 

Lynn Coody is next, followed by Peggy Miars, 

sorry, Peggy, and Aimee Simpson. 

So Lynn, we are ready for you. Please 

state your name and affiliation. And Lynn, we're 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

not hearing you yet. Lynn, still not hearing you.

MS. COODY: Hi, can you hear me now?

MR. ELA: We've got you, yeah, continue 

please.

MS. COODY: Okay, great, thanks. Hi, 

this is Lynn Coody, and I'll just say for the 

transcriptionist, my name is spelled with two O's, 

C-O-O-D-Y. And I'm presenting comments for 

Organic Produce Wholesalers Coalition. OPWC is 

seven businesses that distribute fresh organic 

produce across the United States and 

internationally. 

Sunset materials. OPWC submitted 

written comments on 11 sunset materials. Our 

comments include information about the use of these 

materials in growing fruits and vegetables, as well 

as comments from many growers about their need for 

these materials to produce specific crops.

Paper production needs. OPWC strongly 

supports the Crop Subcommittee's efforts to 

resolve differences in certifiers' approval of 

paper plant pots. Although we agree with this 

direction of the Subcommittee's proposal, OPWC 

suggests some technical clarifications to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

proactively address issues related to review of 

brand name products within this category.

The proposal focuses primarily on the 

source of the fibers used to manufacture these 

products. The Subcommittee chose not to include 

a biodegradability standard in its proposal, due 

to concerns about the time and costs needed for 

testing to that standard.

However, the listing motion for the 

definition of paper-based crop planting aids does 

use the words degrade into the soil. Our concern 

is that this definition would result in the 

application of the ASTM standard for 

biodegradation when evaluating paper planting 

aids.

We suggest a revision in line with the 

Subcommittee's intent to avoid testing for 

biodegradability. We also found the listing 

motion for the national list was not in line with 

the findings of the technical report with regard 

to glossy ink. 

The Subcommittee proposed using the 

same text used in the listing for newspaper, but 

we think it's important to correct an error in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

newspaper listing when applied to paper or planting 

aids, because the planting aids are likely to be 

reviewed more stringently than newspaper.

Biodegradable, bio-based mulch. 

OPWC's grower questionnaire yielded numerous 

responses about this material. Growers 

commented, coalesced around two points. First, 

plastic mulch is a very important weed control tool 

for horticultural crops. And second, there was 

a strong interest in using biodegradable plastic 

mulch.

The goal of NOSB's recommendation was 

to create progressive policy to promote the use 

of a new type of plastic mulch. However, during 

implementation the Board's recommendation failed 

to move growers toward either biodegradable or 

bio-based sources of plastic mulch film.

Our written comments provide a roadmap 

for regulating the source materials used in 

biodegradable mulches in an incremental fashion 

in order to provide better alternatives for 

biodegradable plastic mulch films in the near term, 

and to signal that there is market interest for 

mulch films containing increasingly higher 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

percentages of bio-based content.

OPWC appreciates the flexibility from 

the Board and the NOP staff in organizing this 

online meeting so the important work of regulating 

the organic trade is not interrupted even by a 

worldwide pandemic. Thanks again.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Lynn. And I will 

show throughout this webinar my infinite ability 

to mispronounce names. So I know most people by 

their first name, and suddenly I'm looking at last 

names going hmm. So I apologize, and I will 

apologize in advance to everyone else, you will 

not be alone.

Are there questions from the Board for 

Lynn? I don't see any questions. Lynn, I have 

one question with the biodegradable mulch. We've 

struggled with having, being able to feel 

comfortable that the mulch will degrade in all 

environments. 

And I think that is, that's been one 

issue, and it kind of comes back with the paper 

production aid issue as well, of really knowing 

like, for example, in a dry, arid environment will 

those materials degrade similar to a wet, humid 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

environment. Do you have any thoughts of how we 

should address that?

MS. COODY: Well, I think that the 

strongest tool for addressing it is getting started 

on evaluating the different types of biodegradable 

mulch films that are currently available on the 

market and seeing which have -- well, kind of 

looking at different types of plastic and the 

amount of biodegradability that is possible. 

And as far as your question about 

certification and the opportunity for reviewing 

and looking at things in a specific environment, 

I think that certification has the tools to do that. 

And our comments provided some ideas about how 

you could address that based on different uses.

So the worst, the most difficult 

situation is when a biodegradable mulch is used 

repeatedly, because it doesn't necessarily give 

you a chance to evaluate which plastic is from which 

year. But we suggested a tool for using 

photographs to document the amount of 

biodegradability. 

So I think with some, the certifiers 

putting their heads together could figure out ways 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to do that. And I think it really has to be an 

on-the-ground, individual approach based on 

microclimates and actually the way that farmers 

are managing their specific soils.

I don't see that there's going to be 

a universal approach to that that will work in all 

environments and in all ways of handling soil, 

individual soils by individual farmers.

MR. ELA: So as a followup, you're 

saying rather than the Board trying to assess that 

all the materials that we think we would allow would 

break down in all environments, we would allow, 

we would kind of push it to the certifiers to make 

sure if these biodegradable materials are being 

used, they're not accumulating in the soil.

MS. COODY: Yeah, I think that's the 

only way. I think it really has to be looked at 

individually. And I think what the Board should 

regulate is the ability to increase 

biodegradability over time. 

Even if it's not perfect when you first 

start, you could have papers from the NOP after 

the NOSB has made its rulings, the NOP could explain 

different ways to regulate from the certifiers' 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

point of view, and also to manage from the growers' 

point of view as we go on. 

It's kind of a learning curve, but I 

feel like we need to take a step and then take the 

next step and the next step after that. Which I 

think is doable through regulations through the 

NOP and instructions to certifiers.

MR. ELA: Great, thank you so much for 

those comments, and thank you for the comments on 

the paper production aids. I thought your 

thoughts were very -- made me think. And we may 

have not quite gotten some of the wording right, 

but we'll certainly talk about that. Really 

appreciate your comments.

MS. COODY: Thanks, Steve.

MR. ELA: Anybody else? All right, 

with that, we will move on to Peggy Miars, and then 

we will have Aimee Simpson, and then Jay Feldman 

after that.

Peggy, could you state your name and 

affiliation please. Peggy, we're not hearing you, 

so. Still not hearing you.

MS. MIARS: Can you hear me now?

MR. ELA: Yes, now we have you so.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. MIARS: Okay.

MR. ELA: Yup, you're -- please 

continue.

MS. MIARS: Good morning from Oregon. 

Okay, my name is Peggy Miars, I'm the Executive 

Director and CEO of OMRI, the Organic Materials 

Review Institute. Today I'll comment on EPA List 

4, inerts of minimal concern.

As we know, in 2015, the NOSB 

recommended a change to annotation language at 

205.601(m) and 205.603(e) to reference the EPA's 

Safer Chemical Ingredients List, or SCIL, instead 

of EPA List 4.

Five years have passed, and we're in 

the same situation, so I'll repeat part of OMRI's 

comments from 2015, in which we said the 

Subcommittee stated the proposal that, quote, 

There is a lot of similarity between the Safer 

Chemical Ingredients List and the review criteria 

set by OFPA, end quote. 

OMRI went on to suggest that it would 

be helpful for a final recommendation to include 

a specific plan of how the NOSB will address these 

gaps, and a rationale for moving forward with a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

recommendation prior to the gaps being addressed. 

Plans such as this will give transparency and 

integrity to the recommendation.

Now I'll highlight and expand on some 

of the data that OMRI provided in our written 

comments. Comparing OMRI data from March 2020 to 

OMRI's 2011 data that we previously submitted, we 

see that between 2011 and 2020, the number of 

distinct, inert ingredients used in OMRI-listed 

products increased from 189 to 365. That's an 

increase of 176, or 93%.

The number of distinct inert 

ingredients in OMRI-listed products that do appear 

on the SCIL or the 25(b) list increased from 130 

to 153. That's an increase of 23, or 17%. The 

number of distinct, inert ingredients in 

OMRI-listed products that do not appear on the SCIL 

or the 25(b) list increased from 59 to 212. That's 

an increase of 153, or 259%.

Replacing the allowance for EPA List 

4 inerts with the SCIL and 25(b) list would lead 

to the prohibition of some, but not all, currently 

allowed pesticides in the OMRI products list. 

If the SCIL and 25(b) list replace List 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

4, certifiers and material review organizations 

need clear and specific language to guide them in 

material review, and/or an MOU should be created 

between NOP and EPA so that OFPA criteria are 

applied before a material on SCIL is given approval 

for organic use.

Thank you for your ongoing work to 

uphold organic integrity, and I hope to see you 

in person at a fall meeting.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Peggy. Are there 

questions from the Board.

MR. BRADMAN: Asa, sorry, can you hear 

me?

MR. ELA: Yes, go ahead, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay, thank you. 

Apologies, I don't have all the cues here and the 

mute button is a little hard to reach sometimes.

Peggy, I have a couple of questions. 

One, are there any substances on the EPA List 4 

right now that should be prohibited? I know 

there's strong feelings about some of them.

And then two, I just want to put out 

there in principle, I think all inert ingredients 

and all ingredients in any formulation should be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

publically available. I'm curious to know what 

kinds of inerts are being used that are not on 

25(b), the 25(b) list.

And also even within the 25(b) list, 

there's materials there that are potentially 

respiratory irritants or other concerns. They 

might have low acute toxicity, but I think that 

any user of a material should know what's in the 

material that's being used. And I don't know if 

OMRI has a position on that, but I'd be curious 

to hear your response.

MS. MIARS: Yes, thank you for those 

questions. So the first question was whether 

there are any substances on List 4 that should be 

prohibited. And my response to that is that OMRI 

doesn't take positions on whether to allow a 

material or not. We take our cue from the NOP and 

what is -- what they say is allowed will be allowed. 

We don't take a position on that.

Let's see, you asked a question what 

kind of inerts are in I think in OMRI-listed 

products that are not on 25(b), and that I don't 

have with me, but we could find out that 

information.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And then your last comment/question 

about whether inert ingredients should be 

publically available, again, OMRI doesn't take a 

position on that. We do reviews according to the 

organic standards. So we don't take a position 

on that.

The one comment that I will make, since 

I do interact internationally, is my understanding 

is that the EU doesn't really pay attention to 

inerts, which is quite surprising to me.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MS. MIARS: You're welcome.

MR. ELA: Any other questions for Peggy 

from the Board? Thank you very much, Peggy, we 

do appreciate it. 

Next we have Aimee Simpson, followed 

by Jay Feldman and Kiki Hubbard.

Aimee, you have the floor. Could you 

please state your name and affiliation.

MS. SIMPSON: Good morning from 

Washington. Yes, my name is Aimee Simpson, and 

I'm the Director of Advocacy and Product 

Sustainability for the PCC Community Markets, the 

largest grocery cooperative in the country, based 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in Seattle, Washington area.

We have experienced in the past six 

weeks unprecedented challenges across the organic 

community and food supply chain. Grocery workers, 

farmers, farm workers, processors, transportation 

crews, delivery men and women, and many, many more 

have been thrust into the front lines against 

COVID-19.

We've been tasked with the job of 

keeping society fed, and we've been deemed 

essential, a fact that many of us knew but had never 

contemplated in a manner like this one facing us 

now. And yet, it is a term that lies at the very 

core of the organic principles. 

PCC has always prided itself on 

prioritizing organic, and whenever possible, local 

producers. We've done this to support a better 

way of growing and providing food for our members 

and shoppers, a way that is safer for farm workers, 

better for the environment, and in our minds 

essential for the future of our world and food 

supply. 

Well, never has this essentiality been 

more evident, because it is the organic, local, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

small, and mid-sized producers that under the 

circumstances of COVID-19 have proven their 

ability to adapt and continue to provide supplies 

during these challenging times.

It is these producers that have kept 

our shelves filled with eggs when other grocers 

had none, it is our organic distributors that 

delivered without fail the produce not only to our 

stores, but also to help our struggling food banks 

across the region. 

It is also the organic farmers that 

supply local farmers markets that we worked with 

to help create new food supply chains when our large 

scale national systems were failing and no longer 

could provide the food necessary to support our 

grocery rescue partners.

Unfortunately, we all know the economic 

strain of this pandemic is the second wave, one 

that poses almost a greater threat than the 

pandemic itself to the small and mid-sized organic 

farmers, distributors, and suppliers that have 

become the lifeline to our communities, the ones 

that have embodied true essentiality.

We recognize that given the stresses 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of the times, there may be calls for relaxed 

enforcement, less regulation, but now more than 

ever we must support the organic producers that 

uphold the very highest of organic standards. 

They cannot be undercut by fraudulent 

imports, origin-of-livestock loopholes, poor 

pasturing enforcement, and practices that fail to 

build soil and uphold basic organic principles such 

as cover cropping and biodiversity. They must be 

supported by making the organic label as strong 

and consistent as it can be.

I want to thank the National Organic 

Program and Board for adapting to the demands of 

these times and continuing to provide us with the 

opportunity to voice our support for organic. We 

are grateful for your dedication and hard work and 

ask you to complete this work.

Please, as you do it, consider the new 

lens of essentiality and work to protect the 

organic standards and producers to whom we and the 

many people in our community could not have endured 

these times without. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you much, very much, 

Aimee. It looks like Emily has a question.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. OAKLEY: Hi, Aimee, it's not a 

question. I just wanted to thank you for your 

extremely poignant and articulate comments. So 

thank you very much, I agree with them 

wholeheartedly.

MS. SIMPSON: Thank you.

MR. D'AMORE: Jerry D'Amore here, I 

would like to second that.

MR. ELA: Any other Board members with 

questions? Thank you very much, Aimee, we do 

appreciate it, and we appreciate your support.

MS. SIMPSON: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Next we have Jay Feldman, 

followed by Kiki Hubbard and then, here's, I'm 

going, I'm sorry, Jen, but Jen Berkebile.

So Jay, you're on up, and could you 

please state your name and affiliation.

MR. FELDMAN: Good afternoon, I'm Jay 

Feldman, Executive Director of Beyond Pesticides 

and former member of the NOSB. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: Yes, we can hear you. You're 

fading in and out just a little bit, but let's 

continue and I'll let you know if --

MR. FELDMAN: Okay. Welcome to new 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

members. It's Beyond Pesticides' sincere hope 

that you will embrace the history and spirit of 

the Organic Foods Production Act in ensuring that 

the rich diversity of the organic community and 

industry is an integral part of the deliberations 

of this Board.

We hear the word integrity when we talk 

about the role of the NOSB. Integrity goes to the 

value of the organic seal in the marketplace and 

the longterm growth of the organic market. The 

NOSB has a special responsibility in safeguarding 

the integrity of the National List of the Allowed 

and Prohibited Substances, ensuring that elements 

of the law have been fully evaluated with an 

adequate technical review.

Short-term market growth should not be 

achieved at the expense of longterm trust in the 

organic sector. Allowed synthetic substances 

must not cause, one, adverse effects to health and 

the environment from production to use through 

disposal. 

Two, must be compatible with an organic 

system, which is defined in the law. And three, 

must be essential. We do not add synthetics, even 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

those meeting other criteria, unless we determine 

the need in organic production.

And of course, sunset means that a 

substance does not stay on the National List unless 

current information shows that it meets criteria 

of OFPA. This is admittedly a very high bar. 

OFPA's requirements go beyond those of other 

agencies like EPA and FDA. The law maintains a 

default assumption against synthetics in organic 

production and processing.

We formed the NOSB to be the steward 

of this process. For example, certain substances 

and practices are essential not to organic 

production, but to industrial agriculture. Under 

the law, we need more pasturing of animals. We 

will preserve the marine environment and virgin 

forests. 

We will stop the use of chlorine-based 

substances. We will eliminate inerts that are 

among the most hazardous materials used in organic 

production. We will ensure rigorous inspection 

certification without conflict of interest. 

If we do not adhere to these principles 

in law, we will erode the trust of consumers, who 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

pay a premium, and we will have lost the opportunity 

to grow the only market that offers an opportunity 

to sustain life by stemming the climate crisis, 

protecting farm workers, and halting biodiversity 

decline.

For Beyond Pesticides and our 

constituency of consumers, farmers, scientists, 

medical practitioners, municipalities, 

landscapers, and school districts, the NOSB is not 

a panel of vested interests that are seated to 

protect a piece of the pie, but one charged with 

growing the integrity of the label so that organic 

becomes mainstream agriculture.

You actually may sit in one of the most 

important seats for our future. But what do we 

do when USDA holds us back if there are critical 

issues that you can't get on the NOSB work plan, 

or you want to provide advice to the Secretary of 

Agriculture? 

Please assert the authority that 

Congress gave to this board, for without the Board 

asserting its authority, organic will remain a 

niche market, and we will suffer the apocalyptic 

environmental and health catastrophes that the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

scientific community predict.

The good news is that we have a 

solution: organic. We just need to pursue it with 

all our collective strength. Thank you for your 

service on the Board.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jay. Are there 

any questions for Jay from the Board? All right, 

thank you again, Jay. And we will move on.

Kiki Hubbard, you are up, then Jen 

Berkebile and Amalie Lipstreu will be after Jen.

Kiki, go ahead. Please state your name 

and affiliation.

MS. HUBBARD: Hi, everyone, can you 

hear me?

MR. ELA: Yes, you're on.

MS. HUBBARD: Thank you. I'm Kiki 

Hubbard, and I'm the Director of Advocacy and 

Communications for Organic Seed Alliance. We are 

a national nonprofit that ensures that organic 

farmers have the seed they need to be successful. 

And we do this through research, education, and 

advocacy.

A warm welcome to the new Board members. 

Thank you so much for volunteering to participate 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in this very important public process, and thanks 

to the NOP for making sure that the spring meeting 

happened today. Despite the challenging 

circumstances, I hope everyone is staying well.

My comments that follow emphasize the 

importance of keeping seed and plant breeding 

issues at the forefront of the NOSB's work plan 

and NOP's priorities for implementation. 

I'm going to briefly touch on three 

areas, the first of which is that we want to 

emphasize again that we're so pleased that two Crop 

Subcommittee proposals unanimously were passed at 

previous NOSB meetings on the topic of organic 

seed. These included updating the organic seed 

regulation and strengthening guidance for 

certifiers regarding the organic seed and planting 

stock requirement.

As organic seed growers work to 

increase the quantity and diversity of organic seed 

available to growers, policy must follow suit to 

ensure increased adoption in a measurable and 

reasonable way. This will require the NOP taking 

action to implement these strong proposals.

Secondly, on the topic of genetic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

integrity of seed, we're happy to see that three 

of the research priorities in the current 

discussion document underscore the importance of 

collecting data and more information on this topic. 

Clearly we have been hindered by a lack of data 

along this path. 

But there are a few steps that we can 

take right now, the first of which is we believe 

it's still urgently needed that there be a USDA 

task force that is charged with collecting baseline 

data of seed, both organic seed and --

PARTICIPANT: I lost you.

MS. HUBBARD: Can you hear me now?

MR. ELA: You're still good, Kiki.

MS. HUBBARD: Oh, okay. So it's 

critical that we collect this baseline data to 

inform policies moving forward. And ideally that 

data would be collected not just at the seed level, 

but across the entire value chain. 

And the NOSB is also well positioned 

to develop recommended guidance on GMO testing for 

certifiers and the broader organic industry. Best 

practices in this regard do not exist, and we need 

to understand better how best to move forward with 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

testing so that there's more consistency in how 

we're currently testing and should be testing.

Lastly, we hope to see the topic of 

excluded methods back on the agenda this fall. 

It's important that we continue to understand the 

alignment of both new and older breeding techniques 

with the organic standards in order to provide more 

clarity to organic farmers, plant breeders, seed 

companies, certifiers, and the organic community 

at large.

So we encourage the NOP to adopt the 

recommendations that have been passed to date by 

the NOSB on the topic of excluded methods. And 

we hope the NOP and NOSB will work together to make 

sure that this important topic remains on the 

agenda at future meetings. 

So please let us know how Organic Seed 

Alliance can be of service to you, and thank you 

again for your time and efforts.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Kiki. 

Are there questions? It looks like Sue has a 

question for you, Kiki. Sue, go ahead.

MS. BAIRD: Good morning, Kiki. 

MS. HUBBARD: Morning.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. BAIRD: It appears that I have 

become the hemp consultant of the world. I'm 

getting all kinds of requests to help hemp 

producers. And are you aware of any hemp organic 

seed? Because I'm not finding any. That's my 

first question.

Secondly, it does appear, talking to 

University of Missouri researchers, that there is 

a lot of CRISPR technology being used for hemp seed. 

And thirdly, what about feminization of hemp, are 

you familiar with hemp? I'm sorry.

MS. HUBBARD: Yeah, thanks for the 

question, Sue, much appreciated. Hemp is not a 

crop that Organic Seed Alliance closely follows. 

It is increasingly an important crop to organic 

growers, we all know that. So unfortunately, I 

do not have answers at the ready to your questions, 

but I'd be more than happy to follow up with you 

on all of them. I'll jot them down right now.

MS. BAIRD: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there any other questions 

from the Board? Thank you, Kiki, we do appreciate 

it, as always.

MS. HUBBARD: Thank you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Next -- one thing I want to 

just say to all our speakers is that we aren't using 

video, so if when you're giving your comments, if 

you're trying to use video, just know that that 

won't appear. We're keeping this pretty much just 

audio.

Next up is Jen Berkebile. And Jen, if 

I mispronounce your name, you can correct me. And 

then we have Amalie Lipstreu and then Nicole Dehne.

Jen, if you would state your name and 

affiliation, please continue.

MS. BERKEBILE: Good afternoon, 

everyone, can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We've got.

MS. BERKEBILE: Great. My name is Jen 

Berkebile, so you got it right, Steve. I am the 

Materials Program Manager at Pennsylvania 

Certified Organic, and we certify over 1,600 

organic operations throughout the U.S.

Today I'll be commenting on paper for 

use as a crop production aid. I appreciate the 

Crop Subcommittee's work on this topic. PCO 

supports the allowances of paper pots, seed tape, 

collars, and other paper-based crop planting aids.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Paper is already permitted for use as 

both mulch and as a compost feed stock, and PCO 

agrees that an alternative listing for paper crop 

production aids is a sound and sensible solution 

for allowing paper for other crop uses.

However, we caution the Subcommittee 

regarding the complexity of the proposed listings. 

Including a definition for paper-based crop 

planting aids that requires ASTM D6866 testing will 

likely be a barrier for the allowance of many 

products, especially feed tape and collars, that 

manufacturing may be unwilling to test.

If a paper-based crop planting aid, 

especially the paper pots currently on the market, 

meets the ASTD6866 percentage requirement, PCO 

supports this definition, accepting that some 

products will be disqualified simply because 

manufacturers may not be willing to pay for the 

testing. 

PCO supports soliciting paper-based 

crop planting aids as crop production aids at 

205.601(o). PCO will apply sound and sensible 

decision making when verifying the proposed 

requirement for 100 percent bio-based fiber 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

content when commercially available, as such 

products do not currently exist and are unlikely 

to exist in the near future. We will collaborate 

with other certifiers and develop a consistent 

process for verifying compliance. 

PCO recommends that the Subcommittee 

pass the proposed listing, again provided that the 

paper-based crop planting aids, specifically the 

paper pots currently on the market, meet the 85 

percent bio-based content requirement.

I wanted to take a moment during my 

comments to thank the NOC and NOSB for holding a 

remote meeting. We appreciate that moving from 

an in-person meeting to a remote one on such short 

notice was likely a challenge, and I know that 

sitting in so many hours of remote meetings may 

be difficult for all of us.

So thank you to both the NOP and the 

NOSB. PCO does hope that the NOSB meetings can 

continue to be held in person when it is safe to 

do so. The in-person meetings are used as an 

opportunity to connect with other industry members 

in a more meaningful way than can occur during a 

remote meeting. We encourage the NOP to continue 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

holding in-person NOSB meetings whenever possible.

Thank you to the NOSB for your time and 

dedication on the Board and your work on these 

issues.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Jen. 

Are there questions from the Board? Sue has a 

question.

MS. BAIRD: Jen, I'm interested -- in 

your written comments you said that you have 138 

poultry operations who would interested in 

fenbendazole for blackhead. Did I read your 

comments correctly? And I know that you didn't 

talk about that now maybe, but --

MS. BERKEBILE: No, that's a good 

question. So we have approximately 138 poultry 

operations that are interested in fenbendazole for 

use as a parasiticide. I would say a subset of 

those requested it specifically for blackhead. 

I think that some of the requests came through as 

a general request. 

But some came through specifically as 

for having this issue with blackhead. And now 

fenbendazole is labeled for poultry, can we use 

it for that use. Does that make sense?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. BAIRD: It does make sense. Can 

I follow up, Steve?

MR. ELA: Yes, please.

MS BAIRD: The petitioner has 

specifically asked us for worm infestation. 

Blackhead of course is not a worm. Is that an 

issue? I know that it is used in conventional worm 

with blackhead.

MS. BERKEBILE: That's a good 

question. I guess if it, I will say if 

fenbendazole for poultry is added to 603 listings, 

then as long as it complies with the annotation, 

which I'd have to look at specifically to say 

whether or not blackhead falls under an allowed 

issue to be treated with those 603 parasiticides. 

MS. BAIRD: Thanks. I'll ask maybe 

Merck or some of those people might know. Thank 

you.

MS. BERKEBILE: Yeah, yup, thank you 

for the question.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions

from the Board? I have one myself regarding the 

paper pots. I know a rationale in, well we first 

of all hear your concern about whether feed tapes 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and other things will comply with the bio-based 

requirement. I think our rationale was that the 

paper pots, just because they have to hold up 

longer, from, the word from manufactures is then 

they need to use, you know, additional fibers that 

do not break down as quickly. 

Whereas the feed tape, because it's 

kept dry right until right before use, would not 

require those additional synthetics. It's our 

assumption that they would meet that bio-based 

requirements. 

I also, at least in looking through 

public comments, didn't see, and I need to keep 

looking, any manufacturers of those tapes 

commenting that they wouldn't need that. So given 

how the annotation is currently written, you would 

be okay if we passed it at this meeting?

MS. BERKEBILE: PCO would support the 

Subcommittee passing the proposed listings as 

written, yes.

MR. ELA: Great. Any other questions? 

Thank you very much, Jen.

MS. BERKEBILE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We will move on to Amalie 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Lipstreu, and then we will have Nicole Dehne and 

Jaydee Hanson coming up next. So Amalie, if you'd 

state your name and affiliation.

MS. LIPSTREU: Can you hear me okay?

MR. ELA: We can, go ahead.

MS. LIPSTREU: Thank you. Good 

afternoon, NOSB members and NOP staff. I'm Amalie 

Lipstreu, the Policy Director for the Ohio 

Ecological Food and Farm Association, and I 

appreciate the opportunity to speak with you this 

afternoon and to share our thoughts on the eve of 

the 50th anniversary of the first Earth Day 

celebration in 1970.

For many people who buy organic 

products, it's not hard to imagine that they see 

support for the organic industry is akin to the 

sentiment that drove that first Earth Day and the 

resulting landmark environmental legislation. 

They have the opportunity to purchase 

food grown in a way that protects the environment 

and stewards animals in its care, as well as the 

beneficial insects necessary for agriculture to 

thrive into the future.

As members of the NOSB, you are all 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

aware of the role and benefits of this national 

system of agriculture, as well as its shortcomings. 

And it's to the latter to which you must devote 

significant effort. That effort may include 

strongly advocating for setting your own work 

agenda. Despite its best intentions, large 

bureaucracies are often unable to respond nimbly 

to the needs on the ground.

One of the most pressing needs 

currently is also an opportunity for organic to 

shine. Global climate destabilization is a threat 

to our very existence, and organic agriculture can 

and should figure predominantly in efforts to adapt 

and mitigate this threat.

While there are efforts at state and 

national levels to incentivize practices that can 

help move us toward improvements in carbon 

sequestration, most are piecemeal. The most 

effective way that we have as an agricultural 

community to address this issue is with a 

systems-based approach that integrates multiple 

factors and practices within the agro ecosystem. 

As you are well aware, organic 

certification is the only governmental sanctioned, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

third-party accredited system of agriculture with 

the means to be accountable and respond to this 

need. This will require taking a serious look at 

the oversight of soil management provisions within 

the standards to ensure that we can continue 

advocating for organic as the gold standard of 

agriculture.

That includes enforcement of soil 

building, cover cropping, crop rotation, and 

biodiversity practices required in the organic 

regulation, establishing clear standards for the 

certification of container systems, and 

restrictions on the use of highly soluble 

nutrients.

In summary, please add the role of 

organic agriculture in climate change to your work 

agenda. Thank you.

MR. ELA: It looks like Emily has a 

question.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you. Thank you, 

Amalie, for your comments. And I was wondering 

if you could elaborate on some of the lack of soil 

enforcement provisions that you see might be 

occurring or that you think we need to ensure don't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

occur.

MS. LIPSTREU: Sure. Well I know that 

I think most, certainly most certifiers probably 

feel that, you know, they're doing a good job in 

checking in with producers during the inspection 

time. 

But I think if it's something that we 

are holding up as an opportunity for all of 

agriculture to look to, we need to have really a 

firm footing and foundation in showing that the 

practices that are required are being followed, 

implemented, and achieving results.

So I know that when the National Organic 

Coalition held some discussion groups at one of 

our last NOC pre-NOSB meetings, there was a 

considerable amount of variation in terms of what 

people felt was and wasn't being verified. So I 

think just whatever action the Board can take to 

provide greater consistency when it comes to those 

soil-building practices that will serve us better 

as an organic community. 

And also, again, addressing the need 

for certification standards for container systems 

and restrictions on those highly soluble 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

nutrients.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions 

from the Board? Thank you very much, Amalie. 

We'll next have Nicole Dehne, then we'll have 

Jaydee Hanson and Julia Barton after that. 

Nicole, go ahead. Tell me how to 

pronounce your last name, and if you'd tell us your 

name and affiliation.

MS. DEHNE: We'll be happy to, it is 

a tough last name to pronounce, so no worries, 

Steve. Can you guys hear me okay? Oops.

MR. ELA: We can hear you just fine.

MS. DEHNE: Okay, so my name is Nicole 

Dehne, I'm the Certification Director for Vermont 

Organic Farmers, representing over 800 organic 

producers in the state of Vermont. I'd like to 

thank the NOSB for all of your hard work and for 

the opportunity to give comments today on a few 

agenda items.

The first one is biodegradable 

bio-based mulch. BBM has been on the national list 

since 2014, and yet there's currently no product 

on the market that can meet the required criteria. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

One of the biggest challenges, as you know, in 

meeting this criteria, is finding a material that 

has 100 percent bio-based polymers.

Thanks to the NOSB's proposal allowing 

paper as a planting aid, we may have a path forward. 

If we're willing to accept some synthetic, 

non-paper fibers in paper, we should also do the 

same for BBM. 

We agree that we want to be careful 

about the effect of these synthetic polymers and 

their potential to accumulate small particles of 

plastic in the soil. Research on this topic should 

continue. 

However, we are also struggling with 

the impact of our dependence on plastic. This 

shouldn't be taken lightly. We have a 

responsibility to try to reduce our plastic use, 

and BBM is one important one way to do this.

The NOP's rescinding of Policy Memo 

15-1 provides an opportunity for the NOSB to revise 

the current definition to reduce the bio-based 

content. We implore the NOSB to make this change, 

use the proposal for paper planting aids as a guide, 

reduce the bio-based content from 100 percent to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

85 percent, and require producers to use materials 

with higher bio-based content when commercially 

available.

In addition, we suggest that the 

current listing be amended as follows. BBM mulch 

film must not contain, as opposed to must be 

produced without, organisms or feed stock derived 

from excluded methods. It's not typical for 

certifiers and material review organizations to 

evaluate this far back into the manufacturing 

process to evaluate GMO status. Instead, it would 

be more typical to prohibit GMOs in the final 

product being reviewed.

We feel strongly that we need to make 

these important changes in order to produce a 

commercially viable product. Our farmers feel 

it's time to reduce our dependence on plastic, and 

many feel that the use of BBM would be an important 

step towards achieving this goal. 

The other topic is fenbendazole. We 

do certify, VOF certifies small poultry producers. 

It has been our experience that these farmers do 

not require synthetic parasiticides to manager 

their flocks. Typically, our farmers control 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

parasites by good pasture management. 

It's our concern that because the 

outdoor access requirements for poultry are not 

consistent, that allowing fenbendazole for all 

poultry producers would result in abuse of the 

allowance. 

How can producers without pasture have 

a pasture management plan? Will organic poultry 

producers have enough land to keep birds off the 

infected pasture for enough time to prevent new 

infestation? If adequate land is not available, 

poultry will continue to get re-infected, and the 

need for fenbendazole will become routine. That's 

it for me.

MR. ELA: Thank you, thank you very 

much. And the irony is that I was going to 

pronounce your name actually correctly, but then 

I correct -- then I thought no, it won't be that.

MS. DEHNE: Right, right, so close.

MR. ELA: Oh, yes, oh well. Are there 

questions? It looks like we'll start with Mindee. 

Mindee, we can't hear you, so you may need to 

unmute yourself.

MS. JEFFERY: Hi, Nicole, thank you. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I'm wondering if you could provide us with any 

perspective on what the barrier is to evaluating 

bio-based mulches this far back for GMOs in the 

original source material.

MS. DEHNE: Sure. I don't necessarily 

think that there's a barrier; it's just it seems 

in the annotation that the NOSB is requiring 

stricter requirements as far as evaluating GMOs. 

So it's pretty typical for certifiers and material 

review organizations to say there's no GMOs in the 

final product, but then to go back some steps and 

say were there any GMOs in the production of the 

product materials, for example, that we haven't 

necessarily been doing. That's not as typical.

I'm not saying it's not being done at 

all because it could be inconsistent, but it isn't 

like the typical way in which certifiers will do 

that review for GMOs.

MR. ELA: Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Thanks, Nicole, for your 

comments on synthetic fibers and the paper 

production needs and BBM. I was wondering if 

you're aware of any BBM products on the market that 

could meet that 85 percent wording suggestion that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

you had.

MS. DEHNE: Thank you. That's a great 

question. In fact, the last manufacturer that I 

spoke to was saying that they could have a 

commercially available product that had 60 percent 

bio-based material, but I felt that to be 

consistent with paper and to provide some 

incentive, I thought, you know, a compromise of 

85 percent made sense. 

So I don't -- it's very possible that 

there wouldn't be one that could quite comply yet, 

but I think we would be getting closer to complying 

at 85 than we would at 100.

MS. OAKLEY: Would you mind sharing 

with the Crop Subcommittee offline some of that 

information, or provide it to Michelle?

MS. DEHNE: Absolutely.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions? 

All right, thank you very much, Nicole.

MS. DEHNE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We will move on to Jaydee 

Hanson, and then we will have Julia Barton and Mark 

Kastel after that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So Jaydee, you are up.

MR. HANSON: Thank you. I'm very 

pleased to represent the Center for Food Safety.

MS. ARSENAULT: Jaydee, this is 

Michelle. I can barely hear you, so maybe a little 

closer to the mic or phone, computer.

MR. HANSON: Can you hear me now?

MS. ARSENAULT: That's better. 

Steve, can you hear okay? Make sure it's not just 

on my end.

MR. ELA: Yes, now, it was the same. 

So yes, that was better.

MR. HANSON: Okay, I'm holding the mic 

right on my mouth. Good afternoon, I'm Jaydee 

Hanson, Policy Director the Center for Food Safety, 

and I'm pleased to meet virtually several of the 

new members and pleased to give the oral comments 

of -- these oral comments to the National Organic 

Standards Board.

We are a nonprofit with some million 

consumer and farmer members that support organic 

food and farming and grow organic food and 

regularly purchase organic products. I would note 

in beginning that the Center strongly supports the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

comments that the National Organic Coalition made 

to strengthen organic agriculture during the COVID 

pandemic, and especially those proposals that 

benefit low income consumers.

We note that the USDA has the final rule 

on organic livestock due June 17, 2020, as mandated 

by Congress. We are certainly hoping that the NOSB 

will push the NOP and the USDA to meet that rule.

Want to comment on priorities related 

to new kinds of genetic engineering. The NOSB 

should defend against allowing all genetic 

engineering in organic agriculture, including 

these new GE technologies. The NOSB must uphold 

the definitions and framework that was put in the 

place by the NOSB in 2016.

There are also six new techniques that 

the NOSB had identified for review, and we urge 

the NOSB to make progress on them as swiftly as 

possible. NOSB should urge the NOP to codify the 

prohibitions in organic for new genetic 

engineering techniques by publishing a guidance 

document in the NOP handbook. We're disturbed 

that the NOP has not finalized these 

recommendations yet.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

New genetic manipulation techniques 

are being introduced at an increasingly rapid rate. 

Organic stakeholders and accredited certifiers 

must have clarity on which genetic techniques and 

methods are allowed and which are prohibited under 

the organic regulations. The NOSB and the NOP must 

provide that clarity.

Some genetic engineering companies 

have deliberately mischaracterized their 

techniques as exactly the same as traditional 

breeding. Recombinetics, whose scientists use 

TALENs, a kind of gene editing, to make hornless 

dairy cows, claim that their hornless cows have 

no off-target problems. That is a problem when 

the gene editing misses its target.

Fortunately, scientists from FDA 

examined the complete DNA sequence of the animal 

and found that it contained the entire sequence 

of the plasmid used to move the DNA around in the 

genome, making it not at all the same as traditional 

breeding and not on target.

The organic community and the NOSB has 

clearly --

MS. ARSENAULT: Jaydee?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. HANSON: Yes.

MS. ARSENAULT: Sorry, this is 

Michelle. I don't know if you heard that, that 

was the timer that went off, so --

MR. HANSON: Is that the one-minute 

timer, or the?

MS. ARSENAULT: That was three 

minutes.

MR. HANSON: Three minutes, okay. 

Well thank you very much and we had a few other 

comments orally, but you've got them all in 

writing.

MS. ARSENAULT: Excellent. Steve?

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jaydee. Yup, are 

there any questions for Jaydee? It looks like Sue 

Baird has one. Sue, I think you may on mute. 

MS. BAIRD: There you go, is that 

better? Sorry about that.

MR. ELA: Much better.

MS. BAIRD: Okay, great. I was 

responding, I'm asking a question on your written 

comments. And of course I'm wanting to know about 

your fenbendazole. And I appreciate your comment 

that said more work was needed.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

You did bring up an interesting comment 

that I had not considered, at least, and perhaps 

some of the other Board had, is that some of the 

laying hens could end up as slaughter animals. 

And that there might need to be withdrawal time 

both for a slaughter animal and for -- in the egg 

itself. So could you elaborate on that?

MR. HANSON: Well you know, there are 

many cases where laying hens do end up being 

slaughtered. There is one area that in this 

pandemic time, the -- and they're not organic hens. 

But the hens used to produce eggs for vaccine 

development are slaughtered and put into mostly 

chicken soup. And there would be other hens 

slaughtered in commercial operations as well, 

that's --

MS. BAIRD: I did appreciate that 

comment, thank you.

MR. HANSON: Thank you. Thank you for 

reading all the way to the end.

MR. ELA: Are there any other comments 

or questions? Perfect, and Jaydee, I apologize 

for the timer not coming across to you, we'll work 

on that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. HANSON: We have audio problems. 

You know, one of my jokes about genetic 

engineering is that we think genetic engineering's 

going to work, but we can't get electronic 

technology to work, and it's 100 years old.

MR. ELA: Fair enough. Well thank you 

very much.

MR. HANSON: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on to 

Julia Barton, and then after that we have Mark 

Kastel and Steve Etka.

So Julia, please state your name and 

affiliation. We're not hearing you, Julia. 

Still not coming across.

MS. BARTON: Can you hear me now?

MR. ELA: We've got you, yep, go ahead, 

please.

MS. BARTON: Okay, super, thank you. 

Good afternoon, my name is Julia Barton with the 

Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association. I hope 

you all and your families are well.

First, I'd like to thank you for your 

time and attention to NOSB work during COVID-19. 

Your focus and efforts when there are many other 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

things demanding your attention is appreciated. 

Thank you for your service.

I'd also like to thank the NOP for its 

quick action in pivoting this meeting to a digital 

format amid work-from-home orders and many other 

issues on its plate. Thank you.

There are few items like to discuss 

today on behalf of OEFFA. We and many of the 

growers we serve are anxiously awaiting a proposed 

rule on strengthening organic enforcement from 

NOP. 

These concerns were initially raised 

by OFARM and other farmer groups. And OEFFA's 

Green Grower chapter keeps us informed as to how 

these challenges continue to impact them. You'll 

be hearing from several of them this week.

We both appreciate the work the NOSB 

and the NOP have done thus far to address both 

domestic and import fraud, and we need the 

rulemaking process to address this issue and 

present it to the public for feedback. We'd 

appreciate any help the NOSB can offer in urging 

the NOP to move that along.

Secondly, regarding fenbendazole, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

OEFFA certifies over 100 poultry operations in nine 

states, and our experience has been very different 

than the feedback I heard earlier from our 

neighbor, PCO. We can recollect only one request 

for parasiticides in the last year and a half. 

Further, we request a poultry-focused 

technical review to provide the information 

necessary to make an informed decision regarding 

the use of this parasiticide, specifically with 

respect to poultry. We have concerns regarding 

fenbendazole residue in eggs, and we imagine a 

poultry-focused technical review would provide 

more information regarding that concern.

Further, we appreciate the Board noting 

the emergency language that was previously 

recommended by the NOSB in spring of 2018, and we 

urge the NOP to move forward with those changes.

Next, please work with the NOP to put 

greenhouse and field container production back 

onto the active work agenda. The tacit 

endorsement and certification of myriad systems 

without clear or applicable standards is a 

disservice to organic certifiers, producers, and 

consumers. We need to work together to figure it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

out.

Lastly, OEFFA producers have 

repeatedly asked the NOSB meetings to be moved to 

accommodate field work. Given this foray into 

digital meetings, I got to wondering if this format 

might not make that more doable. Maybe one meeting 

each year could be in person and another held 

remotely.

While in-person meetings encourage 

valuable industry networking that virtual meetings 

do not support, holding remote meetings once a year 

could help level the playing field of access to 

these meetings and increase, as the NOP has 

previously done through the use of these webinars, 

the ability for broad participation.

Thank you for your consideration of our 

comments, and for your work. That's all I have. 

Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Julia. Are there 

questions? Yes, Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Okay, this is 

embarrassing, but I'm getting old. And I lost my 

question, but it was an important one. Can you 

backtrack, sorry, to fenbendazole and perhaps jog 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

my memory of my question. It was regarding the 

poultry TR that you were requesting. Could you 

elaborate on that a bit?

MS. BARTON: Yes, we have requested 

that previously, and we are doing so again. So 

our understanding of the fenbendazole conversation 

is that the information we're using to make 

decisions is based on a mammalian technical review 

that was when we were discussing fenbendazole use 

in mammals, when we had the big parasiticide 

discussion over what ought to be used in mammals.

And poultry are different. They're a 

different species, and they deserve sort of that 

focus that we gave mammalian species. So we're 

hoping that that technical review, if it could be 

completed, would give us the information needed 

to make an informed decision about this material.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Sue, you had a question. 

We're not hearing you, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: First of all, Emily, you 

are not old. That's almost insulting to someone 

who really is old. Did you, were you aware that 

we have requested a TR limited for the laying hens?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. BARTON: No, but I'm glad to hear 

it. So I would hope that we had information to 

make that decision.

MS. BAIRD: Right, right. That is the 

reason we moved this back into discussions is 

because we're waiting on the results of that 

limited TR.

MS. BARTON: Oh, well that's great 

news. I apologize for not having had that 

information of time.

MS. BAIRD: No, no worries. Thank you 

for your comments.

MS. BARTON: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Emily, it looks like you may 

have had your memory jogged.

MS. OAKLEY: Yes, thank you. So the 

question is actually for the program, because I 

know we have heard at the past several meetings 

and we'll probably hear from other commenters as 

well asking that we put container growing back on 

our work agenda in terms of developing standards 

for the ponics systems and others.

I was wondering if the program would 

like to or could respond to those requests that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

we're hearing from stakeholders.

DR. TUCKER: So this is Jenny Tucker. 

Appreciate the public comments, and we want to 

continue to listen to community feedback on this 

topic and others.

MR. ELA: All right. Are there any 

other questions? Thank you very much, Julia.

MS. BARTON: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We are going to move on to 

Mark Kastel, and then we'll have Steve Etka, and 

then Abby Youngblood.

Mark, go ahead please, and state your 

name and affiliation.

MR. KASTEL: Testing, Mr. Chairman, do 

you copy?

MR. ELA: We copy. Go ahead please.

MR. KASTEL; Thank you very much. 

Hello, my name is Mark Kastel, and I am the Director 

of OrganicEye, the investigative arm and a project 

of Beyond Pesticides.

Here's a little reality check in 

orientations for new members. The success of the 

organic movement is based on the story behind the 

label. That story has been greatly degraded 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

through fraud and corruption. We are on the cusp, 

and this pandemic might greatly accelerate the 

shift. After the smoke clears, we could have 

organic food and farming without farms.

The shift to industrial agriculture, 

something we were trying to get away from in the 

first place, is almost complete. The majority of 

organic dairy cows are now coming from livestock 

factories managing as many as 20,000 animals, 

milking them three, even four times a day, and 

creating the illusion of grazing. Good enough for 

certifiers and the USDA.

The law requires access to the, quote, 

outdoors, for all organic livestock. But the 

majority of our organic eggs are coming from 

factories managing as many as a million birds with 

zero outdoor access. 

And don't get ready to applaud the new 

animal welfare rule. It requires just two square 

feet outdoors and 1.2 feet indoors. These are also 

factory conditions.

And how about imports? Are any of 

those eggs, meat, and dairy products truly organic 

if what the animals are eating is laundered 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

conventional feed? 

Dig this: after years of stonewalling 

and cheerleading under the previous Director of 

the NOP telling us how bulletproof the 

certification system was for oversight of imports, 

the NOP recently announced that 75 percent of all 

certified operations in the Black Sea region have 

lost their USDA certification, either through 

revocation, suspension, or get this, surrender.

Other fines or enforcement? None. 

With more authority from Congress, it might get 

better. But the USDA, corporate agribusiness, and 

their lobbyists at the OTA never quit their 

cheerleading until we all received and indelible 

black eye after damning coverage of import fraud 

from the Washington Post.

When Congress charged the USDA with 

oversight of the organic industry, protecting 

consumers, ethical farmers and businesspeople 

against, fraud, they ordered the Secretary, he 

shall, or she shall consult with the NOSB in 

implementing the Act. Instead, when certifiers 

have questions regarding enforcing the law, and 

I wish I wasn't making this up, the NOP tells them 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to confer with other certifiers and define, decide 

on their own.

It's time for the NOSB to assert their 

authority and oversight of how the law and 

regulations are carried out. Thank you very much.

MR. ELA: Are there questions from the 

Board? Seeing none, I thank you very much, Mark. 

We appreciate your comments.

MR. KASTEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. ELA: We are going to need to move 

on to Steve Etka, then Abby Youngblood, and then 

Alan Lewis. Steve, go ahead please, and state your 

name and affiliation. Steve, we're not -- yup, 

now we've got you, go ahead.

MR. ETKA: I'm Steve Etka with the 

National Organic Coalition. In the face of the 

pandemic, NOC appreciates NOP's decision to hold 

the NOSB meeting virtually. And we also 

appreciate NOSB members' flexibility with this new 

structure. We look forward to the meeting 

returning to being in person post pandemic.

NOC has been very busy advocating for 

federal actions to address the needs of organic 

farmers, consumers, and businesses impacted by the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

pandemic. To date, Congress has passed three 

coronavirus response packages, the third of which 

provided over $20 billion to USDA to respond to 

the COVID impacts on farmers, and billions more 

to the SBA to help citizens, including farmers, 

maintain their payrolls and incomes during the 

crisis.

On April 17, Secretary Perdue announced 

the broad outline of the USDA plan to implement 

the legislation, including direct payments to 

farmers and purchases of agricultural products for 

donation to food banks. We're still seeking more 

details on how the plan will affect organic farmers 

specifically, and Congress will likely be debating 

a fourth COVID response package in the coming 

weeks.

In a letter that NOC sent to USDA on 

April 2 jointly with OFA and OFRF, we argued that 

the pandemic should not delay congressionally 

mandated action on two pending organic rules. 

Both the final rule on the origin of livestock and 

the proposed strengthening organic enforcement 

rule should be published immediately.

Both of these rulemakings are critical 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to the economic viability of organic farmers and 

businesses and to maintaining the integrity of the 

organic label and the confidence of organic 

consumers.

One of NOC's top priorities in the past 

couple years has been in promoting the role of 

organic agriculture as a solution to the climate 

change crisis. This not only means documenting 

and rewarding the good work that organic farmers 

are already doing to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions, build soil health to more effectively 

sequester carbon, and to foster more resilient 

farming systems.

But it also means being honest about 

areas where organic can do even better. This means 

closing loopholes in organic livestock and poultry 

regulations that allow organic production using 

large confined animal operations that foster --

that fail to foster environmentally beneficial 

interaction between animals and pastures.

It also means putting more teeth into 

regulations that require farmers to use 

soil-building practices.

As the world deals with the most 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

immediate crisis in the form of COVID-19, the 

spotlight has temporarily moved off of the climate 

change crisis facing our planet. It's our hope 

the pandemic experience will help us understand 

more about how to make our food system more 

resilient, not only to pandemics, but also to 

climate change as well. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Steve. Are there 

questions from the Board? Seeing none and hearing 

none, thank you very much, Steve, we appreciate 

it.

We will move on to Abby Youngblood and 

then Alan Lewis, then we're planning on taking a 

break. And then after break, we'll have Robert 

Rankin. 

So go ahead, Abby.

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: Good afternoon. Can 

you hear me, Steve?

MR. ELA: We can hear you, go ahead.

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: Great. Good 

afternoon, I'm Abby Youngblood, Executive Director 

at the National Organic Coalition. Thank you, 

NOSB members and also National Organic Program for 

the opportunity to provide testimony during this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

challenging time.

The National Organic Coalition is a 

national alliance of organizations and companies 

representing diverse stakeholder groups that 

serves as a unified voice for organic integrity. 

Each year we identify top priorities that we 

believe require sustained focus, advocacy, and 

leadership from the organic community to 

strengthen the integrity of the organic program.

For 2020, NOC has prioritized advancing 

organic as a climate change solution, 

strengthening enforcement of the organic 

regulations to prevent fraud, and restoring 

fairness in the organic dairy sector.

On the climate change priority, NOC is 

requesting that the NOSB create a work agenda item 

related to carbon sequestration and enforcement 

of soil health provisions in the organic 

regulations. We are also asking the NOSB to 

restrict the use of highly soluble sources of 

nitrogen in organic agriculture.

My colleagues, Steve Etka and Alice 

Runde, are commenting on some of the actions needed 

to strengthen enforcement to prevent fraud and to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

restore fairness in organic dairy.

In addition to these top three 

priorities, I'd like to highlight a few other areas 

of critical work for the NOSB and the National 

Organic Program. We urge the NOSB to uphold the 

prohibition against genetic engineering in organic 

agriculture, including new GE technologies. 

Based on the definitions and the framework that 

was put in place by the NOSB in 2016, it was a 

unanimous recommendation.

There are also six GE techniques that 

still need to be reviewed by the NOSB, and we urge 

the NOSB to make progress as swiftly as possible 

to move this work forward.

Regarding the three-year transition 

period for operations that produce organic crops, 

there is a lack of clarity for greenhouses and 

facilities that produce crops. The NOSB should 

ask the NOP to provide that clarity so that all 

certifiers and organic operations are held to the 

same standard.

NOC also believes that hydroponic 

systems and many container systems are 

inconsistent with both the foundational principles 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of organic farming and the certification 

requirements of the National Organic Program as 

set forth in the organic law, especially with 

regards to soil fertility.

Last, I want to comment on liquid fish 

products as a fertilizer and the use of fish oil 

in organic foods. On liquid fish, NOC supports 

this work agenda item and the Board's efforts to 

ensure that these products are not harmful to the 

marine environment. 

And while we approve of the concept of 

listing wild native fish harvested solely for 

fertilizer on Section 205.602 of the National List, 

we have several concerns that we raise in our 

written comments, including how this could be 

enforced.

Harvesting wild-caught fish for the 

exclusive use of fertilizer is a misuse of a 

resource from the ocean and should not be supported 

by organic production. Fish fertilizer should be 

allowed from waste products only, and only if this 

requirement is enforceable.

On fish oil, while we appreciate the 

Handling Subcommittee's attempt to address 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

concerns regarding fish oil, the proposed 

annotation is from our perspective insufficient 

to mitigate environmental concerns. And it 

doesn't address the concerns that we have regarding 

contaminants, as well as the fact that fish oil 

is not a necessary organic food ingredient and does 

not meet the essentiality criteria as outlined in 

OFPA.

Thank you, NOSB, for the work you do 

to protect the integrity of the organic seal, and 

thank you for this opportunity to comment.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Abby. 

Emily, we're not hearing you.

MS. OAKLEY: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't 

realize you had called on me.

MS. ARSENAULT: I didn't hear you 

either. 

MR. ELA: Sorry.

MS. OAKLEY: Okay.

MR. ELA: Okay, Emily, go ahead.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Abby. Thank 

you for your comments asking that the NOSB ask the 

NOP for clarity regarding the three-year 

transition period in greenhouses. And as you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

know, in previous meetings, there have been some 

attempts to get that clarity, but it has been 

challenging to date, and I was wondering if you 

had any specific suggestions for the NOSB on how 

we might try to achieve that clarity.

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: That's a great 

question. One of the things that we have been 

examining is looking across certifiers to see if 

what's happening is consistent. And we believe 

from our conversations with certifiers that there 

isn't consistency from one certifier to the next. 

So my suggestion would be for the NOSB 

to look at those areas of inconsistency and to use 

that lack of consistency to request that clarity 

from NOP.

MS. OAKLEY: Okay. So to follow up on 

that, I think that's a good point and it's one I've 

heard from the NOP as well. But we don't have 

access to that kind of data in terms of 

inconsistency across certifiers. I think it would 

almost have to be something done internally through 

the NOP.

Do you have suggestions or know, have 

other ways that you think we might try to get access 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to that data?

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: I think it would be 

a good conversation to have with ACA as well. I 

know that that's, you know, the mission of ACA is 

to have that consistency from one certifier to the 

next. So I think it's definitely a good 

conversation to be having community-wide. Within 

NOC's membership we have several certifiers who 

participate in our coalition work. 

And I know that even within our own 

membership, there is not always consistency on that 

issue. So that's more anecdotal at this point, 

but I would imagine that ACA would have kind of 

a broader scope and looking across more certifiers 

to see where the inconsistencies are.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Abby, that's 

helpful, and I will follow back up with you on that, 

particularly maybe getting some specific examples 

that your members might be willing to share that 

I could then share with the NOP.

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: Great. Thank you, 

Emily.

MR. ELA: Asa, you have a question.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I have two 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

questions. One, or actually a comment. But I 

assuming, I just want to ask, do we have any written 

comments, a specific explanation of why the 

current, the annotation about, let's see, fish oil 

is insufficient?

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: Yes, and I will try 

to answer your question, Asa, but it may be better 

to ask this of Christie Badger, who's our NOSB 

consultant. We do, in our written comments, go 

into some detail about how there can be 

contaminants. And that's problematic when you're 

-- so the contamination issue is one of the issues 

that we raise.

And I think with regards to fish oil, 

another thing that we have been raising for many 

years is the fact that fish oil is not a necessary 

organic food ingredient. So from our perspective, 

it doesn't meet that criteria in OFPA regarding 

necessity or essentiality. 

So those are some of the points that 

we raise. And if I didn't fully address the 

question that you have on fish oil, I think that 

would be a great question to ask of Christie Badger, 

who could go into more depth.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. Thank you. I 

think the issue of contaminants is an interesting 

one, and there's been some discussions within the 

Board and at other meetings. I think that's --

personally I think it's a hard call there just 

because you know, everything in the world 

everywhere is contaminated. 

And so the question for me is: how do 

we, you know, act to regulate sources of food that 

may be contaminated, or sources -- or ingredients 

that may be contaminated given that I mean 

literally everything in the world has some 

contaminants in it. So how do we set criteria or 

standards?

And I just think that's a tough call. 

Maybe there'll be some materials that are more 

prone to getting contaminated or another based on 

location, but again, it's -- I think how to approach 

that is complicated. And we can say that about 

virtually any input or, you know, material that's 

used. Anyway, just some food for thought there.

About the harvesting wild fish for 

fertilizers, in some ways, we harvest wild seaweed 

for fertilizers, and there's strong support for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that. And I totally support not harvesting wild 

fish for, as a fertilizer, you know, as an input. 

And then for me that kind of begs the 

question about marine plants. And I know we're 

having an ongoing discussion as a board and as a 

community, but I think that there's kind of an 

interesting analogy there. 

And so I, we still needed criteria for, 

you know, harvesting nutrients from the ocean and 

transferring those to land. How do we set up a 

standard to do that? And I don't know if that's 

really a question to you, or I'm sure NOC is 

thinking about that. But how to make that work 

as we go forward I think will be a challenge.

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: Yes, I agree that it's 

a challenge, and I do want to be clear that NOC 

does support the use of liquid fish products as 

a fertilizer. But we want to make sure that it's 

from the waste products only.

MR. BRADMAN: Right.

MR. ELA: All right. We've got two 

more questions, and then I'm going to move on. 

Jesse, you had a question?

MR. BUIE: Yes, well a comment. And 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I just wanted to acknowledge your suggestion for 

-- to consider a step-down percentage in the 

non-bio-based component of the paper products in 

our future sunsets. That was one of your 

suggestions.

And also I just wanted to comment on 

your efforts for, to compliment on your racial 

equity efforts that the organization is doing. 

That's all.

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: Thank you, Jesse. 

We appreciate that and my colleague, Alice Runde, 

is going to comment further later on about racial 

equity issues, and Christie will be talking more 

about biodegradable bio-based mulch.

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jesse. Mindee, 

last question for Abby.

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you, Abby. I 

wanted to see if there -- if stakeholders could 

potentially give more information on the fish oil 

essentiality question, specifically around 

nutrient formulations, because the FDA requires 

fortification of infant formula. And thank you 

to the Center for Food Safety for noting that. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And I would love more information about 

how we can achieve infant formulas as a certified 

organic and how those formulations can happen with 

or without fish oil, and if the community would 

support an annotation along those lines. 

I don't necessarily expect a total 

answer there, but I am hoping we can get that 

information from the organic community.

MS. YOUNGBLOOD: Yeah. Thank you, 

Mindee, and NOC looks forward to working with you 

and other Board members on that issue.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Abby. 

As always, appreciated.

We are going to move on to Alan Lewis 

and then take a break. After the break, we will 

have Robert Rankin and Marcelo Girotto.

And so Alan, please go ahead.

MR. LEWIS: Thanks. Sound check, can 

you hear me okay?

MR. ELA: We have you loud and clear. 

Go ahead, Alan.

MR. LEWIS: Great. Well thanks 

everybody, and thanks Board members and NOP staff. 

So far it's been seamless, which is really 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

awesome. I have five quick, far-reaching 

comments, then I'll let everyone get a break. 

As a reminder, Natural Grocers is, has 

157 stores, all certified organic handlers by Sam 

Welsch at OneCert.

To start, as a reminder, retail is still 

the weak link in organic compliance. Between 

pesticides and lack of non-commingling practices 

in the supply chain, transportation and handling, 

it really calls into question whether we're 

delivering organic to consumers or not. 

A single example is walking into King 

Soopers, which is the Kroger brand in Boulder, and 

seeing a open bulk bin of organic quinoa at the 

very bottom of a six-foot stack of other bulk bins 

above it, all conventional products. If you have 

a customer who's aware of what's going on, that 

just really causes a lot of confusion and concern.

Secondly, the whole COVID crisis in 

food chain supply crisis has really called out the 

concentration of production as a huge problem. 

And luckily as a silver lining, the public is much 

more focused now on local food production, food 

quality. And looking at the problems with 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

concentrated meat processing, CAFOs, dairy, and 

hydroponics as potentially not the cheap food 

solution that it has been promoted as for the last 

70 years. 

In particular, the hydroponic 

concentration and massive disparity in cost 

structure has reduced a lot of local quality 

organic production, especially of course in the 

tomato area. And this really is an opportunity 

for the organic community to tell that story of 

why supporting farmers is so important.

So moving on, someone is, apologize, 

I'm not sure if I'm being spoken to or not. I 

reclaim my time.

MR. ELA: You're good.

MR. LEWIS: Okay. And of course, this 

is a great I-told-you-so moment for all of us. 

My short decade in the organic industry and some 

of your 60-year tenures in organic industry, the 

public is strongly refocused on healthy food and 

local food. And notice the innate, instinctual 

response, human response. People are looking 

towards their diet, healthier food and a cleaner 

environment as Asa referred to.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

The next thing is of course genetic 

manipulation. By whatever method or name you want 

to call it, it's running rampant behind the scenes. 

And they're using COVID as a cover to normalize 

the idea that natural systems are unnatural and 

broken, and they can be improved by the same 

technologies and practices that have actually 

undermined global ecology.

I would encourage everyone not to 

ignore this as it will not affect us, and these 

new genetic units and living organisms enter the 

environment in the food chain. And draw the line 

any time you see these comments, push back to make 

sure that people aren't drawn into that.

Lastly, just a quick story with a happy 

ending. The bros that I have complained about in 

the past who had loudly stated that organic is 

meaningless and refused to get certified are now 

knocking on my door saying hey, I've lost my direct 

sales to restaurants and food service, and I now 

need to reach out to larger markets. I wish I had 

a trusted seal that ensured that a third-party knew 

that my practices were valid and audited, and safe 

and compliant.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And then I'm just quiet for a second, 

and they literally say oh, okay, I get it now, I 

need to get certified. Organic of course in on 

a tier of retail, and if you can get through the 

logistics and get it on the shelf, it's just blowing 

through as fast as you can get it. 

And that's certainly at natural 

retailers as well as conventional retailers are 

actually having significant shortages in organic 

produce. Even though it may be available a few 

miles from a retailer, that supply chain and 

logistics have been broken.

So that's my comments. I appreciate 

everyone, and let's look for those silver linings 

and those opportunities, hold the line against 

genetic manipulation, keeping it out of organic 

and the food supply in general. And continue 

keeping on. Thank you very much.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Alan. And sorry 

about that little distraction in the middle. Are 

there any questions for Alan? All right. Thank 

you very much, as always.

Okay. We're going to take a ten-minute 

break. We will come back at the top of the hour 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of whatever hour and whatever time zone you are. 

So when the big hand -- or I mean little hand hits 

the 12 we will resume. And when we come back, we're 

going to start with Robert Rankin, move on to 

Marcelo Girotto, and then go to Dave Carter.

So a 10-minute break, and then we will 

be back. Thank you, everybody. We'll see you in 

10 minutes. 

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 10:51 a.m. and resumed at 

11:00 a.m.)

MR. ELA: Okay. We'll call it back to 

order. And we'll see if people can, have minded 

their watches correctly.

So, everybody on the webinar, we will 

start again with the public comments. We're 

running just about 20 minutes behind. But we've 

had some cancellations. So I think we're doing 

pretty well. But we'll keep our eye on the clock. 

But for the Board, feel free to keep asking 

questions.

Our next commentator is Robert Rankin, 

followed by Marcelo Girotto and then Dave Carter 

after that. Robert, are you there?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. RANKIN: Yes. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: Yes, we sure can. Please go 

ahead.

MR. RANKIN: Thank you. My name is 

Robert Rankin. And I'm Executive Director of the 

International Food Additives Council.

IFAC is a global association 

representing manufacturers and end users of food 

ingredients, including a number of substances 

permitted in organic food production. So thank 

you for the opportunity to comment today.

IFAC supports relisting waxes, wood 

rosin at 205.605(a), calcium phosphates at 

205.605(b), and colors, inulin-oligofructose 

enriched, and cornstarch at 205.606. All of these 

ingredients are safe, are used in accordance with 

organic principles, and are essential to organic 

food production.

Several questions were raised in the 

handling subcommittee materials and written public 

comments regarding the production of, the 

production process of wood rosin and byproducts 

such as glycerol ester of wood rosin.

As noted in our written comments, the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

initial extraction solvent used in the production 

of wood rosin is a flavor extraction solvent that 

is permitted by U.S. regulation and additive 

regulations worldwide. However, all solvents are 

completely removed when producing the final 

material.

We also agree with the comment that, 

while this material may not be used all the time 

or by a large portion of the organic market now, 

it is important to have options.

Calcium phosphates provide critical 

technical functions in numerous organic foods. 

They also serve public health by providing two 

essential nutrients, calcium, which is 

underconsumed by most Americans, and phosphorous.

Calcium phosphates may also be used to 

replace sodium phosphates in foods and lower the 

sodium content.

Phosphates have a history of, a long 

history of safe use in food globally. And 

historically, the NOSB has agreed that claims 

associating phosphates with negative health 

effects are not supported by the majority of the 

scientific literature.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

The 18 colors derived from agricultural 

products at 205.606 are all essential to organic 

production, as most, if not all of them, lack 

sufficient supply over organic alternatives to 

meet demand.

Organic juices are not standardized 

across the entire market for shade. And most are 

weaker in strength and 30 to 50 percent more 

expensive than non-organic alternatives.

In order for a company to fully 

implement a fully organic juice color, they would 

need to evaluate the juice for batch to batch 

uniformity for color and strength, contract for 

this juice to be grown to meet shade demands, and, 

of course, use more of the organic juice color to 

meet the color strength that would have been 

provided by the non-organic alternative. This 

process would take at least one year and could 

increase cost by 89 percent.

We also reiterate there is no organic 

purple potato juice or organic paprika currently 

and very limited supply of organic carrot juice, 

black and purple carrot juice, grape skin extract, 

grape juice, and elderberry juice.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Inulin-oligfructose enriched is used 

as a source of dietary fiber and to reduce sugar 

content in many foods. Fiber is another widely 

underconsumed nutrient. So IOE helps food 

producers and consumers fill the fiber gap. There 

are no commercially available organic forms of IOE.

Finally, cornstarch provides many 

important functions in organic foods, including 

as a thickener, a formulation aid to make corn 

syrup, and as a bulking and moisture absorption 

agent.

There are not enough certified organic 

acres for corn planted in the U.S. today to meet 

the demand by the organic market. However, per 

NFU regulations, only cornstarch derived from 

non-GM corn may be used in organic food production.

Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on these important organic handling 

materials. That's all.

MR. ELA: Great. Thank you very much. 

Does anybody on the Board -- looks like Asa has 

a question.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I have two 

questions. As you know, we've been addressing, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

evaluating many of these materials in the handling 

subcommittee. And, you know, a challenge in the 

organic arena is when do materials come off of 606 

and when do we have enough material available for 

organically-sourced material?

And I'm curious about what your members 

are doing to increase the organic supply of many 

of the additives, colors, products that you just 

referred to. And do you have a program to 

encourage that within your organization? And if 

so, how is that functioning?

MR. RANKIN: Sure. Thanks for the 

question. I would say that the answer to, one 

answer, the answer to one of your questions is, 

no, there's not a program we have within IFAC to 

advance these types of objectives. I think the 

member companies and maybe their competitors or 

partners may have those types of objectives.

I do know that with regard to the color 

industry, I got a little bit more information from 

the color industry because there's a lot of 

interest and work around, you know, natural food 

colors, including organic food colors.

It does appear that those companies 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

are, or at least some of those companies within 

IFAC's membership are actively pursuing a larger 

supply of organic natural food colors.

But it sounds like, and based on some 

of the things that I mentioned in my testimony, 

there are just some things related to the timing 

and the ability to get those contracts set up and 

do the necessary due diligence around ensuring 

consistent shading and getting the land and 

diversion of the product to devote to the color 

side of it that it's going to take a little bit 

of time to get that together.

It's my understanding that the large 

majority of organic fruit that could be used or 

vegetables used to make the colors are used for 

consumption as the fruit or vegetable. So it's 

kind of a get in line type thing.

But my understanding from some of our 

members is that five years would be a good timeframe 

to allow companies in the industry to get that 

sufficient organic supply together and help 

mitigate some of those cost impacts that I 

mentioned around switching.

This isn't speaking on behalf of all 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of the color manufacturers or necessarily IFAC. 

But I do know that at least one of our member 

companies has said that they believe that working 

within that five-year sunset period, that they 

think it will be a different story in five years.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you for those 

comments. And I appreciate the mention of a 

timeframe. I think that's very helpful to the 

Board.

MR. ELA: This is Steve. I had a 

question as well.

So I hear you say about the five-year 

timeframe. I guess part of my concern is from 

reading notes from the previous sunset review of 

this, that was exactly the same comment made at 

that point.

During that review, there were a number 

of colors that were very close to a Board vote for 

being delisted. And in the end, the Board did vote 

to relist them.

And I also noticed in your comments, 

you know, you said please relist all these colors. 

But then you gave a specific list of five or six 

colors that were particularly problematic. And 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that list kind of echoed some of those same colors 

that were problematic five years ago.

And you also mentioned cost. I guess 

I'm concerned that this just, you know, we keep 

hearing five years, five years. We had another 

company that gave written comments that said we 

have a supply of paprika, that there's plenty of 

organic supply.

How do we suss out, you know, this kind 

of, until it's really required or that these colors 

are delisted, how do we move this forward instead 

of it just being continually kind of put off?

MR. RANKIN: Sure. That's a good 

question. We have a lot of stakeholders around 

the phone I assume and in the organic community 

who I assume have interests there and potential 

roles to play.

As far as I'm concerned with my 

organization, I can only tell you what I'm hearing 

from our member companies. And I'm happy to just 

as a sidebar between now and the fall meeting, if 

that's a good timeframe, to really dig into some 

of these details around each individual color and 

timeframes and kind of what's holding that back.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I can say that on behalf of the IFAC 

members that make natural colors and can respond 

to that. I can't speak on behalf of all the 

companies that might be out there that may say they 

have some form of supply or some ingredient.

That's something where commercially 

available comes into play. And that's a tough 

situation for you all to deal with. But it's not 

-- you know, I don't know that I can fully answer 

that question for you.

But I can, all I can say is that, you 

know, I'd be willing to go back to our members and 

work with other associations that I could maybe 

try to find in the community around additives and 

colors to try to find a little bit more detail 

around each of the individual colors that we talked 

about and those which are probably most important 

or furthest way I should say maybe from an organic 

supply. That's all I can probably say at this 

point.

MR. ELA: Yeah, I think that 

information would be extremely helpful to the 

committee. And I think the questions we posed with 

this round, if you were able to kind of go down 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

those and be really as specific as possible, it 

would really, really help us with that information. 

So, yeah, please do that. And thank you for your 

testimony today.

MR. RANKIN: Sure. Just one last 

question. May I -- is that something we should 

wait to submit in advance of the fall meeting or 

do I, is it that the subcommittee would find that 

information helpful sooner?

MR. ELA: I think the subcommittee 

would find that information helpful sooner. So 

you can go by the questions we already posted. 

And we usually, within several weeks or less than 

a month after this meeting, we open our public 

docket. And so you can easily submit comments that 

way that would give the subcommittee a little bit 

of a lead time to, you know, take those into 

account.

MR. RANKIN: Okay. We'll follow up 

with Michelle about that. Thank you very much.

MR. ELA: Great. Thank you so much.

MR. RANKIN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: All right. We will move on 

to Marcelo Girotto. And, Marcelo, I know I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

butchered your name. And I very much apologize. 

After that, we'll have Dave Carter and then Blayne 

Mozisek. So, Marcelo, please go ahead.

MS. ARSENAULT: Steve, we're not sure 

Marcelo is on the line with us. He left an 

international number. And I'm not seeing anyone 

on the list with that name or number.

MR. ELA: Okay.

MS. ARSENAULT: Maybe --

MR. ELA: All right. Marcelo, we're 

going to skip over you unless we hear from you very 

quickly here. All right. We will come back to 

him at the end of the webinar if he is here.

So, Dave, you are going to be up. Dave 

Carter is up next, then Blayne Mozisek and then 

Alice Runde. All right. Dave, please go ahead. 

Do we have Dave, Michelle?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yeah, Dave, I'm going 

to unmute you, so nobody else can --

MR. CARTER: All right.

MS. ARSENAULT: We'll just be --

MR. CARTER: You should be able to hear 

me now.

MS. ARSENAULT: We got you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: We've got you, Dave. Please 

go ahead.

MR. CARTER: Okay. Happy Earth Day 

eve, everyone. Chairman Ela and members of the 

NOSB, I'm Dave Carter, alumni of this Board, a bison 

rancher and principal of Crystal Springs 

Consulting.

And as an alumni, I want to thank all 

of you, particularly the five new members, for your 

dedication and your willingness to serve the 

organic community.

I'm here today on behalf of Merck Animal 

Care with whom I've worked to submit the petition 

to expand the approval of fenbendazole as an 

emergency livestock treatment for laying flocks 

and replacements.

The initial approval of fenbendazole 

as an emergency livestock treatment in 2012 was 

a step forward in the continuous improvement of 

the National List.

Fenbendazole's benign environmental 

characteristics provided dairy producers, now 

fiber animal producers, with a resource to address 

emergency infestations without negative impacts 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

on dung beetles, earthworms, and beneficial soil 

microorganisms. It allowed the NOSB to ultimately 

delist a previously allowed parasiticide which was 

harmful to those organisms.

Now, as organic management practices 

and the expectations of consumers are moving more 

birds outdoors and in direct contact with the soil, 

fenbendazoles and the program resource for those 

growers to have available to utilize in emergency 

situations. 

One of the first questions asked in 

approving any material is whether natural or 

organic alternatives exist. And as explained in 

our petition, diatomaceous earth has not been shown 

to be effective on young turtle parasites and 

poultry, neither have been 13 other materials that 

have been studied ranging from peppermint to 

tobacco, again all listed in our petition.

Humane husbandry is paramount to any 

organic animal management practice. Freedom of 

movement and the ability to exhibit natural 

behavior are at the core of organic practices, so 

too is protecting the health of the animals under 

our stewardship.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

While management practices, species 

selection, and other steps are important, we are 

not perfect. Emergencies arise and growers need 

to be able to respond with a resource that restores 

the health of the birds without harming the health 

of the soil and that ensures consumers are 

receiving a healthy, wholesome product.

I know there's concern regarding what 

constitutes an emergency. And our next speaker 

will talk about that.

We look forward to receiving the 

technical review that was requested following the 

last meeting and for your consideration of our 

petition at the fall meeting. Again, thank you 

for your service.

MR. ELA: Are there any questions for 

Dave? Sue has a question. Sue, we're not hearing 

you.

MS. BAIRD: Okay. Thanks, Dave, for 

your comments. We've had several people who've 

expressed concerns about the residual 2.4 ppm in 

the eggs. And I want you to address that.

Secondly, concerns are that, and we 

heard somewhat of that this morning, that there 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

might be a problem with these birds that have been 

used for laying hens now ending up as slaughter 

animals. And so could you address those two issues 

for me, please?

MR. CARTER: Well, you know, I will 

address the laying hens that end up as slaughter 

animals, because I know that has been an issue. 

I worked with, in the pet food business before 

trying to look at sourcing those. And I think 

that's about it. I don't have the answer to that. 

But I think it's a valid consideration in terms 

of a withdrawal time prior to slaughter.

In terms of the issue on, in the eggs, 

I'm just going to ask that you delay that because 

Blayne has got some information that really talks 

about that. And then I'll be available for some 

questions. But maybe it would be more appropriate 

to ask both of us after he gets done.

MS. BAIRD: Steve, could I follow up 

with another question?

MR. ELA: Go ahead.

MS. BAIRD: Okay. So you are saying, 

in fact, several certifiers said that none of their 

operations are having problems or have requested 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

a use of a, of fenbendazole or any other 

parasiticide. And they're saying that if we do 

enough rotation, then that will be sufficient. 

We didn't see that with mammalians. Could you 

comment that on poultry?

MR. CARTER: No, the environment is not 

static. And particularly when you think of 

particularly so much poultry, you know, being done 

in environments where it's warmer and wetter, and 

then when you run into situations where maybe a 

drought hits or, you know, things like that where 

you can't, you know, follow an assessed scheduled. 

And that's why emergencies do arise.

If the world stays static, heck, if the 

world stayed static, we'd all have been out at Expo 

West in Anaheim in March or having an NOSB 

face-to-face meeting, you know, next week.

But emergencies arise and, you know, 

growers really need to have the resources to 

address that so that their flocks don't suffer.

MS. BAIRD: Okay. Thank you. I think 

I'll wait for the next speaker to ask further 

questions. Appreciate it.

MR. ELA: Great. Any other questions 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

for Dave? Thank you, Dave. We appreciate it.

So next up we have Blayne Mozisek. And 

then after that we have Alice Runde and then Garth 

Kahl. So, Blayne, please go ahead. And it's my 

understanding you have a PowerPoint. And we'll 

try and get that pulled up for you here, so let 

them do that. But please go ahead and state your 

name and affiliation.

DR. MOZISEK: Thanks, Steve. This is 

Dr. Blayne Mozisek. And I'm with Merck Animal 

Health. And I have four slides to show you today.

The first, here we go. I just want to 

show the five new Board members. You haven't seen 

this, but those who were at the previous meeting 

have. But what you have there on the left -- and 

let me back up a little bit.

But I'm a veterinarian in the field 

servicing, you know, both organic and conventional 

flocks. And this is what I see in the field, so 

actually boots on the ground.

And what you have there on the left, 

those are birds with outdoor access and what I would 

refer to as an extremely heavy worm burden. And 

that's an animal welfare issue. And as a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

veterinarian, this is something that I've been 

tasked to protect, right, the rights of these 

animals and keep them healthy. So that's grossly 

what you see.

And actually, while that looks like a 

large burden, the vast majority are actually in 

the tissue phase. And what you see at the top 

center there are these small larval stages that 

are migrating through the tissues and causing 

inflammation and damage.

Next, below that is the bottom center. 

Sue Baird brought it up earlier. But this is a 

bird with blackhead caused by a protozoa called 

histomonas meleagridis. And it, in turkeys, it's 

a very severe disease causing 90 to 100 percent 

mortality. In chickens, it's also a severe 

disease.

And really there's no cure for it. And 

fenbendazole is also not a cure. However, it does 

control the worm that serves as a vector for this 

disease. So it is a tool in the toolbox should 

producers need it.

And then on the right is one thing that 

we're really trying to provide a tool, again, for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

these producers to protect themselves, protect the 

organic egg market. That is an ascarid, a 

roundworm inside of an egg. And this happens by, 

you know, the cloaca of a chicken is basically the 

common sewer is what that is. And you've got the 

reproductive tract, the GI tract, and urinary tract 

all emptying in that one space.

And when that worm, a live worm has the 

ability to migrate out of the GI tract and can

migrate upwards into the reproductive tract, it 

can be incorporated in the eggs.

And this is something that, as the 

organic industry is becoming more prevalent, we're 

seeing this more often. Consumers are finding 

these eggs, if they're not found prior to entering 

market. So, if we could advance the slide, please, 

Devon?

The next thing that I'd like to talk 

about is the emergency use. And there are two 

things. One is the emergency use and one is the 

residues.

I think these should be based on data. 

There's really no room for opinion here. There 

are plenty methods available. But, and it's my 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

understanding, and there's literature, and I'll 

send this on to the Board.

But the Wisconsin, or the Modified 

Wisconsin Technique is a means of analyzing fecal 

material to look for these worm eggs and actually 

measuring the burden within. It's extremely 

sensitive. It's reproducible. It's very 

accessible, being provided by several labs within 

the country. Merck Animal Health can provide it 

as well. And it's auditable.

So we've got, you know, potentially a 

producer could have a report that says I have X 

amount of eggs within these fecal samples. And 

dependent on a potential threshold that was set, 

I would suggest 50 eggs per evaluation would be 

the emergency threshold coming from the sample that 

I've suggested here. But this is a means of 

providing good data, actionable data, should an 

emergency arise. Next slide, please.

So next is the residues determination. 

I'm short on time. But I just want to point out 

the guidance to the industry that the FDA released, 

it really speaks volumes to what is done to go 

through to provide the information to consider 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

something acceptable.

And then lastly, the, in my 

conclusions, really would like to say that any 

deviation from an FDA regulation in terms of 

safety, it's -- if we could advance one more slide, 

please, the last slide. Any deviation --

MR. ELA: Blayne, I think -- Michelle, 

was that the time?

MS. ARSENAULT: It was the time. 

Thanks.

MR. ELA: Yeah, Blayne, we're going to 

have to cut you off. And I apologize. But --

DR. MOZISEK: No worries.

MR. ELA: -- we do have a couple 

questions for you. Sue has a question for you.

DR. MOZISEK: Yes, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: Okay.

MR. ELA: Sue?

MS. BAIRD: Thank you for this. Yes, 

I'm sorry. I forget to unmute every time. 

Blayne, thank you for this.

As we discussed it as a committee when 

we were discussing this petition, there were two 

sides being expressed from our members, and one, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and both of them impacting human health, them was 

residual and in the egg, of course, and how it might 

impact any kind of health issues, especially people 

who were, these -- and it was brought up today.

These eggs are being used for vaccines. 

They'll be used in potential cancer treatment. 

And how would perhaps that fenbendazole residual 

impact those studies?

The other side -- and there's not this 

side or that side. But the other concern that was 

issued was that we were seeing some data that showed 

that the oocyte from hookworms were entering the 

bloodstream, crossing the blood-brain barrier and 

actually causing worms to grow in the brain, which 

is a horrific thought in my brain.

So I know we can see the worm if we saw, 

cracked an egg and saw a worm in it. But we 

certainly could not see the oocyte. How do we 

address those two different concerns from the 

public?

DR. MOZISEK: Well, in terms of 

residuals or residues in the eggs and the vaccine 

supply, I can assure you that any vaccine or the 

vaccines being produced for human and actually 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

animals are produced in what we call SPF eggs at 

least to my knowledge. They're a specific 

pathogen-free. And they're in extremely tightly 

regulated environments. They're not necessarily 

organic.

And so they can't even have a specific 

-- there's a whole list of diseases they can't even 

be exposed to. So worms would be very highly 

controlled in that environment. So I don't 

believe that to be a problem.

But also in terms of residues and 

safeties, Merck Animal Health has published all 

this. And this information was included in the 

technical review, a poultry-specific technical 

review. And so I'll kind of let that speak for 

itself.

And then hookworms are not actually a 

parasite of poultry. And in that particular case, 

I think we're talking about aberrant migration of 

that particular parasite. And that's something 

else that I wouldn't, I'm not aware of that occurs 

in or outside of the GI tract.

In the case of the eggs that, or the 

worms that are found in eggs, you know, that's not 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

migrating through the tissues to find like the 

brain in the example that you gave. But it 

actually stays within, goes into the GI tract and 

back up into the reproductive tract. So it stays 

in the tube essentially. So --

MS. BAIRD: That's comforting --

DR. MOZISEK: Sue, I'm not sure I 

answered all your questions. But, okay.

MS. BAIRD: Well, that's comforting at 

least. Thank you.

DR. MOZISEK: Yeah.

MR. ELA: Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Hi. Thank you, Blayne. 

Were the photos that you showed on your first slide 

from organic chickens?

DR. MOZISEK: The one on the left, so 

the heavy burden is. The one in the center top 

is. And the right side with the worm and the egg 

I believe is a pastured chicken but not grown under 

organic situations. And then the blackhead 

picture is also not organic.

MS. OAKLEY: Okay. And do you know the 

number of square feet per bird for the organic 

photos?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

DR. MOZISEK: I do not know that number 

off the top of my head, sorry.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

DR. MOZISEK: So, you know, I will make 

a comment, too, that was made earlier. Dave 

commented on it.

You know, these eggs are in the 

environment, and they can last years. And, you 

know, for some cases, they're transmitted or they 

can be carried by insects, right, so whether it 

be flies or beetles, or they can migrate from 

pasture to pasture and introduce the eggs.

You know, obviously, the sun has an 

effect on them. And rotation can help. But 

that's not always an option in every scenario. 

So --

MR. ELA: All right. Thank you very 

much. We do appreciate it.

DR. MOZISEK: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Sue, I'm going to go ahead 

and move on --

MS. BAIRD: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- because we're running a 

little bit behind time. So sorry.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. BAIRD: Okay. No worries. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: But please reach out to Dave 

or Blayne if you have further questions.

MS. BAIRD: I will. Thank you so much.

MR. ELA: Yep. Next we have Alice 

Runde and then Garth Kahl and then Bjarne Pedersen. 

Alice, please go ahead.

MS. RUNDE: Good afternoon, everyone. 

My name is Alice Runde. I'm the Coalition Manager 

for the National Organic Coalition or NOC. My 

comments today pertain to the strengthening 

organic enforcement rulemaking and advocating for 

racial equity in the organic movement.

So, as my colleague Steve Etka 

mentioned earlier, despite the pandemic we should 

not delay congressionally mandated action on the 

origin of livestock and strengthening organic 

enforcement rules. These rules are critical to 

the economic viability of organic farmers and 

businesses and are critical to maintaining the 

integrity of the organic table.

NOC strongly encourages the 

certification, accreditation, and compliance 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

subcommittee to pursue the work agenda item of 

inconsistencies between certifiers. This is a 

recognized issue that is addressed many times 

through NOSB meetings, in published materials, and 

during discussions regarding the anticipated 

proposed rule on strengthening organic 

enforcements.

NOC is also requesting that the CACS 

review and analyze peer review audits, track 

progress made by the organic imports interagency 

working group, ask the NOP to explain its 

risk-based approach to accreditation, request more 

information about how funding increases are being 

used to strengthen the NOP's capacity to fight 

fraud, and identify gaps that would require further 

action.

We are encouraged by the NOP's work in 

this direction and feel that the NOSB can better 

support this work in a way that promotes 

transparency and input from all organic 

stakeholders.

We recognize that access to the organic 

movement and organic certification has not been 

equal across racial groups. Systemic racism has 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

kept our movement from reaching its full potential. 

The organic movement can only be stronger and 

better positioned to meet future challenges if it 

represents diverse participation.

NOC would like to see the NOSB 

prioritize research into both the barriers of 

participation in organic certification for farmers 

of color and technical assistance needs for 

underserved and underrepresented communities.

While we appreciate the added research 

priorities of increased access to organic foods 

and barriers to transitioning into organic 

production, we do not feel that these go far enough 

to address the issues at hand.

We support the NOSB in exploring ways 

to encourage the NOP and organic stakeholders to 

expand their work and resources to further address 

this issue.

NOC encourages the NOSB to work with 

the NOP to identify languages that the organic 

materials should be translated into and then work 

to identify the appropriate means of acquiring and 

sharing those translated materials.

Finally, thank you, NOP and NOSB 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

members, for moving from an in-person meeting to 

a remote one on such short notice. We understand 

that this was likely a challenge, not just for you 

but for many of the participants as well.

We want to express how important it is 

for us to return to in-person meetings when it is 

safe to do so. The in-person meetings are used 

as an opportunity to connect with other industry, 

Board, and NOP members in a more meaningful way 

that can occur during remote meetings. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Okay. Thank you, Alice. 

Are there questions for Alice? Thank you very 

much.

I just have one comment that I would 

love to see NOC and all our stakeholders be engaged 

with the, the nominations are out for NOSB members 

to be appointed later this year.

And I would really like to see, as you 

said, some of our underrepresented populations 

apply, because I think it's just critical for the 

Board itself to express some of that diversity that 

we see in our stakeholders as well. So anything 

NOC can do to help with that would be greatly 

appreciated.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: This is just a quick 

comment that I definitely had written as barriers 

to certifying organic amongst smaller scale 

producers when language is an issue and if 

materials could be translated into a broad number 

of languages.

I am pinpointing those that are most 

likely to be used by producers. I think it would 

greatly increase the number of producers of 

different language backgrounds that would become 

certified organic.

MR. ELA: Great. Oh, A-Dae would like 

to make a comment as well.

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Yes, Alice and 

NOC, thank you for your comments. I think this 

is a critical part of our community to find ways 

to be more inclusive. And I think I really 

appreciated POC's comments in the beginning 

because I think it speaks to the fact of our, the 

fact that we need to be resilient especially in 

these trying times.

So I really appreciate the inclusivity 

of your thoughts. And I hope that it eventually 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

reflects in the NOSB makeup. So thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you. Thank you very 

much, Alice, for your comments. We're going to 

move on.

And Garth Kahl is up. And then we have 

Bjarne Pedersen and Christie Badger after that. 

Garth, please go ahead and state your name and 

affiliation.

MR. KAHL: Hi. My name is Garth Kahl. 

Together with my wife and daughter I run Common 

Treasury Farm, a small, diversified, certified 

crop and livestock operation. We have been 

certified organic since 1993. We also run 

Independent Organic Services, a small, diversified 

company offering organic inspections and 

consulting.

As usual, I want to thank the members 

of the Board for their tireless service and 

Michelle, voice of the NOSB, for her amazing work 

behind the scenes. I also want to give a big 

virtual hug to all the other friends and NOSB 

junkies I see on the webinar. Can't wait to see 

you again in person.

You already have my written comments, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

particularly on ion-exchange membranes, paper crop 

production aids, and especially native fish and 

liquid fish products. I don't want to add anything 

else to those except that I think it's an easy low 

bar to eliminate liquid fish products that are not 

derived from either fish waste or bycatch.

Instead, I want to use some recent 

anecdotes from my experience as a small organic 

livestock producer in recent weeks to talk about 

the sunset process.

Way back in the first week of March, 

we hauled several hogs to our USDA and organically 

certified slaughter and meat processing facility. 

When I got to the facility, I will not mention 

the name since I haven't asked permission, one of 

the owners came out and helped me offload my hogs. 

It's the kind of place where the owner also raises 

heritage hogs. Yes, Portland hipsters turn meat 

processor.

He explained to me the measures they 

were taking to stay in production in the face of 

COVID-19. These include keeping customers out of 

the facility, giving workers extra sick leave, 

requiring masks for all employees, and even 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

providing onsite child care options to the USDA 

inspector and other employees as the schools 

closed.

Two days later the processing facility 

sent out one of the most inspiring emails I have 

seen in the midst of the whole COVID-19 crisis. 

In addition to committing to staying open as long 

as possible, they pointed out that, as Americans 

face the prospect of empty store shelves, this was 

a potential time to bring new customers to the local 

food movement so that when, quote, things go back 

to normal, unquote, more people will be comfortable 

buying meat direct from producers.

This sentiment highlights the 

potential changes that come out of the current 

crisis if we are willing to imagine and implement 

a more resilient and organic food system, as Aimee 

Simpson at PCC just highlighted.

In the last week of March, as restaurant 

clients cancelled their orders in the midst of a 

statewide lockdown, one of our long-term customers 

in Portland wrote us and explained that she had 

contacted three other households of friends and 

together they wanted to buy three-quarters of a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

hog.

Two days later, after picking up my meat 

at the processor, I drove 20 minutes to a Home Depot 

parking lot in suburban Portland. As our masked 

customer and her housemate rolled up, I masked up, 

opened my coolers, and started selling meat out 

of the back of the pickup. Welcome to the new 

normal.

It is in this context that I want to 

come back to 2022 sunset and ask that you let 

processors and growers know that right now they 

can count on continuing to have access to the tools 

they are using.

Organic growers and processors now 

experiencing disruptions in their supply chains 

will face significant changes in sourcing inputs 

and processing aids for months to come. Please 

leave them options on the list.

Thank you all for your time and effort. 

Please stay safe. And I very much look forward 

to seeing everyone in person.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much and very 

well timed. We appreciate those comments. Are 

there questions for Garth? We wish you the best 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of luck. And thank you for taking the time to 

comment. It's always good to hear from producers.

Next we have Bjarne Pedersen. Bjarne, 

go -- after Bjarne, we'll have Christie Badger and 

then Terry Shistar. Bjarne, go ahead and please 

state your name and affiliation.

MR. PEDERSEN: Hi. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can hear you. Go ahead.

MR. PEDERSEN: Great. I'm calling all 

the way from Denmark. I'm a consultant working 

for Ellepot in Denmark. And I'm now commenting 

on the motion for paper pots.

Ellepot thinks the motion is actually 

fine. However, we would recommend more to alter 

the limit of biobased to no less than 80 percent 

at this stage. Using non-biobased materials that 

are actually truly biodegradable will be more 

difficult but still possible within the remaining 

20 percent limit that we suggest.

We could actually be forced to use 

biobased plastics that is not biodegradable to 

replace some non-biobased materials that is 

actually biodegradable. We think --

(Off mic comments.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. PEDERSEN: Pardon me?

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Bjarne. Other 

people, if you could make sure and mute your mics 

please so that we don't interrupt the speaker. 

We'll give you a few extra seconds here, Bjarne. 

Sorry about that.

MR. PEDERSEN: We think this is an 

important issue for future evaluations. Again, 

it is important for us to state that 

biodegradability is the most important thing for 

us, we think even more important than the origin 

of the materials.

Depending on the final ruling on the 

accepted level of non-biobased material, we 

recommend that the growers will be allowed to use 

materials in start for this season even if the 

material is not quite in compliance with the final 

ruling.

And actually we've discovered that, due 

to this COVID-19 situation, we are now waiting for 

the lab to open up again for 6866 testings. And 

we suggest that the paper pots will be accepted 

for this season. And then hopefully we can get 

the tests sometime in the autumn.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

There is an additional motion for any 

available 100 percent biobased products. And I 

see two issues on this.

Some 100 percent biobased products in 

the market will not biodegrade in the sun. And 

two, using 100 percent biobased wood fibers is 

fine, but only if it works for the grower. If the 

product dissolves too quickly, the grower should 

still be allowed to use the 80 percent biobased 

ones.

We do have 100 percent biobased 

products. And it's holding up for six to eight 

weeks. This is also usable for mulch covers 

actually. But it's not for everyone to use.

We encourage the Board to continue the 

work on the future definitions on paper. And the 

extensive work by the crop subcommittee will now 

open up for automatization of plant propagation 

for many growers. And we think this is an 

important step towards more organic grown crops.

So this is the comment that I would like 

to submit this time.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. Are 

there questions? If not, I actually have one. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So, if we stuck with the 85 percent in terms of 

your company, that would eliminate some of your 

products from being included. Is that correct?

MR. PEDERSEN: That would eliminate 

one of them, yes.

MR. ELA: And in terms of just from your 

side of things, so how would we best make an 

annotation, if we were going to go back to the 

drawing board, to really try and keep like 

cellulose-based materials in there? We know most 

of them are synthetic just from the processing of 

the paper itself.

You're saying that there are 

non-biobased materials that would biodegrade 

better than biobased, ones that don't biodegrade. 

How would you propose that we would word that 

annotation?

MR. PEDERSEN: Well, they are, I think 

there is a standard for testing biodegradation of 

a product stating for how long time it would take 

for this product to fully biodegrade.

And that could perhaps provide actually 

a good notion on, say, a limit of 90 percent in 

two years, which is most standards you use for
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

biodegradation, not really considering whether the 

material would be biobased or non-biobased but more 

looking at the biodegradability that would be 

documented by this testing. I think it's 17556 

in the ISO standards. But I'm not sure of the 

number.

MR. ELA: So, if we -- could we stick 

with let's say 80 percent biobased and then not, 

and then like to the remaining 20 percent push for 

biodegradation?

MR. PEDERSEN: So that could be a way 

to move it in the future. Yes, sure, definitely.

MR. ELA: Well, thank you very much. 

We appreciate your input. We'll move on, seeing 

no further questions. But thank you for calling 

in from Denmark.

MR. PEDERSEN: Yeah, thank you. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: Next up we have Christie 

Badger and then Terry Shistar and then Emily Brown 

Rosen. Christie, please go ahead.

MS. BADGER: Thank you. Good 

afternoon. My name is Christie Badger. And I'm 

with the National Organic Coalition. Many thanks 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

for all of the work that you do on behalf of organic 

integrity.

Inerts, there continues to be an 

unconscionable delay in implementing existing NOSB 

recommendations for replacing the obsolete 

references to EPA List 3 and List 4 inert 

ingredients on the National List with listings of 

actual approved non-active ingredients in 

pesticide products.

Further, the NOSB should not delay in 

evaluating NPEs. According to the TR, virtually 

every environmental compartment can be 

contaminated through the use of NPEs.

In our written comments, we outline a 

detailed process for moving forward based on the 

outstanding NOSB recommendations from fall 2012 

and 2015. NOC is recommending that the inerts 

working group be reestablished with membership 

consisting of NOSB members with support from an 

NOP staff person.

Paper pots. We are pleased that there 

is the differentiation being made between paper 

materials used with the intention of degrading in 

the soil versus paper materials that are intended 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to be removed after use. We support the proposed 

definition of a planting aid and are generally 

supportive of the proposed annotation. While we 

appreciate having an annotation that represents 

the market's current reality, we strongly urge the 

Board to keep at the fore the goal of moving towards 

100 percent biobased content in future sunset 

reviews and suggest a way to achieve this in our 

written comments.

Biodegradable biobased mulch film. We 

thank the NOP for acknowledging in their memo to 

the NOSB dated October 16, 2019 that the 2014 rule 

and preamble establish the requirement that all 

polymer feedstock be 100 percent biobased. We 

fully agree.

To be clear, both biobased and 

biodegradability are equally important. In 

organic agriculture, the origins of the materials 

are important, as well as what materials, excuse 

me, as well as what happens to them in the ground.

Biodegradability must be considered in 

a very broad way and must be shown across many 

regions, soil types, and climate types.

NOC acknowledges that a biodegradable 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

biobased mulch film would be a great asset to 

producers. However, we harbor great concerns 

regarding the agronomic, environmental, and health 

effects of the breakdown.

For almost every argument made for the 

use of biodegradable biobased mulch film, we could 

find a counterargument noting that more research 

is needed. We maintain that this product is not 

ready for prime time.

Fenbendazole, NOC opposes the use of 

fenbendazole in poultry as proposed. There needs 

to be a withholding period because fenbendazole 

eggs of treated chickens at zero day withdrawal 

shows the 2.4 parts per million residue. While 

the FDA may consider 2.4 parts per million to be 

safe, organic is not set up to mimic conventional 

production.

To be clear, the FDA does not require 

a withdrawal time on the label for milk from dairy 

cattle either. But within the organic program, 

we follow a precautionary principle that guides 

our decision making, not what the conventional 

market requires.

Organic dairy producers are already 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

working from uneven ground when it comes to 

standards for livestock living conditions, pasture 

requirements, and outdoor access that are not in 

place for poultry.

We have heard the NOP and the NOSB 

continually express a desire for a level playing 

field for all producers. And we agree.

The withdrawal period for fenbendazole 

for use in organic poultry needs to be at the same 

high standards set for all other areas within 

organic production. Finally --

MR. ELA: Christie, I think your time 

is up.

MS. BADGER: Oh, I'm so sorry. I 

didn't hear it.

MR. ELA: Well, you know, it's, our 

timer is sometimes not being heard well. So I 

apologize for interrupting.

MS. BADGER: Okay.

MR. ELA: And you can finish one 

sentence if you want.

MS. BADGER: Oh, I was just -- okay. 

Finally, if organic allows fenbendazole for 

treatment of laying hens, there will be producers 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

both organic and conventional who will not need 

or allow the use of this. And it will become a 

label claim, another label claim and marketing tool 

stating no parasiticides and no chemical residue 

in our eggs.

MR. ELA: Great. Thank you very much. 

Are there questions for Christie? Thank you as 

always, Christie. We appreciate it. And I'm 

sorry. We're a little glitchy on some of the 

timing here. So sorry I had to step in. Oh, it 

sounded like there was a question from Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I'm sorry, Steve. 

I had a couple of questions. About --

MR. ELA: Go ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: About the biobased 

mulch, did I understand correctly that you would 

limit the use of biodegradable mulch solely to 100 

percent biobased, because you said biobased and 

biodegradable mulch were equally important for the 

mulch --

(Simultaneous speaking.)

MR. BRADMAN: Biodegradability.

MS. BADGER: That's right, that both 

biobased and biodegradability are equally 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

important. Our members feel that is the case. 

And, yeah, we don't think that considering just 

biodegradability is sufficient.

MR. BRADMAN: So it should be 100 

percent biobased.

MS. BADGER: That's what our member 

groups, that's the consensus, yes.

MR. BRADMAN: Uh-huh. And how do you 

consider that when you look at other petroleum 

products that we use in organic and get applied 

to plants and soil like, you know, horticultural 

oils?

MS. BADGER: We haven't talked about 

that. But I will make sure that we do, Asa, between 

now and the fall and bring that up for our crops 

specialist and try and get some thoughts for you 

on that.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. And then on 

your comments about NPE and inerts, I just want 

to echo that there's a lot of concern among the 

Board about the situation we have with inerts. 

And I know personally I agree with many of your 

concerns, and that in some ways the situation we 

have right now is broken. And I'm really hoping 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to help fix that.

MS. BADGER: Thank you, Asa. We are 

really hoping that the NOP recognizes that they 

have such a wonderful resource in you, and then 

all of the fellow NOSB members, that they put you 

to work on that. We know that you have been eager 

to do that. And we certainly hope that they will 

take advantage of that.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, 

Christie. We do appreciate it.

MS. BADGER: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on. 

We're running a little bit behind. But I think 

we can, we're not too far off from what we can make 

up, but just as a time check to the Board. But 

please feel free to ask pertinent questions.

We next have Terry Shistar and then 

Emily Brown Rosen and after that Michael Sligh. 

Terry, please go ahead. Terry, we've got your 

slides, but we're not hearing you.

MS. ARSENAULT: Let's see. Terry, 

Terry, Terry, make sure you're unmuted here. 

Terry, I'm going to unmute you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. SHISTAR: Okay.

MS. ARSENAULT: There we go. You're 

unmuted now. And it looks like Devon has your 

slide, yep.

MS. SHISTAR: Okay. You can hear me.

MS. ARSENAULT: Yep.

MR. ELA: Yes, we can. Please go 

ahead.

MS. SHISTAR: Okay. My name is Terry 

Shistar. And I'm on the board of directors of 

Beyond Pesticides. I'm willing to field questions 

on any of our comments. But I might need to get 

back to you with the answer. Next slide, please.

This meeting has a notable lack of 

voting issues. While it concerns us that the NOSB 

may not be moving forward on some important issues, 

it also gives the Board an opportunity to look at 

some broader issues that may receive inadequate 

attention in their rush to complete voting.

Some of these issues have been raised 

repeatedly by public comment. Some have been on 

and off the NOSB working agenda. Some have even 

been the subject of repeated recommendations that 

have not been implemented by NOP. These include 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

inert ingredients in pesticides, rain materials, 

contaminated inputs, sanitizers and 

disinfectants, and products of fermentation. 

Next slide, please.

Today I would like to focus on the need 

to look collectively at options for sanitizing and 

disinfecting. Some sanitizers and disinfectants 

are on the National List. Others have been 

petitioned for listing. They do not all appear 

on the National List as required by OFPA, itemized 

by specific use or application.

Even when the use is specified, it is 

not always possible to determine from the National 

List whether they are adequate, whether there are 

adequate sanitizers and disinfectants to meet the 

requirements of organic protection for a specific 

use. For this reason, we and others have requested 

a comprehensive review of these materials. Next 

slide, please.

Disinfection is a topic that's on the 

mind of many people as we protect ourselves from 

COVID-19. We at Beyond Pesticides are reviewing 

disinfectants used for coronavirus because of the 

concern that some disinfectants affect the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

respiratory and immune systems and, therefore, may 

increase the risk of COVID-19 to users.

We believe that our experience may be 

helpful when it comes to reviewing sanitizers and 

the disinfectants used in organic production. 

Next slide, please.

The first step in such a review is 

identification of the needs for sanitizers and 

disinfectants. In this case, we were looking at 

the need to remove the coronavirus.

The second step is identification of 

available materials. We were lucky to have EPA's 

List N that lists products that are approved for 

removal of coronavirus.

The third step is reviewing these 

materials according to OFPA criteria. We reviewed 

the list and according to our criteria, our 

health-based criteria and producer 

recommendations for them.

The process for simpler for us because 

we had a defined singular need. We have a list 

of effective materials. And we have a simple 

criteria. But the process for the NOSB review is 

conceptually the same. Thank you. Next slide.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ARSENAULT: Steve, if you're -- I 

think you might be on mute.

MR. ELA: Try that again. Thank you, 

Terry. Particularly where I hold the arrow and 

the space bar. Are there questions for Terry? 

All right. Thank you very much, Terry. We 

appreciate it.

MR. BRADMAN: I'm sorry, Steve. I had 

one comment. It takes me a while --

MR. ELA: Go ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: I just want to say, 

Terry, that I really appreciate your input on these 

issues on review of these materials and also the 

prior report that you and BP worked on with respect 

to inerts.

I think that's one of the best documents 

out there evaluating issues and challenges around 

inerts and paths forward. And I just want to give 

a shout out to that and really appreciate your input 

on these issues.

MS. SHISTAR: Thank you.

MR. ELA: It looks like Rick has a 

question as well.

MR. GREENWOOD: Yeah, just a quick 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

question for you on your COVID review. Is that 

all strictly paper review or is any, are you 

responsible for any lab testing?

MS. SHISTAR: No, we're not doing any 

lab testing. We're looking at the EPA's List N 

for, in terms of efficacy and then basically doing 

paper review of the health effects and with a focus 

on respiratory effects and immune system effects.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Terry. 

Appreciate it. We're going to move on to Emily 

Brown Rosen. And then we'll have Michael Sligh 

and Cynthia Fabian. Emily, please go ahead.

MS. BROWN ROSEN: Okay. Can you hear 

me?

MR. ELA: We can.

MS. BROWN ROSEN: Okay. Great. My 

name is Emily Brown Rosen. And my company is 

Organic Research Associates.

I'd just like to welcome all the new 

members and thank you to all the existing members 

for your ongoing work and your service to the Board. 

It's a tremendous amount of work. And we all 

appreciate it.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I'd also like to thank the NOP for 

having this virtual meeting that we can all listen 

in on. It's a great thing to be able to do in times 

like these.

I am just going to make a few comments 

about the crops committee sunset review of List 

4 inerts used in pesticides.

As many of you know, I was an NOP staff 

member from 2010 to 2016. And I was glad to be 

the facilitator of the efforts of the inerts 

working group. This group included members of the 

NOSB, members of the NOP staff, and also EPA.

We ultimately developed a proposal, 

which transmitted to the crops committee, and was 

reflected in the final 2015 NOSB recommendation 

for an annotation of the current listing of List 

4 inerts.

This change, if it is, you know, made 

into a regulation, will provide for collaboration 

with the EPA Safer Choice program for a review of 

inert ingredients and pesticides.

I noticed there's been quite a few 

questions raised by commenters and by the NOSB as 

to what the wording means exactly in the proposed 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

new annotation when it says point 2, little 2, 

substances included on the EPA Safer Chemical 

Ingredient List.

People question whether this means all 

substances on the SCIL list or noting that there's 

a lot of different substances there like 

fragrances, degreasers, all different kinds of 

cleaning products, et cetera.

I think this could have been worded more 

precisely. But it was meant to mean that all 

substances on the SCIL list that also had EPA 

approval for use in pesticides, either they have 

a tolerance for such use or an exemption for 

tolerance.

I think the reason that that language 

was not included at the time was we thought it was 

redundant since you can't legally manufacture a 

pesticide product with inert ingredients that are 

not legal for use.

Therefore, I think -- and also in our 

conversations with Safer Choice, they could easily 

identify which ingredients on their SCIL list are 

approved for, as inert ingredients. And I think 

they're very open-minded about trying to make it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

easier for organic producers and manufacturers to 

recognize which ingredients would be appropriate.

NOSB also asked a question, number 3, 

how should the NOSB establish review criteria based 

on the Safer Choice program while also ensuring 

it's consistent with OFPA criteria.

I'd just like to point out that the NOSB 

did a side-by-side comparison of the OFPA criteria 

and the Safer Choice program criteria, which is 

appended to the 2015 recommendation, and found a 

very good match for most of the criteria.

The working group thought that as part 

of the five-year sunset review the crops committee 

could then re-review the overall SCIL program, the 

criteria in use, make sure they're concurrent with 

OFPA, and also review any additions to this SCIL 

list for any red flags.

We also felt the petition process could 

be used if any undesirable substances made it 

through the SCIL screen. And those petitions 

would be given priority by NOSB for removal.

I'll just close by saying I'd like to 

say we, when I worked on the project, we found the 

EPA staff to be very supportive and very interested 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in collaborating with NOP on this project.

And if you have any further questions 

about the work we did at the inerts working group 

and the recommendation back in 2015, I'd be happy 

to answer them. Thanks very much. I'm done.

MR. ELA: Thank you. It looks like 

Emily has a question for --

MS. OAKLEY: Yeah, thank you. Emily, 

you're such an amazing resource. And I was 

wondering what your answer to our fourth question, 

what would be the consequences of an NOSB 

recommendation to delist for inerts might be.

MS. BROWN ROSEN: All right. I sort 

of formulated some answers to that, but I didn't 

know I wasn't going to have time. But what I would 

like, I think the answer there is there are really 

no terribly good answers.

Number one, you could do nothing, which 

is where we stand right now, which obviously is 

not desirable since it's out of date and it is 

possibly allowing products that you don't want to 

see on the organic market. And it doesn't allow 

for innovation.

Second choice would be to allow all 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

inerts that have a tolerance exemption by EPA or 

a tolerance, basically go along with whatever EPA 

is currently allowing for inerts in pesticides, 

which would be more coherent with other agencies. 

It would, you know, make no work for NOSB. And 

it would be consistent with a lot of other countries 

in the world that are allowing their environmental 

agencies to review inerts.

Or three, you could fall back on the 

2012 recommendation, which would require you to 

review I guess according to OMRI it sounds like 

a huge amount of different inerts now that are not, 

that are in products. I think she said over 200 

that have to be reviewed either singly or in groups. 

There would have to be petitions. There would 

have to be additions to the National List. And 

every five years you'd have to re-review all those 

chemicals.

So, as I say, there's not any terribly 

good option. I would say, you know, trying to work 

with EPA and the SCIL program would be, obviously, 

your, you know, the best bet forward if it does, 

you know, if you can do that.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Any other questions for 

Emily? All right. Thank you very much, Emily. 

That is very helpful.

MS. BROWN ROSEN: You're welcome.

MR. ELA: Next up we have Michael Sligh 

and then Cynthia Fabian and then Kelly Taveres. 

And so, Michael, please go ahead.

MR. SLIGH: Good afternoon. I'm 

Michael Sligh representing the Global Alliance for 

Organic Integrity. And I am a founding member of 

this Board.

We are working with government 

regulators, conformity assessment communities, 

producers, traders, and international NGOs to 

strength the organic assurance worldwide.

We are working on best practices and 

greater harmonization of organic oversight and 

working to develop better tools for preventing 

fraud. We welcome the new NOSB members. And we 

thank all of you for your service.

I want to try to touch on three topics 

quickly. First, during this time of pandemic and 

the need for remote surveillance, we strongly urge 

increasing cooperation and collaboration between 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

accreditation, certifying, and inspection bodies 

on conducting remote surveillance to ensure 

consistent oversight and to create more timely 

communications regarding potential early warning 

of hot spots of potential fraud.

Secondly, we strongly support organic 

oversight globally shifting toward greater focus 

on risk and where the greatest risk resides. And 

we strongly urge the use of consistent criteria 

for risk assessment to help guide our program 

during these very tricky remote times.

Determining high risk should include 

at least histories of non-compliance and problems, 

volatile areas, supply chains that are long and 

complex, high demand commodities, and scale of 

potential impacts if fraud is found.

Thirdly, given our current need to rely 

on more and more remote oversight, hopefully for 

not too long, it is critical and more critical than 

ever that the proposed organic import rule get out 

for public comment ASAP. We must not allow this 

urgently needed rule to get lost during this 

current crisis. We ask all on the call to please 

continue to urge this.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We also don't want to see that the rule 

comes out partially, and it may get caught during 

a potential change of administration, which also 

could hang up the rule going forward. So getting 

this rule out is probably one of the most 

significant things we could do to prevent fraud 

in the short term.

And finally, we strongly support calls 

for addressing racial equity and inclusivity in 

organic. Thank you very much.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Michael. Are 

there questions for Michael? We appreciate your 

thoughts.

MR. SLIGH: Yep, thank you.

MR. ELA: We are going to move on. 

Yep, take care. We're going to move on to Cynthia 

Fabian. And then we'll have Kelly Taveres after 

that and Mark Keating after that. So, Cynthia, 

please go ahead.

MS. FABIAN: Okay. Okay. So I'm 

Cynthia Fabian. And I --

MS. ARSENAULT: Cynthia, your mic just 

cut out. And I think you're on mute now. I'm 

going to unmute you. Oh, somebody --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. FABIAN: Can you hear me?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yep, we got you now. 

Start again.

MS. FABIAN: Okay. So I have a 

patented product that uses gamma rays in order to 

be changed into different forms, even pellets for 

feed. And I'm in the process of getting a USDA 

certified organic certification. I do not have 

it yet.

But it's highly effective in killing 

many of these worms. And it uses DE, diatomaceous 

earth, which is a key element. And as it is 

processed in different forms, it can help the 

agricultural market as well as the livestock. And 

I'm working on the, helping to eradicate from the 

livestock screwworms and things of that nature, 

which are a key part in saving our livestock and 

our agricultural industry.

And I need to work still. But it has 

been tested. It is patented. And right now I'm 

at the stage where I need to get it to market so 

that it could help who it needs to help. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: All right. Thank you very 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

much, Cynthia. And I would just encourage you on 

that to, if you need to, just talk with Devon and 

submit a petition to the program and look through 

those criteria. So are there any questions?

All right. We're going to move on to 

Kelly Taveres, then Mark Keating, and then we'll 

go to John Foster. We have Amber Pool on the list, 

but she has cancelled. Just so, John, know that 

you'll come after Mark Keating. So, Kelly, please 

go ahead.

MS. TAVERES: Thanks. Hi, everyone. 

Good afternoon. My name is Kelly Taveres. And 

I serve as the digital specialist for the Organic 

Trade Association.

On behalf of OTA, I'd like to welcome 

the new Board members, and thank you so much for 

beginning the five-year journey of critical and 

greatly appreciated service to the organic sector.

My colleagues will speak later on 

specific agenda topics. And you have our detailed 

written comments. So my remarks will focus on an 

introduction to OTA and our membership, our NOSB 

comment process, and the work we've been doing as 

it relates to sunset material review.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

To begin, I'd like to thank NOSB and 

National Organic Program, just echoing what others 

have said, for offering this virtual opportunity 

not only for public comment but for the NOSB meeting 

itself. This is a great service and opportunity 

for the entire organic sector. And it ultimately 

has increased accessibility to this public 

process.

We certainly have a strong preference 

for in-person meetings. But it's also great to 

know that we now have a virtual option if it's 

needed.

So a bit about the Organic Trade 

Association, one of our strongest assets is the 

diversity and breadth of our membership. Unlike 

many trade associations, we are uniquely 

structured to include the full value team for the 

organic industry, ensuring that all segments from 

farm to marketplace have a strong voice within our 

organization.

We bring farmers and growers, 

ingredient suppliers, processors, manufacturers, 

distributors, certifiers, retailers, and many 

others together to promote and protect the growing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

organic sector.

We represent over 9,500 businesses in 

all 50 states. And half of OTA members are small 

businesses reporting less than a million in organic 

sales per year.

OTA's members are represented either 

through direct membership of the association or 

through strategic partnerships with regional 

organic farmer organizations across the U.S. 

through our Farmers Advisory Council, or what we 

call FAC.

Smaller organic farms who have current 

membership in one of our participating FAC 

organizations are able to obtain full OTA 

membership for a minimal fee through our farmstead 

membership category.

The comments that we submitted are on 

behalf of our membership. In order to do this, 

our regulatory staff carries out an extensive 

process of membership engagement so that we can 

understand how NOSB recommendations will impact 

certified farmers and handlers on a day-to-day 

basis.

Although it was very challenging to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

conduct membership outreach during a pandemic, OTA 

was able to facilitate a task force addressing all 

things fish and seaweed related. And all of our 

members were provided with an opportunity to weigh 

in and inform all of our final comments.

To help facilitate a thorough comment 

review process for sunset materials, we created 

electronic surveys for each individual input under 

review. The surveys are confidential, 

user-friendly, available to every NOP certificate 

holder, and include seven to ten questions that 

address the necessity or essentiality of a National 

List input under review.

You have our written comments, which 

include all the survey responses we received to 

date. We were able to collect a total of 

(telephonic interference) unique responses from 

organic physicists across the country.

This is a particularly low response 

rate for us. And we recognize that that's largely, 

if not completely, due to the COVID-19 pandemic 

and the priorities that organic operators are 

facing during this comment period. But we'll 

continue to collect responses to inform the vote 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that's going to take place in the fall.

Thank you to the Board for your hard 

work and your commitment to furthering organic. 

And that's all for me.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. Are 

there questions from the Board? All right. Thank 

you very much.

And we will move on to Mark Keating. 

After that, we will have John Foster and then Tom, 

sorry, Tom, Honigford I assume. So, Mark, please 

go ahead. And, Mark, we're not hearing you. 

Mark, still don't have you.

MS. ARSENAULT: Mark's on the line. 

Mark, Mark, Mark, there you are. Mark, I'm going 

to unmute you. There you go. Your mic should be 

open now. And your slide is, slide deck is up.

MR. KEATING: Are you hearing me now?

MS. ARSENAULT: We got you.

MR. ELA: We've got him.

MR. KEATING: Great.

MR. ELA: Please go ahead.

MR. KEATING: I'm humbled to be part 

of this community. My name is Mark Keating. And 

I operate Wheel of Life Consulting.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I want to thank the NOP and the NOSB 

for making this unique forum possible. And I want 

to thank Michelle for being such a pleasure to work 

with.

Between 1999 and 2002 I served as the 

lead agricultural marketing specialist at the 

National Organic Program on crop and livestock 

standards and the corresponding National List 

materials. This was during a period in which the 

NOP responded to the 275,000 public comments, 

published both the second proposed rule in March 

of 2000 and the final rule of December.

With the exception of the pasture 

standards, that is essentially the same crop, 

livestock, and handling standards that we're 

working with today. The National List, you know, 

changes. But I was there, amoeba on the food 

chain, working on those 275,000 comments.

Over the past ten years, I have 

conducted more than 1,000 crop, livestock, and 

handling inspections. I know how the standards 

were written. I know why they were written that 

way, and how they're being applied.

Earth Day, a good day to remember one 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of our heroines, Rachel Carson. Michelle, if you 

could forward to the next slide. That's way more 

about me than I really wanted to get into.

Very quickly, just two issues that I 

think I'll have time to address. Fenbendazole, 

first and foremost, I want to compliment Dr. 

Mozisek for his knowledge and comment on this 

subject. I think, as we all talk about what people 

think or consumers think or what I think, he 

projected a very, very thorough, did an in-depth 

understanding of the subject matter.

We do have to include turkeys up front 

in this conversation. If you go to any organic 

slaughter facility in this country that handles 

poultry, they will tell you that worms are a 

recurring phenomenon in all sources of organic 

poultry. And this is because increasing outdoor 

access leads to increases in exposure to pathogens.

We should bear in mind that the farmers 

and the companies that have petitioned for this 

material are the ones who for ten years have 

voluntarily complied with the animal welfare 

standards which the USDA has proven incapable of 

making law. Those are the people who, and those 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

are the type of operations, that specifically need 

these materials.

It is unethical to leave the birds out 

there without this. And I think for consumer 

expectations it's a very false premise. I do not 

agree with the comment from NOC that this is somehow 

inconsistent with what the consumer thinks or what 

the OFPA should allow.

We have registered pesticides that are 

used in organic production that have tolerances. 

EPA runs that show. FDA runs this show. There 

is no difference. And if a consumer, consumers 

-- is that my time?

MS. ARSENAULT: That was the timer.

MR. KEATING: Unreal, because the next 

subject, organic seed practice standard, I will 

urge anybody who wants a contrarian opinion, please 

reach out to me. It's an issue that has been just 

poorly managed. I hate to say that. But that's 

for another time.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Mark. 

Are there questions for Mark? It looks like Sue 

has a question for you.

MS. BAIRD: Thanks, Mark. I really 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

appreciate this. And we have not even considered 

turkeys when we were discussing this fenbendazole.

But just to comment, I suppose, I agree 

with you. The producers that I see in Missouri 

that are having real issues with the worms in the 

laying hens are the ones that are not only certified 

to the current standard of organic, but also those 

that are voluntarily adhering to the enhanced 

livestock proposal. Supposedly, it was passed at 

one point.

And they are -- and I've reached out 

to them. And they are seeing a lot of worms in 

their eggs. So thank you for bringing the turkeys 

to our minds as well as we discuss this.

MR. KEATING: May I have a follow up 

comment?

MR. ELA: Yes, quickly, please.

MR. KEATING: Sometimes the organic 

poultry sector gets painted with a broad brush, 

the smaller scale and the larger scale.

There are actually three clear 

categories. There is small scale. There is large 

scale with humane compliance. And there's large 

scale without humane compliance. And I won't go 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

any further right now.

But that large scale with humane 

compliance is one of the sectors in the organic 

community which I'm most proud to work. And 

they've done an exemplary job and made an enormous 

financial investment.

And we're not talking about going to 

hedge funds to put the money together. We're 

talking about people who put the family farm on 

the line to put up these houses.

And exploring that in a little more 

depth and detail I think would really be 

beneficial. And thanks, everybody, for their 

service.

MS. BAIRD: Just as a further comment, 

my people that I deal with are the small, mainly 

Mennonite communities. And they are smaller 

scale. And I have reached out. And they 

absolutely say they're seeing a lot of worms in 

their eggs.

MR. ELA: Asa, you have a question.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, my question, it 

seems like there's kind of two takes on this 

material, one, whether, in principle whether it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

should be allowed, and then, two, if it's allowed, 

should there be a withdrawal period and what that 

should be.

You made the analogy to the EPA food 

tolerances, which we have for some organically 

approved pesticides. Are you -- do you have 

opinions on the withdrawal period and what that 

might be?

MR. KEATING: I would not favor a 

withdrawal period. I'm somewhat of a contrarian 

I guess in the sense in the organic world that I'm 

not as materials or residue driven as many are. 

I don't -- I think from a compliance standpoint 

the withdrawal period would be a very complicating 

factor.

And personally, I am confident that the 

food safety network in this country -- I don't agree 

with all the decisions that they make on food safety 

oversight in this country. I don't obviously 

agree with all the decisions. But I do not see 

a reason for an extended withdrawal period on an 

FDA medication.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: All right. Thank you very 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

much. We appreciate your comments, Mark.

Just as a note, I think we've lost 

Michelle temporarily. But we have others taking 

over. So bear with us a little bit here.

We next have up John Foster and then 

Tom Honigford and then Maricela Adrian. So, John, 

please go ahead. And I will -- Michelle's not 

here. I will take over the timing. So --

MR. FOSTER: All right. Can you hear 

me okay?

MR. ELA: We have you.

MR. FOSTER: Great.

MR. ELA: Go ahead.

MR. FOSTER: My name, John Foster. 

I'm Director of Business Development for 

EarthKind, a pretty longstanding member of this 

(telephonic interference), worked on the Board 

2010 to 2015 in a handler role. So welcome to the 

third of you who are new, and thank you all for 

your service. It is no small feat I can assure 

you.

Here today, first talking about the 

subject EPA List 4, inerts of minimal concern, or 

just inerts to use the parlance of our times.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I believe that these inerts continue 

to be essential for organic production and handling 

by virtue of the regulatory extension by every 

relevant regulatory definition present and should 

be continued to be included until a suitable 

alternative method for inclusion is determined.

So, first up, I just urge members to 

recommend continuation of these materials as 

written just to keep them in the pipeline. I have 

more detail in written comments I submitted online.

But so for context, EarthKind, we 

develop and manufacture EPA-registered and 25(b) 

exempted repellents. We use agricultural carrier 

oils, almond and sunflower oil, upcycled corn cobs, 

and botanical essential oils in deterring rodents, 

moths, ants, and spiders for now.

They're pretty effective as an 

independent tactic or in concert with IPM practices 

in and around structures. These are primarily 

geared for structural use.

They're included on OSP's multiple 

certified organic operations. And their 

rationale there is under 205.271(d).

And then, so my position is primarily 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Director of Business Development. But I am also 

quite involved with innovation and 

commercialization. So I did want to follow up to 

those four questions from 2015.

So, answer to question 1, yes, 

development of better products has been stifled 

because of the disconnect and regs in the EPA 

listings. And to be very clear, these are products 

that could easily reduce the need around structure 

for synthetic poisons that are known to be a 

significant toxicological concern, humans, 

livestock, and wildlife, which is a particular 

interest of mine.

Number 2, the answer is we're aware that 

NPEs are of some concern. EarthKind products 

don't use it. But we know that that is one type 

of material that is of concern on other EPA lists, 

current EPA lists.

Number 3, I really encourage -- I 

couldn't echo Emily's thought, Emily Brown Rosen's 

thoughts on this more. I encourage implementing 

the 2015 recommendation. I was on the Board during 

those conversations. I recall them clearly. 

Emily Brown Rosen captured them just right. It 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

was a lot of hard work that I think just needs to 

be implemented.

Having taken part in the panoply of 

those sunset reviews myself, individual review of 

every inert I believe is untenable. I can go into 

a long list of whys, but untenable is the right 

word. And without --

MR. ELA: John, your time is up.

MR. FOSTER: All right. Thank you all 

for your time.

MR. ELA: Thank you for your comments. 

Are there questions from the Board? John, I have 

one. So, if we were to go to the Safer Choice 

program and move away from List 4 to Safer Choice, 

would that, how would that affect the business 

environment?

MR. FOSTER: Twofold, one, it would 

provide clarity and consistency. And that 

intrinsically has value. That's a -- just knowing 

that that's what we can count on, it would help.

Having, I've done some formulations 

with things on the SCILs, on SCIL, and also with 

25(b) materials, 25(b) as used in, for inert 

purposes, as well as active ingredients.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And there are many good options. But 

where I find the value would be is being able to 

go to my CEO and my board and say, hey, you know 

all that stuff I asked to do on the side because 

there wasn't an immediate avenue to commercialize 

it, now we can take advantage of all of that work 

and actually bring these things to market with some 

certainty that it's going to be okay.

So, for EarthKind, it would have 

dramatic effects because we've done a ton of the 

work for alternatives to poisons or sprays that 

are much more toxic that would target additional 

pests that are of both public health and non-public 

health concern.

MR. ELA: Great. And it looks like, 

Asa, a quick question.

MR. BRADMAN: I would like to know your 

comments on question 4.

MR. FOSTER: Oh, I -- so, without an 

alternative that we just talked about, I think a 

number of tools would leave the market and for 

producers and livestock, but by extension, 

handlers as well, because handlers are, you know, 

they don't have a 601(m), you know, under, anywhere 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

under 605 or 606.

So we refer through 272, 271 to the 

National List. So handler are also on the hook 

for this even though inerts aren't listed, you 

know, per se for handlers.

So I think as materials would leave the 

market, there would be fewer materials kind of in 

the organic sphere. And without alternatives I 

really believe that very small toolbox that's 

available to producers and livestock, as well as 

handlers, but certainly producers and livestock 

operators, that would get smaller.

And without clarity on what to develop 

next, there's very little incentive for folks who 

have the resources to go out and develop new stuff 

to go do that.

Organic, like in my world, organic is 

all I do. Like that's my whole world. And to a 

lot of people on this call and in this virtual room, 

it's the same.

But it's a very small portion of what 

chemical manufacturers make. And so any lack of 

clarity on what's coming around the corner, 

particularly in the context of greater lack of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

clarity, pandemic, et cetera, is going to be 

harmful for development. It has to be, because 

people aren't going to throw money at uncertain 

things. Generally speaking, they won't.

MR. ELA: All right, John. Asa, did 

you have one quick follow up?

MR. BRADMAN: I have just one great 

comment. I think your mention of the importance 

of lower toxic materials for structural pest 

control is really important.

I do a lot of work in child care and 

schools, not quite relevant to this Board. But 

certainly a lot of markets and grocery stores and 

other indoor environments are using a lot of 

materials that we wouldn't necessarily want in an 

organic setting. And structural pest control is 

another part of the picture in environments where 

food passes through.

MR. FOSTER: Couldn't agree more. And 

I would say on the schools particularly, that's 

a particular concern of mine. I'd love to connect 

with you at another time on that.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, John. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We appreciate that.

MR. FOSTER: Thank you. Thank you all 

very much.

MR. ELA: Yep. Next up we have Tom 

Honigford, then Maricela Adrian. And then we will 

take a short break. We're running a little bit 

behind. So we might just take a five-minute break. 

And then we'll move on to Beth Rota right after 

the break. So, Tom, please go ahead.

MR. HONIGFORD: Can you hear me? 

Hello?

MR. ELA: Yeah, go ahead. We can --

MR. HONIGFORD: All right. Great. 

Okay. Good. I'm actually a farmer. So I'm going 

to get off the, I hate to call it this, but the 

geek talk a little bit and give you a slightly 

different perspective on what it's like to be here 

in my field. As I'm speaking actually, I'm in my 

truck. Rainy day here in Vermont, by the way.

I got a kick out of the woman from the 

OTA referring to small farmers as being around a 

million dollars. I'm substantially under that. 

But up here in Vermont, there's one of us around 

every corner. So we probably have more organic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

farmers than any place in the nation per capita.

So I'm going to speak about two things. 

The first thing is I'm not going to talk to you 

about the technical merits of it. But the paper 

pot transplanter is a critical tool for my 

operation, my size operation, when you have live 

startup in the springtime. I don't even employ 

enough people to run a water wheel transplanter, 

which requires three people.

And this thing plants faster than a 

water wheel transplanter. It's cheaper. It's 

just a great system. So I think when you're 

looking at a paper pot system, it is a very 

sustainable system.

The other thing I want to do is put a 

bug in your ear about the use of plastics. I've 

been at this for 25 years. And I am seeing a 

growing use of plastic in the egg sector. Whether 

it's a dairy farmer or a vegetable farmer, people 

are relying on plastics more and more and more.

We have a big conference in Manchester, 

New Hampshire every two years. There's literally 

thousands of growers there. And there must have 

been six workshops on how to use plastic in your 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

field.

So we pride ourselves in the organic 

world of being, you know, sustainable. We're 

thinking about outlawing Chilean nitrate because 

it is not sustainably mined. And here we're using 

plastic up the ying-yang and running towards 

plastic more and more.

So we need to start a conversation. 

And people need to start thinking about how we can 

reduce our use of plastic, not how we can increase 

our use of plastic. We're heading the wrong way 

on this one.

So I just wanted to give you that kind 

of perspective. That's all I had to say.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Tom. 

We always appreciate hearing from somebody out in 

their field. Some of us share that sentiment. 

So are there questions for Tom? It looks like 

Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Hi, Tom. Thank you so 

much for calling in. I wasn't clear then. Are 

you advocating for the biobased biodegradable 

mulch film or not advocating for it?

MR. HONIGFORD: I don't know enough, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Emily, to say one thing one way or the other. I'm 

not advocating necessarily for anything except for 

the fact that we can't keep on the path that we're 

on.

I mean, we've abandoned the use of silos 

up here so we can wrap all of our bales of hay to 

marshmallows. And we just throw that plastic 

away. And when we had appropriate technology of 

putting stuff in silos, we're no longer using it 

because it's inconvenient for us.

So I'm not necessarily advocating for 

anything. I'm just saying we need to start a 

conversation. We need to start thinking about it. 

And if it's biodegradable mulch, if that's where 

we start, then that's where we should start.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Mindee has a question for 

you, Tom.

MS. JEFFERY: Tom --

MR. ELA: Mindee --

MS. JEFFERY: -- paper pots in your 

field. Did I hear that correctly?

MR. HONIGFORD: That's correct.

MS. JEFFERY: How many years?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. HONIGFORD: Oh, I got on it as soon 

as I heard about it. So I've been using it, I don't 

know exactly how many years, eight to ten.

MS. JEFFERY: And any observation on 

the impacts to your soil?

MR. HONIGFORD: None, zero. It 

doesn't look like it has any impacts. The second 

year, like I was out there tilling today in some 

of the places where I've used paper chains last 

year, I can see the remainder of chains, just little 

like two-inch pieces of paper. Places that I 

planted it two years ago I don't see anything. 

So, within a season it's gone.

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you, Tom.

MR. HONIGFORD: You're welcome.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Tom. 

Good luck in this growing season.

MR. HONIGFORD: All right. Thank you. 

We need it.

MR. ELA: Yes, we know that feeling. 

All right. We're going to move on to Maricela 

Adrian. We're going to take a very short break. 

And then we'll have Beth Rota and Diana Castillo 

after that. Maricela, please go ahead. We're not 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

hearing you.

MS. ARSENAULT: Sorry, Steve, it's 

Michelle. I don't believe Maricela is with us. 

We haven't seen her up until this point.

MR. ELA: Okay.

MS. ARSENAULT: Double check --

MR. ELA: Maricela, if you are with us, 

please try and let Michelle know, and we'll come 

back to you.

Otherwise, we're going to go ahead and 

move on to a five-minute break. So, if everybody 

could come back at, well, we'll just, we'll call 

it 1:40. We'll give you two extra minutes. So, 

well, 1:40 Mountain time, so 40 minutes after the 

hour of whatever time zone you're on. So we'll 

be back, be back shortly. I hope you enjoy the 

break. Take care.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 12:33 p.m. and resumed at 

12:40 p.m.)

MR. ELA: Okay. Well, we'll call this 

meeting back to order after a short recess. Sorry 

that it was a little short for everybody, but --

I think we're a little bit behind, but I think we're 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in pretty good shape.

So coming up we have Beth Rota and then 

Diana Castillo and then Carlos Chinchilla. So, 

Beth, you're up and please state your name and 

affiliation for the record.

MS. ROTA: All right. Can everyone 

hear me?

MR. ELA: We can. Please go ahead.

MS. ROTA: Great. My name is Beth Rota. 

I'm the policy and quality assurance manager for 

Quality Certification Services. QCS currently 

certifies over 1,250 USDA organic operations.

Thank you for everyone present for 

engaging the public comment process, despite the 

current travel limitations. I'd like to add a 

special hello to the newest NOSB members.

And while I appreciate the option of 

a remote meeting due to circumstances, I also want 

to stress the significance of in-person meetings, 

which allow organic stakeholders to share ideas, 

collaborate and find solutions in ways that remote 

meetings cannot facilitate. For these reasons, 

I truly hope that future meetings will continue 

to be held in-person.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I will use my time today to expand on 

our written comments on paper. QCS continues to 

support adding paper-based crop planting aids to 

the National List. The benefits of these 

materials, and their compatibility with OFPA, have 

been clearly laid out in the petition, the 

discussion documents, and public comments.

There is broad support from both 

organic producers and certifiers to codify their 

continued use in organic production. This is the 

fourth consecutive NOSB meeting addressing this 

petition, and I hope it will resolve in a long 

awaited recommendation for the NOP to add 

paper-based crop planting aids to the National 

List.

We appreciate the crop subcommittee's 

continued engagement with the organic community. 

And while we support the intent of your proposal, 

we're concerned with its complexity. We offer 

these suggestions in hopes of finding language that 

can be clearly and consistently applied, while 

maintaining your intent.

The definition should allow for all 

types of paper-based crop planting aids that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

decompose into the soil, and not be limited to the 

examples in the proposed definition.

Please clarify the meaning of 

cellulose-based paper, including what types of 

cellulose will be allowed. We support limiting 

the amount of synthetic adhesives and 

non-bio-based fibers, a minimum of 85% bio-based 

content and a maximum of 15% synthetic adhesives 

and strengthening fibers seems appropriate. But 

the NOSB should verify that this threshold matches 

what is currently available to it and used by 

organic producers.

The definition and annotation should 

enable organic certifiers and mid-tier review 

organizations to determine if a paper-based crop 

planting aid is allowed based on ingredient 

composition alone, without burdensome bio-based 

testing that may be subject to margins of error.

We support increasing the bio-based 

fiber content requirement over time. We encourage 

the NOSB to use the sunset review process to 

re-evaluate the appropriate minimum content and 

eliminate a complex commercial availability 

requirement, and the potential for inconsistent 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

application.

We support the addition of paper-based 

crop planting aids to the National List because 

they're in line with OFPA criteria. These 

materials embody the organic principles by 

reducing reliance on plastic containers, promoting 

recycling of paper products and increasing soil 

conservation through reduced tillage.

We urge the NOSB to pass a simplified 

National List motion to meet producer needs and 

ensure consistent application of the organic 

regulation.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. Are 

there questions from the Board? All right, Beth, 

thank you very much.

MS. ROTA: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We will move on. We have 

Diana Castillo up next. And it looks like maybe 

-- Diana, are you out there? I'm not sure if we 

can find your number. There's somebody talking 

on mute. Is that you Diana?

Devon, Michelle's computer just went 

offline again. So, Angelyque or Devon, we may need 

you to step in here.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. PEGUES: So I'm not actually seeing 

Diana on here.

MR. ELA: Okay. Yes, Michelle gave me 

the heads-up that she couldn't see her either so. 

Well, if Diana you're there, we'll come back to 

you. The same is true for Carlos. I think we 

might be missing him. Angelyque, do you happen 

to see him?

MS. PEGUES: I do not see him, either.

MR. ELA: Okay. Then we'll move on to 

Keith Jones. Next is Cynthia Smith, who we're not 

seeing right now. So, Cynthia, if you're there, 

give us a heads-up. But we'll do Keith Jones then 

Lee Frankel and then Jenna -- I'm sorry, Jenna --

Pugliese. Okay. So, Keith, please go ahead.

MR. JONES: Hi. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: Yes. We've got you. Go 

ahead.

MR. JONES: Great. Thank you. My 

name is Keith Jones. I am the Executive Director 

of the Biological Products Industry Alliance or 

BPIA.

The BPIA is a nonprofit organization 

based in the Washington, D.C. area. Our mission 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

is advancing sustainability through biological 

solutions.

Our organization is dedicated to 

fostering the responsible development of safe and 

effective biological products, including 

biopesticides, biostimulants and biofertilizers.

Biological products are generally 

considered reduced-risk products based on 

biological or naturally derived chemistry. By 

combining performance and safety, biological 

products offer value and benefits normally not 

realized by conventional chemistry.

BPIA is a vibrant association with over 

135 member companies, ranging from small, 

innovative sole proprietors, to large 

international companies.

Our member companies have developed 

dependable pioneering products for commercial and 

agricultural forestry, home gardens, 

horticultural, ornamental, public health, turf, 

and more.

Many of our member companies produce 

products specifically for organic growers and BPIA 

itself is a member of the OTA.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

On behalf of BPIA and all our members, 

I want to thank the NOSB and the NOP for the work 

that you all do and for the opportunity to provide 

these comments.

We previously submitted our detailed 

written comments so I will just briefly give a 

high-level summary of some of those comments.

Regarding the March 11, 2016, NOP 

Document 3011 entitled, Procedure - National List 

Petition Guidelines, BPIA respectfully requests 

the following.

Confirmation that it is not necessary 

to disclose confidential business information as 

a requirement for obtaining an NOP listing to 

permit use in organic agriculture.

The addition of a definition of the 

terms heavy metals or other contaminants, and 

publication of the associated maximum permitted 

concentrations for such material.

The addition of a definition of the word 

essential, and clarification that useful new 

resistant management tools and/or integrated 

management tools are not precluded by the existence 

of one or a short list of currently allowed organic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

options.

The addition of a provision that would 

allow the NOP and the NOSB to accept the results 

of studies that one, meet the requirement of good 

laboratory practice as defined in 40 C.F.R. Part 

160 and two, have been accepted by the U.S. EPA.

The addition of a requirement that the 

NOSB regulatory recommendations be based upon 

clearly stated objectives and criteria.

Inclusion of a realistic best case 

timeline that includes the entire NOP process from 

petition, receipt, published final rule.

Regarding the April 11, 2012 NOP 

document entitled, National Organic Standards 

Board Policy and Procedure Manual, we respectfully 

request the following.

The addition of disclosure of the areas 

of technical expertise of the authors of a new 

technical report, and an NOP confirmation that 

areas of technical expertise are sufficient to 

address the scientific theories addressed within 

each new technical report.

The addition of an opportunity for 

comments and proposed corrections by the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

petitioner before the technical report is 

finalized.

An update on Page 48 of the 2012 NOSB 

Policies and Procedures Manual regarding the 

submission of confidential business information 

to be consistent with the 2016 NOP procedure 

document.

And, finally, BPIA respectfully 

requests an expansion of the interpretation of 7 

U.S.C. Section 6517 to permit inert ingredients 

that have a current, relevant, U.S. EPA exemption 

from tolerance with new limits.

And, again, I would just like to thank 

you all for the work you do and the opportunity 

to offer these comments.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Keith. And are 

there any questions for Keith? All right. Thank 

you very much, Keith. We appreciate it. Next up 

-- go ahead, Devon.

MR. BRADMAN: Sorry. I have a couple 

questions.

MR. ELA: Asa, yes. Go ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: You talk about CBI. I 

just want to state, you know, in principle, I think 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

all ingredients in pesticide formulations should 

be publicly available, and there should be an 

ingredient list.

And you said it was not necessary to 

disclose CBI. I know that's often the case, but 

can you clarify what your reference to -- you 

mentioned metals. You went very quickly through 

that.

MR. JONES: Yes. So my understanding 

is there is a provision on heavy metals, and it 

just says heavy metal or other contaminants. And 

we're actually requesting that those terms be 

defined and if possible that it be indicated what 

the maximum levels of such materials or 

concentrations that would be permitted.

We're just seeking clarification and 

possibly definition of those terms.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. Thank you.

MR. JONES: Yes.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Keith. We're 

going to move next to Cynthia Smith. We're not 

sure we can find Cynthia on the phone list. But 

if Cynthia is not there, then we'll go to Lee 

Frankel, Jenna Pugliese and Adam Seitz. So, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Cynthia, are you out there?

MS. PEGUES: She's not here.

MR. ELA: Yes. Not hearing from 

Cynthia, we're going to move on to Lee Frankel. 

Lee and then Jenna and then Adam Seitz. So, Lee, 

please go ahead.

MR. FRANKEL: Okay. Thanks. My name 

is Lee Frankel, and I'm speaking today as executive 

director for the Coalition for Sustainable 

Organics. And I would like to thank the members 

of the Board for their devotion to the organic 

community, and welcome the new members to the 

Board.

I did have some slides. I'm not sure 

if they're available, or not.

MR. PATTILLO: Lee, I'm trying to pull 

them up right now. I'm fighting with some windows.

MR. ELA: Devon, do you want us to do 

the next speaker and then come back to Lee?

MR. PATTILLO: They're coming up here. 

Sorry. Bear with me.

MR. ELA: No worries.

MR. PATTILLO: Okay. Do you see it 

now?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Yes. You got it. Okay. 

Good. Lee?

MR. FRANKEL: The next slide. The CSO 

represents growers of all sizes from around the 

country who incorporate containers into their 

organic production systems and on their farms.

Next slide. Sustainability is 

fundamental for all agricultures as we try to feed 

a growing population. Organics should be no 

exception.

Next slide. Climate change will 

relocate, and, in many cases disrupt crop 

production. Containerized growing uses 

sanctioned techniques to open new and reliable 

production possibilities for a variety of site 

specific conditions while also helping to produce 

local and urban agriculture.

Growers report using up to 90 percent 

less water per pound of vegetable produced, while 

growing up to 10 times more product within the same 

footprint.

Next. Organic agriculture in the 

United States is built on three main principles, 

freedom from artificial chemicals and fertilizers, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

recycling of nutrients where the waste from the 

previous group production cycle nourishes the next 

crop, and the recognition the growers must respond 

to their unique site-specific conditions when 

developing their organic systems claim. 

Containers follow those pillars.

Next slide. Organic policy is built 

on the combination of Congressional oversight, 

USDA regulation enforcement, and the NOSB, with 

all bodies receiving public comment from the 

organic community.

Next slide. Unfortunately, a lawsuit 

filed earlier this year is intended to have the 

court overrule the will of Congress, the National 

Organic Program and the National Organic Standards 

Board.

The CSO disagrees with the aim of the 

lawsuit to de-certify all organic operations and 

incorporate containers, hydroponics or aquaponic 

as well as other requirements.

Next slide. Can you keep hitting it 

a couple more times? Increased consumption of 

fruits and vegetables to correspondingly increase 

the availability with additional supplies coming 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

from organic producers using containers.

Next slide. In fact, supplies to many 

organic products from seedlings used by fruit and 

vegetable producers, to tomatoes to berries to 

herbs to living plants rely on container production 

methods.

Next slide. Please do not hesitate to 

contact me if I can provide any other information 

or data you need to help make informed decisions 

of this topic or related issues to return to your 

work agenda. Thank you for your attention.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Lee. Are there 

any questions for Lee? I'm not seeing any. We'll 

move on. Thank you, Lee, for your presentation.

MS. SMITH: This is Cynthia Smith. 

Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: Yes.

MS. SMITH: You passed me up and my 

phone was unfortunately muted, and I didn't realize 

it.

MR. ELA: Okay. We'll come right back 

to you, Cynthia. Let me finish up with Lee here.

MS. SMITH: Sure.

MR. ELA: Okay. No questions for Lee? 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Yes. So we will come back to you right now, 

Cynthia. Thank you for jumping in. And then 

after Cynthia, we will go to Jenna Pugliese -- I'm 

sorry, Jenna -- and then Adam Seitz. So, Cynthia, 

please go ahead.

MS. SMITH: Thank you very much. Good 

afternoon. My name is Cynthia Smith. I am a 

pesticide registration consultant and a partner 

with Conn & Smith, Incorporated. I have 35 years 

of pesticide registration experience, 28 years 

registering green and other reduced-risk products. 

I am a successful past NOP petitioner and am 

currently working on a new petition. I am also 

a BPIA member.

I wanted to expand on some comments that 

I had before but were not expressly included in 

the BPIA comments, and this has to do with inert 

ingredients.

The law associated with organic foods 

was passed 20 years ago. And there has been 20 

years of development of pesticide formulations for 

use in organic crops.

If the rules were to change now, we 

would effectively lose 20 years of development. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Companies who are currently registrants of 

organic formulations, if they could no longer sell 

their products, would need to make a return of 

investment decision. Do I or do I not invest more 

money so that I can keep this product on the organic 

market? And there clearly will be products that 

will be lost.

If the decision is positive to go 

forward, then there would need to be formulation 

development followed by toxicology testing, 

followed by efficacy testing, followed by amended 

EPA registration, followed by an amended 

California registration, followed by amended 

organic certifier registration, and then finally 

you would have a new product perhaps under a new 

brand name.

That whole process will take multiple 

years. And that is specific to each cross-pest 

combination, due to the efficacy requirement. I 

would propose that it would be better to expand 

the definition to allow all inert ingredients to 

have a tolerance exemption. Because whether 

you're on 4A or 4B, which is now an outdated 

mechanism, everything that has a tolerance 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

exemption does comply with EPA's requirement for 

a reasonable certainty of no harm.

I would encourage the opportunity for 

greater competition than what is in the organic 

marketplace. If that were to happen, then costs 

for organic products would go down, farmers would 

have more choices, and they would also have access 

to some beneficial inert ingredients that are 

currently locked out of the marketplace.

I would like to emphasize the idea of 

realistic and transparent timelines, and the 

absence of that information is very problematic 

to even make a business decision to pursue an 

organic petition.

I thank you for your attention. I 

would be happy to take any questions.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Cynthia. Are 

there any questions from the Board? I have one 

and then we'll go to Asa.

I guess my question is, we know that 

List 4 is outdated and cannot be updated at this 

point so that in itself is an inhibition to 

developing new products or new materials, would 

you be comfortable if we migrated to the Safer 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Choice Program? Would that satisfy your goals?

MS. SMITH: I would say it depends on 

how this is done. If you eliminate List 4A and 

4B and then go to some other program, I would say 

that it would be a huge disservice to the organic 

community.

If you offered some other program in 

addition that, you know, would certainly allow 

opportunities for new products to come online. 

But I wouldn't throw away what has already been 

achieved.

MR. ELA: Okay. Asa, you had a 

question.

MR. BRADMAN: Yes, I think, Steve, you 

really asked what I was going to ask. But I would 

put a little bit -- I would extend a little bit 

and say, you know, there may be some materials on 

List 4 that don't meet OFPA requirements and are 

really not acceptable for organic.

So there's kind of a tension there 

between, you know, transferring that list to an 

SCL-approved process would still result in 

probably losing some materials. And, you know, 

that process, it's hard for me to see how that would 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

be damaging to the existing formulations if we 

retain those materials which are reasonable under 

organic production and, you know, organic 

standards.

MS. SMITH: Well if you were to say that 

inert ingredient one, it doesn't meet your 

criteria, but inert ingredient one happens to be 

in current organic products, then you're 

disallowing those current organic products.

So you either have to reformulate or 

take them off the market.

MR. BRADMAN: I understand that. But 

there may be some inerts that should be taken off 

the market for organic. And, I mean, I know 

there's a lot of complexities here because, you 

know, we've heard from other commenters and there's 

a concern that it's not tenable to go one by one. 

But there are, you know, some materials on List 

4 that many people feel are not compatible with 

organic. And so there has to be some process to 

streamline that and, you know, maybe --

MS. SMITH: What I would suggest is a 

phase-in period of 10 years. It needs to be long 

to allow for transition, because when you think 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

about all of the organic products and then all of 

the crop/pest combinations associated with them, 

each needing to be tested in field trials, you could 

say its untenable to go inert by inert, but it's 

also untenable to go for each crop/pest combination 

for the entire organic world.

So time is the critical factor, to allow 

time for a phase-in of a new program, whatever that 

new program is.

MR. ELA: All right. Fair comments. 

Thank you, Cynthia. I'm glad we were able to get 

back to you. Are there any other questions? All 

right. We will move on to --

MS. SMITH: Thank you.

MR. ELA: -- thank you, Cynthia -- to 

Jenna and then Adam Seitz and then Jill Smith. 

And, Jenna, I know I butchered your name. I really 

apologize. Would you please edify me on how to 

say it?

MS. PUGLIESE: No troubles. This is 

Jenna Pugliese. It's simpler than you think, like 

the dog and what you sign for an apartment. Can 

you hear me okay?

MR. ELA: We can hear you. Please go 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

ahead and thank you for that.

MS. PUGLIESE: All right. Well thank 

you for your time today. Again, I'm Jenna 

Pugliese, director of programs at NativeEnergy. 

I would like to take this opportunity to provide 

our support for the petition that was submitted 

by Nutrien to amend the listing for ash from manure 

burning. It currently excludes biochar from use 

as a non-synthetic material in organic production.

Next slide. I'm going to take this 

opportunity to talk about who NativeEnergy is, what 

biochar is, why we're interested in it, and why 

we believe it should be an eligible non-synthetic 

substance for use in organic production.

Next slide. On behalf of 

NativeEnergy, thank you again for this opportunity 

to present comments. We are a carbon offset 

project developer and retail company that has been 

investigating pyrolysis as part of a system to 

reduce greenhouse gas emissions on farms.

Next slide. The output of pyrolysis 

or heating with limited oxygen of dairy manure is 

biochar. It is our understanding that biochar 

currently is included in the listing of ash manure 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

burning as a prohibitive substance for the use in 

organic production.

We maintain that biochar is not itself 

ash. In fact biochar has significant opportunity 

to contribute to the sequestration of greenhouse 

gases on farms and elsewhere, and has soil building 

properties that could be leveraged for sale as an 

organic product and provide an additional revenue 

stream for farmers. In fact biochar from other 

non-manure sources is already able to sold with 

an organic label and is proving to be beneficial 

in a wide range of applications.

Next slide. Ideally for the climate, 

all dairy would be pasture-grazed with manure 

deposition naturally decomposing in fields. 

Until such time as most farmers adopt or are 

required to fully graze, greenhouse gases released 

from the storage of manure will be a contributing 

factor to climate.

Separation of solids has shown 

significant benefit to reducing greenhouse gases 

from manure storage. And the addition of 

pyrolysis has the potential to be the lowest 

greenhouse gas emission practice for farmers that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

must store most or all of their manure.

Pyrolysis of separated solids converts 

the carbon in manure to a more stable form, and 

when used as a soil amendment can sequester the 

carbon and add significant value as part of an 

overall carbon reduction strategy on farms.

Next slide. Not only does biochar show 

potential as part of a greenhouse gas reduction 

strategy on farms, there's also significant 

research showing its soil building properties.

If farmers are able to leverage the sale 

of biochars as a soil amendment, it has a potential 

to also contribute as an alternative income stream 

and an offset to costs of greenhouse gas reduction 

projects.

Considering the soil building 

properties, carbon sequestration capabilities and 

the function in methane reduction on dairy farms, 

biochar presents substantial opportunity to be 

part of the organic supply chain.

Thank you. And I'm happy to take 

questions.

MR. ELA: Wood, it looks like you have 

a question.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. TURNER: I do. Can you hear me, 

Steve?

MR. ELA: We've got you. Go ahead.

MR. TURNER: Jenna, thanks for your 

comments. Can you tell us anything about 

NativeEnergy's perspective on the energy use 

required to pyrolyze manure? Thanks.

MS. PUGLIESE: I can't specifically, 

but I'm happy to get back with comments.

MR. TURNER: Thanks. It would be 

great to have that to get a full picture of what 

your perspective is.

MS. PUGLIESE: Absolutely.

MR. ELA: Any other questions? I 

guess I have one question. So would you make the 

claim that the biochar from the animal products 

is not ash?

MS. PUGLIESE: Correct. So pyrolysis 

generates both biochar and some small amount of 

ash. But the biochar itself we would contest is 

not actually ash.

MR. ELA: So in that case, the petition 

is really just for clarification of that, or to 

change the prohibition to something different?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. PUGLIESE: So being very new to 

both carbon markets and this process, you know, 

we support Nutrien's claim to amend the listing 

so that ash for manure burning with the exception 

of when it's made by pyrolysis. Ideally, I'm not 

sure how to approach the listing differently with 

the assertion that we truly do believe that biochar 

is not itself ash.

MR. ELA: All right. Well, thank you. 

That brings up an interesting question. With 

that, we will move on. Thank you for your 

testimony and thank you for helping me with your 

name.

MS. PUGLIESE: Yes. Thank you for the 

time.

MR. ELA: You know, my last name of Ela 

gets mispronounced even with three letters so at 

least I have compassion. But let's go next to Jill 

Smith and then we'll go -- but wait, I'm sorry, 

Adam Seitz and then we'll go to Jill Smith and then 

to Jessica Shade. So, Adam, please go ahead.

MR. SEITZ: Good afternoon. My name 

is Adam Seitz, and I'm happy to be joining virtually 

for my first ever public comment.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I serve as the policy specialist for 

Quality Assurance International, an international 

certifier based in San Diego, California.

First, I'd like to address the 

situation the organic community finds itself in 

during these challenging times. The current 

organic regulation requires that certifiers 

perform an onsite inspection prior to granting 

certification and at least once a year thereafter.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a great 

challenge to this requirement. Stakeholders, 

including certifiers, are struggling to find the 

right balance between following the letter of the 

law and avoiding health risks for inspectors and 

operators.

The good news is we live during a time 

when the technology for conducting virtual 

inspections like meetings is available and 

effective, unlike when the NOP Organic Regulation 

was published in 2000.

QAI would like to respectfully request 

that the NOSB submit an emergency motion to 

encourage the NOP to allow virtual inspections, 

at least during the pandemic. This action is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

necessary for the viability of the organic 

industry, enabling its continuous supply of 

organic food during the pandemic and creating a 

foundation for the post-pandemic recovery of the 

organic food sector.

L-malic acid. We support the 

reclassification of L-malic acid as an allowed 

synthetic. We understand that traditionally 

fermentations have been considered a sausage 

machine of sorts. The substrate goes in, and a 

material with non-synthetic classification comes 

out, regardless of the type of fermentation or the 

classification of the substrate.

However, we believe the line can be 

drawn to distinguish whether the classification 

with the substrate impacts the classification of 

a final fermented product. If the substrate is 

directly acted on to produce the product in 

question, the classification of the substrate does 

dictate the classification of the fermented 

product.

If the substrate is used to support the 

overall metabolism and growth of the microbe that 

is, or produces, the product in question, the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

classification of the substrate does not dictate 

the classification of the fermented product.

I will keep my comment on ion exchange 

much shorter than my written comments and state 

that QAI's allowance of ion exchange filtration 

is entirely consistent with all NOP guidance and 

training materials issued prior to the May 7, 2019 

notice, and is consistent with the facts that the 

FDA regulates ion exchange resin as food contact 

substances. Please see our written comments for 

more information.

Finally, I would like to personally 

comment on the 2020 research priorities topic of 

increasing access to organic foods. I support 

this research priority and would like to kick it 

off by stating that the number of organic staples 

in my home has decreased over several years. 

Yes, decreased.

As an adoptive parent and active foster 

parent, two of the children in my home receive 

benefits under the federal WIC program. The 

program states its mission is carried out by 

providing nutritious food to supplement diets.

However, opening up my Pennsylvania WIC 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

food list and shopping guide, I see organic under 

the cannot-buy heading for all of the allowed wet 

foods except for the small fruit and veggie 

benefit. No organic cheese, yogurt, milk, juice, 

cereals, whole grains, legumes, infant formula, 

eggs, or peanut butter. Further, the PA WIC Guide 

notes in a highlighted fashion, quote, organic 

fruits and vegetables can be purchased but tend 

to be more expensive. You will get more food with 

non-organic items, end quote.

Not a great advertisement, but truthful 

and those words have meaning given the food 

insecurity of many WIC participants. For WIC to 

permit the purchase of organic foods, it would 

better fulfill its mission and contribute another 

potential $3.1 billion per year to the organic 

market.

Thank you all, NOSB and NOP, for your 

dedication and work and for the opportunity to 

comment.

MR. ELA: Emily, we'll come to your 

question. But first, Scott, do you have a thought 

on his first question?

MR. RICE: Yes. Sure. Thanks, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Steve. Adam, thanks for your comments. I wanted 

to circle back to your initial comment on some 

concerns around how we as certifiers conduct 

certification and inspections in light of the 

pandemic.

And there is quite a bit of work 

happening now with the Accredited Certifiers 

Association and the International Organic 

Inspectors Association to ensure that we keep those 

certification activities moving forward, and 

keeping both our certified operations and our 

certification staff safe.

And I heard you asking for some action 

to allow for inspections to not happen or to happen, 

maybe I didn't quite understand. But I just wanted 

to be sure that you were aware that there is a lot 

of work happening to keep things kind of open and 

running and that those inspections keep happening 

in, admittedly, some slightly different ways.

MR. SEITZ: For sure, definitely. And 

I'll clarify that the comment was to allow virtual 

inspections. That was probably the fastest I've 

spoken ever in my life.

Yes. I'm definitely aware of all of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the work that's being done. But this is a very 

unique situation for my time at least, you know, 

not unique in the history of the world. But, you 

know, we don't necessarily know whether or not that 

work is going to go far enough.

And I'll state that, you know, we have 

new organic operations that are lining up to get 

their products out in the organic marketplace. 

And we are currently hindered by any limited 

guidance currently received by the National 

Organic Program on that front.

And I'll be very clear that organic 

integrity is a priority and, you know, it's 

unprecedented to even consider a virtual 

inspection. But these are, again, unprecedented 

times at the moment. So we'd like to see some 

further action on that front.

MR. ELA: Sure.

MR. RICE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Emily, you had a question?

MS. OAKLEY: Yes. It was actually 

regarding this point as well. I think that while 

virtual inspections might have a role to play right 

now during this pandemic period, I think any 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

virtual inspection that took place now would need 

to be subsequently followed-up by an in-person 

inspection later.

And I just want to express some concern 

about new producers coming under a virtual 

inspection. Just because I think that initial 

inspection is so critical, I don't quite see the 

potential for replacing it virtually.

Of course, if this persists and the time 

period goes, you know, into many, many, many more 

months that might need to be revisited. But for 

the time being, I would hope that those could simply 

be paused and come back to an in-person inspection 

for those initial applicants. I just wanted to 

express that.

MR. SEITZ: Yes. And I'll admit it's 

uncomfortable. That said, you know, organic foods 

are flying off the shelves at grocery stores. And 

we think that we should be doing everything that 

we can to ensure a continuous supply of organic 

foods.

And I won't speak to any efforts that 

the ACA is currently working on in conjunction with 

the IOIA. I'm not sure if others will be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

commenting on that front. But I will say that it's 

a standard practice for QAI now to follow up with 

all new applicants with an unannounced inspection 

within six months, I believe, of their being 

granted certification. So, yes, from our 

perspective we would certainly revisit as soon as 

possible in a physical manner.

MR. ELA: We have another question, I 

believe, from A-Dae.

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Yes. Thank you, 

Adam, for your comment. I just wanted to point 

out and just emphasize your comments about WIC and, 

I guess, the prohibition on purchasing organic 

products with those dollars.

I think that's a really super important 

point, especially when we had several commenters 

point out that we're trying to be more inclusive 

of underrepresented communities. And the fact 

that we have institutional barriers that are in 

place by federal food purchasing programs is a 

critical barrier that I think should be addressed.

And thank you for bringing it up. I 

never thought about it that deeply, but once you 

said that, I was, like, thinking about tribal 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

community's purchase programs. And it's also 

federal purchasing dollars, which do follow the 

same regulations that WIC perhaps does.

And, again, those organic products are 

not allowed in those programs either, which seems 

amiss. So thank you, Adam, so much for that 

comment. And I'm really going to take up that 

baton, if I can. Thank you.

MR. SEITZ: Yes, thank you. Yes, it 

would be great to subsidize organic producers and 

processors with those federal dollars, for sure, 

and get those organic products to the people that 

need them.

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Absolutely. 

Thank you.

MR. ELA: I think we'll just go to, I 

think -- Jenny, did you have something to say before 

we move on to the next speaker?

DR. TUCKER: I thought given the 

comments on inspections, I wanted to share what 

we have said actually to certifiers on this. I'm 

getting a little feedback. Stand by.

Okay. So first we want to remind 

everybody, including certifiers, that ultimately 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the USDA Organic Regulations drive compliance. 

And this is what I've also shared with certifiers, 

so everyone has the information. 

We are encouraging critical thinking 

about ways to ensure compliance in the current 

environment, but certifiers must remain true to 

the regulations.

So one question we did get several times 

was if the onsite inspection requirement could be 

modified for new applicants. And our response 

was, no. The initial onsite inspection at 

205.403(a)(1) is a fundamental requirement. A 

virtual inspection cannot replace an initial 

onsite inspection. We know that some certifiers 

are not happy with that answer, but we believe it's 

both consistent with the regulation and necessary 

for organic integrity.

Once certified, an operation remains 

certified until it surrenders or is suspended or 

revoked. And so 7 CFR 205.406 addresses different 

approaches to managing continuation of 

certification. And this is where different 

risk-based oversight approaches may be appropriate 

to ensure ongoing compliance until an onsite 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

inspection can be conducted.

That does not remove the need for an 

onsite inspection but does allow some different 

oversight approaches.

We are concerned that some certifiers 

have expressed that they plan on or want to continue 

to do virtual inspections for new applicants. 

That is not compliant.

We will be following up to make sure 

that certifiers are not taking that action. So 

I just wanted the whole group to hear what we have 

shared with certifiers on the inspection topic.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jenny. Emily, 

one quick last thing and then we need to move on.

MS. OAKLEY: Yes. No I just wanted to 

thank Jenny for that clarification and those 

reassuring words. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Adam. 

Next we have Jill Smith and after Jill we have 

Jessica Shade and then Megan DeBates. Jill, 

please go ahead.

MS. SMITH: Hi, everyone. Again, I'm 

Jill Smith representing the Western Organic Dairy 

Producers Alliance, also known as WODPA. And 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

WODPA represents approximately 285 dairies across 

the Western United States.

I want to thank you all for the chance 

to comment today and for the work you've done to 

adopt the meeting platform for our current 

situation.

I'm also an organic dairy producer and 

processor in Washington State and have experienced 

the ups and downs in the marketplace as a result 

of the current pandemic.

And I really liked the term Adam used, 

I guess, calling it uncomfortable because that 

really describes where we're at at the moment.

We submitted a comment on the sunset 

review of livestock substances. I won't go

through that list, but I'm happy to answer any 

questions on those substances or their necessity 

in organic livestock production.

We also provided written comments on 

the Petition to Remove whey protein concentrate 

from the National List. We're in support of its 

removal given the commercial availability of 

organic products.

In addition this supports organic dairy 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

product utilization and the use of organic 

ingredients, especially dairy-related ones, are 

expected by our consumers at this point in time.

We look forward to a final rule on 

origin of livestock as soon as possible as well 

as a clear path to its implementation. It's not 

only key to fairness in organic dairy but the 

credibility of organic milk hinges on enforcement 

of these standards.

The remainder of my comments largely 

center around continuing to support our organic 

producers through the enforcement and adherence 

to organic standards and maintaining the integrity 

behind the organic seal as well as the value our 

organic products offer.

Now more than ever we need to ensure 

strict adherence to these standards and that full 

accountability takes place with clarified rules 

and consistency among certifiers. It's essential 

for fairness across all sizes of operations. And 

we need to maintain this under our unusual 

circumstances.

Our smaller scale organic producers 

have been even more essential as we've navigated 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the ups and downs of the marketplace. We've 

continued our production, kept people employed, 

provided high quality products and have adapted 

to meet the needs for food supplies.

So it's essential that we support 

organic dairy producers by leveling the playing 

field and its essential that we help with the 

sustainability of these operations as we move 

forward.

We also support continued work on 

addressing climate change head-on in organic 

production. I think how we face these challenges 

speaks volumes to our consumers. Our organic 

story really is a compelling one as it shows our 

work toward the highest land stewardship standards 

and the welfare standards and the goal to improve 

the world around us.

Together these standards bring even 

greater value to our organic products and 

encourages our consumers to vote for organic with 

their food dollars at time when food budgets are 

tight, but they must be confident in the integrity 

of the organic seal and the many layers of value 

that organic production provides.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

In summary, at the heart of everything 

we're discussing is organic integrity supporting 

our organic farms with fairness of rules and in 

helping consumers understand why organic is a 

choice that brings layers of value to them in the 

environment.

Thank you again for the opportunity to 

comment today. And I do have to say I really look 

forward to future in-person meetings like we used 

to have.

MR. ELA: I think you speak for all of 

us, Jill. Other questions for Jill? Thank you 

for your comments. I think we all miss the social 

and personal aspect of in-person meetings.

MS. SMITH: Absolutely.

MR. ELA: It's also nice to have access 

to everybody in this case, too. So next we will 

move on to Jessica Shade and then Megan DeBates 

and then Johanna Mirenda. Let's go to Jessica. 

Jessica, you're up. Would you please say your 

name and affiliation?

MS. ARSENAULT: Jessica, give me one 

second. You are still muted here. I've unmuted 

you. Go ahead.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. SHADE: Great. Thanks. So, hi, 

everyone. My name is Jessica Shade. I am the 

director of Assigned Programs for the Organic 

Center. We're a nonprofit organization 

(telephonic interference) research on organic and 

collaborates with academic and government 

institutions to fill gaps in our knowledge.

MS. ARSENAULT: Jessica?

MS. SHADE: Yes?

MS. ARSENAULT: Jessica, can you just 

hang on for one second. We're getting a bit of 

feedback on your line. I'm just checking to make 

sure nobody else is open. It doesn't look like 

it. Okay. Go ahead. Start again. And I'll see 

if it continues. Is everyone else hearing that? 

There's a little bit -- there's some feedback.

MR. ELA: Yes. I'm hearing it, too, 

Michelle.

MS. ARSENAULT: Okay. It was a little 

hard to pick up what you were saying so.

MS. SHADE: Great. Thanks. Is this 

any better?

MS. ARSENAULT: That's better. Thank 

you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: So much better. Thank you.

MS. SHADE: Great. No problem.

MS. ARSENAULT: I've paused your time 

so please start again.

MS. SHADE: All right. Hi, everyone. 

My name is Jessica Shade. I'm the director of 

Assigned Programs for the Organic Center. We are 

a nonprofit organization that communicates 

research on organic and then we also collaborate 

with academic and governmental institutions to 

fill gaps in our knowledge.

And first of all I want to say thank 

you to the material subcommittee for its 

recommendation on research priorities. I'm going 

to quickly highlight a couple of our current 

projects that were informed by NOSB priorities and 

then go into a few suggestions for additions to 

this year's list.

So we're really happy to see that plant 

disease management and invasive insects were on 

the list. Insects creating disease is an issue 

that's been highlighted in the NOSB research 

priorities for several years.

And we're thrilled that we were finally 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

able to secure some federal funding in the form 

of an OREI planning grant to develop a proposal 

that takes a system based approach to combat that 

situation is creating in organic growth.

And we'll be applying for a full OREI 

proposal in the next funding cycle so it's really 

helpful that NOSB is highlighting the importance 

of this issue through the research priorities.

We were also happy to see pathogen 

prevention on the list. There's an unfortunate 

myth out there that some biodiversity maintenance 

strategies employed by organic farmers might 

increase the risk for introduction of human 

pathogens on the field despite research showing 

the opposite.

And the Organic Center has recently 

published some of the literature disproving that 

fallacy. And we also have a project looking at 

how soil health on organic farms can help suppress 

pathogens.

Climate change is a matter item on the 

list that we're deeply engaged with. We hosted 

a conference last year focusing on mitigating and 

adopting climate change in the organic sector. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And we've released and continue to work on several 

projects looking at aspects of climate change 

mitigation (telephonic interference) 

sequestration, energy use, et cetera.

We have a lot more projects, but to keep 

this short I'm going to move on to our suggestions 

for additions to this year's NOSB research 

priorities.

Based on feedback that we've received 

during our own outreach efforts, we'd like to 

suggest that the areas of soil health, protection 

for organic farmers in certain pesticide residues 

and comparison of pesticide antibiotic and 

synthetic growth hormone residues in organic and 

conventional products be considered for inclusion 

in the 2020 research priority.

We also think that the focus on 

alternatives to conventional celery powder for 

curing organic meat that was included in the 2019 

research priorities should be included in this 

year's priorities because while there's research 

underway and we've got this great project going 

with the OTA and the University of Wisconsin, we 

still need to flag the importance of the issue as 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the research happens.

So thank you all so much for giving me 

this opportunity to comment.

MR. ELA: Are there questions? It 

looks like none. Thank you very much, Jessica. 

We appreciate your thoughts on the research 

priorities. That always helps us.

Next up we have Megan DeBates and then 

Joanna Mirenda and then Doug Currier. So, Megan, 

please go ahead.

MS. DEBATES: Can you hear me all 

right?

MR. ELA: We have you.

MS. DEBATES: Okay. Well, hi. I'm 

Megan DeBates of the Organic Trade Association. 

I want to say welcome to the new Board members. 

You will play a critical role in advancing the 

organic standards during your service on the Board.

And as the leading trade association 

representing the organic industry, we are 

committed to protecting the NOSB and elevating our 

important work in supporting the organic sector.

The National Organic Program is 

dependent upon consistent standards and a verified 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and enforced claim. Organic is the most closely 

regulated and transparent food system in the U.S., 

which is why consumers trust the seal.

A large majority of the challenges that 

we struggle with today are a result of not having 

clear standards. And for many of those same 

challenges, we have NOSB recommendations to 

address them. However, the National Organic 

Program has failed to implement a vast majority 

of NOSB recommendations to advance practice 

standards and ensure consistency in how the 

regulations are applied.

This body was not meant to exclusively 

focus on the National List and materials review. 

In order to achieve through excellence in food 

and agriculture, we, as stakeholders, all have a 

responsibility to advance the standards and 

continuously improve.

This is why we are working with Congress 

on bipartisan legislation to bring transparency 

and accountability to the process by which NOP 

responds and implements NOSB recommendations.

There have been several important 

recommendations developed by the NOSB at the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

request of industry that have collected dust for 

more than 10 years.

Just in this meeting, NOP was asked by 

a Board member about the timeline for implementing 

production standards for greenhouse containers and 

the response that they are still gathering 

feedback. So it's been 10 years now that they are 

still gathering feedback.

And on inerts even OMRI had to reference 

comments that they submitted from 2015, five years 

ago. This is unacceptable, and we must do better 

to meet the expectations of the consumer and create 

new opportunities for growth in the market.

This legislation will require NOP to 

formally respond to NOSB consensus recommendations 

and to implement them within a defined time frame 

or communicate publicly with Congress and 

stakeholders as to why they haven't implemented 

the recommendations that have vast support from 

the industry and stakeholders.

Thank you again for your service on the 

NOSB.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. Are 

there questions? Not seeing any, thank you so 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

much, Megan. Johanna Mirenda and then Doug 

Currier and then Jackie DeMinter. Johanna, please 

go ahead.

MS. ARSENAULT: Johanna, let's check 

you here. I'm unmuting you now. Oh, somebody --

there you go. We're battling it out.

MS. MIRENDA: Okay. Hi. Can you hear 

me?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes, we can hear you.

MR. ELA: Yes, we can hear you.

MS. MIRENDA: Great. Thanks. Hi. 

I'm Johanna Mirenda, the Organic Trade 

Association's farm policy director. And I'll be 

commenting on paper, inerts and marine materials.

First on the crop subcommittee's 

proposal for paper-based crop planting aids, we 

appreciate the process and the patience you've had 

with the petition, and we support many aspects of 

the proposed definition and listing.

Outstanding questions indicate there 

might be a need for some fine tuning of the 

proposal. So remember that NOP approved continued 

use of these materials while you deliberate so 

you've got time to do those finishing touches 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

without compromising farmers' access to these 

tools.

Second, on the sunset review for 

inerts, this is the fourth sunset review of inerts 

and again we are looking at List 4, which was 

abandoned by EPA 15 years ago. It's time to 

prioritize implementation of the NOSB's 2015 

recommendations to update this listing.

As my colleague Megan just commented, 

it's essential for our industry to advance organic 

standards. The issue with inerts is a prime 

example of the industry harm that is created by 

stalled implementation.

We are excluded from using EPA's 

current program for approving the least toxic 

inerts. And manufacturers are unable to invest 

in developing safer pesticide products.

Modernizing the system for reviewing 

inert ingredients is the priority of the organic 

industry, and we urge NOP to prioritize this work.

Lastly on the broad topic of seaweed 

and fish-based inputs, our concern isn't about 

whether NOSB can or should evaluate environmental 

impacts of sourcing marine materials for input 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

rather our concern is how NOSB is going about it.

The approach has become disjointed and 

siloed within subcommittees. The history is all 

laid out in OTA's supplementary information 

submitted through our written comments.

Four subcommittees have worked on 16 

topics using varying levels of scrutiny, technical 

information and annotation approaches. This 

approach creates a risk of inconsistent or 

conflicting requirements for the same harvested 

material used for different inputs.

It creates duplication and 

inefficiencies in NOSB's resources. And at its 

worst, it won't achieve meaningful progress in 

protecting marine environments.

So we are encouraging NOSB to create 

a new mechanism for coordinating efforts amongst 

subcommittees. NOSB needs to collaborate on an 

approach to establish a common baseline 

understanding about what it means for harvested 

marine materials to be harmful to the environment.

From there, each subcommittee 

calibrates their evaluation of environmental harm 

to that baseline, leading to consistent and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

balanced decisions across scopes and uses.

Thank you for considering our comments. 

I look forward to returning to the in-person 

meeting format so I can fully express my Italian 

instincts of talking with my hands. I hope 

everyone stays safe and well until then. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Johanna. Yes, I 

think we all talk with our hands. Thank you for 

your comments. Emily, you have a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Yes. This is a question 

for the program based on Johanna's comments about 

a comprehensive approach to looking at marine 

materials.

It's something that the Board had 

wanted to do and was hoping to achieve that through 

a task force. But I'm wondering if the program 

might have changed their minds on the feasibility 

of exploring a task force for this subject across 

livestock handling and crop uses of these 

materials.

DR. TUCKER: So this is Jenny. Can you 

hear me?

MS. OAKLEY: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Yes, we can, Jenny.

DR. TUCKER: Okay. So at this point 

we have not approved the stand-up of a task force. 

I think there are likely other ways for better 

collaboration and coordination across 

subcommittees. But I'm very interested in 

continuing that conversation with the Board at this 

point. We have not approved a task force moving 

forward.

MS. OAKLEY: Would it be okay to just 

make a follow-up to that, Steve?

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Just a quick one. It 

definitely is possible to collaborate across 

subcommittees in many creative ways. But I think 

that the technical expertise that a task force 

could provide and the additional time allotted for 

it would be beneficial.

It's difficult to carve out time within 

the subcommittees meetings themselves to address 

these cross-cutting issues although I do think it 

is helpful.

And then I will just say that even if 

we continue down the current path of exploring the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

crop option first, I think we do address some of 

the inconsistencies that are already out there 

because livestock uses of seaweed are certified 

organic required and many of the handling uses are 

also certified organic required.

So it's this fertility use that we have 

that's sort of -- I don't want to say slipping 

through the cracks, but it is not getting the same 

level of attention.

And we did address looking at it from 

a cross-perspective first as sort of a pilot sort 

of test case perspective knowing that we need to 

go back and then try to apply this broadly to all 

the subcommittees. But thank you so much for your 

comments, Jo.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Emily. Thank 

you, Johanna. We appreciate it. Next we will go 

to Doug Currier and after Doug, Jackie DeMinter 

and then Leslie Touzeau. Michelle, you were 

thinking that you may not be seeing Doug on the 

line. Doug, are you out there?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes. We don't see his 

name on the list. But there's several numbers with 

his area code so maybe he called in from a different 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

line. Doug, are you out there? Send me an email 

or chat in the Zoom chat if you're there.

MR. CURRIER: Am I coming through?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes, there you are. 

Excellent.

MR. CURRIER: Okay, good. Great.

MR. ELA: Yes, go ahead, Doug.

MR. CURRIER: Thanks so much. Good 

afternoon, NOSB, members and NOP staff. My name 

is Doug Currier. I'm the technical director at 

--

MR. ELA: Doug, we just lost you.

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes. We just lost 

you. Are you on a 785 number?

MR. CURRIER: Yes. I'm on a phone. 

And it keeps going on mute, and I unmute it again.

MR. ELA: Yes, you're back now.

MR. CURRIER: All right.

MR. ELA: So why don't you go ahead and 

start over.

MR. CURRIER: Okay. So my name is Doug 

Currier. I'm the technical director at the 

Organic Materials Review Institute. I'm 

presenting comment today on the synthetic, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

non-synthetic classification of L-malic acid.

I'm in support of the classification 

of L-malic acid produced through the enzyme 

conversion of synthetic fumaric acid as synthetic.

A good amount of debate occurred during 

the writing of the technical report --

MS. ARSENAULT: Hang on one second, 

Doug. If you can see me.

MR. CURRIER: Okay.

MS. ARSENAULT: There's a noise coming 

from a different line. And I don't know if they're 

both yours or not.

MR. CURRIER: Okay. How's that? 

Sound check.

MS. ARSENAULT: I muted one, and it

muted you as well.

MR. CURRIER: Okay. So --

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Doug. Continue.

MR. CURRIER: So, yes, there was debate 

regarding the reclassification as discussed in the 

report whether L-malic is produced through the 

enzymatic conversion of synthetic fumaric acid is 

classified as synthetic or non-synthetic. It 

depends on how the decision track is read and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

interpreted.

Whether L-malic acid is derived from the 

natural source is the first question to answer in 

the decision tree, and it's the issue at the center 

of the classification debate. How this question 

is answered impacts the classification of other 

materials, including those already on the National 

List.

So natural source is defined in the 

guidance as a naturally occurring mineral or 

biological matter. We know that L-malic acid is 

commonly produced using synthetic fumaric acid as 

a starting material.

One answer then to the decision tree 

question is the substance manufactured/produced 

extracted from the natural source is no. L-malic 

acid is produced from a synthetic fumaric acid.

Answering this way puts the focus on 

a specific material from which a substance is 

derived. Taking this further the TR examined how 

viewing the starting material from which a 

substance is derived could impact most synthetic 

classifications.

One example of that examination is the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

consideration of microbial first media, starting 

materials and how much of a microbe organism or 

a microbe product is derived.

Reviewing the gross media leads to 

complications and some gross media components do 

not meet the definition of natural source in the 

guidance and yet the final microorganism or 

microbial products are generally considered to 

meet this definition of non-synthetic.

So instead of equating or otherwise 

extending natural source to growth media OMRI 

instead puts forth a reading that considers any 

microorganism or microbial product produced the 

fermentation to meet the definition of natural 

source. In other words, the fermentation process 

is the biologic --

MS. ARSENAULT: I'm sorry. Can I 

interrupt you just for one second? We are getting 

some noise on somebody else's line. So if you are 

not talking, if you could mute yourself?

MR. ELA: Particularly if you are 

washing dishes.

MS. ARSENAULT: Wow. Brilliant. 

Okay. Doug, continue. I paused your timer. And 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I think -- go ahead, Doug. Oh, it might be your 

line actually. I'm not hearing you now. No. All 

right. Doug, unmute this line. Doug, are you 

there?

MR. CURRIER: Here I am again.

MS. ARSENAULT: There. We got you.

MR. CURRIER: Okay. Thanks for that. 

Thanks for your patience. Am I good?

MS. ARSENAULT: We're good. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: Go ahead.

MR. CURRIER: Okay. Really quickly, 

while the enzyme conversion of synthetic fumaric 

acid mimics a natural biologic pathway cell in 

microbial free production, it should not be viewed 

as synonymous with the same enzyme conversion which 

happens during natural microbial fermentation. 

Thank you for your time today and your patience. 

And thank you to all the Board members for their 

work on these matters.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Doug. And I truly 

apologize for the technical issues there. I know 

it's always hard to give a presentation when you're 

interrupted multiple times.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Are there questions for Doug? I'm not 

seeing any. Thank you, Doug, for sticking by us 

here. Next up we have Jackie DeMinter and then 

Leslie Touzeau and then finally, it may not be on 

some of your sheets, but Alex Strauch at the very 

end here.

So once we go through these, we're going 

to circle back around to anybody that we skipped 

over. So we'll do that. But, Jackie, go ahead.

MS. DEMINTER: Hello. This is Jackie. 

Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We've got you. Go ahead.

MS. DEMINTER: Awesome. Great. Good 

afternoon. My name is Jackie DeMinter. I am the 

certification policy manager at MOSA. We certify 

about 2,155 organic operations throughout the 

United States, including over 500 with vegetables 

or transplants and more than 200 with laying hens.

I will be commenting on mulch, paper 

pots, fenbendazole and sunset materials.

First, I'd like to take the opportunity 

to thank you all for your work. While I do enjoy 

seeing you all, this meeting is an interesting 

opportunity for the wider organic community, and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I will be curious to hear how it worked.

I also want to thank the NOP again for 

their work on the Organic Integrity Learning Center 

and especially the Organic Dairy Compliance 

Course, which helps resolve significant 

discrepancies in enforcement of days on pasture 

and temporary confinement.

Moving on to NOSB recommendations. We 

appreciate the discussion to reconsider the 

annotation for biodegradable, bio-based mulch 

film. This material is a difficult one to explain 

to clients since there are no products that can 

meet the annotation.

Mulch is a very common input among our 

operations, and it seems illogical to have a 

listing that's impossible to meet. We know our 

clients would appreciate an alternative to plastic 

mulch.

Paper pots. We continue to support a 

listing of paper for use as a plant production aid. 

However, with this proposal we have some new 

questions.

Does the new definition including 

production aids beyond those listed? Is the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

intention to allow materials composed primarily 

of paper, with up to 15% of other materials, like 

adhesives and fibers, to require bio-based testing 

for the entire product or testing for just the 

fibers? And what is meant by cellulose based?

This new language in addition to 

bio-based testing is confusing and needs further 

discussion. So does commercial availability 

documentation specifically pinpointing the 

bio-based content of the fibers, which are used 

as a minor ingredient in paper-based crop 

production aids.

Please read our written comments for 

specific clarification requests and suggestions 

for revision.

Fenbendazole. The addition should not 

be a replacement for good management practices. 

We request additional guidance on what is meant 

by emergency for a poultry flock.

We understand that emergencies are 

urgent and non-routine and exist only when all 

other measures have been exhausted. Can the NOSB 

provide situations that would lead up to whole 

flock treatment?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We have requested the same basic 

guidance for all species of livestock during the 

NOSB's work on defining emergency. With little 

or no withholding period for milk, meat or eggs, 

we would expect to see the use of parasiticides 

increase.

And last please refer to all of our 

written comments for further details. I'll draw 

attention to our comments on L-malic acid and 

sunset materials, especially those on excipients 

and inerts, two very important categories of 

materials.

Again, thank you for your work and the 

opportunity to comment. I am happy to answer any 

questions you have.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jackie. Anybody 

have any questions? Sue has a question. Sue, 

you're still on mute.

MS. BAIRD: I am so sorry. I do that 

every time, don't I? Thank you, Jackie, for your 

comments on fenbendazole. I read your written --

you said you had 200 laying operations and you have 

very few requests for any kind of a parasiticide.

I'm really interested because some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

certifiers are saying they have quite of few of 

them. Some of them are saying no. And I know that 

you certify a lot of operations here in the Midwest.

And yet when I talked to some of my MOA 

members here in Missouri and in Arkansas, they say 

they are seeing a lot of worms in the eggs. I guess 

I'm just confused about why we're seeing such 

differences of opinion. Maybe you can shed some 

light on that?

MS. DEMINTER: You bet I can. I am not 

specifically talking about the cited cases of worms 

in poultry flocks. I'm saying as a certifier, we 

haven't gotten a request to use parasiticides. 

So we don't have the knowledge of what's going out 

there in reality. But we do know that we're not 

getting phone calls from clients. It's not 

something that clients are calling and requesting, 

likely because they know it's not an allowed input.

But I did talk to one of our clients 

that is down in Missouri, Sue. And he said it would 

be a nice tool for the toolbox. I expressed that 

in our written comments. But he also agreed that 

it shouldn't be a replacement for good management 

practices.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

But I encourage you to read the entire 

written comments and have the whole group read it. 

And we certainly didn't mean to represent what 

is happening out there. We know that there are 

issues, and it's not being requested to use 

parasiticides to us.

MS. BAIRD: Right. And I certainly 

appreciate your comment that we need to clarify 

emergency because I think all of us on the Board 

agree with that same comment.

MS. DEMINTER: I think in our comments 

we encourage you to continue the solicitation of 

comments from producers and handlers until you guys 

feel really substantial feedback has been received 

to evaluate that necessity.

And as certifiers, we definitely would 

appreciate that guidance for poultry because we're 

talking whole flock treatment. It's not where you 

can individualize animals and treat just them as 

you can with other livestock species.

MS. BAIRD: Yes. I absolutely agree. 

Thank you.

MS DEMINTER: Thanks.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Jackie. Any other 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

questions? All right.

MS. DEMINTER: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Moving on -- yes, thank you. 

Leslie Touzeau and then Alex Strauch and then 

we're going to circle real quickly back around. 

I know we're getting towards the end of things 

here. So go ahead, Leslie.

MS. TOUZEAU: Hi. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: Yes, we can. Go ahead.

MS. TOUZEAU: So good afternoon, 

everyone. My name is Leslie Touzeau and I'm the 

material review specialist for Quality 

Certification Services. Thank you for this 

opportunity to provide comments and thanks to all 

for committing to the public comment process during 

this difficult time.

I hope you and your loved ones are well, 

healthy and safe, and I hope that future meetings, 

when it's safe to do so will continue to be held 

in person.

I would like to use my time today to 

discuss inert ingredients in pesticides. QCS 

applauds the NOSB's collaborative work with the 

EPA and NOP to develop a new system for inert 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

ingredient review that would no longer rely on the 

now defunct EPA List 4.

To continue approving inert 

ingredients for organic production based on a 

system that has long been obsolete is detrimental 

to the integrity of our organic program.

This is now the fourth sunset review 

of EPA List 4 inerts and we strongly urge the NOP 

to prioritize the implementation of the 2015 NOSB 

recommendation to change the annotation for EPA 

List 4 inerts to language permitting substances 

included on the EPA safer chemical ingredient list 

as well as minimal risk products under FIFRA 

Section 25(b) and inerts exempt with tolerance at 

40 CFR Part 180 for passive pheromone dispensers.

QCS believes that reviewing each 

individual inert ingredient would be overly 

burdensome and time consuming and the updated 

language utilizes the EPA's current scheme for 

approving the least toxic inert ingredients.

We also support reserving a section of 

the list for other inerts that may be individually 

petitioned and found to meet the OPA criteria, 

which would allow for some flexibility for the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

organic industry to meet the demands of organic 

products while adhering to the new annotation.

Inert ingredients are necessary 

components of a variety of pesticide products, and 

they are important ingredients in the limited 

toolbox of pesticide products available to organic 

producers.

QCS currently reviews and approves 23 

pesticide products containing allowed inert 

ingredients and our clients also use hundreds of 

pest control products approved by OMRI, PCO, WSDA 

and CDFA.

We understand that removing the 

allowance for inert ingredients on EPA List 4 would 

lead to the prohibition of some currently allowed 

pesticides.

According to comments from OMRI, there 

are currently 365 distinct inert ingredients that 

are used in OMRI listed products and only 153 of 

those ingredients appear on the safer chemicals 

list or the 25(b) minimum risk inert list.

A goal of the 2015 recommendation was 

to make the transition to a new inert review system 

as seamless as possible for organic producers. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And we believe this should still be a priority of 

NOP.

We support the inclusion of a 

reasonable implementation time in order to allow 

manufacturers the opportunity to either petition 

the NOSB for specific inert ingredients and/or to 

reformulate their products so they're compatible 

with the regulation.

It is critical that we have a reliable 

system in place to thoroughly evaluate inert 

ingredients with compatibility of organic 

materials and that these materials continue to be 

available for our organic producers.

Thank you for your time and dedication 

to our organic community.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Leslie. Are 

there questions? All right. We do appreciate it. 

Okay.

We will go to Alex Strauch and then if 

we happen to have Marcelo Girotto, Diana Castillo 

or Carlos Chinchilla we passed over earlier, we 

could go to them. But, Alex, please feel free to 

go ahead. And if you'd state your name and 

affiliation.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

DR. STRAUCH: Wonderful. Testing. 

Can I be heard?

MR. ELA: You are being heard.

DR. STRAUCH: Wonderful. My name is 

Dr. Alex Strauch. I am a veterinarian that 

primarily treats poultry with three years of 

experience working in the field, and I service 

various operations in the Midwest.

I see the differences in conventional, 

organic, free range, non-GMO and cage free 

operations.

I'm specifically speaking briefly 

today about fenbendazole and its usage in laying 

hen operations in organic agriculture emergency 

settings.

In short fenbendazole works. It works 

in conventional. I've seen it work in 

conventional. And there is a definite need in 

organic for "emergency situations" to actually be 

handled instead of kicking the can down the road.

It is not only an animal health issue 

that causes intestinal inflammation and steals 

nutrients from the birds, but I consider it a 

"kitchen table" issue when consumers find worms 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in their eggs and are upset and lose confidence 

in the wholesomeness of their product.

I personally deal with the public 

relations aspect of upset consumers when they send 

their concerns in regarding worms that are found 

in their eggs.

Organic by design, unfortunately, puts 

the birds at a higher of contracting these worms. 

And our current alternatives are absolutely 

ineffective.

I've witnessed the ineffectiveness of 

diatomaceous earth and I've witnessed the 

ineffectiveness of other herbs. All they do 

really is burn money.

Using fenbendazole as part of an 

elevated force continuum or emergency purpose 

seems like a logical progression given that we do 

not have effective alternatives currently. I 

would embrace alternatives when they're made 

available in the future.

Those are all of my thoughts. Thank 

you very much.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Alex. Are there 

any questions from the Board? All right. I'm not 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

seeing any.

MS. ARSENAULT: We just put -- oh, 

there we go.

MR. ELA: So no Marcelo?

MS. ARSENAULT: All right. So we're 

going to loop back now, Steve, and check with folks 

that we skipped over. Is that correct?

MR. ELA: Yes, if we could. Yes, yes.

MS. ARSENAULT: Okay.

MR. ELA: That was great. So, sorry. 

Marcelo Girotto? Okay. Diana Castillo? 

Carlos Chinchilla? Going once, going twice. All 

right.

Thank you, everybody, for 

participating today. We're going to have another 

public comment webinar on Thursday following the 

same format starting at the same time. There is 

a different Zoom sign-in for this.

I want to thank the Board and all the 

stakeholders. A five hour webinar is a very long 

time, but I appreciate everybody hanging in there 

to the end and giving great comments and asking 

good questions.

Michelle, Jenny, any of the program 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

staff, do you have anything to add before we sign 

off until Thursday?

DR. TUCKER: Well done, Steve. 

Congratulations. That was beautifully executed. 

Thank you so much for doing such a great job 

chairing this webinar.

MR. ELA: Well, thank you very much. 

And thank you for the staff. I'm glad we had 

multiple hosts. And Michelle had some off and on 

computer issues so for the NOP that was a very 

seamless transition back and forth. So we do 

appreciate it.

So thank you, everybody. Have a great 

evening or rest of the day. And we will see you 

on Thursday for more public comments. Take care. 

Have a good day. Bye.

MS. BAIRD: Thank you all. I agree.

Great job, guys.

MS. ARSENAULT: Thank you, everyone.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 4:59 p.m.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

+ + + + +

NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS BOARD

+ + + + +

PUBLIC COMMENT WEBINAR

+ + + + +

THURSDAY

APRIL 23, 2020

+ + + + +

The Board met telephonically at 12:00 

p.m. EDT, Steve Ela, Chair, presiding.

PRESENT

STEVE ELA, Chair

SCOTT RICE, Vice Chair

JESSE BUIE, Secretary

SUE BAIRD

ASA BRADMAN

JERRY D'AMORE

RICK GREENWOOD

KIM HUSEMAN

MINDEE JEFFERY

DAVE MORTENSEN

EMILY OAKLEY

NATE POWELL-PALM

A-DAE ROMERO-BRIONES

DAN SEITZ

WOOD TURNER
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

STAFF PRESENT

MICHELLE ARSENAULT, NOSB Advisory Board 

Specialist, National Organic Program

DAVID GLASGOW, Associate Deputy Administrator, 

National Organic Program

DEVON PATTILLO, Materials Specialist, National 

Organic Program

ANGELYQUE PEGUES, Management Analyst, National 

Organic Program

DR. JENNIFER TUCKER, Ph.D., Deputy 

Administrator, National Organic Program; 

Designated Federal Official

SHANNON NALLY YANESSA, Assistant Director, 

Standards Division, National Organic 

Program

PENNY ZUCK, Accreditation Manager, National 

Organic Program
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

12:00 p.m.

MS. ARSENAULT: All right. Well, 

welcome everyone. This is the second day of NOSB 

comment webinars for the spring meeting. Or 

welcome back if you were with us on Tuesday.

We are going to just remind you of a 

few things. You should see the slide on the screen 

if you are with us on the computer. With some 

information about logging on, numbers to dial into 

and a few tips to remember while we're on the call.

So, if you're not on the computer with 

us I'll just summarize some of those points that 

you may not be seeing.

So if you're having technical problems, 

you can go to zoom.com and click the support button. 

It should be in the upper right. There's a 

contact us button. And you can either call them 

or live chat with them.

With the caveat that Zoom is really busy 

these days, as probably all of you know, and so 

they do have a little disclaimer on their website 

that says that may be a little delayed.

We have a transcriptionist on the call 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

with us as well. And she is, as always, doing a 

great job recording the meeting, which will be, 

the transcript will be available a couple of weeks 

after the in-person meeting, or what would have 

been the in-person meeting, next week. And we'll 

post that on the website when it's available.

Make sure you please mute your 

microphone until it's your turn to speak. We have 

the capacity to mute and unmute you from our end 

as well.

If you're on your phone you should be 

able to hit *6 and use it as a toggle to unmute 

and mute yourself. But we'll figure it out. We 

didn't have too many issues on Tuesday so I trust 

we'll do a great job here.

Speakers had to sign up in advance and 

will be called on when it's their turn to speak 

by Steve Ela, the Chair. All other people on the 

line will be in observation mode only and listen 

only mode.

And then when Steve opens it up to 

questions, it's questions from the NOSB members 

to the speaker.

And speakers, we ask that you please 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

state your name and affiliation for the record so 

our transcriptionist can capture that and 

associate your comment with the right person.

We're going to try the timer again. 

We had some issues with the timer on Tuesday. I'm 

going to demonstrate it for you guys now. Let me 

see if you guys can hear it.

PARTICIPANT: Loud and clear.

MR. ELA: Loud and clear.

MS. ARSENAULT: Excellent. We think 

that Zoom was filtering out the previous beep that 

I was using and that's why nobody could hear it 

on your end. So, unfortunately, it seems like a 

doorbell doesn't bother Zoom, so great.

Now I'm going to turn the mic over to 

Jennifer Tucker, the Deputy Administrator of the 

National Organic Program. Jenny.

DR. TUCKER: Thank you, Michelle. 

Hello everyone. This is Jennifer Tucker, Deputy 

Administrator of the National Organic Program.

Welcome to all of our National Organic 

Standards Board members. I would particularly 

like to acknowledge our five new Board members who 

are now in the second day of their first public 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

meeting with us. That's Nate Powell-Palm, 

Kimberly Huseman, Gerald D'Amore, Mindee Jeffrey 

and Wood Turner.

To all of our Board members we thank 

you for your insights, your engagement and your 

flexibility as we identified new ways to connect 

for this meeting.

To all of our public commenters, thank 

you as well. The public comment process is an 

important part of the Board's and the program's 

work.

These webinars have become a standard 

part of the NOSB meeting over the past few years, 

smoothing the transition this time.

We thank all of you for signing up to 

have your voices heard. I also thank our audience. 

You always serve as important witnesses to this 

public meeting process, and we are grateful that 

you are here.

This webinar is part of a series of 

virtual webinars that will occur over four days, 

through next Thursday, April 30th. Meeting access 

information for all meeting segments will be posted 

on the NOSB meeting page on the AMS website.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Transcripts for all segments will be 

posted once completed. This meeting, like all 

other meetings of the National Organic Standards 

Board, will be run based on the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act and the Board's Policy and Procedures 

Manual.

I will act as the Designated Federal 

Officer for all meeting segments. To close, I 

thank the National Organic Program Team for their 

amazing work in getting us here today.

The webinar was very smooth on Tuesday, 

and we're expecting the same today. So many, many 

thanks to Michelle Arsenault, Devon Pattillo, 

Shannon Nally Yanessa and David Glasgow.

I also want to thank Steve Ela, Chair 

of the Board, who did a fabulous job on Tuesday 

and who I am sure will do a fabulous job chairing 

the webinar today.

Steve, you are a wonderful 

collaborative partner. We are all very grateful 

for you.

I'm going to now hand off the mic to 

Shannon Nally Yanessa, Standards Division 

Director, who is going to do the roll call of NOSB 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

members and NOP staff. Thank you very much.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you, Jenny. 

I will start off the roll call with the National 

Organic Standards Board members and then move on 

to the National Organic Program staff who are on 

the call.

Sue Baird?

MS. BAIRD: Yes, I'm here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. Asa 

Bradman?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes, I'm here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Great, thank you. 

Jesse Buie?

MR. BUIE: I'm here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Great. Jerry 

D'Amore?

MR. D'AMORE: Here as well.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Steve Ela?

MR. ELA: Present and accounted for.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Rick Greenwood?

MS. ARSENAULT: I am searching --

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Rick Greenwood?

MS. ARSENAULT: -- Shannon, let's see. 

I'm not seeing Rick by name. He may be dialed 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Okay, we'll check 

back, back to confirm later.

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Kim Huseman?

MS. HUSEMAN: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Thank you. Mindee 

Jeffrey?

MS. JEFFERY: Good morning.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Good morning. 

Dave Mortensen?

MR. MORTENSEN: I'm here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: -- calling late, 

oh, you're here. Okay, great, thank you. Emily 

Oakley?

MS. OAKLEY: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Nate Powell-Palm?

MR. POWELL-PALM: Good morning. 

Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Good morning. And 

Scott Rice?

MR. ELA: Scott had sent me a text 

saying he was having some technical difficulties 

getting on, so I expect he will be on very shortly.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Okay.

MR. ELA: But it doesn't sound like 

he's on quite yet.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Okay. All right, 

thank you for that.

A-Dae Romero-Briones?

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Dan Seitz?

DR. SEITZ: I'm here.

MS. ARSENAULT: We heard you, A-Dae, 

just so you know.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Wood Turner?

MS. ARSENAULT: Wood, if you're --

MR. TURNER: I'm here, thanks. Did 

you hear me? Sorry.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: It looks like he's 

on.

MS. ARSENAULT: Got you.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Okay, great, thank 

you. Now for the NOP Staff. Michelle Arsenault? 

Is here.

MS. ARSENAULT: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Devon Pattillo?

MR. PATTILLO: Present. I'm here, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

thanks.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Jennifer Tucker?

DR. TUCKER: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: David Glasgow?

MR. GLASGOW: Present.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: And Penny Zuck?

MS. ZUCK: Present

MS. NALLY YANESSA: All right.

MS. ARSENAULT: And Shannon, Angie 

should be on the line with us?

MS. SCHRIVER: Yes, I'm here.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Oh, great, okay. 

Thanks, Angie.

MS. ARSENAULT: You're doing a great 

job behind the scenes managing everything, so thank 

you.

MS. NALLY YANESSA: Yes, thank you. 

And now I'll hand the mic off to Steve Ela, who 

is the Chair of the National Organic Standards 

Board.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Shannon. And 

thank you, Jenny.

Once again, welcome to our second round 

of public webinars. And I, again, want to thank 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

everybody for being flexible and for the oral 

commenters who are normally scheduled to be at our 

public meeting in Crystal City to be willing to 

sign up for these webinars. That we really 

appreciate that flexibility.

And we all know these are indeed very 

different times for all of us, so thank you to the 

community on that.

I would again like to welcome our new 

members. This is a new experience for them. And 

we're a little bit sad that we can't meet everybody 

in person but we hope that will happen in the fall.

But Jerry D'Amore, Kim Huseman, Mindee 

Jeffery, Nate Powell-Palm and Wood Turner, welcome 

to this new experience.

And as you saw last Tuesday, our 

stakeholders are very involved people and have lots 

of great information that really does help inform 

our decisions.

Just as a reminder, our public comment 

policy comes from our policies and procedures 

manual. I will recognize all the speakers who 

signed up during the registration period.

We will call upon them in the order of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the schedule. Each has three minutes. And then 

after that we will have time for questions from 

only NOSB members.

When everybody, each speaker starts, 

if you would give your name and affiliation for 

the record. And also, it would help if you were 

speaking as a consultant for a company, we would 

like it if you would identify what company you are 

speaking for. Proxy speakers are not allowed.

And especially important, out of 

respect for everybody that is giving comments,

individuals that are providing public comment, 

refrain from making any personal attacks or remarks 

that impugn the character of any individual. And 

if that happens I will step in and ask you to do 

it differently. And if it happens twice we will 

just move on.

We want to make sure, this is such a 

respectful community, we want to make sure we 

maintain that respect and get information but not 

point fingers at anybody.

As we go through I will announce the 

speaker that is up, and then I will also announce 

the next speaker and the person after them so you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

all will have time to get ready.

Michelle demonstrated the timer. And 

when you start speaking she will start that timer. 

And so when the timer beeps, if you would complete 

your sentence and end your comment, then we will 

open up the question period for the Board members.

Board members, if you can raise your 

hand on the, from the participant menu, I will call 

upon you in turn. And of course, if for some reason 

you can't raise your hand please just interject 

yourself before we move on and I will recognize 

you for your questions.

With that, does the Board have any 

questions? If so, we will dive right into our 

public comments.

First up we will have Kyla Smith. 

After that we will have Maddie Kempner and then 

Robin Hadlock Seeley after Maddie.

So, Kyla, start us off if you would. 

Please state your name and affiliation.

I am not hearing you, Kyla. Do we have 

her on, Michelle?

MS. ARSENAULT: So, sorry, Steve, Kyla 

cancelled. And so we will --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Oh, thanks --

MS. ARSENAULT: -- go right to Maddie.

MR. ELA: I missed that, I apologize. 

I think you let me know that.

MS. ARSENAULT: That's okay.

MR. ELA: So, Maddie Kempner will be 

up. After her, Robin Hadlock Seeley and then Harry 

Rice.

So, Maddie, you have the floor. Please 

state your name and affiliation.

MS. KEMPNER: Great, thank you so much. 

Hi everyone, my name is Maddie Kempner and I am 

the policy director for the Northeast Organic 

Farming Association of Vermont, or NOFA Vermont.

NOFA Vermont is one of the largest 

organic farming associations in the country. We 

have over 1,200 members around our region. Our 

mission is to promote organic practices, to build 

an economically viable, ecologically sound, and 

socially just food system.

Vermont Organic Farmers is a USDA 

accredited certifier representing 775 certified 

organic farmers and processors. VOF has been 

certifying producing since 1985 and has been 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

accredited by the USDA since 2002.

I appreciate this opportunity to 

comment on the NOSB agenda items and I really thank 

the members of the NOSB for your critically 

important work.

I would like to comment today on the 

proposal for paper-based crop planting aids as well 

as research priorities. On paper-based crop 

planting aids we really want to thank the NOP for 

extending the allowance of paper pots for use on 

organic farms, and we thank the crop subcommittee 

for submitting the proposal in a timely manner.

Based on the many written and oral 

comments that NOSB has received and the input we 

have received directly from our producers, it is 

clear that the paper pot transplanting system saves 

time and labor significantly for small organic 

vegetable producers like those here in Vermont. 

The inability to use the system would have an 

immediate negative effect on those organic 

farmers.

We agree with the subcommittee's 

findings that the adhesives and synthetic fibers 

in the paper pots are also in recycled paper and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

mulches and should therefore be allowed in paper 

planting aids as well.

Regarding the non-paper synthetic 

fibers we agree that these should be restricted, 

however, we're concerned that the requirement to 

include at least 85 percent bio-based synthetic 

non-paper fibers will result in the unintended 

prohibition of these paper pot systems as well as 

the unintended prohibition of other paper planting 

aids like seed tape, collars and cloches.

We do support this proposal overall but 

we would like to hear from the manufacturers of 

these materials to ensure that the criteria listed 

in the proposal are achievable.

Secondly, we appreciate and support the 

research priorities provided by the materials 

subcommittee. And in addition to the important 

priorities listed, we recommend that the NOSB take 

up the issue of phthalates in organic dairy 

equipment. Primarily in milking inflations and 

dairy hoses.

Our initial research a couple of years 

back showed that they are relatively affordable. 

Non-phthalates alternatives available to many of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

these products. And we would like to see the NOSB 

conduct additional research in order to move 

toward, toward these alternatives due to concerns 

about the human health impacts of phthalates. 

Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. Do we 

have questions from the Board for Maddie?

Maddie, I have just one question. We 

have received a number of comments similar to what 

you said for paper production aids of making sure 

that seed tapes and other such paper materials are 

acceptable under the sanitation.

We really haven't heard from anybody, 

that's one of the reasons we put this out for public 

comment. Do you have any sense that these 

materials would not be acceptable under our 

criteria?

MS. KEMPNER: Are you referring to 

specifically the seed tape and the other materials 

I mentioned?

MR. ELA: Yes.

MS. KEMPNER: I personally am not 

familiar, but I can certainly reach out and see 

what input we've gotten, if any on that, and follow 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

up with the Board on that.

MR. ELA: That would be very helpful, 

I'd appreciate that because we, I think in the 

public comments I was hoping that we would hear 

from some of those and we didn't. So any 

information would be very instructive to us.

MS. KEMPNER: Okay, great, I will share 

whatever I can find. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Okay, thank you, Maddie. 

Are there any other questions from the Board? All 

right, we will move on.

Next up is Robin Hadlock Seeley, 

followed by Harry Rice and Michael Crotser. 

Robin, you have the floor, please go ahead and state 

your name and affiliation.

DR. HADLOCK SEELEY: Thank you. Good 

morning, good afternoon. I'm Robin Hadlock 

Seeley. I have no current academic affiliation 

but I'm recently retired from Cornell University 

as a senior research associate. And I still teach 

at the Shoals Marine Laboratory.

Thank you for the steadfast work over 

the years on the use of marine algae seaweeds in 

organic production. We are making progress.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Thank you especially for organizing the 

marine panel of experts in Pittsburgh last fall.

Today I want to take a 30,000 foot view 

of what the NOSB and NOP should be doing, I believe, 

with respect to wild marine species and then end 

with some specific recommendations.

Here is the 30,000 foot overview. I 

suggest that NOSB, NOP need guiding principles with 

an ecosystem view of wild marine species used in 

organic.

Guiding Principle Number 1 would be, 

first, do no harm. Recommended protection of wild 

native marine ecosystems in the sea, including 

marine forests, as you have already recommended 

protection of wild native ecosystems on land.

Guiding Principle Number 2 would be, 

to end the fragmented review and different 

treatment of wild marine species used in organic 

products. Whether inputs or food, they are wild 

crops and should be held to the wild crop harvest 

standard in 205.07.

An example of fragmentation is the wild 

seaweed rockweed, or Ascophyllum, being considered 

under different subcommittees in different rules. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

The organic producers' wholesalers coalition 

recommends facilitating "a more integrated and 

comprehensive approach to the topic," of marine 

source materials.

And OTA is recommending "cross 

committee discussions to calibrate decisions on 

environmental impacts of marine source raw 

materials across inputs and scopes."

My specific recommendations are for 

fish oil liquid fish products and kelp. I support 

the beyond pesticides comment on fish oil. "The 

proposed annotation is inadequate to protect the 

marine ecosystem."

And on supporting kelp delisting. 

"De-listing kelp from 606 would -- required kelp 

to be organically produce which would require that 

harvesters comply with 205.207(b)." And NOC says 

on liquid fish products, "harvesting wild caught 

fish for the exclusive use of fertilizer is a misuse 

of a resource from the ocean and should not be 

supported by organic production."

And on aquatic plant extracts I 

believe, I would agree with BPs, conclusion, 

"synthetic aquatic plant extracts are unnecessary
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and incompatible with organic practices."

The slide you are seeing summarizes 

recommendations of the marine expert panel, and 

MOFGA from last fall in Pittsburgh, which support 

the route of annotation with guidance for marine 

materials using a cautionary approach. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there questions from the 

Board? Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you very much for 

your comments and thank you for the slide. I was 

wondering if there any specific suggestions that 

you recall from the panel that you think that we 

should particularly consider as we move forward 

on trying to develop standards for potential 

annotation that might try to address the 

environmental impact of harvesting wild seaweeds 

for fertility inputs?

DR. HADLOCK SEELEY: Yes. The two 

that I've highlighted on the slide for the Panel 

I think are very important.

One is the cautionary approach, or as 

it's termed in the ecological literature, 

precautionary approach to this given the rates of 

ocean change, the paucity of data and the tendency 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

for overexploitation.

And also, the second one that I would 

really recommend is putting protected areas off 

limits to harvesting. That means conservation 

areas, which are already designated for 

conservation, off limits to harvest.

For example, in Maine we heard from a 

producer who uses an organic seaweed in harvests 

that way, that there was actually an incentive to 

go into the nature conservation and preservers, 

that include the intertidal zone because they could 

be assured that conservation rockweed was organic.

And I think that's one of the things 

that we want to really stress, that that should 

not be possible.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Any other questions from the 

Board? All right.

And, Emily, right now I can't lower your 

hand, I'm going to work on that. So if you could 

lower your own hand that will help me keep track 

of things. Thank you.

MR. BRADMAN: Steve, sorry, I had a 

question.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Yes, please go ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: Can I chime in?

MR. ELA: Yes.

MR. BRADMAN: My question would be, 

when evaluating marine materials that are 

essentially bycatch from other purposes, do you 

have an opinion or thoughts on whether those should 

be considered differently from taking a primary 

organism specifically like, the rockweed is being 

harvested specifically for fertilizer, what if we 

had a source of fish oil or something else that, 

where liquid fish products seems to be an issue 

where it's only bycatch. I'd be interested to hear 

your thoughts on that,

DR. HADLOCK SEELEY: Well, that's why 

I was advocating a holistic approach. Because 

even if something is listed, for example, in 

fisheries, if something is listed as a byproduct, 

it may be, people may be worried about that as a 

byproduct just because it's a, sorry, a bycatch.

Just because its bycatch doesn't mean 

it's not important. And in fact, the fisheries 

regulations may not be accounting for that bycatch.

So, simply calling it bycatch doesn't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

really tell you enough information to be able to 

evaluate. But that's why I was suggesting this 

comprehensive approach to it.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you. And just for the 

record, that was Asa asking the question.

All right, thank you again, Robin. We 

will move on to Harry Rice, followed by Michael 

Crotser and Bill Wolf. Harry, please go ahead and 

state your name and affiliation.

MR. RICE: Thank you. My name is Harry 

Rice and I'm with the Global Organization for EPA 

and DHA Omega-3s. GOED for short. Which 

represents the wide industry for EPA and DHA, the 

primary and long chain Omega-3 fatty acids found 

in fish oil.

Our membership is built on the quality 

standard unparallel to the market. And our 

mission is to increase consumption of EPA and DHA 

and to ensure that our members produce quality 

products that consumers can trust.

I'm going to address the handling 

subcommittee's proposed modified fish oil 

annotation. Though it's important --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ARSENAULT: Harry?

MR. RICE: Yes.

MS. ARSENAULT: Harry, I'm sorry. 

This is Michelle from NOP. I think we're getting 

some feedback from your line and I'm having a hard 

time hearing you. So if you could maybe get a 

little closer.

MR. RICE: I got earbuds on. Can you 

hear me better now?

MS. ARSENAULT: All right. I'm 

curious it's not somebody else's line.

MR. RICE: Can you hear?

MS. ARSENAULT: I can hear you a little 

better, yes. Okay, and I -- so you know.

MR. RICE: Should I go ahead, do you 

want me to start over or --

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes. No, go ahead, 

continue.

MR. RICE: Okay. All right, thank 

you.

MS. ARSENAULT: Sorry.

MR. RICE: Nope. GOED supports 

sustainable fishing practices. While fish oil 

human consumption is always a value added product 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to fishmeal or seafood production because the 

proteins value is much greater than that of oil 

there are those that remain unconvinced.

For this reason, GOED views a 

modification to fish oil annotation as an 

acceptable solution to its sustainability concerns 

and ensure that fish oil is compatible with organic 

practices.

At the same time, GOED has concerns 

about the proposed modifications specifically 

referenced to NOAA and FAO. I'll elaborate 

briefly.

While NOAA's work is very important, 

the reality is that it's impact on the fish oil 

industry, as it applies to the sustainability, is 

limited to menhaden and salmon oils. And due to 

the low amount of these oils used, the fish for 

human consumption, the overall impact is minimal.

More specifically, GOED has estimated 

that only approximately one percent and 

approximately two percent of the salmon oil and 

menhaden oil, respectively, produced from salmon 

caught in the United States, is used for food or 

human consumption.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

As GOED mentioned in its written 

comments, we apologize for the confusion 

concerning the appropriateness using exploitation 

data of the FAO.

Unfortunately, the most recent report 

with figures for state of exploitation is from 

2011, which means the data is too old to be accurate 

and thus of utility to address its sustainability.

Also, it's unclear how organic 

certifiers can verify the sustainability of the 

fish used to produce this fish oil.

Given that most of the fisheries 

through which fish oils for human consumption are 

sourced are either certified or are currently 

pursuing certification by a number of 

well-respected programs and organizations, GOED 

recommends fish oil used in products labeled as 

organic be required to have third-party 

certification and thus the annotation should 

reference third-party certification as a 

requirement.

Not only does third-party 

certification address the environmental concerns 

is timely unlike the FAO data. And would not 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

create an undue burden for organic certifiers.

In closing, GOED proposes the existing 

fish oil annotation to be modified to include the 

following text. Sourced from fishing, pardon me.

Sourced from fishing industry 

byproduct only and certified as sustainable by a 

third-party certifier. As always, thank you for 

your time and tireless effort. I will take 

questions if anybody has any.

MR. ELA: Does any of the Board have 

questions? Wood, it looks like you have a 

question.

MR. TURNER: Thanks, Harry. Can you 

restate that point you made about the amount of 

percent of salmon and menhaden that is consumed 

for human, by humans?

MR. RICE: Yes.

MS. ARSENAULT: Wood, sorry. Wood, I 

just lost the end of your sentence as well, I did 

not hear what you asked.

MR. TURNER: Okay. Can you hear me 

now?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes, better.

MR. TURNER: Harry, can you just 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

restate the percentage of salmon and menhaden 

that's been consumed by humans?

MR. RICE: Yes. So, with respect to 

that which is caught in the United States, we've 

estimated that approximately one percent salmon 

oil and approximately two percent menhaden oil is 

caught, is from the respected species caught in 

the United States.

I'm sorry, I kind of jumbled that, does 

that make sense?

MR. TURNER: It does. Thank you.

MR. RICE: Okay.

MR. ELA: Asa, it looks like you had 

a question?

MR. BRADMAN: Sorry --

MR. ELA: If you're talking -- yes.

MR. BRADMAN: I have two questions. 

One, one issue of discussion we've had as a Board 

is relying on third-party or other kinds of 

certifications that are external to the National 

List. And those standards can change and may not 

be reliable in terms of implementing the kind of 

principles we want under the organic laws.

And then there are some plant-based 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

sources of some of these fatty acids, or at least 

precursors. And I'm wondering why other sources 

of these fats which are considered so healthy, 

can't come from plant sources?

And again, I understand that there is 

not necessary, they may be precursors to some of 

these products, but still it may achieve the same 

nutritional goals that are touted for these 

materials.

MR. RICE: So, with respect -- for 

plant-based Omega-3s, they're good but they 

unfortunately don't convert very efficiently to 

EPA and DHA. Very low percentage.

I'm going to get the percentage mixed 

up. But for like alpha-linolenic acid, I think 

it's less than one percent will convert to DHA. 

And I think it's less than five percent to EPA. 

And obviously they're individual because, so 

that's just an average.

So, in order to achieve the outcome,

the health outcomes, cardiovascular, that have 

been seen with EPA and DHA, you actually need to 

get a direct source of EPA and DHA. And fish oil 

would be one of them.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And I apologize, I heard the first part 

but I didn't understand the question about the 

third-party certification.

MR. BRADMAN: This is kind of a general 

issue that, or concern we have on the Board is 

having a standard that relies on somebody outside 

of the organic community to define what's 

acceptable or not acceptable. So --

MR. RICE: Yes. And --

MR. BRADMAN: -- that's kind of, maybe 

a perhaps more general philosophical issue than 

a question.

MR. RICE: Yes. And no, I understand 

the concern. All I can say is I know that the top 

third-party certifiers are very good. They have 

a very good reputation and they always get better.

There are obviously third-party 

certifiers that probably wouldn't meet the 

standards that you're looking for, so I think the 

challenge is, is figuring out which third-party 

certifiers to rely upon.

And I know that in GOED's comments, we 

solicited a handful of the ones that our members 

are using and that have the best reputation in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

industry right now.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MR. RICE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: I may have inadvertently 

lowered somebody else's hand. Was there anybody 

else from the Board that had a question?

All right, thank you very much, Harry.

MR. RICE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Next up we have Michael 

Crotser, then Bill Wolf and then Stephen Walker. 

Michael, please go ahead.

MR. CROTSER: Good morning. Can you 

hear me?

MR. ELA: We can hear you loud and 

clear.

MR. CROTSER: Oh, thank you. I'm 

Michael Crotser and I'm the certification manager 

at CROPP Cooperative. We appreciate the work of 

the NOSB and the NOP to support organic 

agriculture.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak 

today. My first comment will be about sunset 

review of whey protein concentrate, WPC. We 

support removing WPC from 205.606.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

CROPP Cooperative is a major supplier 

of whey protein concentrate. We produce liquid 

whey through our organic cheese production.

Our whey is condensed and sent to 

co-packers to be processed into WPC. WPC is used 

to add protein to food such as infant formula, 

bakery, bars, sport drinks and adult nutrition.

Dairy whey is no profitable and 

maximizes the value of our supply chain. Both 

international and domestic markets are important.

Sixty percent of our whey is processed 

into whey powders with plans to utilize our entire 

whey stream. Our supply could produce 1.4 million 

pounds of WPC annually.

Today organic WPC is fully available 

in farm and volume and the supply will grow. In 

fact, our WPC supply is greater than market demand 

where large volumes are sold on the conventional 

market.

There is the processing infrastructure 

in place and it has grown dramatically since WPC 

was placed on the National List. There is no need 

to list WPC on 205.606.

My second comment will be about the fish 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

oil annotation. We use fish oil in our Omega-3 

supplemented whole and reduced fat milks.

Omega rich products are preferred by 

a large sector of our consumers. We use 606 listed 

fish because there is no organic alternative 

available.

It is difficult to determine if the new 

annotation would mitigate environmental concerns. 

The referenced FOA classifications are out of 

date.

The six fish population categories have 

now been reduced to three. This three category 

system uses data from 2011, which cannot assess 

current sustainability.

NOAA jurisdiction is only relevant to 

U.S. managed waters. The fish oil industry 

predominately harvests fish outside of U.S. 

waters.

Limitations to using these 

sustainability categories should be addressed 

prior to NOSB recommendations. Utilizing 

third-party fishing standards such as the Marine 

Stewardship Council, Friends of the Sea and 

Responsible Supply of Fishmeal and Fish Oil can 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

verify that production maintains or improves 

aquatic ecosystems.

Finally, our fish oil is a secondary 

byproduct of fishmeal production. We support 

adding an annotation that the fish oil is sourced 

from fishing industry byproducts only.

And thank you for your time.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. Are 

there questions from the Board? Emily has a 

question. Go ahead, Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you. Thank you for 

your comments.

For example, the Marine Stewardship 

Council sustainability standard addresses more 

than environmental concern, it also looks at 

economic impact and social justice issues. I'm 

wondering if you think that that is something that 

would be relevant or something that the NOSB could 

even look at in an annotation given that it is 

beyond the scope of current organic certification 

requirements?

MR. CROTSER: Your question, if I have 

it correctly, was talking about economic 

sustainability, fair trade issues, those types of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

concerns?

MS. OAKLEY: Yes. Just that other 

third-party sustainability standards while 

addressing environmental impact also have other 

tiers that they're standardizing to or certifying 

to.

MR. CROTSER: Yes. They don't, as you 

know, they don't directly relate to other 

standards. But any time there is additional 

attributes to third-party verification, us, as a 

CROPP Cooperative, look at those sustainability 

and economic on a social level are important to 

us as a cooperative.

And we do look for those additional 

attributes in some of our ingredients that we use 

throughout our portfolio.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there any other questions 

from the Board? All right, thank you very much, 

Michael.

MR. CROTSER: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Yes. Have a good day. 

We're going to move next to Bill Wolf and then 

Stephen Walker and then Sam Welsh.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Bill, please go ahead.

MR. WOLF: All right, can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can hear you now.

MR. WOLF: Can you hear me now?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes, we got you, Bill.

MR. ELA: We can hear you. Please go 

ahead.

MR. WOLF: Great, okay. Thank you. 

I am Bill Wolf, president of Wolf, DiMatteo and 

Associates. A 25 year old organic consulting 

firm.

I've been active in the organic 

community for 49 years farming organically and 

helping to develop organic products and standards.

Slide 2. Thank you for your work 

continuing to improve organic standards. 

Earthworms are a guide to the best practices.

Even in a pandemic, earthworms and 

healthy soils, like people, need air to live. 

Finding a mask for this earthworm wasn't easy, but 

he really wanted to come to this meeting and share 

an important point with you.

When considering what should be allowed 

in crop production we suggest that you imagine what 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

encourages earthworms. They are pretty good 

biomonitors and they don't let the perfect be the 

enemy of the good.

Slide 3. Biotic systems are complex 

and farmers need a robust and diverse toolbox to 

manage organic crop production.

Not just one choice or tool per problem 

but having several choices for different 

situations.

Slide 4. To protect that toolbox I ask 

that you vote to allow paper pots, renew listing 

of aquatic plant products, insecticidal soap, 

Vitamin B3 and EPA List 4, at least until it is 

replaced with a new program.

Slide 5. And as an advocate of 

continuous improvement, the Board should establish 

a consistent method of reviewing National List 

materials.

Every action and product has an impact. 

And a carbon footprint. And there is no such 

thing as no impact.

But the benefits of input, such as fish 

emulsion and seaweed, outweigh those impacts.

I also ask that you take a more 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

strategic approach to studying inputs. Why not 

take a step back and prioritize which inputs most 

need to be reviewed for their lifecycle impacts.

Another improvement would be to apply 

commercial availability to the entire list. 

Requiring organic, when available, to the sections 

601.603 and 605.

And finally --

MR. ELA: Michelle, was that the time?

MR. WOLF: -- please change the rules 

to actually allow the use of biodegradable --

MS. ARSENAULT: It was.

MR. WOLF: -- mulch film.

MS. ARSENAULT: Sorry, Bill.

MR. WOLF: Slide 6.

MR. ELA: Bill, your time is up 

unfortunately.

MR. WOLF: I'm done? Thank you.

MR. ELA: You're done. Are there 

questions for Bill? Emily, you had a question?

MS. OAKLEY: Yes. You didn't quite 

get a chance to get to it but I saw you had 

prohibited sodium nitrate and I was wondering if 

you could elaborate on your thoughts on that?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. WOLF: Certainly. The Board voted 

upon the response and request from the NOP, many 

years ago, to remove the 20 percent allowance for 

sodium nitrate on 602.

That was done in order to align the U.S. 

NOP standards with international standards. 

IFOAM, EU, Canada, many other countries. Because 

sodium nitrate has always been controversial and 

does have a pretty high salt index. And earthworms 

don't like it. So, that vote occurred at the 

request of NOP, but then it got stuck in regulatory 

bureaucracy, to put it simply.

The five year review has been ignored, 

so sodium nitrate has not been brought up each time 

that the five year's timeline came up. It's still 

posted on 602 with an allowance for up to a 20 

percent nitrogen. But it's a pretty confusing 

situation.

And NOSB could take a vote again to put 

it on NOP's work plan to remove the 20 percent 

allowance.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions for 

Bill? Thank you very much, Bill, we appreciate 

your time.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. WOLF: All right, thank you.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on to 

Stephan Walker, then Sam Welsch and then Joel 

Kelly.

Stephen, please start and state your 

name and affiliation.

MR. WALKER: Hi, I'm Stephen Walker, 

Accreditation and Industry Affairs Manager at 

MOSA.

I'll draw attention to our written 

comments on the 2020 research priorities and this 

new pandemic perspective. So, yesterday was the 

50th anniversary of the first Earth Day.

Forward thinking Greta Thunberg said, 

"whether we like it or not, the world has changed. 

It looks completely different from a few months 

ago and will probably not look the same again. 

We're going to have to choose a new way forward."

Organic research directs our new way 

forward. For 2020, we appreciate the call toward 

integrated research, considering the interplay of 

agroecology, the environment beyond our fences and 

native biodiversity.

Our comments note how priority setting 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

means putting some needs aside. And that sounds 

like this COVID-19 crisis.

This month the International Panel of 

Experts on Sustainable Food Systems released a 

COVID report which notes global food system 

vulnerabilities on three fronts.

Industrial ag is driving habitat loss 

and creating the conditions for viruses to emerge 

and spread. Varied disruptions are testing supply 

chain resilience and revealing vulnerabilities.

And hundreds of millions of humans are 

living permanently on the cusp of hunger, 

malnutrition and extreme poverty and very 

vulnerable to global recession.

Yet, this pandemic also offers a 

glimpse of a desired new normal. With more 

resilient food systems.

Communities have come together to plug 

gaps, and some public authorities have taken 

extraordinary steps to secure food production and 

distribution. Global recognition of the short 

sidedness of the conventional path creates fertile 

ground for a new food system. But crisis can be 

misused to accelerate unsustainable, business as 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

usual approaches. We need the kind of resistance 

and new hope inherent in our organic movement.

At a Texas NOSB meeting a while back 

I recalled Helen and Scott Nearing's influential 

book, Living the Good Life: How to Live Simply and 

Sanely in a Troubled World.

The Nearings sought economic 

independence, well-being and social and ethical 

ideals. They wrote, the Good Life is more than 

a yearning, it includes decision, will, 

determination and effort.

They also warned, keep out of the

system's clutches and you have a chance of 

subsistence, even if the oligarchs disapprove of 

what you think and say and do. Accept the system 

and you become a helpless cog in an impersonal 

machine operated to make rich men richer.

The forward thinking organic research 

priorities help us choose a good new normal of 

resilient agroecological food systems, which 

address climate change, ensure fairness and 

protect the vulnerable. Now is planting time for 

necessary seeds of change.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. Are 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

there, it looks like Emily has a question. Go 

ahead, Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: This is a comment. I just 

wanted to thank you for your articulate points. 

Thank you for bringing them to us.

MR. WALKER: You're welcome. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: Dave Mortensen has a 

question. Go ahead, Dave.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes. Mine also is a 

comment. And I also wanted to just echo what Emily 

just said.

I've been sitting out here in space 

listening to the comments and the perspectives. 

That was very helpful to hear, so thank you.

MR. WALKER: Thank you. And thank all 

of you for your work.

MR. ELA: Are there any other questions 

from the Board? All right, thank you very much, 

Stephen.

MR. WALKER: Okay.

MR. ELA: We'll have, up next is Sam 

Welsch and then Joel Kelly and Patty Lovera.

Sam, please go ahead.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. WELSCH: All right, hello. My 

name is Sam Welsch. I represent OneCert, an 

accredited certification agency.

The theme of my comments today is 

consistency and clarity. Remember, if it can be 

misunderstood, it will be misunderstood.

My first example is the confusion about 

the correct classification of malic acid. The 

synthetic, nonsynthetic decision tree in NOP 

5033-1 is not being used consistently.

The technical evaluation report 

prepared for the NOSB discusses the inconsistent 

interpretations in 5033-1 in the section, status 

of L-malic acid from synthetic fumaric acid 

production.

It appears that some are incorrectly 

considering the microbes to be the sourced 

substance. It should be obvious that the microbes 

do not create malic acid by themselves, there must 

be a source substance for the microbes to act on. 

Microbial action is the cause of the chemical 

change from fumaric acid to malic acid.

I urge the NOSB and NOP to revise 5033-1 

considering the confusion about how it is being 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

interpreted.

Remember my theme, if it can be 

misunderstood it will be misunderstood. The 

proposal for listing, for the listing for paper 

and paper pots is another example.

Certifiers who reviewed the proposal 

concluded that they need more clarification before 

they could consistently verify compliance. It 

needs to be rewritten before it is published.

Discussion on paper pots has revealed 

that paper is a more complex synthetic substance 

than just chemically altered cellulose. Paper can 

also include binders and synthetic fibers.

When those non-cellulose substances 

include plastic or other non-biodegradable 

substances, we must consider the effect those 

substances have on the living organic matter in 

the soil.

Microplastics are accumulating 

throughout the world, including our soil. The 

effects of microplastics are now known to be 

detrimental to microbial life in the soil, organic 

matter.

I like the photo Bill Wolf had of the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

earthworm. You've all seen pictures of plastics 

that are consumed by marine life or even 

terrestrial life where it gets in their stomachs, 

it essentially starves them to death. There is 

research showing that earthworms are smaller when 

there's microplastics in the soil.

Think of earthworms like the 

microplastics and earthworms are analogous to the 

larger life forms and the bigger pieces of plastic 

we see in oceans and in the soil.

Keep that in mind and be cautious about 

believing claims of plastics and other synthetic 

substances are biodegradable. That's more of a 

marketing claim than a genuine feature.

MS. ARSENAULT: Great.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Sam.

MS. ARSENAULT: A second left on the 

timer.

MR. WELSCH: Wow.

(Laughter.)

MR. ELA: Terrific.

MR. WELSCH: I practiced.

(Laughter.)

MR. ELA: Well done. Are there 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

questions from the Board? 

I have a question, Sam. In terms of 

you're saying that we need to revise the annotation 

for paper pots, how would you propose that we 

actually word that?

MR. WELSCH: I was afraid you might ask 

that and I did not prepare a proposal. I'd be happy 

to put some thought into that, but currently, the 

way it's written with references to other 

standards, it really creates a situation where 

certifiers would have a hard time evaluating that.

And that's what I hear from my 

colleagues, is that we're not sure how to evaluate 

it, or if we really are able to evaluate it, to 

those standards. I like the annotation that if 

it's 100 percent biodegradables available, use it. 

And I think there's a lot of potential for --

MR. ELA: We just lost you, Sam.

MR. WELSCH: All right, I was 

just -- can you hear me now?

MR. ELA: Yes.

MR. WELSCH: Okay. I think there are 

some --

MR. ELA: You said --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. WELSCH: Yeah, there are some 

things that can be made from hemp and other fibers 

that are going to be more fully biodegradable.

I think the stricter you make the rule, 

and the clearer you make the rule, the more 

incentive there will be for people to make things 

that comply with it. When there's ambiguity about 

how to enforce it or what it means, there's less 

incentive for people to develop substances or 

products that can meet a more strict and clearly 

written rule.

MR. ELA: And thank you, Sam. And I 

guess I would personally appreciate if you would 

give some thought to how we would actually write 

that, because it's a -- you know, the devil is in 

the details always, so I would love it for you to 

send us your thoughts on the exact wording of that.

It looks like Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Yeah, I was actually going 

to just say the same thing, and just to let the 

community know that this issue has taken a 

tremendous amount of the Crop Subcommittee's time. 

Which might not surprise people, but it is much 

more complicated than one might at first think. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So, any detailed suggestions or comments would 

be great, to be either given to Michelle or to the 

open docket when it opens back up again, because 

we can use all the help we can get.

MR. WELSCH: Right, well noted.

MR. ELA: Is there any other questions 

for Sam? Sam, as always, thank you very much.

MR. WELSCH: All right, thank you.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on to Joel 

Kelly, then Patty Lovera, and then next, Cali 

Alexander.

So, Joel, would you please state your 

name and affiliation and start?

MR. KELLY: Hey, can you hear me okay?

MR. ELA: We can hear you. Please 

continue.

MR. KELLY: Great. My name is Joel 

Kelly and I'm from Live Local Organic in Portland, 

Oregon. We're a certified organic farm using 

aquaponics to grow food for local grocery stores 

and markets.

Live Local Organic is thankful to the 

NOSB for taking the time to listen to public 

comments, even in the midst of a global pandemic. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We also want to greet the five new members of the 

Board and express our gratitude for the 

responsibility that you've all undertaken.

Live Local Organic was founded from a 

desire to produce food locally, sustainably, and 

organically. We choose to use container 

production methods because there is now feasible 

option for growing out-of-season produce locally 

in a climate like ours in Portland, Oregon.

We choose aquaponics over other ponics 

systems because it aligns with organic practices 

by using a symbiotic ecosystem between fish, 

plants, beneficial bacteria, fungi, and other 

microorganisms.

The protection of the certification of 

container production systems if vital for assuring 

that consumers have access to both locally grown 

and organic produce during winter months in 

climates like ours in Portland.

Without an organic certification, our 

farm would lose our advantage against other 

container producers who use synthetics, GMOs, and 

other unsustainable practices. Consumers wanting 

to buy organic, out-of-season produce would then 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

be forced to buy non-local options from farms often 

thousands of miles away. This produce would 

typically be one to two weeks old, have a 

significant carbon footprint from transportation, 

and be from a farm with less accountability because 

of their distance from the marketplace.

These last four months have highlighted 

the need for food security. And we want to agree 

with previous commenters and express our 

appreciation for the local farmers who are keeping 

the shelves stocked during this time of crisis.

That being said, Live Local Organic 

supports the use of aquatic plant extracts in 

organic production. We would also support 

revisiting the question of container production 

for organic certification.

With recent litigation regarding this 

issue and perceived disagreement between the NOSB 

and NOP, clarity is more important now than ever. 

In this ever-changing industry the feature 

unknowns make is difficult to decide into which 

areas we should invest our time, innovation, money, 

and research and development efforts.

If and when this issue is revisited, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

we hope that it will be accompanied by extensive, 

unbiased inquiry into the public opinion about this 

issue, as a core part of the argument for 

decertification seems to be that consumers don't 

know about, and wouldn't approve of, organic 

certification of container production systems. 

This has not been our experience over the years 

of working with thousands of customers. And we 

have seen strong public support for the 

certification of container production system.

I'm proud to be an organic farmer and 

to use container production methods with all the 

ecological benefits associated with such

production. Any restriction of container 

production, in my opinion, would be short-sighted, 

as it is going to account for a significant portion 

of our food production over the next 50 years. 

However, a clear and final decision on this issue 

will help everybody plan for the future.

We would again like to thank the NOSB 

for the time and dedication in helping us resolve 

all of the important issues facing the organic 

community today, and I'm happy to take any 

questions if there are any.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Thank you. It looks like Sue 

has a question. Sue, go ahead.

MS. BAIRD: Hi, thank you for your 

comments. In your mind, do you differentiate 

between containers growing that has, in pots, as 

opposed to strict water-based hydroponic, and/or 

do you differentiate in the aquaponics? Is there 

a difference in your mind between those?

MR. KELLY: There is a difference 

between aquaponics and hydroponics, as aquaponics 

uses fish in the system as a source of the 

nutrients. And so there is a maintaining of a 

biological ecosystem that happens.

And I do see a differentiation that was 

stated from the taskforce that looked at this issue 

and their differentiation between bioponic systems 

as opposed to ponics systems. And, yeah, that was 

part of the reason that we choose to do aquaponic 

systems. 

However, I think there still is the 

issue of making sure that there is a local and 

organic option available, especially in northern 

climates who have harsh winters. I think making 

sure that container production system 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

certification is protected is still important.

So I guess, in summary, yes, I see the 

differentiation there, but I still think that the 

certification should be protected, as long as they 

are following all the standards that are put forth 

in maintaining an organic plan with their organic 

certifier.

MS. BAIRD: Thank you.

MR. ELA: It looks like Dave has a 

question, and then Dan. And we'll keep an eye on 

time, but go ahead, Dave.

MR. MORTENSEN: Okay. I would just 

say that, as one of the Board members of many who 

have worked on this over the years, we would need 

a stronger signal sent to NOP that this is something 

that we should be working to resolve.

It's been in something we've discussed 

on and off over the last two years, quite intensely 

at times. And I think to have it more squarely 

on the work docket and something that we really 

devote time to, that we do need a stronger signal 

in that way.

MR. KELLY: Yeah, I would agree. And 

if there's any way for us to help with that or assist 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

with that in any way, I would be happy to do that.

MR. ELA: Dan, you have a question?

DR. SEITZ: Thank you for your 

comments. And I just want to echo a little bit 

what Dave just said.

I appreciate that you're indicating 

support for standards for container production. 

And there are a number of us on the NOSB who feel 

that it's sufficiently different that we really 

do need to develop standards.

But my question is, you made a statement 

about consumer support for the type of production 

you do, container production. And I'm wondering, 

and this is not a matter for the NOSB, but would 

you support labeling of container production or 

hydroponic production so that consumers can make 

an informed choice about what type of production 

method fits their values?

MR. ELA: Joel, we're not hearing you.

MS. ARSENAULT: There we go, we just 

got him. You're unmuted, Joel, go ahead.

MR. KELLY: Yeah, I was just going to 

say, absolutely, I would support that. I think 

that's a great solution, to just requiring that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

growers put their production method on their 

labeling somehow so that consumers can make an 

educated decision about it.

MR. ELA: All right, thank you very 

much, Joel. We appreciate your comments.

MR. KELLY: Thank you all for your 

time. Appreciate it.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on to 

Patty Lovera. Cali Alexander will follow Patty, 

and then Marie Burcham.

Patty, please go ahead and state your 

name and affiliation.

MS. LOVERA: Hi, this is Patty Lovera. 

Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can. Please continue.

MS. LOVERA: Okay. Hi, my name is 

Patty Lovera. I'm the policy director for the 

Organic Farmers Association. I want to thank you 

for figuring out a way to have this -- have the 

public comments happen today, and say welcome to 

the new members of the Board.

The Organic Farmers Association is led 

by domestic certified organic farmers. And a top 

priority for our farmers is we're maintaining, in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

whatever way we need to, the integrity of the 

organic label. We appreciate the role that NOSB 

plays in the process of keeping organic integrity 

high. And we think an important part of that is 

actually that the NOSB have more ability to set 

their own work agenda, which just came up from the 

last commenter. I think that's an important 

point.

Because this is a space where the whole 

organic community gathers, we actually have a 

couple of thoughts I wanted to share with the NOP 

for some key actions that we need to move forward 

as quickly as possible so that we're keeping the 

integrity really high.

One is we desperately need this rule 

on the origin of livestock to address the 

inconsistency we see on the ground in how the 

organic animals are being transitioned. We put 

some details about OFA's policy of the points that 

need to be covered in that rulemaking, but the key 

one is that you can transition one time per 

producer; and that once this regulation is done 

we need a very quick effective date, because this 

is going on for a long time and created a very 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

unlevel playing field for folks who are already 

living up to the intent of the standards on that.

In addition to an origin of livestock 

rule, we also need the program to continue to focus 

on compliance with the pasture rule and to keep 

emphasizing compliance for these high-risk 

operations.

The second main point is we desperately 

need to strengthen the organic enforcement 

rulemaking. We are catching up to have enough 

capacity to properly enforce a $50 billion industry 

with complicated, often global supply chains. And 

we understand that that rule appears to be stuck 

in the review process, but we're just really 

reminding the program who desperately we need it. 

And that when it gets unstuck we need to get it 

moving and finished as soon as possible.

And then one last point I wanted to 

raise, again, with the program, because the whole 

community is here, is that in this pandemic 

situation we've seen organic farms adapt very, very 

quickly, on their own, essentially on a dime, 

figuring out how to market, how to adapt, figure 

out new rules and regulations that change every 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

day from their local government or state 

government, figure out how to access the Small 

Business Administration.

Like, it's been a really impressive 

response, but we still need USDA's pandemic 

response to include organic producers. They can't 

be left behind just because many organic producers 

have scrambled quite effectively to turn on a dime; 

in a lot of ways, faster than our conventional 

counterparts who are on very consolidated supply 

chains.

So I just want to flag that and actually 

specifically ask for some help from the program 

in figuring out ways for organic farmers to access 

the USDA pandemic response, whether it's the 

commodity buys or the direct payments, because so 

far the details that are out so far aren't super 

clear that these programs are going to work for 

organic farmers and we need them to be included, 

as well. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much for your 

comments. And I think, Jenny, do you want to make 

any comments on that?

DR. TUCKER: Yeah, we appreciate the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

feedback on all of those different elements. 

Strengthening organic enforcement is 

currently with the Office of Management and Budget. 

We responded to a number of questions that they 

had on the rule. And so it is with them at this 

stage of the game.

Origin of livestock is currently in, 

and coming out of very soon, legal review, which 

was done very quickly. So both of those are moving 

forward.

I appreciate the comment on the pasture 

dairy compliance project, which does continue in 

its third year, this year. And we will visit more 

farms this year than we have in the previous two 

years.

And then, finally, on the coronavirus 

response, I appreciate that feedback. We are

monitoring closely what is happening within USDA 

and AMS and providing feedback from the organic 

community on those topics. There are a lot of 

different programs that are being developed.

There is a new fact sheet within the 

Organic Integrity Learning Center, under NOP 

Presentations Course 998. It is the NOP update 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

presentation that just launched last night. It 

includes a fact sheet on resources for organic 

farmers, as well our NOP update presentation that 

includes some of the information I just covered 

here.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Jenny, 

I appreciate that update. Dave, do you have a 

quick question?

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes, just a quick 

follow-up on that. I was wondering, it sounded 

like Jenny addressed everything but the origin of 

livestock, and I just was curious if we could hear 

an update on that, as well.

DR. TUCKER: Origin of livestock is 

almost clear of legal review. So, the final rule 

has been written, it has gotten the first round 

of legal review. It is waiting OGC clearance, and 

then it goes into a departmental clearance, and 

then to Office of Management and Budget for review.

MR. MORTENSEN: Is there a timeline 

that? Like, just is that years and years away or 

months away?

DR. TUCKER: So, you know, I am no 

longer committing to timelines, because I'm the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

one who said strengthening organic enforcement 

would be out in the fall, and it is at OMB. So, 

all I can is tell you where it is in the process. 

We had really hoped strengthening organic 

enforcement would be out of OMB by now. It is not.

The origin of livestock, the legal 

review has gone faster than we expected. The 

Department clearly knows how important origin of 

livestock is to the community. They consider it 

a high priority rulemaking. And then it goes to 

OMB. OMB does have 90 days, formally, to review 

rules.

MR. MORTENSEN: Okay, thank you.

MR. ELA: All right, thank you. And, 

as always, I'm just going to chime in -- and our 

stakeholders know this, but I think it always pays 

to reiterate it -- when those rules come up for 

public comment in the rulemaking process, it is 

imperative that we all give comments in favor of 

those rules, because we don't want to have 

something derailed by a couple of comments that 

maybe are not in favor of them and not have 

countervailing views. So we should all make sure 

in the rulemaking process to give comments, as well 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

as to the NOSB.

Thank you very much, Patty. We're 

going to move on to Cali Alexander, then Marie 

Burchman, and then Mary Capehart.

And, Michelle, I think you had said you 

were having a hard time finding Cali. Cali, are 

you out there?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yeah, we're not 

finding her on the participant list by name or phone 

number.

MR. ELA: Okay. Cali, if you are out 

there, could you let Michelle or somebody in the 

program know, please? And we will come back to 

you if you are.

Okay, we'll move on to Marie Burchman, 

followed by Mary Capehart, and then Harold Austin.

Marie, please go ahead.

MS. BURCHAM: Hi, can you hear me?

MR. ELA: Yes, we can. Continue.

MS. BURCHAM: Hi. My name is Marie 

Burchman and I'm an attorney and the director of 

domestic policy for the Cornucopia Institute. I 

just have a couple of general comments in addition 

to Cornucopia's written comments.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We stand by the fact that the organic 

label isn't just about substitution of inputs. 

The rules and regulations make that clear, but the 

industry has moved away from holistic practice. 

We urge the NOSB to continue to work toward organic 

rules and regulations that support economic 

justice for family farmers, livestock animal 

welfare, and environmental stewardship.

To that end, it is essential that the 

NOP acts on NOSB recommendations. Of particular 

concern is the lack of action on the NOSB's 2018 

former recommendation to eliminate the incentive 

to convert native ecosystems to organic 

production.

Sensitive ecosystems are still at risk. 

This is an issue that is essential to organic 

production and label integrity. We cannot say we 

are dedicated to environmental stewardship and 

then allow farms to destroy rare habitat in the 

name of organic production.

OFPA gives NOP broad authority to enact 

regulation to further the aims of the statute. 

The formal recommendation of the NOSB in this 

particular case does exactly that, since organic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

production is explicitly required to support 

biodiversity and prevent environmental harm. 

Cornucopia urges the NOSB to continue to push these 

issues with NOP. 

We agree with the other commenters that 

the rulemaking on the origin of livestock needs 

to be moved forward. The systemic problems of 

livestock origin and pasture compliance had not 

evaporated just because we are facing a global 

pandemic. In fact, now is the perfect time to get 

final regulation enacted to give some clarity and 

assurance to farmers who are facing an uncertain 

marketplace.

Cornucopia also wants to see fair 

competition under the organic seal. That means 

there must be uniform application of OFPA in the 

organic rules and regulations. We urge NOSB to 

act on these issues to the extent they can. 

Rulemaking and guidance are USDA's contribution 

to continuous improvement.

Cornucopia was happy to see the broad 

scope of the research priorities suggested by the 

NOSB. We suggest that it is paramount that 

research be done on regenerative agriculture and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

its relation to climate change issues. Shifting 

global agriculture away from exploitative and 

input-heavy practices may be an important piece 

of solving the climate issues. And the organic 

label has an important role to play in that shift.

We'd also like to see research into how 

to bring racial and economic justice to the 

forefront of the organic label. Right now many 

families do not have access to land or the ability 

to farm. Still others do not have access to 

healthful organic food. The organic marketplace 

shouldn't just be a niche market reserved for some 

members of society. Labels' goals stand in 

contrast to the harms perpetuated by conventional 

food systems and should be the norm, not an outlier. 

Our industry, like our society, needs to examine 

how we can do better. This is what it means to 

be dedicated to continuous improvement.

Thank you for your time and dedication 

to this public process, and welcome to the new NOSB 

members.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Marie. 

Are there questions from the Board?

 Seeing none, we will keep moving on.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Mary Capehart is up next, followed by Harold 

Austin, and then followed by Harriet Behar. Hmm, 

I don't recognize that name at all, Harriet.

(Laughter.)

MR. ELA: We will go ahead, Mary 

Capehart, we'll look for you here.

MS. CAPEHART: Hello, can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can. Please continue.

MS. CAPEHART: Oh, great. Hello, my 

name is Mary Capehart and I am the certification 

senior specialist focused on dairy at CROPP 

Cooperative.

My husband and I, we were herdsmen out 

at Hawthorne Valley Biodynamic Organic Farm for 

several years. We had our own dairy in the 

Midwest. Although we no longer are milking we 

still have several retired dairy cows, one which 

is 24 years old.

I will be commenting on biodegradable 

bio-based mulch and livestock sunset review. 

Biodegradable bio-based mulch, we appreciate the 

work the Subcommittee has done to advance the use 

of bio-based mulch (audio interference). Plastic 

mulch is widely used and near impossible to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

recycle. Thus, as the Subcommittee is aware, 

there is a large volume of this plastic mulch going 

to the landfill.

CROPP encourages the committee to allow 

mulch film with less than 100 percent bio-based 

content, as there are currently no products that 

can meet this standard. Furthermore, it is unlikely 

that there will be product that can meet this 

standard soon. CROPP supports finding a solution 

to minimize or eliminate the use of plastic mulch.

Livestock sunset review. So, in 

response to the Subcommittee's questions, 

butorphanol; is butorphanol the considered the 

preferred choice for its use at this time or is 

there any other option? Xylazine is another 

option but it is not as effective. Butorphanol 

is not in use very often but is important to have 

when needed.

And are there any non-synthetic 

materials that would serve the same purpose as 

butorphanol? There are herbal remedies for pain 

control but are not as effective to prevent acute 

pain. This material should remain on the National 

List for animal welfare and safety considerations. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We support the continued listing of butorphanol 

on the National List.

Flunixin. Is it still deemed 

necessary for organic livestock production? Yes. 

Flunixin is a strong anti-inflammatory that 

counteracts endotoxin. No other drug performs as 

well. It is very useful in acute mastitis. 

Taking away pain medications is a major welfare 

issue.

Are there other non-synthetic 

materials that would serve the same purpose? Once 

again, there are other pain medications, but there 

are circumstances where this is the best option. 

Flunixin is accepted by most animal welfare 

programs, and, again, we support the continued 

listing of flunixin on the National List.

Poloxalene. Are organic approaches to 

dealing with bloat enough to address this 

healthcare issue or is poloxalene essential to full 

organic livestock production? Most often we use 

butter, although it should remain on the list since 

it's a common carry on veterinarian trucks. Not 

all vets know about using butter or oils in an 

emergency and it's good to have many options to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

treat. It's not to be used as a feed additive or 

preventative, just a single dose for emergency use 

only.

MS. ARSENAULT: Mary, that was your 

time if you didn't hear the beep.

MS. CAPEHART: Oh, okay. Well, I 

would just like to thank you for the opportunity 

to provide the comments on the matter before the 

National Organic Standard Boards and we are 

grateful for the flexibility to keep moving forward 

during these challenging times. Again, thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Mary. And for 

future speakers, we're still not getting a loud 

beep from the timer, so I'm just going to have 

Michelle say beep. And so if you hear her say that 

you'll know your time is up. So, Michelle, 

practice your beeps.

(Laughter.)

MR. ELA: And are there any questions 

for Mary from the Board? Looks like Sue has a 

question. Go ahead, Sue. 

Sue, we're not hearing you.

MS. BAIRD: Of course, you're not, 

because I never remember to mute.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I was interested in your comment that 

you're using butter as a source instead of 

poloxalene. And I'm wondering, is that butter 

than considered to be a health product as opposed 

to food? Because, of course, we know you can't 

use an animal product back to feed it to that same 

animal? It's just an interesting thing to me.

MS. CAPEHART: I guess I never thought 

of it that way. Yeah, I guess we thought more of 

it as a food, not necessarily milk that came from 

that cow.

MS. BAIRD: But milk comes from a cow.

MS. CAPEHART: I know.

(Laughter.)

MS. CAPEHART: I guess I -- no, I guess 

I never thought of that.

MS. BAIRD: All right.

MS. CAPEHART: And I've never had that 

question. That's a very interesting question.

MS. BAIRD: Well, it was an 

interesting -- it was just interesting. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: Are there any other questions 

for Mary? 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Thank you very much, Mary, much 

appreciated. We're going to next move on to a 

couple former NOSB members. Harold Austin, then 

Harriet Behar, and then Vamshi Chintha.

Harold, please go ahead.

MR. AUSTIN: Good morning. Can you 

hear me okay?

MR. ELA: We can.

MR. AUSTIN: Okay. All right, thank 

you, Steve. Good morning. My name is Harold 

Austin. I'm a former member of the National 

Organic Standard Board, having served as a handler 

from 2012 to 2017. I am the current chair of the 

Northwest Horticultural Council Science Advisory 

Committee, as well as it's organic subcommittee.

I'd like to thank each of you for taking 

the time out of your busy schedules to participate 

in this process on behalf of the various organic 

stakeholders that rely on it. And especially to 

those five new members that have recently joined 

the NOSB. I'd like to provide you with the 

additional following comments. 

Crops List 4 inerts. As Emily Brown 

Rosen and John Foster stated on Tuesday, this has 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

been a listing that has received a tremendous 

amount of scrutiny and hard work in past 

subcommittee undertakings, but we cannot de-list 

this listing without having something in its place. 

To do otherwise would have devastating 

consequences for the organic crop producers and 

handlers.

This listing is essential until an 

alternative process has been put in place and fully 

implemented. Please refer to my written comments 

on the impact that the loss of this would have on 

organic tree fruit if we were to lose the passive 

pheromone dispensers that the List 4 inerts are 

a part of. It is time -- actually, it's well past 

time -- to implement the 2015 NOSB recommendation 

that John Foster were a part in helping to draft.

Continuing in crops: aquatic plant 

extracts. These materials, primarily sourced 

from kelp, are a key source for organic crops for 

nutrients, amino acids, proteins, and other 

components that are derived from them. Soil and 

plant health begin and ends with the balance of 

nutrients, proteins, vitamins, and other key 

essential substances for both the crop and the soil 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

within which the crop is grown.

The materials derived from the aquatic 

plant extracts are used to help complement the 

other areas of practices, such as mulching, cover 

cropping, composting that all organic crop 

producers are doing on the farms to help and improve 

soil health and fertility. These materials are 

used on an as-needed basis when it's been 

determined that there is a need or a deficiency 

that truly does exist. Yes, this material listing 

is still a very important one for organic crop 

production in the United States.

The alkali extraction method is proven 

to be the best process to providing a material that 

is consistent in quality and of ease to use for 

both the manufacturer and the organic crop producer 

alike.

In handling, ozone is an important 

material used as a disinfectant sanitizer in our 

organic packing and storage facilities. While 

it's a very good disinfectant, at the same time 

it is proven to be a very benign compound within 

the environment. It is used to help reduce and 

control microorganisms in our organic handling 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

operations. 

This is only one of several materials 

that we use. Resistance management and pathogen 

control are important, but even more so now as we 

move into the COVID-19 era, as is providing a safe 

work environment for our employees and freshly 

packed fruit that is safe to our families and our 

organic consumer. Thus, having ozone, along with 

the various other materials that we us, is more 

important now than ever before.

I would also like to make a comment, 

agree with Bill Wolf's comment earlier about sodium 

nitrate. It's time that that listing goes away. 

Thank you for your time, everybody.

MS. ARSENAULT: Thank you, Harold.

MR. ELA: Thank you.

MS. ARSENAULT: You heard the beep.

MR. AUSTIN: I did.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Harold. 

Are there questions for Harold? 

Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Harold, for 

your comment on sodium nitrate. What would you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

suggest the current NOSB do to forward this issue 

within the NOP?

MR. AUSTIN: You know, I guess I would 

take and maybe ask for it to be either put back 

onto your work plan, or that various committees, 

subcommittees within the NOSB, draft language, a 

resolution requesting that action be taken by the 

National Organic Program and the USDA.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. AUSTIN: We've used the resolution 

process in the past, Emily, and it's worked, I 

think, quite well.

MS. OAKLEY: Yeah, I think that's a 

good point. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Harold, this is Steve. 

Would you agree that we should again ask for it 

to be prohibited completely rather than the 20 

percent?

MR. AUSTIN: Absolutely. I think that 

message has been sent loud and clear by the past 

NOSB members, and I think by the organic community 

as a whole. It's time that we stop for the 

allowance for the use of it.

MR. ELA: Are there any other questions 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

from the Board for Harold? 

Harold, we appreciate you continuing 

to give advice. Thank you very much.

MR. AUSTIN: You're welcome.

MR. ELA: Next up we have Harriet 

BeHar, and then Vamshi Chintha, and then we will 

have a short break. And after break we will have 

Patrick Kerrigan.

Harriet, welcome back and we'll be very 

curious how it feels to be on the other side of 

the fence. Please start.

Harriet, we're not hearing you. Still 

not hearing you. 

Michelle, can you check on that, 

please?

MS. BEHAR: Can you hear me now?

MS. ARSENAULT: We got you.

MR. ELA: We can hear you loud and 

clear.

MS. BEHAR: Okay, great. My name is 

Harriet Behar and I'm a certified organic farmer 

calling you today from my solar earth-bermed 

greenhouse. I'm also an organic inspector, an 

educator, and an advocate. And the former chair 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of the NOSB.

I welcome the new members. Your time 

on the Board is what you make of it. The organic 

community has many issues and your stakeholders 

depend on the citizen boards to bring forward their 

concerns and improve the implementation of the 

organic law in this very young program within the 

USDA.

I am impressed how many consumers write 

public comments telling the Board how important 

it is that this organic label maintains their trust 

and that there are no problematic ingredients, as 

well as inputs or practices, that harm the 

environment under that label.

I understand that this label is 

overseen by the USDA and it is difficult to write 

regulations that incorporate the intricacies 

inherent in a healthy ecosystem. However, I 

encourage you to consider the long-term 

consequences of each material and management 

practice that you will be voting upon.

A change to the voting procedure during 

the sunset of materials has made it much harder 

to remove a material once it is on the National 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

List. Putting something on the list as a 

short-term solution is no longer an option, since, 

once it is allowed in commerce, the NOP may decide 

to keep it there forever. 

This is what has happened to sodium 

nitrate. So I'm joining the chorus there. The 

NOP has removed it from the review of the NOSB, 

so you will not even be considering it as a sunset 

material. But it has remained on the National List 

for over eight years, without that five-year 

review.

I hope that both the Crops and Materials 

Subcommittees will continue to bring up this 

allowance without sunset review, since it is 

illegal under the Organic Food Production Act and 

is a bad precedent for any materials that the NOSB, 

with strong stakeholder agreement, has removed, 

but the NOP then puts this in its own special 

category of forever on the National List.

Fenbendazole. I urge the Livestock 

Subcommittee to table this petition until there 

is a clearer set of rules for outside access for 

poultry. At this time there are very few 

operations that would have the right management 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

practices in place to rest pastures to prevent 

reinfection, and the use of this parasiticide will 

become routine. The fact that there is residue 

in the eggs is a rejection of the trust of those 

organic consumers I spoke of earlier.

Biodegradable mulch film. I urge you 

not to change the annotation until further research 

has been shown that this material does not cause 

any environmental damage from microplastics, 

larger plastics, or an imbalance in soil biology 

caused by its breakdown.

Whey protein concentrate, it needs to 

come off the list. We have plenty of sources for 

this product, so it needs to come off 606.

And I refer you to my written comments. 

And thank you for all your work.

MR. ELA: Perfect. I'm --

(Simultaneous speaking.)

MR. ELA: Yes. Emily has a question.

MS. BEHAR: Hi, Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Hi. Thank you, Harriet. 

(Audio interference.)

MS. ARSENAULT: So we're getting some 

feedback. Harriet, I think it's coming from you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

(Audio interference.)

(Simultaneous speaking.)

MR. ELA: Yeah, we're getting a lot of 

feedback. Harriet, do you have two microphones?

MS. BEHAR: How about that, is that 

better?

MR. ELA: Much.

MS. ARSENAULT: Way better. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: Yes.

MS. BEHAR: Okay.

MR. ELA: Okay. Emily has a question. 

Go ahead, Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Okay. Well, this was 

actually a question directed to the program, 

regarding sodium nitrate, since this has 

definitely been raised multiple times this 

morning. So I was wondering for your comments on 

the issues that have been raised by commenters.

MR. ELA: We will see if we can get 

Jenny --

DR. TUCKER: Hi, sorry.

MR. ELA: Oh, there we go.

DR. TUCKER: Can you all hear me? 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Sorry about that, it took me a little bit to find 

the mute button.

So, sodium nitrate is not currently on 

the regulatory agenda. We do periodically get 

public comments on it. This is an area where we 

did send a memo to certifiers about how they should 

consider the sodium nitrate listing. That memo 

is in the NOP Handbook, for anyone interesting in 

that. We have not gotten feedback that 

implementation of that memo has been problematic. 

And we do check it during audits.

We will, of course, take this feedback 

back. And as we report key items from the meeting, 

this is clearly a topic of interest, so we will 

bring it back up to leadership. It is not, 

however, currently on the Board agenda -- on the 

NOP's regulatory agenda.

MS. OAKLEY: Steve, could I just do a 

quick follow-up question?

MR. ELA: Sure.

MS. OAKLEY: So, given the current 

confusion over it, we've had some indication that 

there might be producers who are using this 

material above 20 percent limit. Is the program 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

aware of that at all?

DR. TUCKER: We have not heard that 

that is happening, so that, if there is evidence 

of that, we would be interested in hearing about 

it.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Dan, you had a question?

DR. SEITZ: Hi, Harriet, thank you so 

much for your comments. Now, I want to just ask 

you about fenbendazole used for poultry. And 

we've heard almost polar opposite views on that 

from some people saying it's absolutely necessary, 

protects the consumers. We haven't heard from 

poultry producers who feel they need that.

And what I'm wondering -- and you 

mentioned pastured space and so forth. I was 

wondering if you think that there are cultural 

methods that would obviate the need for allowing 

this substance. And how does the practices of 

poultry producers come into play in regards to 

fenbendazole?

MS. BEHAR: Thank you, Dan. Well, 

just as it would for mammalian livestock, it would 

be a rotation of pasture, where you are aware of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

what the lifecycle is of the parasite and do not 

bring the birds back into that area until there 

are no more viable larvae or eggs for those birds 

to consume. And that's the way to break it.

But, at this point, we have many poultry 

operations that have limited or, you know, they 

just don't have very much outdoor access for their 

birds, and so they don't have a place to rotate 

them. And so, really, until we have a 

better -- similar to the organic livestock and 

poultry practices rule where we did have a 

recommendation for at least 50 percent vegetative 

area for the birds, that would mean a very 

significantly larger amount.

Because, as you know, when birds, poultry are out 

on pasture they do scratch and denude the 

landscape. 

So, making sure that it's at least 50 

percent vegetative means that they would need a 

very large area. And there could be more of a 

rotated pasture. I have seen operations with 

maybe 3- to 5,000 birds where they do rotate 

pastures. And those operations would meet the 

rule.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

But my concern is that there's a 

significant portion of the egg production under 

the organic label right now which do not have enough 

space. And so what we would be doing is 

encouraging crowded conditions, kind of poor 

outdoor assets for birds, by allowing the 

parasiticide. And that it would become a routine 

use.

And then, of course, the fact there is 

residue in the eggs means that there will be 

constant residue of this parasiticide in the eggs, 

which I believe the consumers would find abhorrent.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Harriet. We have 

a couple more questions, with an eye at the time 

here. Rick.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay, can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay. Harriet, first 

of all, I miss my pies. So, beyond that, just 

wanted to make a comment about the fenbendazole. 

And I made the same comment at one of the live 

meetings, I think about a year ago.

Fenbendazole may end up as a residue 

in eggs, but the issue is it's destroyed at 179 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

degrees centigrade, which is average cooking 

temperature. So, I don't think the residue issue, 

since eggs are eaten cooked -- or they should be 

because of salmonella and other issues -- I don't 

think that's a particularly important issue. And 

I think that's part of the reason FDA has said that 

it's insignificant. But I just wanted to make that 

point again, because we're talking about a residue 

that doesn't really exist when the item is 

consumed.

MS. BEHAR: Well, yesterday we also did 

have someone talk about that some of those culled 

birds might end up at slaughter also, so that should 

be considered, as well.

MR. GREENWOOD: Yeah, but, again, if 

they end up at slaughter they're still going to 

get cooked. So I don't think people eat chicken 

tartar -- or they shouldn't, because it's pretty 

dangerous. Just wanted to reiterate that point.

MR. ELA: Yes. Okay, Wood, do you have 

a question?

MR. TURNER: I just have a quick 

comment. And I just wanted to acknowledge 

Harriet's service, and I'm sorry we're passing in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the night and she's leaving as I'm coming in and 

I'm sorry we won't have a chance to work together.

But I also want to just flag the value 

of comments like hers in helping make sure that 

incoming Board members, and the Board as a whole, 

really understand historical procedural changes 

that might affect our work on the Board. It's 

really important to have that perspective. And 

I just want to acknowledge that. It's very helpful 

for me to hear comments she offered.

MS. ARSENAULT: Hey, Wood, this is 

Michelle. You're fading in and out and somebody 

just muted you. I am trying to unmute you now.

MR. TURNER: Can you hear me now?

MS. ARSENAULT: Got you.

MR. TURNER: So you didn't hear 

anything I said?

MR. ELA: We did, yeah. You were in 

and out, but we could hear you.

MR. TURNER: Okay. Thanks.

MR. ELA: Thank you. And, Dave, one 

last quick comment.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yeah, I just wanted 

thank Harriet for reminding us that we're talking 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

about approving a synthetic pesticide, in 

fenbendazole. And the idea that we would allow 

residues of a synthetic pesticide in an organically 

certified egg that we can mitigate by cooking the 

egg to a certain temperature is really disturbing 

and worrying to me.

But, thank you, Harriet, for reminding 

us of what we're really talking about where a 

cultural method could help address this problem 

from a systems point of view. Thanks.

MS. BEHAR: You're welcome. And thank 

you all for your work.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Harriet. 

We miss you. We've got five Board members that 

are looking this year of what it looks like on the 

other side, so --

(Laughter.)

MR. ELA: Okay. We've got one more 

speaker and we're not sure they are on. Vamshi 

Chintha, are you out there?

Then we're going to take a quick break 

and then come back to Patrick Kerrigan, Jorge 

Gomez, and Emily Musgrave.

So, Michelle, did you find Vamshi?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ARSENAULT: We haven't yet, by name 

or phone number. Vamshi, are you on the line with 

us? 

MR. ELA: All right. Well, let's take 

a ten-minute break. It's 11:30 -- we'll, 

depending on your time zone, it's 37 minutes after 

the hour, so let's come back at 45. I know it 

doesn't quite add up to ten minutes, but a quarter 

'til. So we'll see everybody back in about eight 

minutes. Thank you very much.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 1:37 p.m. and resumed at 

1:46 p.m.)

MR. ELA: All right, everybody, we will 

come back from our break and get started again.

I neglected earlier, Scott Rice and 

Rick Greenwood did join us soon after we got 

started. So just for the record to know they were 

on. I think you could tell by some of the questions 

that they were obviously here.

But we would like to start now with 

Patrick Kerrigan. And then we will move on to 

Jorge Gomez and then Emily Musgrave.

Patrick, please start. And please 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

state your name and affiliation.

MR. KERRIGAN: Hello, everyone, I am 

Patrick Kerrigan with the Organic Consumers 

Association. I'd like to preface my comments in 

replying to the issue Harriet just raised: would 

organic consumers find it abhorrent that a 

synthetic pesticide be included in their eggs?

Yes, I think they must definitely 

would. This would only further undermine organic 

consumers' confidence in the organic seal. 

Especially the confidence in the integrity of 

organic eggs, which has already been significantly 

undermined. And I think this would also be a issue 

that would be receiving widespread media attention 

and just give organic another black eye.

That being said, dear organic 

stakeholders, we are in the midst of an enormous 

global challenge in navigating our coronavirus 

crisis, including increasing instability and 

vulnerability of our industry food system. And 

we are also presented with an enormous opportunity 

to transition organic and regenerative production 

practices and in implementing organic farming's 

soil-health-building best practices to best 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

address our other global crisis, the climate 

crisis.

Indeed, we are well underway in 

building ecologically-based food systems that not 

improve soil health but also encompasses fairness 

for workers and humane treatment of animals. But 

we need to rapidly pick up the pace.

We have great models in place, include 

Mad Agriculture's Perennial Fund, an innovative 

organic transition loan program, and 

Pennsylvania's exemplary organic transition 

program in their state farm bill.

But along with bringing new farmers and 

ranches into organic production, it's essential 

that we keep organic producers, current organic 

producers, on the land and organic companies and 

business throughout the coronavirus crisis.

NOSB members, please do all you can to 

urge Secretary Sonny Perdue and the USDA leadership 

to protect our organic farm workers, farmers, 

businesses, certifiers, inspectors, and 

consumers. The $9.5 billion CARES Act allocates 

funds to prepare for and respond to coronavirus 

by providing support for agricultural producers 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

impacted by the coronavirus, including producers 

of specialty crops; producers that supply local 

food systems, including farmer's markets, 

restaurants, and schools; and livestock producers.

The needs of organic producers must be 

lobbied for with a unified voice. The USDA can 

best support organic farmers and ranches as 

proposed by Beyond Pesticides, which include 

providing direct payments to farmers, including 

organic farmers, to keep them solvent through this 

critical production season in the face of disrupted 

marketing channels; providing financial systems 

for farms; setting up virtual platforms to 

facilitate the sale of their products, as well as 

on-farm stands, curbside pickups, and other 

direct-to-consumer, safe distribution channels.

Demand for organic food has never been 

higher. Farmer's markets, farm stands, CSAs, and 

other local marketing venues need to be classified 

as essential operations by the Department of 

Homeland Security, which the USDA should be 

lobbying for. It's also essential to support 

organic certifiers as they transition to online 

operations. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Organic dairy farmers were already in 

crisis --

MR. ELA: Patrick?

MR. KERRIGAN: Yes?

MR. ELA: Your time is up.

MR. KERRIGAN: Three minutes goes so 

quickly.

(Laughter.)

MR. ELA: Yes, it does.

MR. KERRIGAN: Thank you all for your 

service.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for 

Patrick? 

Thank you very much, Patrick, I don't 

see any questions, but we do appreciate your 

comments.

MR. KERRIGAN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on to 

Jorge Gomez, then Emily Musgrave, and then Brian 

Baker.

And I will ask the Board, one thing is, 

when you address the speakers, if you would ask

questions. We do have time later in the public 

meeting next week for Board deliberations and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

comments. So if you must make a comment, go ahead, 

but especially let's try and direct our comments 

at least to a question for the speaker.

So, Jorge, please state your name and 

affiliation.

MS. ARSENAULT: Steve, we're not 

finding Jorge in the participant list by name or 

phone number.

MR. ELA: Okay. Jorge, if you're out 

there let Michelle know and we will circle back 

to you.

Next up is Emily Musgrave, then Brian 

Baker, and then Jane Kircher.

Emily, please state your name and 

affiliation and start.

MS. MUSGRAVE: Can you all hear me?

MR. ELA: We can. Go ahead.

MS. MUSGRAVE: Good morning. My name 

is Emily Musgrave. I am the organic program 

manager at Driscoll's. I would like to thank the 

NOSB, as always, for their commitment to protect 

the integrity of the organic program and uphold 

the vital regulatory processes of the NOSB.

I would also like to thank both the NOSB
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and the NOP for their willingness and flexibility 

to hold a virtual meeting. I know this has not 

been an easy feat and I echo other public 

commenters' sentiment on this and appreciate your 

effort.

My comments focus on biodegradable 

bio-based mulch and the continued allowance of 

insecticidal soaps, aquatic plant extracts, and 

lignin sulfonate.

I'll begin with the topic of 

biodegradable bio-based mulch, or BBM. I'd like 

to echo one of the comments we heard on Tuesday 

from an organic grower in Vermont. He was spot-on 

when he said that the growing use of plastics in 

the agricultural sector is alarming, and organic 

growers are not exempt from this.

Plastic usage has become an integral 

part of organic farming from the field level all 

the way through to the plastic clamshells that 

consumers buy. Both growers and consumers are 

acutely aware, more than ever, of our plastic 

footprint in agricultural and want change.

Many Driscoll's organic growers have 

expressed a desire to use BBM as part of their 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

toolbox while at the same time cutting down on the 

immense amount of plastic waste. Driscoll's urges 

the NOSB to rewrite the language in the 2015 policy 

memo on BBM that includes requirements 

manufacturing companies can meet. There were good 

ideas from public commenters on how the Board could 

do this. It is clear organic growers want to 

reduce their dependence on plastic, and BBM is one 

avenue to do that.

For the crops subcommittee, Driscoll's 

supports the continued listing of insecticidal 

soaps for use in organic production on the National 

List. Driscoll's supports the continued listing 

of aquatic plant extracts for use in organic 

production, as they are widely used in the industry 

and are a necessary tool for organic growers. 

Driscoll's growers use aquatic plant extracts as 

foliar fertilizers to improve plant and soil 

health. The most common plant extracts used by 

our growers are seaweed and kelp.

Driscoll's supports the continued 

listing of lignin sulfonate for use in organic 

production as a plant or soil amendment, as well 

as a chelating agent and dust suppressant. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I thank the National Organic Standards 

Board for your service and for consideration of 

my comments.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Emily. 

Are there questions for Emily from the Board? 

Asa has a question. Go ahead, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: I am just curious. 

Driscoll's, of course, produces a lot of 

strawberries, and, as you know, there is literally 

acres and acres of plastic used in strawberry 

production, in conventional and organic, including 

Driscoll growers and other progressive organic 

farmers.

Is there -- would the bio-based film 

replace that use? And I just kind of want to get 

a sense of what -- to what extent would that be 

adopted, or what would your expectation be in terms 

of the plastic culture now that's used to grow 

strawberries, both in the organic and conventional 

sectors.

MS. MUSGRAVE: That's a good question. 

Thank you, Asa. So, I know that a lot of our 

organic growers have really stressed that they want 

the use of biodegradable plastic mulch, and they 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

stress that if there is one that is certified and 

that works they would really like to use it.

And, on that note, you know, we also 

have conventional growers. And there is 

also -- many of our conventional growers adopt 

organic practices, which is great to see. And so 

even some of the conventional growers have also 

said that they would be willing to use, and want 

to use, biodegradable plastic mulch.

So I think if it works, and if it's 

certified, there's definitely a desire for our 

growers to move away from traditional plastic 

mulch.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MS. MUSGRAVE: You're welcome.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions 

from the Board?

I have one question myself, Emily. So, 

on that same note, do you have any concerns with 

the biodegradable plastic mulch, that it won't 

fully biodegrade or that we would have some plastic 

particles left over in the soil, maybe that we can't 

physically see, but that would contribute to the 

microplastic issue?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. MUSGRAVE: Yeah, that's a good 

question, Steve. I mean, there is that concern, 

and I do see that concern. And Harriet also 

brought that up in her comment. And I think it 

is, you know, something to think about.

However, I see that the plastic waste 

from traditional plastic mulch, we talked to 50 

recyclers all over the U.S. and none of them would 

take this plastic. I mean, so you think of all 

the strawberry growers, and even raspberry, 

blackberry, just all your organic growers that are 

using traditional plastic mulch, that is simply 

going to waste, to the landfill.

I think -- although what you are 

mentioning is definitely a concern, but I think 

that something needs to be done, though, in the 

meantime, just simply because of how much plastic 

is going to waste. So it is a concern and I think 

the Board should continue looking at it. But I 

think that we need to do something. And growers 

and consumers want us taking this step to reduce 

plastic.

MR. ELA: Thank you. And I have a 

follow-up question. Emily, we'll get right to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

you.

Given that we are -- the Board is a 

little uncertain that this biodegradable plastic 

mulch would break down in all environments. What 

would you say that if we required -- and I'm just 

brainstorming here -- if we required it to be 

removed but then composed it in a commercial 

composting facility?

MS. MUSGRAVE: Oh, I think that would 

be a good alternative, one way to do it.

There's also -- I think it was maybe 

Lynn Coody who recommended yesterday, or Tuesday 

in the public comments, about the possibility of 

certifiers, you know, reviewing the ingredients 

in some of those biodegradables and some of the 

BBMs.

So I think there is different avenues 

to make it work, it's just really unfortunate now 

that, because of the current language, 

manufacturers can't meet the standards and 

growers, you know, can't use something that's 

written in the standards. But that's a good -- I 

think that would be viable, what you've mentioned.

MR. ELA: Emily, you had a question.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. OAKLEY: Just a quick one in terms 

of climates where these might not break down. 

Particularly hot, dry climates. Is that an 

environment where you see many of your growers 

might be using this material?

MS. MUSGRAVE: Yeah, that is, would be 

a concern. That's a good point, Emily, in the hot, 

dry climates. I mean, we don't typically 

grow -- well, there are some berries that we do 

grow in hot, hot, dry climates. So, I mean, that 

would be something that I think we would need to 

look into.

I think there's still quite a bit more 

research that needs to be done on this, like your 

point. But I also think that we really need to 

move it forward so that growers can start using 

biodegradable bio-based mulch. So, it's a good 

question and something that we should look into.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Emily. 

I don't see any other questions. We appreciate 

your comments.

MS. MUSGRAVE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Next we're going to move on 

to Brian Baker, and then Jane Kircher, and then 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Dennis Dean.

Brian, please go ahead.

MR. BAKER: Hello, can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can.

MR. BAKER: Hello? Oh, good. Okay. 

NOP staff, NOSB members, new members, Mr. Chair, 

thank you for the opportunity to provide public 

comment to the National Organic Standards Board.

IFOAM North America is the 

self-organized regional body of IFOAM Organics 

International in the U.S., Canada, and the 

English-speaking Caribbean. Our members include 

organic farmers organizations, organic

food-related businesses and trade associations, 

consumer groups, non-governmental organizations. 

IFOAM represents the global organic movement in 

over 120 countries.

IFOAM North America wants to speak to 

grower group policy, emergency remote inspections, 

and integrity in the food chain.

IFOAM has a longstanding interest in 

building a global organic guarantee system that 

protects integrity for everyone. We also want all 

farmers who meet the requirements worldwide to have 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

access to organic markets regardless of scale or 

location.

In principle, organic agriculture 

should contribute to food sovereignty and a 

reduction of poverty. Grower groups are 

collections of small scale producers whose farms 

are similar and all their products are marketed 

through a common certified organic entity. These 

are often farmers cooperatives or handlers that 

work closely with small growers.

The NOSB made recommendations about 

grower group certification in 2002 and 2008. In 

2011 the NOP said it would draft guidance and 

request public comment before publishing vital 

guidance and possible regulatory change.

The draft guidance has not been 

published, and there has been no opportunity to 

public comment. IFOAM understands that the 

European Union is revising its regulations 

regarding certification and market access to 

grower groups.

We ask that the USDA and EU Commission 

as gatekeepers of the two largest organic markets 

worldwide to harmonize the requirements and not 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

create any unfair technical barriers to trade or 

entry for organic small holders who care for the 

land in the world's poorest regions.

We request the NOSB to reaffirm its 

previous recommendations and the NOP to move 

forward with draft guidance for public comment.

The COVID-19 health emergency has 

postponed organic inspections worldwide. We 

asked the NOSB and NOP to work with the 

International Organic Inspectors Association and 

Accredited Certifiers Association to find 

innovative ways to verify compliance without 

compromising integrity.

Tools developed for organic emergency 

remote inspections can potentially improve the 

certification process worldwide. Certification 

and inspection should be risk-based and focus on 

where the opportunities and motivates for 

fraudulent activity are the greatest. Inspection 

and certification requirements need to be adapted 

to local and regional conditions.

Requirements shouldn't discriminate 

against producers based on size, but risk-based 

approaches in the control system may want to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

consider scale as a risk factor. Exclusion of 

non-certified brokers and other handlers from 

certification has been a source of fraud. We 

support international cooperation to provide 

oversight of such operations. Consider us a 

resource. We wish you a successful meeting and 

I welcome your questions.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Brian. Are there 

questions from the Board? Sue has a question. 

Go ahead, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: Hi, Brian.

MR. BAKER: Hi, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: It's good to hear from you. 

I got a question, and it's just been running 

through my mind because if -- and it's back to the 

fenbendazole issue.

MR. BAKER: Okay.

MS. BAIRD: And I know you had nothing 

to say with that, but since you were --

MR. BAKER: No, no --

MS. BAIRD: It was only forever.

MR. BAKER: And I can't really speak 

with my IFOAM North America hat on --

MS. BAIRD: No.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. BAKER: -- so I have to take that 

hat off, if I could.

MS. BAIRD: Take it off and think about 

ex-OMRI a long time --

MR. BUIE: Yes, okay.

MS. BAIRD: Yes. The rule says that 

we have to prevent contamination with the organic 

product.

MR. BAKER: Right.

MS. BAIRD: Right? Okay, so we're 

feeding a fenbendazole to the chicken --

MR. BAKER: Right.

MS. BAIRD: -- but that's not our final 

product. The final product is the egg or perhaps 

the slaughtered chicken. And we cook that 

chicken, and that is the product we eat.

Are we then preventing contamination 

to that final product if it disintegrates? Is it 

like a processing aid?

MR. BAKER: Well a couple of things. 

One is that looking at the petition, I also need 

to take off my other mask which is my armory role.

MS. BAIRD: Right.

MR. BAKER: I was the principle 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

investigator on that technical review --

MS. BAIRD: Okay, great.

MR. BAKER: -- so it's going to be an 

interesting situation here because I don't know 

if you had a chance to read the technical review 

yet.

MS. BAIRD: No. Has there been one, 

are you talking about the old one for the mammals

or the --

MR. BAKER: No, the forthcoming one on 

the petition --

MS. BAIRD: No.

MR. BAKER: -- for use in laying hens.

MS. BAIRD: Oh no, I have not seen it. 

So it's great that we're hearing from you.

MR. BAKER: Okay. Well, thank you.

MR. ELA: And, Brian, make it through 

the CliffsNotes on this please.

MR. BAKER: Oh, okay. No, I can speak 

for hours on this. Yes, briefly, I thought that 

the petition was for eggs and not meat birds.

MS. BAIRD: It was.

MR. BAKER: Yes, for laying hens. So 

you're looking at different temperatures at which 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

eggs are prepared than what's baked in an oven or 

fried. That's one thing to bear in mind.

The other is that it's only been a few 

years where fenbendazole has been labeled for use 

in poultry. It's been labeled for use in ruminants 

for years, for decades, but prior to, I believe 

it was 2017 or 2018, any use of fenbendazole was 

off label, and there was a zero tolerance for it.

So FARAD recommended a 17 day extended 

withdrawal instead of a zero withdrawal, which is 

why it was granted with the new label. Does that 

answer your question?

MS. BAIRD: You cut out, I didn't hear 

that last sentence which I guess was the most 

critical.

MR. BAKER: Oh, okay. Yes, well 

FARAD, the Food Animal Residue Database that's run 

by different land grant veterinary schools 

recommended a 17-day withdrawal for layers treated 

with fenbendazole to meet a zero residue --

MS. BAIRD: Okay.

MR. BAKER: -- zero tolerance 

standard. When it was off label use.

MS. BAIRD: Okay. Well that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

definitely answers the question then. Thank you.

MR. BAKER: Okay. Welcome.

MR. ELA: Any other questions? Thank 

you very much, Brian, we appreciate it. And we 

will look forward to reading that technical report 

that's still working its way through the system, 

but will soon be to the Subcommittee.

Next up we have Jane Kircher, then 

Dennis Dean, Ki Song Lee. And just after that Kate 

Mendenhall and Jennie Landry. We may have a couple 

of speakers that aren't on the call, so Kate and 

Jennie please be ready if we jump forward to you.

So Jane, please state --

MS. ARSENAULT: Hey, Steve?

MR. ELA: -- your name and affiliation 

and continue.

MS. ARSENAULT: Steve, I'm sorry, it 

seems like you may not have the most updated version 

of the schedule, and I apologize for that. I will 

make sure that you have it. But Jane is not on 

this schedule. I believe she cancelled.

MR. ELA: Ah.

MS. ARSENAULT: So Dennis Dean is next 

and then Ki Song Lee. And neither one of those 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

folks we can find in the participant list at the 

moment.

Dennis, if you are out there please let 

me know. We're not seeing his name or number. 

Nor are we seeing Ki Song Lee on the participant 

list.

MR. ELA: All right. Thank you. 

Dennis or Ki Song, are you out there? If you are, 

please let Michelle know.

And Michelle, yes, I printed this off 

from your list last night so I think there may have 

been a few updates that I didn't get put in this 

morning, so that's my bad.

MS. ARSENAULT: I'll make sure that you 

get the updated one. So Kate Mendenhall is next 

on my list.

MR. ELA: Yes, same for me. So Kate 

Mendenhall, then Jennie Landry and then George 

Seaver.

So Kate, please go ahead.

MS. MENDENHALL: Thank you, members of 

the NOSB, for the opportunity to speak before you 

today. My name is Kate Mendenhall, I am the 

director of the Organic Farmers Association and --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ARSENAULT: Kate, I'm sorry. This 

is Michelle at NOP. Could I ask you to speak up 

a little bit? I'm having a hard time hearing you.

MS. MENDENHALL: Yes. Can you hear me 

now?

MS. ARSENAULT: Ah, better. Thank 

you.

MS. MENDENHALL: Okay. I'll start 

again.

MS. ARSENAULT: Okay.

MS. MENDENHALL: Thank you, members of 

the NOSB, for the opportunity to speak before you 

today. My name is Kate Mendenhall, I am the 

director of the Organic Farmers Association and 

I'm also an Iowa organic farmer.

OFA was created to be a strong voice 

and advocate for certified organic farmers. We 

are led and controlled by domestic certified 

organic farmers, and only certified organic 

farmers determine our policies.

Each year U.S. certified organic 

farmers are invited to participate in our 

grassroots policy process and identify their top 

policy priorities. Organic farmers have stated 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that their top five policy priorities for 2020 are, 

number one, NOP enforcement to ensure organic 

integrity, number two, organic import fraud, 

number three, to prohibit hydroponics in organic 

production, number four, climate change, and 

number five, organic dairy standards and 

enforcement.

For the past three years organic 

integrity has been at the top of the list. Organic 

farmers built and established the organic label, 

and now they rely on the national organic program 

and the NOSB to preserve and enforce it.

Without strong regulations and 

standards enforced equitably across size, region 

and commodity, the organic label will wither. 

Prohibiting hydroponics has returned to third 

place on the OFA priority list for the second year 

in a row. Farmers nation-wide are committed to 

healthy soil and the crucial role that it plays 

in a healthy organic, agroecosystem.

And even conventional farmers and 

politicians are beginning to advocate for its 

important role in mitigating climate change. For 

organic to underplay the importance of organic soil 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

now would be misguided.

Since the NOP declared just a few years 

ago that hydroponics is allowed, we have seen a 

burst of hydroponic operations and enforcement 

issues that highlight real problems and concerns 

on this issue.

We cannot have a production system out 

of compliance with a definition of organic. We 

cannot have certifiers creating their own 

standards to regulate this booming sector. And 

we cannot undercut a label that farmers have built 

over the past 40 years.

With the 50th Anniversary of Earth Day 

celebrated yesterday, we should focus on making 

sure that certified organic, the gold production 

standard, is upholding its values, not 

undercutting them when Mother Earth needs us most. 

The NOSB needs to revisit this issue.

Organic Farmers Association supports 

the NOSB process and agrees with the crop 

subcommittee's assessment in support for paper 

pots as an allowable synthetic and defined planting 

aid.

One lesson that is clear from COVID-19 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

is that we need more small to mid-size organic 

farmers throughout our communities able to meet 

our local food needs. Paper pots help small 

organic farmers and are similar to already approved 

inputs.

While organic farmers associations 

does not have a position on biodegradable mulch, 

I will comment that this policy issue was proposed 

in our grassroots process, yet it did not receive 

any farmer support to bring it forward.

With domestic and import fraud still 

gaining headline space nationwide, a lack of 

guidance from NOP on three year transition equity 

across growing practices, hydroponic production 

operating on a per certifier basis and undermining 

the very definition of organic, biodegradable 

mulch seems like a low priority topic for precious 

NOP volunteer time. Let's get busy on the issues 

that are crucial for the organic community, not 

special interests.

I appreciate all of your dedication to 

working for the full organic community, for hearing 

public comment today, and for the farmers 

especially who have had to find others to cover 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

their farm work so that they can fully participate 

in this process over the two weeks of meetings. 

Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Kate. 

Are there questions for Kate?

I'm not seeing any. Thank you very 

much, Kate, we appreciate your comments.

MS. MENDENHALL: Thank you for the 

opportunity.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on to 

Jennie Landry, George Seaver and then Dave Chapman. 

Jennie, please state your name and affiliation 

and continue.

MS. LANDRY: Thank you. My name is 

Jennie Landry. I represent DSM Nutritional 

Products, who manufacturers Omega-3 EPA and DHA 

based products from refined fish oil.

DSM strives to support a renewable and 

sustainable environment, and we welcome the 

opportunity to provide comments to the NOSB for 

official annotation change to address 

environmental concerns.

DSM would suggest source from fishing 

industry byproduct only and certified as 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

sustainable by a third-party certifier to be added 

to the existing annotation as an additional measure 

to ensure that fish oil is compatible with organic 

practices.

With this suggestion, it's important 

to allow flexibility in the use of third-party 

certifiers. There are several reputable 

organizations globally that safeguard vulnerable 

fish species and ensure that sustainable practices 

are in place for both the fishery and fish oil 

manufacturers.

We recommend third-party 

sustainability certification because it has a 

potential to directly impact and improve the 

sustainable sourcing of fish oil for human 

consumption. It is also clear and enforceable and 

is not overly burdensome because many fish oil 

manufacturers already have certifications in 

place.

DSM does have reservations with part 

of NOSB's proposed annotation that relies on 

classifications from both the NOAA and FAO. First 

of all, they actually do nothing to mitigate or 

control the overexploitation of fish when applied 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to fish oil for human consumption since fish oil 

is only a byproduct of fish caught for other 

purposes.

Fish oil for human consumption will not 

drive or influence the outcome of NOAA or FAO 

classifications, which will remain unchanged with 

or without fish oil in the organic market. 

Therefore the requirements are irrelevant when 

applied to fish oil in organic products.

Aside from that, using both NOAA and 

FAO classifications could cause confusion, are 

potentially unfair, are unreliable, cause 

additional complexity and are difficult to 

enforce. The confusion and unfair playing field 

lies with using two independent organizations with 

potentially different expectations and standards 

of assessment.

DSM found one example of conflicting 

classifications for the same fish species in the 

same fishing area. And there could be others. The 

different organizations update their data and 

report at different frequencies. According to the 

proposed annotation, DSM would have to rely 

completely on FAO classifications that according 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to the most recent report in 2011 are already almost 

10 years old.

In addition to this requirement, it 

would introduce additional ramifications to the 

sourcing and supply management of fish oil 

globally. This is already quite complex. These 

additional measures could offset the benefits of 

supplying the U.S. organic market and therefore 

potentially reducing fish oil availability.

I'd like to thank the NOSB for your time 

and opportunity to provide comments in this 

webinar.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. Are 

there questions from the Board? I am not seeing 

any questions, so thank you very much for your 

comments. We do appreciate it.

MS. LANDRY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We are going to move on to 

George Seaver and Dave Chapman, and then Pam Krone. 

George, please go ahead.

MR. SEAVER: Hi. This is George 

Seaver. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: Yes, we can. Please 

continue.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. SEAVER: Okay. I wanted to talk 

about rockweed harvesting on the coast of Maine. 

I'm Vice President of Ocean Organics Corporation. 

I've been making rockweed based fertilizers and 

biostimulants now for 42 years.

The slide on the screen provides a link 

to a short four minute video. I believe, yes, the 

link is there, that shows the harvesting, 

processing, and some of the uses of seaweed.

I support the re-listing of aquatic 

plant extracts for organic farmers for three 

reasons. One, the sustainable harvest of this 

resource is licensed and managed by the State 

Government.

Two, the resulting extracts are 

essential to organic farmers as a fertility tool. 

Three, the quantity used per acre is minuscule 

in comparison to almost all other organic farming 

inputs. It's a very small amount.

I previously provided documentation 

about the State of Maine's oversight on harvest 

in the written submissions earlier. To establish 

some perspective, the coast of Maine covers about 

3,000 miles when you include all the islands and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

coves. Only a fraction of that coastline offers 

practical places for commercial harvest of 

rockweed.

However, around 2004, following 

decades of commercial harvesting, the claim that 

rockweed harvesting was damaging the coastal 

ecosystem was asserted. Although that claim 

continues to be made over 15 years later, there 

are no, there are still no studies or supporting 

evidence of any such damage. There is no reason 

to think that the ecosystem will be impacted as 

we continue to responsibly harvest seaweed.

The total harvest is calculated to be 

about 2 percent of the standing biomass on the coast 

of Maine. And in contrast to the message often 

presented, the total harvest from Maine waters has 

grown quite slowly over the past 40 years.

Rockweed harvest data has been required 

by the Department of Marine Resources only since 

2008. And in these last 12 years the average 

increase per year is about 13 percent. So it's 

just modest growth.

Considering all the serious threats to 

the coastal ecosystem, it is clear that rockweed 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

harvesting at current or projected levels is not 

one of them. Perhaps more importantly, as long 

as the Department of Marine Resources remains 

empowered to monitor and manage the future 

harvesting of rockweed, we can and should continue 

to allow rockweed to be harvested for use in organic 

food production without any additional 

requirements.

Regarding the questions you asked, yes, 

aquatic plant extracts should be re-listed. Are 

plant extracts needed in organic production? Yes. 

And natural seaweed meals are not a substitute 

for extracts. The extracts provide a unique mode 

of action. I welcome any questions.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, George. 

Are there questions from the Board? I am not 

seeing any questions. So thank you very much for 

your comments, George. And we're going to move 

on.

MR. SEAVER: I encourage you to look 

at the video.

MR. ELA: Good.

MR. SEAVER: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Yes. Thank you. And thank 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

you for that link. We will move on to Dave Chapman, 

and Pam Krone, and then Anne Ross. Dave, please 

take the floor. Dave, we're not hearing you.

MR. CHAPMAN: Yes. Can you hear me 

now?

MR. ELA: Now we can. Please go ahead.

MR. CHAPMAN: Okay, good. Thank you. 

So I'm Dave Chapman, owner of Long Wind Farm in 

Vermont. And we grow delicious organic greenhouse 

tomatoes in fertile soil.

I am also Director of the Real Organic 

Project. I'm speaking today to introduce some of 

the newer members to the challenges that we all 

face as an organic community.

Most of us speak glowingly about the 

importance of healthy soil and its critical role 

in human nutrition, and in reversing climate 

change. These are easy words to say.

But the reality of the National Organic 

Program is that it's going further and further from 

these words, certifying hydroponic and CAFOs, and 

allowing annual spraying of hydro greenhouses with 

prohibited pesticides.

This is not because of the personal 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

beliefs of the Deputy Administrator. It's because 

of the institutional realities of the USDA. 

Government is paid for by taxpayer dollars, but 

it's steered by corporate lobbyists. As a result, 

the NOP has failed to enact a single NOSB 

recommendation in 10 years.

You are certainly not a group of 

radicals, and yet your decisions have been too 

radical for the USDA. Undersecretary Ibach's 

publicly stated solution is to pick different 

members for the NOSB who will be more agreeable 

with the USDA's perspective. And if they have 

chosen any of you with that in mind, I hope that 

you will disappoint them.

At the moment there are three lawsuits 

against the USDA concerning issues of organic 

integrity. These lawsuits are focused on two 

major issues of animal welfare, and certification 

of hydroponics.

The lawsuits are trying to force the 

adoption of two recommendations of the NOSB that 

have been passed. Moderate though they are, if 

enforced they would lead to the decertification 

of three quarters of the organic eggs in America, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

according to former NOP Director Miles McEvoy.

They would lead to the decertification 

of $1 billion of hydroponic produce, according to 

the Coalition for Sustainable Organics. And that 

is why they're not being acted on.

The impact of these outcomes makes it 

likely that these powerful corporations will 

simply have the law changed if they lose the 

lawsuits. They can do that, and have already done 

so in the past with the Harvey lawsuit.

As a community we are faced with a 

dilemma. If we accept that organic doesn't really 

stand for healthy soil, we participate in its 

destruction. If we insist that organic must be 

based on healthy soil, we are often accused of 

attacking organic. We can't claim that organic 

is an alternative to CAFOs and simultaneously 

permit CAFOs to be certified.

We can't claim that organic is based 

on healthy soil and simultaneously permit hydros 

to be certified. If we do this we allow organic 

to become a nice brand in the marketplace that 

actually means very little. The organic label 

will die a sad death in that mushy indifference. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And I am done. Thank you. Two seconds to spare.

MR. ELA: I was going to say, very well 

timed, Dave. Are there questions for Dave? Dan 

has a question. Go ahead, Dan. Dan, you have a 

question? Go ahead.

DR. SEITZ: Sorry. I was on mute. 

Dave, thank you very much for your remarks. An 

earlier person said that, who is involved with 

container production, said that if we were to 

remove the organic certification for container 

production, that people involved with that 

industry would be at an unfair advantage, vis-a-vis 

conventional hydroponic and organic production 

companies.

And I'm wondering if you could talk a 

little bit about the competitive disadvantage, if 

there is one, with soil based farmers in regard 

to hydro -- organically certified hydroponic and 

container production facilities.

MR. CHAPMAN: Sure, Dan. Were they 

suggesting that, were the people, the hydroponic 

producers who are being certified to drop their 

certification, and they would have unfair 

competition with the conventional hydroponic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

producers?

DR. SEITZ: Yes. That was the -- at 

least that was my understanding of the essence of 

their comments. So I'm just --

MR. CHAPMAN: Yes, yes.

DR. SEITZ: -- curious about your read 

on --

MR. CHAPMAN: Sure. Well --

DR. SEITZ: -- competitive 

disadvantage.

MR. CHAPMAN: You know, you have to 

bear in mind that the major hydroponic organic 

producers are also major conventional hydroponic 

producers. So I don't think they'd be at an unfair 

disadvantage competing with themselves. You know, 

it's really all one and the same industry. It's 

just a matter of pretty much what they're putting 

in the nutrient tank.

In terms of soil producers trying to 

compete with the hydroponic producers, without a 

doubt hydroponic production is cheaper. It costs 

less to produce food hydroponically. And that's 

why they can afford to charge less for it.

So if that is the only metric by which 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

we decide whether or not it should be certified, 

by allowing hydroponic of course we are essentially 

mandating it. That will become, and has become 

the norm for tomatoes, blueberries. And it will 

soon become the norm for peppers, and lettuce, and 

things like that.

I don't think that it's possible to 

compete unless there's a distinction made in the 

marketplace between the different production 

systems.

MR. ELA: Another question from Sue. 

And, Sue, make it fairly quick.

MS. BAIRD: Yes. Hi, Dave.

MR. CHAPMAN: Hi, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: Rotation is a major part 

of the organic standard. And I'm not sure how we 

rotate hydroponically. People are focused on 

soil. And I see soil not so much as rotation in 

biodiversity.

MR. CHAPMAN: That is true in most of 

the world. They require some kind of rotation in 

Europe, in the EU. England does not. A few 

countries handle it differently. England allows 

no rotation of greenhouse crops. Holland and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Germany do require it, but it's a very narrow 

rotation. Typically they might rotate tomatoes 

with peppers.

MS. BAIRD: But we're talking about the 

NOP. And I appreciate all the international. But 

we're talking about the NOP requirement, which 

definitely --

MR. CHAPMAN: Yes.

MS. BAIRD: -- says it needs to be 

rotated.

MR. CHAPMAN: Yes. And --

MS. BAIRD: And --

MR. CHAPMAN: What are you asking me?

MS. BAIRD: -- can't maintain 

biodiversity. I'm just wondering if you feel like 

hydroponics or container growing would meet those 

standards for crop rotation and maintaining 

biodiversity?

MR. CHAPMAN: Well I would say that 

they inherently have less biodiversity. A pot of 

coco coir is, you know, dramatically -- got 

dramatically less biodiversity within it than a 

similar volume of fertile soil. That is why in 

my greenhouse I actually don't have to rotate. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And I can still grow --

MS. BAIRD: No, no.

MR. CHAPMAN: -- healthy crops.

MS. BAIRD: You do have to rotate. The 

rule says you have to rotate. I know that you 

don't.

MR. CHAPMAN: I understand, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: But you do have to.

MR. CHAPMAN: Yes. And I don't --

MR. ELA: I'm going to --

MR. CHAPMAN: Yes.

MR. ELA: I'm going to jump in. I 

think we have one more question, and then we'll 

need to move on. So Nate, go ahead. And let's 

make it quick.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Yes. Sorry. 

Thanks for your comments, Dave. I was just 

wondering if you had a position on moving forward 

with the hydroponic discussion with labeling?

And if they were allowed to keep the 

certification and use the seal, what do you feel 

about labeling hydroponics with a distinction 

between soil grown and hydroponically grown 

produce in the marketplace?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. CHAPMAN: Yes, Nate. I think that 

would be better than what we have now. I 

personally can't support it, because I can't 

support calling it organic. But I do think it 

would better than what we have now.

My dream would be that the hydroponic 

producers would create their own label, a bioponic 

label. And create a process verified program to 

certify it. I'm sure that they could find good 

market response for saying they used only organic 

inputs.

And in fact, they would have very little 

competition for years to come, because they pretty 

much wiped it out. So I think that would -- that 

would be my idealist solution, if the NOP chose 

to create an organic hydroponic label. I think 

it would be better than what we have now.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Thank you.

MR. CHAPMAN: Yes.

MR. ELA: Great. Thank you very much, 

Dave. Sorry to have to cut things off, but we do 

need to move on.

MR. CHAPMAN: All right.

MR. ELA: We appreciate --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. CHAPMAN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: -- your comments.

MR. CHAPMAN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Yes. Take care. Next up we 

have Pam Krone, and then Anne Ross, and then Annie 

Kusterman. Pam, please go ahead. Pam, we're not 

hearing you. We've got your slides, but not your 

voice.

MS. KRONE: Hello.

MS. ARSENAULT: Hi, Pam. We can hear.

MR. ELA: There we are.

MS. KRONE: Okay. Okay. So --

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Pam.

MS. KRONE: Thank you. Thanks for 

this opportunity to present our interests and 

concerns. I work for the California Marine 

Sanctuary Foundation under contract to the 

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.

And I'm Ag Water Quality Coordinator. 

My main concern is trying to find ways to have 

agriculture help ocean health, and preserve the 

ecosystems of the ocean. Next slide.

So I don't think the news -- I don't 

think this is new news. Plastic is a big problem 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

for ocean health. But I think what is interesting 

and disturbing is that not only is plastic, micro 

plastic, and plastic found in these big ocean gyres 

in the middle of the ocean, but it's also found 

right in Monterey Bay, right in the sanctuary.

And this is some work done by the 

Monterey Bay, by the research foundation that's 

part of the -- part of Monterey Bay here on micro 

plastic at different depths in the ocean.

And micro plastic is found throughout 

the ocean, throughout the water column, not just 

floating on the surface. And it's found in 

abundance at all levels.

And not only that, but the microplastic 

isn't just within the food web, starting from the 

very base with pelagic crabs and zooplankton, and 

working its way up the chain through the larger 

fishes and other ocean creatures. Next slide.

So ocean plastic is a big problem. And 

it's being added to the ocean at about eight metric 

tons of plastic a year. It's found in all kinds 

of species. Almost every species that has been 

tested has evidence that plastic is within it. 

Next slide.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I worked with a group of students at 

California State University in Monterey Bay to 

sample water in agriculturally dominated 

watersheds. We sampled water in seven creeks, and 

found that the density of plastic, micro plastic 

particles in the agricultural creeks was about 

equal to the plastic particles found in Monterey 

Bay. So indeed, agriculture is contributing to 

that plastic. Next slide please.

We also did bank surveys, and found that 

by far the most prevalent type of plastic was PE 

plastic mulch, composing more than 75 percent of 

the agricultural plastic found on stream banks. 

Next slide.

This is just an example of our findings. 

Next slide. This plastic can't be recycled. We 

had a recycling facility that found it wasn't 

economically feasible. Next slide.

Therefore, the only current way to get 

rid of plastic mulch is at the waste facility. 

And it's just filling up with mountains of plastic. 

Furthermore, about 10 percent gets left in the 

field, and doesn't even make it to the waste 

facility. Next slide.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And biodegradable plastic mulch we 

believe could be a sustainable alternative. It 

has the same benefits. Its cost, although 

initially it's higher, is the same or lower when 

you take into account labor and disposal. Next 

slide.

MR. ELA: And I'm going to have to jump 

in, Pam. I think your time is up. So --

MS. KRONE: And so that's the end of 

my presentation, other than ask you to please 

seriously consider some program for adopting 

current biodynamic plastics that are available, 

and making the standards progressively better 

through time.

MR. ELA: And we do have a couple of 

questions for you. So Asa, please go ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you for your 

comments. I'm interested in your findings partly 

because most, you know, virtually all the 

production in the Salinas Valley, at least the 

lower valley, is soil-based.

But there really are acres and acres 

of plastic used. I'm curious about recycling. 

I understand that the soil mulches are pretty much 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

exclusively landfilled. What about plastics used 

on hoop houses and high tunnels, which are also 

heavily used a little farther north in the berry 

growing locations?

MS. KRONE: Well currently in 

agriculture that's one of the things I'm doing is 

to investigate the different products that can be 

recycled. Drip irrigation tape is recycled by 

Encore Plastic. But I'm not sure who is recycling 

the hoop houses. That's something I'm going to 

be looking into in the future.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MS. ARSENAULT: And Steve, it looks 

like --

MR. ELA: Emily, go ahead. Yes. 

Sorry, I messed up the mute that time. I 

apologize. Emily, you have a question? Please 

go ahead.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you. Yes, thank 

you for your comments. I think it is important 

to note that a large percentage of the agriculture 

in that area is also conventional. Just to throw 

that out there.

But I completely agree with your 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

findings about plastic. And I was wondering if 

you think the Board should consider not allowing 

plastic mulch at all, given what you presented to 

us.

MS. KRONE: Well I think that there are 

just so many benefits to the biodegradable plastic 

mulch that I'm not sure what the economics to the 

organic growers would be, compared with 

conventional if it weren't allowed in organic 

production.

I would just hate to see our organic 

strawberry production not be feasible if buyers 

would refuse to pay that higher price. I'm not 

really sure. I'm not sure of the economics. But 

that would be my concern.

MR. ELA: We have another question from 

Mindy. Mindy, go ahead.

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you. Pam, I 

believe you referenced a study in one of the Cal 

State schools. And I'm wondering if you could 

provide the, or us with some more in depth 

information from that study.

MS. KRONE: I'd be happy to provide it. 

You could send me an email, and I'll provide you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the information I have. We haven't written a 

formal report for the study. We've just finished 

all the data collection. So we're still a little 

bit early on.

MS. JEFFERY: Great. Thank you. I 

will reach out.

MS. KRONE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Other questions from the 

Board? I have one quick question myself. Do you 

worry at all about if biodegradable plastics, which 

you seem to be a proponent of, if they do not break 

down all the way in the soil, wouldn't we be 

creating the same kind of problem with them that 

we're creating with the plastics that we currently 

have?

MS. KRONE: I'm not sure what their 

properties are once they get into the ocean. And 

that would be really interesting to find out is 

what -- how long it takes them to break down once, 

you know, if they get out into the environment, 

and into the rivers and streams, and into the ocean.

We know with conventional plastic that 

essentially, you know, the word is that they break 

apart, but don't break down. However, there is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

some evidence that weathering does occur, and that 

even PE plastic eventually breaks down in the 

ocean. But I think the process would be a much 

slower process than with the biodynamic, 

biodegradable plastics.

MR. ELA: All right. Thank you very 

much. We do appreciate your comments.

MS. KRONE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Okay. Next we're going to 

have Anne Ross, followed by Annie Kusterman, and 

then Javier Zamora. Anne, please go ahead. Anne, 

we're not hearing you.

MS. ARSENAULT: Hang on a second. 

We're making sure. All right.

MS. ROSS: Hello.

MS. ARSENAULT: Anne? There we go.

MS. ROSS: Hello. Thank you.

MR. ELA: We've got you now, Anne. 

Please go ahead.

MS. ROSS: Thanks so much. Good 

afternoon, everyone. My name is Anne Ross. I'm 

an attorney and policy analyst for the Cornucopia 

Institute. Challenging times such as the one we 

are living in now have a way of shifting priorities, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

some by choice, and some out of necessity.

But there are certain efforts that 

cannot fall by the wayside without undermining core 

principles. This is true in the organic sector, 

and it's also true about its foundation, which 

depends on integrity.

That's why I encourage the Board and 

NOP to do everything in their power to ensure that 

the strengthening organic enforcement rule is 

published for comment. For years now, organic 

grain farmers have been forced to compete against 

some who are intent on violating the rules. At 

the same time authentic organic dairy producers 

have watched as fraudulent grain made its way to 

operations feeding herds numbering in the 

thousands upon thousands of cows, calling into 

question the authenticity of entire supply chains.

The enforcement rule needs to be 

released for comment immediately to make sure it 

does what it should do, which means that it actually 

works for and protects all organic producers, so 

that eaters get what they pay for every time they 

choose organic.

In addition to the publication of the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

strengthening organic enforcement rule, we 

strongly support research to test for pesticide 

and fumigant residue. Not only can testing detect 

fraud, the threat of testing can deter it.

There can be no tolerance for bad actors 

in the organic market ever, and certainly not in 

times like these, where organic producers face 

uncertainty, and many will face market disruption. 

The empty shelves in some grocery stores indicate 

how easily disrupted our food system can become 

in times of crisis.

The conventional industrialized 

agriculture system, supported by decades of cheap 

unsustainable policy, is a failure. The extreme 

costs to human and environmental health cannot be 

overstated.

This shows how important local and 

regional food systems are, and how essential 

organic producers are in providing their 

communities with nutritious food.

In addition to working to finalize the 

strengthening organic enforcement rule, we need 

to make sure organic farmers are included in the 

USDA's aid payments.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Congress needs to hear from us. 

Organic farmers who need assistance must be 

included in emergency disaster payments and farm 

loans. Finally, our legislators, agencies, and 

public need to know the organic community will not 

tolerate the intrusion of genetic engineering into 

organic production. Organic production is 

premised on being free from genetic modification, 

without exception.

In sum, even in the most challenging 

times, our foundational priorities cannot change. 

Priorities like eliminating fraud, being there 

for our organic producers in crisis, and adhering 

to fundamental organic tenets. Thank you all for 

your time and service on this Board.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Anne. 

Are there questions for Anne from the Board? I'm 

not seeing any. So thank you for your comments. 

MS. ROSS: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We are going to move on to 

Annie Kusterman, then Javier Zamora, and then 

Gwendolyn Ward. Annie, please go ahead.

MS. ARSENAULT: Annie, I saw you just 

a minute ago. And I know you're on the line with 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

us. Hold on one second. Let's make sure you're 

unmuted.

MR. ELA: We like to make Michelle earn 

her pay here.

MS. ARSENAULT: It's a long list.

MR. ELA: Along with --

MS. ARSENAULT: There we go. I found 

her. All right, you are unmuted. Annie, can you 

hear me? I think there are two of us trying to 

unmute you. And we just keep toggling back and 

forth here. Apologies.

We'll get you -- all right, Annie, I 

am going to unmute you. I'm saying that out loud. 

Oh, you are unmuted. Go ahead and talk. We're 

not hearing you. Annie, if you're, it looks like 

you might be only on your phone. Maybe not.

Try, if you're on your on phone, no, 

it doesn't look like you're on your phone. It 

looks like you're on your computer. If you are 

using a hand phone, a telephone, hit *6, and that 

should unmute you. No. I'm showing your line --

MR. ELA: What's the -- Annie, we know 

you're out there. So what I'm going to do is, we're 

going to jump onto Javier Zamora, and we're going 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to come right back to you. So don't worry that 

we're going to lose track of you. But we'll figure 

out the technical difficulties here. So Michelle, 

can we go on to Javier Zamora?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes. Javier, are you 

there? Looks like, I'm going to unmute you, 

Javier. Hold on one second. You should be 

unmuted.

MR. ZAMORA: Okay. Can you hear me 

now?

MS. ARSENAULT: We got you.

MR. ELA: We got you, Javier. Go 

ahead, Javier. And then, Annie, we will come back 

to you.

MR. ZAMORA: Hola. Hola, muchachos. 

Buenos Dias from our beautiful Watsonville. I 

thank you for the opportunity to allow me to give 

you my five cents. That might not be much, but 

it's actually very real.

I am Javier Zamora. I own JSM Organics 

in beautiful Aromas, California. One of the very 

few independently owned labels that has been 

blessed to still be around after nine years. And 

I really take a lot of pride in breaching that gap 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

between not only a small partner, but also an 

immigrant, and that comes from other country to 

do beautiful things.

So in my family and my community, and 

thousands of people that are fed now with our 

strawberries and our vegetables. What I wanted 

to say is that organic, it's a beautiful thing. 

And it comes in my blood since I was little.

And yes, lately there has been a lot 

of changes that perhaps might not be the best thing 

for our small organic community, and benefits lots 

of the larger guys. And we can talk about the 

hydroponic things, and all those things. But I 

really hope that you guys really keep in mind a 

small organic grower in our community.

That sometimes, or most times we really 

don't have the voice to talk about the issues. 

And we are for the most part left behind, whether 

it's the FSA, or USDA, on some of the changes that 

we have very little to say.

We have a big impact as the smaller 

guys. And we always talk about how beautiful it 

would be to have closer farms to big communities 

where food is needed. But when we get the power 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to really make the change sometimes we look the 

other way, and obey the larger fish.

You are in a very unique part. And you 

have lots of power that you can keep in mind that 

organics is, it's supposed to be for everyone, not 

just to be pleased, or to be pleasing the people 

that have the most money.

I always say that we have to produce 

lots of food. And we don't have anything, all 

right, first we don't have anything against my big 

neighbor. Because we need the food that he 

produces, that they produce.

However, we need a lot smaller farms 

and family farms that do have a big impact in our 

communities. Shelf, economic, and just even 

mental health, it helps a lot.

So I -- please keep in mind that some 

of your decisions might not be the best thing for 

a smaller guy sometimes. And I really, really hope 

that you guys have the opportunity once to visit 

me, and see what we do, and contribute to what we're 

all here for is to feed our families, and feed 

communities.

I always work with someone like Pam that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

is doing beautiful things about, you know, the 

plastics, the ocean, for the oceans. There are 

a lot of things that I work with, with universities. 

And my farm is always open not only for my 

community, but for all the researchers that are 

willing to do something for the future generations. 

And --

MS. ARSENAULT: Javier --

MR. ELA: Javier --

MS. ARSENAULT: In case you didn't hear 

the beep. Sorry.

MR. ZAMORA: Okay.

MR. ELA: Javier, your time is up. But 

are there questions from the Board? I have a quick 

question, Javier. What would be the single -- like 

if you could think of one thing that this Board 

could do to help you, what would it be?

MR. ZAMORA: Perhaps, first of all 

really know what someone like me goes through, or 

Hannah Lyon, or Jose Flores, when he has three 

acres, and he can't really sell his things. He 

cannot compete with a larger label. That he 

doesn't have access to sell to school districts. 

But his strawberries are probably or vegetables 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

are even tastier than some of the larger guys, and 

a lot healthier.

Marketing is a big issue. Insurance 

is a big issue. A big thing is insurance for small 

organic diversified growers. We, I think I'm the 

only guy, and it took me years to really be able 

to get whole revenue insurance.

You go through so many different 

things. But if our corn or soy, or larger farms 

wants to get whole revenue insurance, they can get 

it right away. So for someone that is smaller and 

very diversified, it's very different. We are -- I 

feel like sometimes we're not treated the same.

MR. ELA: And Javier, I see we also have 

another question from Rick. Go ahead, Rick.

MR. GREENWOOD: Yes. Thank you. 

Just a quick question for you. You call yourself 

a small organic farmer. I was just curious, how 

many acres do you farm? Because everybody seems 

to have a different definition of what a small 

farmer is. So just to --

MR. ZAMORA: I'll tell you what. 

Correct. So I think that's a question that we all 

answer differently. The same as: what's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

sustainable?

To me a small organic guy is someone 

that perhaps in our area has no more than 20 acres, 

and has three or four employees and their family. 

That's small. I started really, really small. 

And I'm up to a little over 100 acres now.

But that doesn't necessarily make me 

a $5-10 million revenue farm yet. It makes me a 

$2 million revenue farm. But I -- $800,000 out 

of $2 million goes to my employees.

So I think a small organic farm is when 

the family can actually, does not need to work for 

anybody else, and employs a couple of other people. 

I think that's still small. Once you start 

getting into the hundreds of employees, I don't 

think you're small anymore.

But I mean that's just the way I think. 

I'll leave it up to, you know the Berkeley and 

Stanford students to really determine what's a 

small farm.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay. No, that's 

interesting. Because in California, I'm an 

avocado farmer. And over 50 percent of the avocado 

growers are less than six or seven acres. And so 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

they're small farmers too. But in a different kind 

of definition. But no, thanks very much.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Javier. 

Muchas gracias.

MR. ZAMORA: Hasta luego.

MR. ELA: Hasta luego. We will move 

on to Gwendolyn Wyard, Eli Chandler, and Brad 

Johnson. And just as a note, Annie was having, 

Kusterman was having some technical issues. We 

will circle back to her at the end of the day here. 

So Gwendolyn, please go ahead.

MS. WYARD: Yes. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can.

MS. WYARD: Okay, great. Well, thank 

you so much. Good afternoon to everyone. And a 

huge welcome to the new Board members. My name 

is Gwendolyn Wyard, and I'm the Vice President of 

Regulatory and Technical Affairs for the Organic 

Trade Association.

It's nice to be coming to you from 

Oregon. I think this might be my 32nd NOSB 

meeting, but it's the first that I've attended in 

my comfy pants. So thanks so much for this virtual 

opportunity, and I hope that you too are all 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

enjoying your comfy pants.

I'm going to address a couple of the 

more technical handling topics on this agenda, 

L-malic acid and ion exchange filtration. You 

have our detailed comments, so I'll just briefly 

hit some high points, and answer any questions that 

you may have.

So starting with L-malic acid, 

synthetic. The answer to the classification 

question is synthetic. I really encourage Board 

members to take a step back on the two-step 

production process in question, and recognize that 

if the starting material or source is petroleum, 

and the intermediate source is synthetic, that it 

would really defy logic to end up with a 

non-synthetic substance.

We believe that the definition of 

synthetic, and the classification guidance folks 

support this conclusion. And if we can agree on 

that, the next question is how to go about the 

listing on the National List.

We've offered some food for thought in 

our comments, with the end goal of assuring clear 

allowance for the synthetic form, only when the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

non-synthetic form is commercially unavailable. 

If that approach is not favorable, then we ask 

that you please make sure that both forms are 

clearly allowed, and not just the synthetic form, 

which would be an unfortunate mistake.

On ion exchange, our comments with 

great purpose focus on technical background 

information, and the extensive history around the 

allowance of ion exchange filtration.

It's really important to understand 

that the allowance of ion exchange is based on NOP 

policy from 2002, and subsequent NOP guidance to 

certifiers in 2008 and 2010. It's really 

important to understand that certifiers are 

currently reviewing ion exchange process, and 

requiring what are known as the recharge materials 

to be on the National List.

At the heart of the matter are the ion 

exchange resins, their classification as food 

contact substances, and whether they need to be 

petitioned to the National List.

And finally, it's particularly 

important to understand that the allowance of ion 

exchange in organic processing is the result of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

direct and open communication between NOP and 

certifiers over many years. But it's a topic 

that's never made it to the NOSB agenda until now.

From this perspective, and really above 

all, the Organic Trade Association supports 

transparency, consistency, and consensus, and a 

well-informed recommendation to the National 

Organic Program on whether the ion exchange resins 

need to be on the National List.

So thank you so much, and I welcome any 

questions that you might have. Thanks.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Gwendolyn. Scott 

has a question I think.

MR. RICE: Thanks, Steve. One of the 

questions that we, and thanks, Gwen, for your 

comments. One of the questions that we had in our 

discussion document addresses kind of the impacts 

of how we classify this on other substances that 

appear on 605A.

And classification of this says that 

synthetic, what impact that would have on some of 

those other substances that appear on 605A. And 

I wonder if you can just share some of your thoughts 

on that?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. WYARD: Sure. And thanks, Scott. 

And I'm sorry I can't see you. I imagine that 

you're probably sporting a really nice COVID beard 

here for this meeting.

But as explained in our written 

comments, we analyzed citric acid, lactic acid, 

yeast, and xanthan gum. And I also took a close 

look at gibberellic acid.

And we found that as long as you view 

the two-step production for malic acid as one 

process, so one process with two steps, I really 

think that's an important way to look at it, and 

focus on the source or the starting material at 

the beginning of the first step, then there 

shouldn't be a problem. There shouldn't be a 

conflicting impact.

The two-step production process 

starting with petroleum is unique from all of the 

other materials that we looked at. And in no other 

non-synthetic example is the primary food source 

a petroleum product, or is it a synthetic 

substance. In this case the fumaric acid that's 

converted directly from a synthetic source.

So you know, that said, I think the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

issue is around what constitutes the source 

material for substances produced via fermentation. 

And it, you know, gets long winded, and we need 

to get through the day. But I think that the real 

problem is that for fermentation and other 

naturally occurring biological processes, your 

starting material, the substrate, the medium, the 

culture broth, it's going to involve multiple 

inputs. And they're going to be synthetic and 

non-synthetic.

You'll have your microorganism and your 

glucose, which would be the primary food source. 

But then you're going to have nitrogen, oxygen, 

trace minerals.

Basically you're going to have other 

proteinaceous and complex nutrients that are 

required, and consumed by the organisms to 

successfully carry out that fermentation process, 

which in turn cranks out the citric acid, or 

whatever the substance is that is in question.

And so this really gets to the question 

of source, and how to distinguish one component 

of a substrate from another, and the question of 

what is allowed in that substrate.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And in light of the existing guidance 

on classification, I think this is what Sam was 

speaking to earlier in his comments, I really do 

think that there's additional work that needs to 

be done on that classification and materials 

guidance. It's not very clear in addressing 

fermentation products.

So for those of you that don't know my 

background, my academic background is in 

fermentation science. So my apologies if I just 

got a little excited there. But thanks for your 

question.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Gwendolyn. Much 

appreciated. Scott, did you have anything else?

MR. RICE: My beard's --

MR. ELA: All right.

MR. RICE: -- actually pretty short 

right now.

MR. ELA: Sounds good.

MR. RICE: But thanks for the question.

MR. ELA: We won't -- we'll give an 

allowance at the next meeting for, in person for 

everybody to show up in their comfy pants. And 

we can have a sit in protest.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We're going to move on to Eli Chandler, 

Ed Johnson, and then Angela Schriver. Eli, please 

go ahead.

MS. ARSENAULT: I think if Eli will --

MR. ELA: Or Eli, excuse me.

MS. ARSENAULT: No, that's all right. 

Devin is setting up your slides. There you go. 

You are now unmuted.

MR. CHANDLER: Okay. Am I coming 

through okay?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes. And can you 

see --

MR. ELA: You are. And I apologize for 

the mispronunciation. Go ahead.

MR. CHANDLER: All right. That's 

fine. Good afternoon. My name is Eli Chandler 

with Thorvin. Thorvin provides certified organic 

kelp ingredients for animal feeds, fertilizers, 

and human uses.

I'd like to thank the Board for their 

time and efforts, as well as the opportunity to 

comment on the issues being discussed. I hope 

everyone is doing well and staying safe during 

these strange times.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Aquatic plant extracts are widely used 

by many organic producers. At this time there are 

no direct replacements for these products. These 

products are also very efficient in their use of 

natural resources. A one acre application only 

requires approximately four pounds of fresh 

harvested kelp.

Likewise, these harvests 

are -- likewise, the harvest of the parent 

materials of these products are regulated by 

government agencies. On your screen you'll see 

an example of the type of precautionary approach 

used to regulate these harvests.

This document is a 2018 update from the 

Icelandic Marine and Freshwater Research 

Institute, that states that no more than three 

percent of the total biomass should be harvested 

from the site. And that the current harvest rate 

is less than one and a half percent of the total 

biomass annually.

In short, we support aquatic plant 

extracts being relisted for use in organic systems. 

My next topic is the kelp listing in Section 

205.606(k).
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Kelp should not be relisted on Section 

205.606(k). Organic kelp meals are available in 

sufficient quantities to meet the needs of both 

animal feed and human uses.

In response to your question, since 

kelp is a generic term, the regulatory definitions 

of such varied slightly between human uses and 

animal feed use regulations.

So, there are minor difference in the 

definition of kelp, whether it's for human use or 

animal feed. I'd be happy to answer any questions 

at this time. And thank you for your time.

MR. ELA: Thank you. Are there any 

questions from the Board? I don't see any. Thank 

you, Eli. We appreciate your thoughts.

We are going to move on to Brad Johnson, 

Angela Schriver, and Meagan Collins. And after 

Megan we will take another break. So, Brad, please 

go ahead. And state your name and affiliation.

MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Can you hear me 

okay?

MR. ELA: Yes, we have you. Go ahead.

MR. JOHNSON: Okay, great. I also had 

some slides. Oh, perfect, they're up. Okay.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ARSENAULT: Okay. And can I tell 

you to hang on one second while -- Devin will switch 

slide decks there. Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Okay, perfect. Got it 

now. Sorry about the incorrect date there on the 

first slide. But good afternoon. My name's Brad 

Johnson. I'm the Senior Manager of Process 

Engineering at Ingredion, of our corporate 

engineering team.

And I wish today to show the Board that 

ion exchange purification is acceptable for use 

in organic processing. If you'll go ahead and go 

on to the next slide, please.

So, there are several salts, color 

bodies, and organic acids that are present in the 

agricultural products that we process in our 

plants.

To improve the safety, quality, and 

purity of the product, we employ a two-step 

purification technique using ion exchange resins. 

Both of the resins are already approved as both 

product contact surfaces, and secondary direct 

food additives.

And as you can see in the process flow 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that I show, the cation resin captures any 

positively charged ions from the incoming 

impurities. And the anion resin captures an 

residual acids, leaving a completely 

de-mineralized product.

So, if you'd move on to the next slide, 

please. So, the resin can only operate for a 

limited time period, since it has a finite capacity 

to capture and hold these impurities.

So therefore, the resin must be 

periodically regenerated to restore it to its 

original condition. So, to regenerate the cation 

resin, the strongly held impurities must be removed 

using an acidic solution in the hydrochloric acid.

To regenerate the anion resin, the 

weakly bound impurities must be removed with a 

basic solution in the form of sodium hydroxide.

All of the removed impurities, and the 

regeneration fluids, are sent to waste for further 

biological treatment. And they're never in any 

contact with the product that we process. Next 

slide, please.

Okay. For the rinsing step, any 

remaining hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

is fully rinsed from the resins using purified 

water.

The purity of the exiting rinse water 

is tested to ensure there's no residual acid or 

caustic remaining. And only then -- then and only 

then, the system is ready to return to processing 

our product. Please go to the next slide.

So, this is -- the key points I wish 

to express during this presentation are the 

following. The ion exchange purification does not 

chemically later the syrup we're purifying. We 

are only removing unwanted material. There's no 

chemical alteration of the product.

Point number two, for the purification 

to work both cation and anion resins must be used. 

Sodium hydroxide cleans the anion resin, and is 

on the National List. Hydrochloric acid must be 

used to clean the cation resin, but it's currently 

not on the National List.

Point number three, none of the sodium 

hydroxide or hydrochloric acid used during 

regeneration passes into the purified product. 

Although we use these materials, they're only used 

to clean the resins of the captured impurities. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

None of the acid or caustic is in contract with 

the product at any time during the processing. 

So, thank you for your time and consideration 

today.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much. It 

looks like Rick has a question.

MR. GREENWOOD: Yes. Just had a 

question on the materials that you send to waste 

processing. How is that processed? And where 

does it end up?

MR. JOHNSON: So, most -- the chemical 

and any impurities will go off as a liquid waste. 

And there's a typical biological treatment that 

a water reclaim system, any kind of municipal water 

treatment facility would have, to be able to treat 

the liquid waste to put it back into the waterways.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay. Can you explain 

that a little further? I mean, do they neutralize 

it? Or how about the, I'm thinking of the BOD, 

if --

MR. JOHNSON: Sure.

MR. GREENWOOD: -- you're having 

organic waste, and how that's handled.

MR. JOHNSON: Correct. So, any 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

organic waste, just like at a municipal plant, 

would -- there would be obviously the 

neutralization of any of the alkalinity or acidity 

of the waste, to where biological activity would 

take place to be able to capture and remove the 

organic impurities.

And that gets removed as a sludge, and 

dried. And that's typically land-applied in any 

kind of a municipal waste system. So, the 

biological oxygen demand, I think every 

municipality has a different regulation. But it's 

below a certain BOD that's allowed to be able to 

discharge into the waterways.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there any other 

questions? Thank you very much, Brad.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We are going to move on to 

two people before the break, Angela Schriver, and 

then Meagan Collins. And after our break we will 

have Mark Hutton. So, Angela, please go ahead.

MS. ARSENAULT: Angela, I know you're 

there. Hold on one second, make sure 

we're -- looks like -- Angela's listed. I don't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

see whether you are on --

MS. SCHRIVER: Can you hear me?

MS. ARSENAULT: Ah, we got you.

MS. SCHRIVER: Can you hear me now?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes, we got you.

MS. SCHRIVER: Excellent. All right.

MR. ELA: Please go ahead.

MS. SCHRIVER: Hello. My name is 

Angela Schriver, Schriver Organics located in 

Ohio. We primarily grow row crops, and have been 

certified organic since 2018.

We are members of OFA and the OFA Grain 

Growers Chapter. I want to thank the Board for 

their time, support, and dedication to organics. 

It is deeply appreciated.

Regarding domestic and import fraud, 

we entered the organic grain market when prices 

were depressed, primarily from the influx of 

imported, potentially, and most likely fraudulent 

organic grain.

We spent three years of our lives 

transitioning our grounds to organic. Three years 

is a long time to wonder if that decisions is what 

is going to save your farm. Three years is a long 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

time to wonder if you'll be able to support your 

young family unless you get to the other side.

And although we're confident in our 

decision to transition to organic, we know that 

it can be better. But we're still waiting. How 

much longer should we keep waiting?

I hope the NOSB and NOP can acknowledge 

how slow actions or inactions concerning 

strengthening organic enforcement is affecting 

farmers like us. This is hurting our bottom line. 

It's hurting our livelihood, and it's hurting our 

families.

Prior to the organic price slide, beans 

were at $30 dollars per bushel, and corn at $15. 

We are currently at $18.50 per bushel for beans, 

and $8 dollars for corn.

On 20 acres that's a difference of 

roughly $8,000 dollars for beans, and $14,000 

dollars for corn. Those are prices that can 

sustain farms through crop rotation. Those prices 

can sustain families.

There are enough challenges out there 

as it is. Please don't make competing with 

fraudulent grain one of them. Don't make us keep 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

waiting for the proposed rule on strengthening 

organic enforcement.

Regarding the integrity of the organic 

label, we still have a split operation with organic 

and conventional ground. I believe having a foot 

on either side gives us a unique vantage point.

When considering requests and 

proposals, I believe the NOSB is being asked to 

consider one of these four things, the viability 

of the farming operation, the scalability of an 

operation, environmental stewardship, and human 

health and welfare.

I believe you do have a responsibility 

to consider impacts to the environment, and also 

to human health and welfare, including consumer 

expectations.

However, I do not believe you need to 

consider the viability or scalability of 

operations when making your decisions. That is 

something for the farmer to consider.

I hope the organic standard is not based 

on alleviating burdens, removing hurdles, and 

accommodations. It is not meant to function as 

a safety net for farming operations. That is what 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

conventional agriculture is for, where there is 

a poison for every poor management practice out 

there.

Specifically, concerning poultry 

welfare, I agree it would be unethical to withhold 

treatment in emergency situations. And after the 

animals are treated, they can be separated and 

marked as conventional, similar to other livestock 

standards.

Do not let the organic label become less 

than what it was intended to be, or less than what 

it is expected to be. The organic label is held 

to a higher standard, and should be.

Lastly, it was noted some certifying 

agencies had many requests for the use of 

fenbendazole, while others had none. I would like 

to make note that some agencies have a reputation 

for being stricter than others. And I would 

presume it is reflective of the farmers that choose 

them.

I would be happy to answer any questions 

you may have about our experience in choosing a 

certifying agency, or anything else I discussed. 

Thank you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Thank you, Angela. It looks 

like Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Okay. It's a comment. 

I just wanted to thank you very much for taking 

the time to provide us with your testimony.

MS. SCHRIVER: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions? 

Angela, I had one, given the -- talking about how, 

like, other livestock is treated with a antibiotic 

or something and they're then sold on the 

conventional market, given that at least with 

fenbendazole, that really it's not treating one 

animal, it's treating a whole flock, do you still 

think that then that whole flock should be removed?

MS. SCHRIVER: I think if you're 

managing any operation, regardless if it's 

poultry, or your crops, or anything, that once you 

scale up to a certain size those are the issues 

your facing. And if that's the risk you're willing 

to take, then that's your farmer's decision. 

But yes, I think if you consistently 

need to find other ways to manage what you're 

currently doing, then maybe you need to actually 

look at how you're managing your operation.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Sure.

MS. SCHRIVER: So yes. I think that's 

a risk that every farmer would have to take. Yes, 

I believe that.

MR. ELA: Any other questions from the 

Board? Thank you very much, Angela, for taking 

the time to -- oh, Sue has one question here. Go 

ahead, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: I'm so sorry. I 

apologize. I appreciate that take on it, and your 

opinion. And you're right, Steven, that they 

would have to either eliminate -- and probably the 

only choice would be to eliminate the whole flock.

Because once that farmer has his eggs 

contracted, he can't sell them on the conventional 

market. It's different than some products. But 

I do appreciate that. And it's something to take 

into consideration.

But it's not a scale up thing. Most 

of the farmers who have these problems are those 

who have done more than just organic. They are 

adhering to the OLPP, thinking it was going to be 

inhumane standards.

So they're giving more outdoor access 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

than is currently allowed. And that's caused some 

of the problems. But thank you. I appreciate 

that a lot.

MS. SCHRIVER: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Angela. 

We are going to do one more person before the 

break. Meagan Collins will be up. And then, 

after the break, just so people are aware, we have 

Mark Hutton, Sarah Alexander, and Ramzi Sulieman. 

Meagan, please go ahead.

MS. COLLINS: Hello. My name is 

Meagan Collins. And I am the coordinator for the 

Accredited Certifiers Association. Thank you for 

the opportunity to make comments to the NOSB.

The ACA is a nonprofit educational 

organization. And our mission is to ensure 

consistent implementation of USDA organic 

regulations through collaboration and education 

of accredited certification agencies.

Our membership includes 63 

certification agencies that are accredited by the 

USDA or in the process of accreditation. This 

includes all of the USA-based certifiers.

First we would like to comment on the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

proposal for paper based crop planting aids. 

Thank you for the work the NOSB has done on this.

The ACA requests clarification on the 

proposed definitions. Do certifiers and material 

review organizations need to verify both cellulose 

composition and ASTM 6866 bio-based content 

percentage?

If so, what does primarily 

cellulose-based mean? Also, does the term 

cellulose in this definition include modified 

forms of cellulose?

The ACA supports the allowance of paper 

based crop planting aids, including pots, collars, 

and seed tapes, provided that the NOSB gives 

clarification on certifier and material 

reorganization verification.

Finally, I want to just spend a moment 

highlighting the recent work of the ACA. In light 

of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have been working with 

the International Organic Inspectors Association 

on best practices for verifying compliance when 

onsite inspections are not possible.

This industry-wide contingency plan, 

which includes inspection policies to verify 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

compliance, maintain consistency, and ensure the 

integrity of the organic supply chain, while 

protecting our human capital, was shared with the 

NOP this week.

We had 60 certifiers, 16 contract 

inspectors, and four organizations participate and 

come to a consensus in record time, less than one 

month.

The ACA and IOIA have been working 

diligently over the last month to address the pre 

competitive problems. We hope the NOP and the NOSB 

will support our work during these challenging 

times.

Thank you for ensuring the safety of 

the organic community by holding the NOSB meeting 

virtually. I would like to stress the importance 

of having in person NOSB meetings when we are safe 

to do so.

We find the ability to connect in person 

with other industry members extremely valuable. 

The ACA also uses the opportunity when our 

membership is together to hold our meeting in the 

evening, which is very productive, and essential 

for our organization.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We encourage the NOP to continue to hole 

in person NOSB meetings when possible. Thank you 

for your time and attention.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Meagan. Are 

there questions for Meagan? Meagan, I have one 

question. Of course on paper pots, since I'm the 

lead on that now.

So, your comment about that primarily 

cellulose-based is unclear. Would you -- how 

would you propose that we word that to make it -- I 

just about said less unclear -- to make it more 

clear?

MS. COLLINS: Yes. I think the 

working group that worked on this was saying they 

had, they all had kind of different perceptions 

on what exactly that meant.

Like, the biobase is like 85 percent. 

So, would cellulose be over 50 percent, especially 

when there's other biobased components in the 

product that aren't necessarily cellulose?

So, I think being very clear, if that's 

something you want to verify, what percentage are 

you verifying it at.

MR. ELA: Fair enough. And yes, I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

appreciated that comment in the written comments 

as well. So, are there any other questions for 

Meagan from the Board? Thank you very much, 

Meagan. We do appreciate it.

We are going to take a ten-minute break 

now. So, we will reconvene at 30 minutes after 

the hour, for the final segment of our public 

comment webinar. Thank you, everybody. We'll 

see you in ten minutes.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 3:20 p.m. and resumed at 

3:32 p.m.)

MR. ELA: Michelle, do you want to tell 

people about -- let's see, if they click on their 

---

MS. ARSENAULT: How quickly they 

forget, I just asked you ten minutes ago.

MR. ELA: Right.

MS. ARSENAULT: Well, if you're in 

Zoom, if you click in the upper right of the Zoom 

box, you'll see a grid of dots, like the Brady Bunch 

dots, and it says gallery view or speaker view. 

If you go to speaker view, you'll see my webcam 

on. And it's pointed at the speaker timer, if I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

can get Devon to pin it again, the speaker timer 

so folks can see it count down, since we're having 

trouble with the audio and people aren't hearing 

the beep very well.

Ah, thank you, Devon, he just pinned 

my camera so it's there permanently. All right, 

thanks, Steve.

MR. ELA: All right, thank you, 

Michelle. All right, in this final segment of our 

public comment webinars, we'll start off with Mark 

Hutton, then we're going to go to Sarah Alexander, 

and then Ramzi Sulieman. Mark, please go ahead.

MR. HUTTON: Thank you. Good 

afternoon, my name is Mark Hutton. I'm the 

University of Maine Extension vegetable specialist 

and also the Associate Dean for Research at the 

Ag Experiment Station.

I'd like to thank you for the 

opportunity to address the NOSB and update you 

about our work here in Maine developing a 100 

percent bio-based agricultural paper mulch.

But I'd also like to express some 

concerns we have around the requirement of recycled 

paper content in organically approved paper 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

products and specifically something like this 

paper mulch. The requirement of recycled paper 

content could be a barrier to commercialization, 

due to poor product performance or to excessive 

costs.

And here for your information and 

possible entertainment is a slide showing photos 

of our current product. Over the past ten years, 

in collaboration with several paper companies, 

we've been working to develop this agricultural 

paper mulch, as an alternative to degradable 

plastic mulch and plastic mulch films.

As you can imagine, there are many 

engineering obstacles in developing a sheet of 

paper with the properties of a sheet of plastic. 

Chief among them are thickness, weight, opacity, 

and durability.

Our current mulch in testing is about 

one half to one third the weight of currently 

available mulches. And it's about not quite twice 

as heavy as plastic mulch. We can put a standard 

four by 4,000-foot mulch roll that is manageable 

by two people.

This thin sheet also allows for some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

infrared transmission resulting in a slow warming 

profile greater than what we normally achieve with 

paper mulch and nearly as favorable as plastic 

mulch. And a combination of bio-based coatings 

on the top and bottom surfaces of the sheet manage 

weed growth and also increase longevity of the 

mulch.

Materials used to make this mulch are 

100 percent bio-based. They are cellulose fiber, 

nanocellulose lignin fiber, and sucrose esters. 

And furthermore, these raw materials that are 

being used are sourced from Forest Stewardship 

Council-certified suppliers.

Part of the NOP guidance 5034-1, which 

limits virgin pulp fiber, lead to questions about 

the allowability of this paper mulch in organic 

production. And our concerns, as I said, are 

typically around fiber quality and uniformity in 

recycled paper pulp is not adequate for this high 

quality paper. Also impurities and residues from 

inks in recycled pulp will also have a negative 

impact on this paper mulch.

I'd like to thank you for your 

attention, and I'm happy to answer any questions.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Mark. 

You timed that to a T, you had one second left. 

Are there questions? It looks like Asa has a 

question. Go ahead, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: I have a couple of 

questions. One, in terms of water conservation, 

how does that compare to plastic?

And then, two, have you done any 

calculations on the impact on forests? You 

mentioned that it was from FSC-certified pulp 

sources, but I'm wondering, you know, could we 

calculate acreage that would be needed if, for 

example, all organic ag used a paper mulch.

And then, three, are there other fiber 

sources like hemp or other, you know, other 

non-forest sources that might allow production of 

the paper without cutting down trees?

MR. HUTTON: Okay. Let me try to take 

these questions one at a time. So your first 

question about moisture conservation underneath 

the paper mulch, we have measured that, and we do 

still conserve moisture underneath that paper.

Our soil to moisture measurements, 

while a little bit drier than under plastic mulch, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

they're still -- our watering frequency isn't any 

different. And it's still superior to bare-ground 

production. So we have higher soil moisture 

compared to bare-ground production.

The next question on impact of forest 

production or logging operations, we did 

some -- one of the companies I worked with initially 

who have since dropped out or lost interest, the 

market isn't big enough.

Even if we replaced all plastic mulch 

with paper mulch, compared to their other paper 

outlets, this market wasn't big enough for them 

to be interested in it. They could make, in a 

three-day run, in the paper plant, enough paper 

to replace all the plastic mulch being used in a 

year in the country. So it just wasn't a big enough 

market for them. So I think our impact on forest 

production would be not super significant.

And then the third part of the question, 

you know, have we looked at other pulp sources, 

and the answer to that is we haven't yet. But that 

certainly could be a possibility.

Did I get them all, Asa?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes, thank you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: You did very well, Mark. You 

have a much better memory that I do.

Emily, you have a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Mark, this is 

really interesting information. I know you listed 

some of the ingredients, but could you again tell 

us what the bio-based coatings on the mulch are?

MR. HUTTON: It's nanocellulose and 

then sucrose esters.

MR. ELA: Looks like, Nate, you have 

a question.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Apologies if I 

missed this. I echo Emily, it's really 

interesting. Do you have an idea or any data on 

cost comparison for this versus a more traditional 

plastic mulch?

MR. HUTTON: So that's a really good 

question. And as we've been designing this and 

working on this, we've been trying to hit a price

point. There's about a $350 margin in ag mulch 

if you look at disposal. Pickup and disposal costs 

run roughly around $350 an acre for plastic mulch. 

So we think we've got kind of that range of 

increased product price.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

The product certainly will cost more 

than plastic. But how much more, I don't know. 

But we are trying to keep in that, not to exceed 

$350 an acre.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Mindee, you have a question.

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you. If I reached 

out, would you be able to provide us a little bit 

more information on what nanocellulose is?

MR. HUTTON: Sure. But basically, you 

can think of it as really tightly bound pieces of 

carbon that the microbes can't get a hold of, or 

it's harder for them to get a hold of. So it slows 

biodegradation.

MR. ELA: Other questions? I have a 

question. How does this product hold up, like, 

if somebody steps on it or an animal steps on it?

MR. HUTTON: Not well.

MR. ELA: Not too surprising. And if 

we were -- I guess, what percentage of virgin paper 

do you need, versus recycled, or are really talking 

about pretty much all virgin paper?

MR. HUTTON: The preference would be 

all virgin paper. But I'm told -- you know, I'm 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

an ag guy, so I'm just an overeducated farmer. 

But the paper people tell me that we could have 

a percentage of recycled content in there, maybe 

as high as 25 percent. But sourcing high quality 

recycled pulp is, I'm told, challenging.

MR. ELA: Makes sense. Any other 

questions for Mark?

Thank you very much, Mark. That is 

very interesting. We appreciate you taking the 

time to ---

MR. HUTTON: Thank you for the 

opportunity.

MR. ELA: Next up we have Sarah 

Alexander, then Ramzi Sulieman, and then Dave 

Shively.

Sarah, please go ahead.

MS. ALEXANDER: Great, thank you. I'm 

Sarah Alexander, Executive Director of the Maine 

Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association, often 

referred to as MOFGA.

Our organization was formed in 1971, 

and we're the oldest and largest state organic 

organization in the country. Additionally, we're 

the sole member of MOFGA Certification Services, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

LLC, which is a USDA-accredited certification 

agency certifying more than 550 operations in 

Maine.

MOFGA would like to thank the NOSB 

members for your work and your commitment to the 

organic community and thank the NOP for your work 

on increasing enforcement and oversight to help 

maintain the integrity of the USDA organic label. 

And thank you for the opportunity to provide 

comments today.

First, we would like to address organic 

integrity. I would like to reiterate concerns 

regarding consumer trust and questions that will 

only continue as the industry grows. Without 

consumer trust and belief in the integrity of 

organic standards, this will become another 

confusing and meaningless label in the 

marketplace.

In order to maintain consumer 

confidence, we urge the NOP to continue to 

prioritize two rulemaking efforts that are 

critical to the integrity of the organic label, 

the proposed rule on strengthening organic 

enforcement, and the final rule on the origin of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

livestock.

Specifically, as the NOP finalizes the 

rule on origin of livestock, please don't leave 

any loopholes that will allow for continuous 

transition or multiple transitions by related 

entities, or allow any variation of interpretation 

by an accredited certification agency. Our dairy 

farmers are relying on this rule to create equal 

standards for all producers.

We also strongly urge the NOP to 

continue to focus on compliance with the pasture 

rule with an emphasis on higher risk operations 

including those on the margins of the 30 percent 

dry matter intake rule and dairies with 1,000 or 

more milking and dry cows.

Another action that breaches consumer 

trust and confidence and creates confusion in the 

marketplace is the NOP allowing organic 

hydroponics without clarity on how this type of 

production complies with the Organic Foods 

Production Act. We call for an immediate 

moratorium on any new hydroponic operations and 

to return this issue to the NOSB work agenda as 

a top priority.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Lastly, we know that the COVID-19 

pandemic is shifting the way many of us work 

together. But we're concerned that a remote NOSB 

meeting will become the norm. Once it is safe to 

gather in groups, we encourage the NOP to continue 

holding in-person NOSB meetings.

These are important gathering points 

for our community, including many organizations 

that meet in advance of each NOSB meeting. And 

in-person meetings provide a level of transparency 

that is important. Thank you for your 

consideration.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Sarah. 

Are there any questions from the Board?

We appreciate you taking the time to 

give us your testimony and for what you do.

We are going to move on to Ramzi 

Sulieman, Dave Shively after that, and Michael 

Jones after that. Ramzi, please go ahead. And 

I may be mispronouncing your name. And for that, 

I apologize.

MR. SULIEMAN: No, you got it correct. 

Thank you. My name is Ramzi Sulieman. I am the 

Chief Operating Officer at True Organic Products. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I want to thank the NOP and each volunteer member 

of the National Organic Standards Board for hearing 

my comments about the importance of liquid fish 

as a fertilizer in organic crop production.

True Organic Products is a leading 

organic fertilizer manufacturer based in 

California. We produce liquid and pelleted 

fertilizers for many organic crops across the U.S. 

and internationally. Because of our growth and 

demand to support organic farmers, we are 

constantly challenging ourselves to assure 

supplies of sustainable and effective ingredients.

Fish solubles, a by-product of the fish 

oil and fish meal industry, are an essential 

ingredient. We rely upon it as a key component 

of our liquid fertilizer program. Fish solubles 

are a proven and important tool in organic 

fertility programs.

As indicated in the technical report, 

the wet reduction process for making fish meal and 

oil produces a by-product known as fish solubles. 

This by-product would be wasted or thrown away 

if not captured and returned to use. 

Our supply consists exclusively of fish 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

solubles as well as fish waste. Both are 

by-products that are collected from fish 

processing plants that produce human food.

One of our fish ingredient suppliers 

harvests fish for fertilizer purposes. The 

products we purchase capture waste from other fish 

uses, such as food, oils, and feed.

We support the findings of the 

technical review, that there are no species of 

wild, native, harvested exclusively for liquid 

fish fertilizer products. We support the 

continued use of fish solubles on organic crop 

systems.

Thank you for this opportunity. I'll 

take any questions.

MR. ELA: Are there questions from the 

Board? Kim has a question, go ahead, Kim.

MS. HUSEMAN: Hey. I have a question 

about the properties in the by-product of the fish 

that you purchase versus the whole fish that are 

harvested for fertilizers. Can you speak to if 

there's different properties in that fertilizer 

that makes one more advantageous than another on 

our crop application?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. SULIEMAN: For the most part, 

they're very similar in terms of, you know, output 

as a fertilizer. Again, most of the fish that we 

source is scrap or waste. Of course, some fish 

that doesn't make it through any quality, you know, 

programs from the fisheries, what they'll do is 

they split that over to get sent over for fish oil 

or fish meal use. And it basically turns into 

waste.

But of course, most of the waste is 

specifically from scraps. And if you're asking 

in regards to different species of fish, we haven't 

really seen much variation. In fact, most of the 

fish that we source is a cocktail of different 

species.

MS. HUSEMAN: Thank you.

MR. SULIEMAN: You're welcome.

MR. ELA: Are there any other questions 

from the Board?

Thank you very much, Ramzi.

MR. SULIEMAN: You're welcome. Thank 

you, guys.

MR. ELA: We are going to move on to 

Dave Shively, Michael Jones, and then Kenneth 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Rider. Dave, please go ahead.

Michelle, have you been able to find 

Dave?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes, Dave's here. Oh, 

I just lost him. Hold on one second. Ah, there 

he is. I am unmuting your mic now, Dave. I only 

say that out loud, because there are three of us 

unmuting and muting people. And I didn't want 

someone to just keep muting and unmuting you. All 

right, you should be unmuted now.

MR. SHIVELY: So am I on?

MS. ARSENAULT: We hear you.

MR. ELA: You're on, Dave.

MR. SHIVELY: Okay, great. Good 

afternoon NOSB members. My name is Dave Shively. 

I would like to thank you for your time serving 

on the Board, NOSB Board, and the time to speak 

to you today.

I live and farm in the northwest Lake 

Erie watershed basin, in northwest Ohio, and raise 

organic corn, soybeans, wheat, and use cover crops 

for soil building. This is my 16th year of being 

100 percent certified organic. I'm a member of 

the OEFFA grain growers chapter and a past 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

president of the group.

Growing organic crops without 

herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides has brought 

great satisfaction to me over the years. However, 

the last few years has brought a drastic decline 

in market prices, especially in corn. Corn prices 

have dropped over $3 since last year and some places 

have not even given bids.

There seems to be an excess amount of 

corn in the marketplace, and I believe a lot of 

this is due to the imported shiploads of layer corn.

The NOSB and NOP has set rules with high 

standards of meat. And I take pride in knowing 

my organic corn can be traced from my farm, what 

bin, what field, seed, and even how it was grown. 

It is disheartening that the imports do not have 

the same traceability. Consumers see the USDA 

organic label and trust that those standards are 

traceable and have been met.

Imported, supposedly, organic grain 

should not even be unloaded without testing at the 

port of entry and proper document for the original 

origin of the grain, not shuffled around paperwork 

by unreliable and unethical certifiers, and false 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

certificates. The NOSB must put more pressure on 

the USDA and the SOE to close the loopholes in these 

imports.

The new farm bill has allotted funds 

to increase inspections and trace fraudulent 

import documents of grains. I wrote comments to 

the NOSB Board earlier this year, and I spoke on

this same subject last year.

I urge you to make this a priority. 

The longer you delay enforcement of this rule, the 

more it erodes the organic label and the future 

of the U.S. organic farmers.

Thank you for your time and dedication. 

The only other thing would be please consider 

changing the dates, if it be possible, for more 

convenience for the organic farmers to comment. 

Dave Shively, USDA certified organic farmer.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Dave. 

We have a question from Nate for you.

MR. SHIVELY: Okay.

MR. POWELL-PALM: I've struggled with 

this myself, Dave, but when is a good time, do you 

think, to have these meetings? I feel like in 

April, Montana is planting, and in May everyone 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

else in the Midwest is planting. So I've always 

thought it was just sort of the burden we bear.

MR. SHIVELY: I would say earlier in 

the year, February, March. I mean, for us it's, 

you know, if it wasn't not good weather, I'd 

probably be really chomping at the bit to get out 

there. The fall is a bad time for guys harvesting, 

the October, September -- October, it's just, I 

mean, we're right in the middle of harvest season.

So earlier in the year, in the spring, 

earlier in the summer maybe not as far as peak time. 

You may hear some more from other guys about this, 

too.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Great, thank you.

MR. ELA: Sue has a question for you.

MR. SHIVELY: Okay.

MS. BAIRD: Thanks for your comments 

and for struggling to continue doing organic with 

prices low, and I appreciate that.

What procedures would you suggest that 

we put in place that are not already there to help 

us to identify and eliminate the fraud in the grain 

organization?

MR. SHIVELY: I think there needs to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

be, I guess what I see when I hear about grain loaded 

in the Black Sea, and then getting transported to 

Turkey, or somewhere else, and then grains changed, 

you know, instead of from being whole corn to 

cracked corn, which makes it different, and then 

it can somehow get magically certified coming into 

the ports, that's just disturbing to me. It just 

really disturbs me and all the organic grain guys 

out there.

I mean, we built the standard, and the 

more we let this infiltrate the organic label, the 

more it just degrades the standard that we set.

MS. BAIRD: Yes.

MR. SHIVELY: I don't --

MS. BAIRD: I think we all agree with 

that. I over-talked you, I apologize for that. 

I think we all agree with that. I think the NOP 

is really working hard to implement some procedures 

to stop that.

What do you think about our domestic 

fraud?

MR. SHIVELY: I dislike that just as 

much, more so on that.

MS. BAIRD: More so, right.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. SHIVELY: Because it shouldn't be 

here. But when you started getting more 

conventional guys transitioning over, they get 

ideas. And they don't understand that we set this 

and the standard that needs to be for the organic 

label. You know, they're just looking at it as 

a commodity. I'm looking at it as raising a 

special crop. Special grains need to be handled 

with integrity, traceability, all the above.

MS. BAIRD: Again, we agree with you 

and appreciate your commitment to continue on.

MR. ELA: Agreed.

MR. SHIVELY: Well, it's in my system, 

so I enjoy, I mean, it's just making it much harder 

to go on. I mean, I'm going to continue to do it, 

it just makes it not as fun.

MS. BAIRD: Yes, we understand. Thank 

you very much.

MR. ELA: Yes, thank you, Dave, for 

taking the time to talk to us. We do take it 

seriously, and we appreciate you reminding us of 

that.

MR. SHIVELY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Michael Jones, Kenneth Rider, and then Edward 

Andrews. Michael, are you out there?

MR. JONES: Yes, can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can. And could you please 

give your affiliation as well?

MR. JONES: Sure. My name is Michael 

Jones, and I'm a small organic grain farmer and 

on-farm handler. I'm from north central Ohio. 

I also wish to thank you and the other Board members 

today for the opportunity to comment today. I 

belong to the OEFFA grain growers group, just as 

Mr. Shively spoke about just a minute ago.

I was first certified in 1983 with 

OEFFA. And, you know, things have changed since 

then, and have not changed over the years. I know 

back then we all struggled to learn from each other, 

both within our mistakes and in our successes. 

We were all trying to succeed, both as farmers, 

as producers, as processors. Our goal was, at that 

time and it still is today, was to produce high 

quality, healthy food instead of high quantity, 

poor quality food.

Sure, there were people back then who 

tried to cheat and misrepresent themselves, and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

how they grew and processed their crops. I 

remember back, the general consensus when the USDA 

became willing to support the self-policing of the 

USDA just to maintain and improve that label, that 

integrity of the certified organic label. Let's 

fast forward here, you know, to the last five years. 

You know, we began to see prices drop 

when the demand was going up. And we saw increases 

of foreign imports from different areas of the 

world. And it became known to us of the fraud and 

the lack of enforcement against it.

I am thankful for the NOSB, who have 

heard our concerns and have passed many 

suggestions, both to the NOP and USDA, who are now 

trying to implement these. But we need to continue 

to encourage the USDA to finish its job, the 

strengthening of the organic enforcement rules, 

and then to give us the opportunity to comment on 

them and to add to them.

The future of my farm and other organic 

farms that are around me and across this country 

depend on this. You know, my farm in particular, 

it has lost between 30 and 35 percent of our crop 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

prices, corn, soybeans, wheat, because of this 

import problem or situation, whether it's fraud 

or not.

It's my greatest concern of the 

viability, you know, to be able to pass this farm 

on, its way of life on, to the next generation which 

is my grandchildren. You know, this is something 

that I started over 35, 40 years ago. And I wish 

for it to continue on.

But I do want to thank you for your hard 

and, most often than not, thankless work that the 

NOSB does. With that, any questions?

MR. ELA: Are there any questions for 

Michael?

I don't see any, Michael, but as always, 

we always reiterate, thank you for taking the time 

to give the very personal perspective on this as 

a farmer. We know it's not easy to do, and we 

appreciate you doing that.

MR. JONES: Well, I appreciate your 

work that you're doing, and I encourage you to 

maintain the battle. And have a good day.

MR. ELA: You too, take care.

We next have Kenneth Rider and Edward 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Andrews, and then DeEtta Bilek or Bilek. So 

Kenneth Rider, please go ahead.

MS. ARSENAULT: Ken, we're unmuting 

your line. It looks like -- there you go, you 

should be able to talk now.

MR. RIDER: Hi, I'm Ken Rider. Can you 

hear me?

MR. ELA: We can, Ken. Go ahead.

MR. RIDER: Okay, it's Kenneth Rider, 

and I've been certified for over 33 years, 

certified under OEFFA, a member of Ohio Organic

Grain Growers, Organic Farmers Association, and 

Real Organic Project.

I'd like to reiterate what the two 

gentlemen before me have just said. Thinking 

about that, please follow me into the field, see 

the soil, and feel the sun. This is my organic 

grain farmer's cropping overview, all the while 

counting on you to provide evidence in defeating 

fraud in domestic and international imports.

This is a brief seasonal example of how 

we approach pure organic food, starting with 

commitment to organic land set aside or purchased, 

field buffering, crop selection, equipment 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

selection and purchase, with whom to certify, which 

crop planted where, seed selection, when to plant, 

fertilization, land preparation, plowing, ground 

work, planting, weather, crops sprouting, tining, 

rotary hoeing, cultivating, foliar spraying, 

hand weeding noxious weeds, making hay, harvesting 

small grains, bin storing, selecting and 

purchasing cover crop, sowing cover crop, 

cultipacking cover crop, equipment cleanup, grow 

crop harvest preparation, cleaning combines, 

trucks, wagons, arbors, harvesting grow crops, bin 

storage, fertilizing for the next crops, sewing 

winter grains, more cover crops if time available, 

caring for stored crops, conditioning stored crops 

using heat and fans, maintaining a safe operation, 

logging every above mentioned activity and date, 

marketing and sales, contracting, providing an 

audit control register, enjoying annual and 

unannounced organic inspections, off-season 

maintenance, et cetera, et cetera.

This intensity never stops for an 

organic farmer family, and this is nowhere near 

inclusive. We must have defined worldwide organic 

standardization, the United States to government 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and foreign policing agencies to be adequately 

funded to be 100 percent effective.

We want to see printed, updated 

evidence of these efforts, and it must be in a 

timely and structured manner to determine progress 

in defeating both international and domestic 

fraud.

The penalty must be immediate, no 

off-loading of ships or trucks, and monetarily 

punitive where required. Standardization 

requires evaluation, but evaluation without 

enforcement is of no value. I ask you to verify. 

Any questions?

MR. ELA: You timed that very well. 

I'm impressed. Are there any questions from the 

Board? Sue has a question. Go ahead, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: I appreciate -- I never do 

it, I never hit the unmute. No, not really a 

question, just thank you for walking us through 

that. We love you guys, you are the backbone of 

our organic industry. Sorry fruit and avocado 

guys, that's how I feel about it. Thanks for all 

your work. That's all I have to say.

MR. RIDER: And I would say that as 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

professionals, and we look around and we see 

professional doctors and so forth, and if you are 

considered a professional, you have a 

responsibility with that.

And to define it, a professional is 

someone or a group of people that police 

themselves. If you see someone in there that's 

doing something wrong, it is your obligation to 

make sure that that is taken care of and contended 

with.

MR. ELA: All right, thanks. That's 

a great point, and I totally agree. The best 

enforcers are ourselves. Thank you, Ken, for 

taking the time. And, I'm going to say, that 

exhaustive and exhausting list, it is pretty 

amazing what we all do. So thank your for giving 

us your testimony.

MR. RIDER: Yes, adios.

MR. ELA: We're going to move on to 

Edward Andrews, and then DeEtta Bilek, and then 

Michael Menes. Edward, please go ahead.

Michelle, have you found Edward?

MS. ARSENAULT: He is on the line. Oh, 

I just lost him. Sometimes it jumps. Edward, oh, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I'm unmuting now. Okay, go ahead and talk. You 

should be able to.

MR. ANDREWS: Hello, this is Ed 

Andrews.

MS. ARSENAULT: There you go. We got 

you.

MR. ANDREWS: Hi. I'm not near as 

well-spoken as the three people before me, Ken was 

really good. But I have a lot of the same ideas 

that they do.

I'm Edward Andrews from Andrews Farms 

Incorporated. And Andrews Farms and other organic 

farmers that I know of, like Ken Rider, and Dave 

Shively, take care to follow the rules. And other 

farmers, they don't follow the rules.

And some of the certifying agents don't 

follow the rules. And I'm here to talk about not 

only foreign grain coming in but also, you know, 

I think we need stricter enforcement for all of 

our organics coming into this country or grown 

here.

And I also wanted to, I think there are 

some real abuses of the rules in the livestock 

industry too. And these problems are, well, you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

know, we'll have more organic meat, it'll be 

cheaper, and all of this. And it's the same with 

the grains.

Yes, I'm struggling right now too 

because of low prices. But it's the same with the 

meat, same with the grain, I don't care where it 

comes from. It needs to be stricter enforcement, 

because this will destroy our markets.

If the people that are buying get tired 

of all of our abuses of the rules, we're not going 

to have a market to sell to. And we're not going 

to take any more money than your other farmers. 

So I'm just asking for stricter enforcement, 

faster enforcement and, you know, I'm just asking 

the best you can do. And that's what I ask for 

today.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Edward. 

I think we take those things to heart. So are 

there any questions for Edward from the Board?

Thank you again for taking the time and 

giving us your perspective. It is truly greatly 

appreciated.

MR. ANDREWS: And thank you.

MR. ELA: Next, I guess DeEtta 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

cancelled and so we are going to move on to Michael 

Menes, then after him, Jeff Dean, and then Elijah 

Dean. So, Michael, please go ahead.

MS. ARSENAULT: Mike, hold on one 

second. I'm not sure you're unmuted here. Your 

slides are on the screen, let me make sure I unmute 

you. There you go, good.

MR. MENES: Want to make sure you guys 

can hear me.

MS. ARSENAULT: We can hear you now.

MR. ELA: We've got you.

MR. MENES: Great. Thank you. My 

name's Mike Menes, VP of Food Safety and Technology 

at True Organic Products. Thank you for this 

opportunity to address to you about a new petition 

regarding a novel material that needs your 

immediate attention.

Change the slide please. As an organic 

stakeholder, I'm deeply concerned about the use 

of ammonia extract, a novel fertilizing material 

that should be prohibited from use in organic crop 

production. This has been presented in a public 

forum, and the feedback was of genuine concern.

To help facilitate the process, I've 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

submitted a petition asking the NOSB to vote to 

prohibit ammonia extract from use in organic 

farming. The petition details why the NOSB must 

act. It also provides a definition and the various 

ways it can be extracted.

This ammonium extract petition needs 

prompt action to protect the organic integrity 

before the situation gets worse. Ammonia extract 

is not compatible with organic principles, and 

allowing it will harm the integrity of the Organic 

Program.

And here's why. Next slide please. 

Synthetic ammonia fertilizer is specifically 

prohibited in organic production because it is a 

chemical and does not foster a healthy soil system.

Think of all the principles that were 

the basis of OFPA, or the Organic Foods Production 

Act. New technologies are making it possible to 

create ammonia fertilizers that are non-synthetic 

but essentially identical to the prohibited 

chemical fertilizer.

Although ammonia is present in nature, 

it can now be extracted and concentrated for sale 

to organic farmers. Imagine, if you will, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

yourself on the farm with a tank of organic ammonia 

directly next to a tank of synthetic ammonia, and 

you might just see just one potential for domestic 

and/or international fraud. Understand that MROs 

and certifiers are beginning to review and approve 

several such products.

Next slide please. I ask that you 

expedite this petition and vote to prohibit 

non-synthetic ammonia extract at the fall 2020 

meeting. Otherwise, use of this material will 

reverse the progress on soil health, the 

environment, and human health.

This novel fertilizer is clearly not 

compatible with organic principles as spelled out 

in the Organic Foods Production Act. It threatens 

the movement and it threatens the seal. Thank you 

for your consideration. I welcome any questions.

MR. ELA: We have a question from Dan 

and then a question from Emily. Dan, go ahead. 

Dan, you're still on mute.

DR. SEITZ: I know, I don't how my hand 

got raised, because I didn't hit the computer. 

So I apologize, no questions.

MR. ELA: Must have been psychic, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Dan. We'll move on to Emily. Emily, go ahead.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you. Thank you for 

this testimony. You said that some MROs and 

certifiers are approving use of some of these 

products. Could you elaborate on that, please?

MR. MENES: Yes. I think there's one, 

I know that there's one MRO, actually both MROs 

that have approved one, what I would consider a 

novel ammonia fertilizer or ammonia extract.

And I know that there are, as I 

understand it there has been a lot of other 

applications that have been submitted for review, 

and it could be expanding into all the other MROs. 

So yes, I think there are, I know there are two 

that have already approved one and many in line.

MS. OAKLEY: Could you tell me the name

of that product?

MR. MENES: Yes, it's Perfect Blends, 

BioStar Perfect Blend 600.

MR. ELA: Mindee, you have a question.

MS. JEFFERY: I just wanted to thank 

Mike for his comments here and for all of his 

contributions to the California Organic Products 

Advisory Committee.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. MENES: Thank you, Mindee, it was 

good serving with you on that.

MR. ELA: I have a question. So how 

is this being produced organically? And I'm sure 

when we get the petition before us -- I know it's 

being worked on right now, we'll see it 

shortly -- I'm sure that's explained, but just if 

you can give a very quick explanation for right 

now.

MR. MENES: Sure, absolutely. There 

is -- as you say, it's all in the petition. But 

there are biological ways of making this chemical 

fertilizer. And that's really the focus, I want 

to focus on what the end product is and not 

necessarily how it got there.

But a number of ways could be capturing 

from just normal fermentation or composting, any 

time that ammonia can come off of a particular pile 

or source and it's acted on biologically. There's 

a definition that we're proposing in the petition, 

so if you could refer to that, I think that would 

be -- answer a lot of your questions as well.

MR. ELA: Great, thank you. Any other 

questions from the Board?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Perfect, thank you, Michael. We'll 

look forward to reading through that petition.

MR. MENES: Excellent, thank you.

MR. ELA: Next up we have Jeff Dean, 

then Elijah Dean, and then Steven Turnow. Jeff, 

please go ahead.

Have you been able to find Jeff?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes, Jeff's here. I'm going 

to unmute you now. There you go, I had to unmute 

myself first. Okay, thanks. Jeff, you should be 

able ---

MR. DEAN: All right, can you hear me 

now?

MS. ARSENAULT: We can hear you.

MR. ELA: We've got you.

MR. DEAN: All right.

MR. ELA: Please go ahead.

MR. DEAN: My name is Jefferson Dean. 

I'm co-owner of Timberlane Organic Farms with my 

son, Elijah. And our farm's been certified 

organic for over 25 years. And we grow corn, 

beans, wheat, sunflowers, multiple grain crops. 

We were a certified -- had a certified organic 

dairy, sold beef, sold some pork. So we've been 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in a lot of things over the years.

This is like the fourth or fifth time 

that I've addressed the Board. And I appreciate 

the Board, and I thank you for your contribution 

and your sacrifice you've made. It's got to be 

a tough thing to do, and we appreciate it.

I went out to Colorado and spoke in the 

spring. I went to Pennsylvania last fall and 

spoke. One of the problems we have as organic 

farmers is the times of the meetings. And I know 

you can't satisfy everybody. But the spring and 

the fall are the worst for everybody. You couldn't 

pick a worse time for the majority of organic 

farmers, vegetable farmers, dairy farmers, grain 

farmers, they're all busy in the spring, they're 

all busy in the fall.

You've got January, February, March, 

maybe even December. You've also got, you know, 

the end of July, August, September, not nearly as 

busy. There's got to be a better way than having 

the times where the least amount of farmers can 

contribute.

The other thing I wanted to talk to you 

about is this organic fraud. It's just appalling 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that we've been talking for years, it's been over 

five years now, and it doesn't seem like it's gotten 

any better.

We continually have organic fraud, 

fraudulent grain coming in from overseas. 

Mostly -- we know where it's coming from. We know 

it's not organic. People have identified the 

ships coming in, they've told, you know, 

authorities and nothing happens until a ship gets 

unloaded. And then it's like, oh well, we can't 

do anything now.

But you could. You could trace it 

down, find out where it went, and stop it and, you 

know, decertify them. That's what would happen 

if it came to my farm. You know, if I got caught 

doing some fraudulent organic, if I used treated 

seed or something, I would be decertified. So 

should they.

But it needs to be stopped before that. 

It's really disheartening, and it's going to just 

kill the organic label. The integrity is all that 

we have. We work so hard with this traceability, 

the work we do to do things correct, and then we 

get hammered with this fraudulent imported grain.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

It's costing us. Our prices dropped 

another $2 a bushel. We're down over $4 a bushel 

for our corn. And I don't know how long we can 

sustain at a $4 a bushel loss. So I urge you, 

please, take urgent action now to take care of this 

problem. Thanks for your commitment. Any other 

questions?

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jeff. We do 

appreciate your comments on that. Nate has a 

question for you.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Apologies if I 

misunderstood this, Jeff. Are you saying that 

your organic corn is less than $4 a bushel?

MR. DEAN: Our organic corn has dropped 

$4 a bushel from when we first identified the 

fraudulent grain coming in. And now we have big 

buyers using the organic fraud against us. 

They're contracting at a very low price and then, 

in advance, without any grain to back it up, knowing 

that if they can't get farmers to come down in price 

where they can make a lot of money, they'll just 

import grain knowing it's fraudulent, and cover 

their contracts.

And when the big buyers, you know, we 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

talk to them and try to sell stuff to them. They 

say, well, we're already booked up. Even though 

that grain's not coming from, you know, U.S. 

farmers, it might not even be legitimate, but they 

don't care as long as it has the paperwork to back 

it up.

So no, our price is not $4 a bushel, 

it's $4 less than it was.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Thank you for that 

clarification. I appreciate it.

MR. ELA: Are there any other 

questions?

Thank you very much, Jeff. We 

appreciate you taking the time, as always, to give 

us your input. And we, just to clarify, we have 

taken very seriously your comments about timing 

and discussed it.

And one of the things we're up against 

is, because our country is large there are always 

farmers doing something at all times of the year. 

And we really haven't been able to identify 

another good time. But we appreciate the 

difficulties, and we do take that seriously. So 

thanks for continuing to bring that up.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

It sounds like your son is up next, 

Elijah Dean. And then after that we have Steven 

Turnow and Michael Hanson. So, Elijah, would you 

like to go ahead?

MR. DEAN: Hello. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can, please go ahead.

MR. DEAN: Hello. Yes, this is Elijah 

Dean. I am -- well, obviously you just heard from 

my dad. And you heard from a lot of the other OEFFA 

grain growers members.

I am the current president of the OEFFA 

grain growers group. It's kind of a mouthful. 

But we have a really great group of guys. We meet 

in the spring, sorry, not in the spring, in the 

early spring and in the winter to share information 

and to work together to become better farmers. 

And these meeting are purposely held in the very 

early spring and in the winter, because that's when 

all of our members are available.

I also would like to address the problem 

of meeting time. I spoke at the meeting in 

Pittsburgh, and there seemed to be some resistance 

but also some openness to potentially moving these 

meetings maybe a month, or maybe two months earlier 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

than they are now.

Because as my dad just said, and as 

other members of our group have said, this is a 

very, very bad time for this meeting. I'm sitting 

out in my field right now watching some clouds roll 

in. I was trying to plant oats. And I'm about 

half done with this field, and I would really like 

to finish up. If this meeting had been one month 

earlier, this wouldn't even be a problem.

Anyway, moving on to what I really 

wanted to talk about today, taking a step back, 

looking at the organic economy, it's really 

amazing. The organic industry, the organic 

economy is based on growers voluntarily complying 

with stricter regulations and consumers 

voluntarily paying more for what they see as a 

better product.

This is based on the trust and integrity 

that happens in the intermediate steps. This trust 

and integrity is the most important thing we have 

and what our entire industry is based on. And this 

integrity is being attacked in multiple ways, both 

from products and practices that are being proposed 

to weaken this integrity and to weaken what we go 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

through to provide a good product. Also, as you 

have heard many times already, from fraudulent 

activities and fraudulently imported grain.

I urge you to take strong action on both 

of these, maintain strong standards, and if people 

say that we need new products or new practices 

because organic is difficult, good, organic is 

supposed to be difficult. It's supposed to be 

hard. That's what the consumer wants. The 

consumer wants us to work hard and provide healthy 

products under strict practices.

Please help us do that, help us provide 

what the consumer wants us to. And with that, do 

you have any questions?

MR. ELA: We do. Thank you, Elijah. 

Emily has a question. Go ahead, Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you for your 

comments, really articulate, your second half. 

And I also just wanted to say that I have spoken, 

and several of us have spoken with the NOP about 

the possibility of trying to move the meetings 

back, either February or March.

I think some concern that was expressed 

was potential travel complications that can come 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

up at that time of year. But I do just want you 

to know that that conversation is taking place, 

and people understand the need to try to make it 

more accommodating to growers who are clearly not 

able to come at this time.

MR. DEAN: I appreciate that there's 

progress being made on that and, of course, the 

sooner the better. Because as you can see, we have 

many growers that are interested in taking part 

in this organization and in these meetings.

MR. ELA: Yes, I agree, Elijah. And 

I don't -- my previous comments, I don't mean to 

at all say that we're not taking that seriously. 

Our biggest problem is having to have meetings 

exactly six months apart with our work plan. And 

then having them earlier also means that we have 

to have the fall meeting earlier which can create 

some issues as well.

But please know that we continue to talk 

about it, and we're always open to, you know, you 

submitting ideas for how we can accomplish that 

with our current workload. And certainly, we 

appreciate you bringing it up as a real issue. 

We do take it quite seriously.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Are there other questions for Elijah? 

Nate has a question.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Just a comment. I 

just really wanted to thank everyone in the OEFFA 

Grain Growers Chapter for taking the time out of 

their growing season. I am between plantings 

myself, so I totally understand. And it's really 

important to be hearing from you. So thanks for 

taking the time.

MR. DEAN: Thank you too.

MR. ELA: Agreed. I think the full 

Board always appreciates hearing from any farmer 

that takes the time to talk to us. And I get the 

issue, we're at full bloom out on our peach trees 

and other trees right now too. So thank you for 

giving us your thoughts.

We are going to move on to Steven 

Turnow, Michael Hanson, and then Bill Deneven. 

Steven, please go ahead.

MR. TURNOW: Okay. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We certainly can.

MR. TURNOW: Okay, very good. I just 

want to thank you for your service on the Board, 

every one of you. I think as you can tell now, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

this is kind of a hot topic in the Midwest as far 

as corn and soybean farmers, you know, both fraud 

imports and domestic.

As you can tell, people get pretty 

passionate about it when they're doing the right 

things and they get undercut from things coming 

in from other countries that might not be 

legitimate.

You know, as I walk through the grocery 

stores, I look at the organic products, and I 

appreciate the NOP label and what it means. And 

I've got a couple of daughters, you know, and 

they're raising young kids. And that label means 

something to them. They expect a product that 

meets the standards, non-GMO, no herbicide 

residuals, and a product that's environmentally 

pure.

You know, as I look from the consumer 

standpoint, I ask myself do I want imported 

products that might not meet NOP standards or do 

I trust a product that has met the standards and 

is certified in the United States?

A global pandemic was never expected. 

However, you know, it's kind of forced us to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

reflect and raises many questions on imports in 

the United States. You know, do we want to be 

reliant on foreign food the same as we're reliant 

on ventilators and face masks?

This country has the capacity and the 

willpower and the farmers to grow a good quality 

organic food, especially corn and soybeans. And, 

you know, why are we spending so much time, effort, 

and money trying to verify something grown halfway 

around the world when we could encourage and 

resource our own farmers to produce it?

We need to be proactive here. We must 

have a process, a plan to discourage imported 

grains and encourage domestic production. We must 

keep organics at a premium so it keeps conventional 

farmers transitioning into the organics. And we 

need to educate others on the environmental payoffs 

of organics, not only for us but for the next 

generation of farmers. Thank you. 

MR. ELA: Thank you. Are there 

questions? Not seeing any, thank you so much for 

your comments. They're very much appreciated.

MR. TURNOW: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Next we will have Michael 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Hanson and then Bill Denevan, and then John 

Hendrickson. Michael, you have the floor.

MR. HANSON: Hi. Can people hear me?

MR. ELA: We certainly can. Please 

continue.

MR. HANSON: All right, thank you very 

much. Thanks for the opportunity to speak and for 

your service on NOSB. My name is Michael Hanson. 

I'm a senior scientist with Consumer Reports, and 

I'd like to make comments on two items on the 2022 

sunset review for the Handling Subcommittee, 

that's colors and inulin-oligofructose enriched.

Consumer Reports' national 

representative surveys have consistently shown 

that a large percentage of Americans expect organic 

food to be free of artificial or non-organic 

ingredients. Thus the use of colors derived from 

conventional crops, for which organic versions are 

readily available in organic products, may mislead 

consumers.

In addition, practices used to grow 

conventional crops for colors are not consistent 

with organic farming and handling and may have 

adverse human health and environmental impacts. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

For example, the USDA Pesticide Data Program data, 

the most recent data, show residues of various 

pesticides on a significant fraction of carrots, 

blueberries, grapes, and cherries.

And in fact, more than ten percent, if 

you look at that, there are 15 different pesticides 

on blueberries that meet that, six on carrots, 13 

on cherries, 16 on grapes.

If we look at 30 percent of the acreage, 

there are four pesticides that are on more than 

30 percent of blueberries, eight that are on more 

than 30 percent of cherries, and five that are on 

more than 30 percent of grapes.

So many certified organic products 

contain certified organic colors. Thus, there 

should be enough organic carrots, blueberries, 

cherries, and organic versions of all the crops 

used for colors on 205.606 to meet market demand.

Removing these materials from the 

National List will create demand for all organic 

foods on the marketplace that contain organic 

colors. We urge NOSB to remove these 18 colors 

from the National List.

We also urge NOSB to remove 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

inulin-oligofructose enriched, IOE, from the 

National List, because it is not necessary for 

production and handling of organic products. IOE 

are highly processed isolates of sugar that are 

derived from foods such as chicory, sunchokes, and 

agave. And they're added to products to make 

certain marketing claims related to the perceived 

health benefits of highly isolated fibers and 

sugars.

Thus IOE is not necessary for 

production, only useful for marketing claims. The 

2015 technical report clearly shows that IOE is 

highly processed, uses synthetic aids, and that 

enzymatic hydrolysis that helps create the 

product, quote, is a chemical change, and although 

the change occurs using an enzyme from a fungus, 

this is not a process that occurs in nature. 

Consequently, we urge NOSB to remove IOE from the 

National List.

Finally, although it's not on the 

agenda for this meeting, we urge the Crop 

Subcommittee to have its GMO Subcommittee continue 

their work on the table of excluded methods, 

expressly to discuss and review those methods on 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the to be determined list and to put this topic 

on the agenda for the fall 2020 meeting. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: Thank you. We do appreciate 

all those thoughts, certainly lots to think about. 

Are there questions from the Board? Asa has a 

question, go ahead, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: One of the issues that 

came up in the discussion from the IFAC 

representative was what -- of the colors, which 

specific colors do or do not have the option of 

organically sourced material?

And I hear that you're, you know, you're 

arguing that there is organically sourced material 

available for all of the colors. But are there 

some that are more, maybe I should say egregious 

versus others in light of the fact that there really 

is organically sourced material available?

MR. HANSON: Well, I guess what I'd say 

on that is just based on the Pesticide Data Program, 

I mean, they're not sampling all the 18 different 

colors, but just on there. Come on, I mean, there 

should be enough blueberries, carrots, cherries, 

and grapes so that those colors -- and then for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

carrots there's actually three colors.

So I think for the ones where there's 

PDP data showing that, you know, a significant 

fraction are produced in this way that if there 

are enough of those crops, you know, they should 

easily be able to supply the colors.

And I think the other point is, is 

you're trying to create a market demand for those 

organic colors. So I would first start, if you're 

going to remove them, I would first start with the 

ones for which there is PDP data.

MR. ELA: Just a follow-up question 

from me, Steve. There certainly were some public 

comments saying that the problem is not the 

quantity of crops but that the crops, that you 

actually pick the crops at a different maturity 

to make colors.

So you're actually picking a fresh crop 

at a different stage of life to make a color versus 

just what you might, you know, sell fresh market. 

So there is the discrepancy between whether a 

grower wants to sell fresh market or for processing 

in the colors. Do you have any thoughts on that?

MR. HANSON: Well, but just again, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

since the same would be true for then a conventional 

versus organic. Since you're getting them from 

a crop, the same thing is going to be true for the 

conventional production, right? They would have 

to be harvested at a different time than they would 

for food. But it's cheaper to do with 

conventional.

I mean, it can be done with organic, 

because there are certified organic colors. They 

might cost more, and I suspect what people are doing 

here is they're moving to the conventional, because 

they can get it cheaper. Because any of these 

issues about you have to harvest it earlier or maybe 

later, that's going to be true for the conventional 

as well.

So if they can supply it, the organic 

ones can supply it as well as long as they can get 

a reasonable price for it, right? So it would seem 

to me you would want to be helping to create that 

market for organic colors.

Because most consumers, again, when we 

surveyed them, they don't think that these 

materials are in organic or that they should be. 

They just assume when they see, you know, a color 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

from a blueberry, or from one of these other things, 

they think, oh, it must be organic when it's not.

MR. ELA: Fair enough. Thank you.

MR. BRADMAN: Right, but --

MR. ELA: Appreciate that.

MR. BRADMAN: I just want to add, I 

mean, theoretically, you know, I'm looking at the 

listing on the National List right now, and this 

is a problem with 606, you know, but it says only 

in accordance with restrictions specified in the 

section and only when the product is not 

commercially available in organic form.

So, I mean, theoretically there should 

be, inherent to the certification system, a push 

towards organically sourced colors. But I think 

what you're saying here is that, because of the 

market balance and the lack of use of organically 

produced crops to produce the colors, we're not 

getting the actual alternative to the final product 

which is the color.

MR. HANSON: Well, right, and it's 

probably an economic, right, because if they could, 

for all this time, I mean, there is enough -- I 

would say organic cherries, any of these basic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

ones. Those are being produced in large volume. 

But if you can get the color from the conventional, 

and it's cheaper, why would you even bother for 

the organic?

And folks that are doing the organic 

certified colors, and there are for all of these 

organic certified versions, they're clearly paying 

more. So, you know, there is stuff out there.

But to help create the market, if you 

say you could only use organic colors, then it would 

force people to say, you know, maybe there's, for 

turmeric or some of these other ones, maybe there's 

not enough for the color there.

And they could say, even if they're

willing to pay more money, we can't find a product, 

then maybe those should be allowed. But here, this 

is about creating the market conditions for those 

organic versions of colors.

MR. BRADMAN: I understand. I can see 

how there's a concern here that 606 could be a 

barrier here. Because it allows the 

non-organic --

MR. HANSON: Exactly.

MR. BRADMAN: But I guess a further 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

question I would have, and perhaps you could send 

this in as comments later on, is we should all 

review the specific colors that have organic 

alternatives right now.

MR. HANSON: Yes.

MR. ELA: Yes. And I think that would 

be, yes, particularly helpful if we could suss out 

those that are currently available and those that 

maybe aren't.

We're going to have to move on because 

we do have several people that aren't on the list 

at the end here that we had to add at the end. 

So I think we're going to run just slightly over 

anyhow. But next we have Bill Denevan, and then 

we'll have John Hendrickson, and then Albert 

Straus. So Bill, please go ahead.

Michelle, were you able to find Bill 

Denevan?

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes. Bill's on the 

list. I'm having trouble unmuting his line. 

Bill, if you're on your phone, if you could hit 

star 6 it might be on your end that we can't unmute 

you. Once in a while we have a little issue with 

this.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Oh, hold on one second. I think I just 

muted you again. Okay, go ahead, Bill. Bill, 

you're showing as unmuted, but we're not hearing 

you talk. No, we're not hearing you.

MR. ELA: Let's go on to John 

Hendrickson, and then we'll come back to Bill after 

John, and we'll figure this out. So could we go 

ahead with John Hendrickson.

MS. ARSENAULT: Yes, John's on the line 

with us. John, I'm going to unmute your line. 

Okay, you should be able to talk now.

MR. HENDRICKSON: Thank you. Thanks 

to all the members of the Committee. John 

Hendrickson, Small Farm Works, supplier of 

equipment and supplies for small scale farms.

I submitted the petition regarding the 

use of paper pots in 2018, and I'm here to express 

my support for the proposal to add 205.2 which will 

extend the use of paper-based crop production aids 

to include paper pots.

Use and popularity of paper pots has 

grown significantly since I submitted the 

petition. Vegetable growers across the country 

rely on paper chain pots, which is a clever, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

efficient, profitable, and environmentally 

friendly method of transplanting.

There's a large contingent of growers 

who support this change to the NOP rule. Many tell 

me that, given the choice between continuing to 

use paper pots and maintaining their organic 

certification, they would drop certification. I 

would hate to see that happen.

My only concerns about the language and 

specifications in the motion are these. As written, 

the proposal would require ASTM D6866 testing of 

paper pots to determine the precise percentage of 

synthetic fiber in the paper.

According to a head scientist at a 

laboratory that does this testing, this test is 

not reliable for paper products made from wood 

pulp. The reason for this is a rather fascinating 

story which is rather long and complicated, but 

I'll offer a short summary.

As a result of atomic bomb testing in 

the middle part of the last century and the 

resulting radioactive carbon atoms floating around 

in our atmosphere, which trees indiscriminately 

absorb through the photosynthetic process, test 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

results of paper products made from long-lived 

trees cannot be trusted, and results can vary 

widely with no assurance of accuracy.

For paper products made from annual 

plants, tests are corrected to account for the 

amount of atmospheric radioactive carbon in the 

atmosphere during the year those plants were grown. 

However, for long-lived trees it is impossible 

to correct for this background radioactive carbon 

source.

Apparently, our atmosphere has only 

just now started settling back to pre-atomic bomb 

testing levels of naturally occurring atmospheric 

radioactive carbon. I'm not sure what the NOSB 

can do about this, but based on the information 

that I have gathered, the proposed tests will not 

be satisfactory for the intended purpose.

Second, I think the last part of the 

proposal which currently states that, quote, if 

these paper-based crop planting aids are 

commercially available with 100 percent bio-based 

fiber content, these must be used, unquote, could 

be changed to encourage the use of commercially 

available products with the least synthetic fiber 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

content.

As the proposal reads right now, an 

organic grower would only have to switch away from 

a paper pot with 15 percent synthetic material if 

there was one with zero percent. It makes more 

sense to encourage growers to use products with 

the least synthetic fiber content rather than 

jumping to a standard of zero which may not even 

be practical or achievable.

I believe this change fits nicely with 

a concept of continual improvement. The company 

that makes the paper products that I sell is well 

on its way to bringing to a product to the 

marketplace that will rely on hemp fiber for paper 

strength rather than synthetic fiber. We're 

really excited about that.

And I would like to sincerely thank the 

members of the Crops Subcommittee who have worked 

on this very complex and complicated issue 

involving paper and have developed this proposal. 

Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, John. Are there 

questions? I am not seeing any questions.

MR. BUIE: Steve?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Yes, go ahead.

MR. BUIE: This is Jesse, one quick 

question. What's the timeframe that you think 

hemp would be on the market?

MR. HENDRICKSON: The goal of the 

manufacturer that I work with is to have them in 

the marketplace for next growing season.

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: Any other questions? Thank 

you very much, John. We do appreciate it. And 

we appreciate your patience as we try and figure 

this out, since it is your petition.

Michelle, were we able to get Bill 

Denevan on?

MS. ARSENAULT: Sorry, now I'm muted 

and talking. Bill, I think you're unmuted. You 

want to try to say something? We're not hearing 

you. Your mic is unmuted. Bill, I'm going to send 

you the phone number so you can dial in on the phone.

MR. ELA: So maybe we will go ahead and 

go to Albert Straus. And Bill we'll keep trying 

to come back to you. So Albert Straus, and then 

David Epstein, and then we're going to do Annie 

Kustermann, if she's here, and then Alesia Bock 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to finish things off.

So as I told everybody, we probably are 

going to run just about ten minutes over. So I 

apologize for that. But Albert, would you like 

to go ahead?

MR. STRAUS: Yes, hi. My name is 

Albert Straus, and I'm the founder and CEO of Straus 

Family Creamery. And I want to talk about kind 

of the organic certification, enforcement, 

clarity, and consistency in livestock production.

But first, I want to kind of talk about 

the crisis that we're in. There's a disconnect 

between farmers producing the products, the milk, 

the produce, and retailers, and people -- and 

consumers. So we're losing, we don't have the 

infrastructure, and all this restricting of buying 

is causing hunger, at the same time we're 

destroying food.

So I think there's a lot of clarity that 

needs to be done in this society around clear 

directions around shelter in place, people getting 

availability of food, and supporting farmers 

through this crisis and the economic crisis as 

well.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

As far as the video that was put out 

by the NOP, I think it was an excellent attempt 

or direction to create, well, enforcement, better 

enforcement around improving documentation from 

farmers. I think that there's clarity that needs 

to be dealt with.

There's definitions around grazing 

seasons that still need refinement, and looking 

at the different age groups and nutritional needs 

of different animals and not having consistent 

grazing seasons, and then pasture productivity. 

Recognizing that pasture productivity 

after -- well, it changes over the season.

So I think that, well, shade and 

shelter, also climate considerations for shade and 

shelter of animals, and really trying to get

consistency by educating certifiers, inspectors, 

and farmers, and using the same guidelines, and 

being on the same page.

So overall, I think that everything's, 

you know, we're doing well as an organic industry. 

We've gotten a lot more clarity, and we're on the 

right path.

And I look forward to really, actually, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I think through this crisis, we actually have an 

opportunity to really look at a food and farming 

system that is local, organic, and is more 

regionally-centric and brings nutrition and value 

to the public and our communities. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Albert. Are 

there questions for Albert?

Albert, as always, we appreciate your 

thoughts and commitment to helping us think through 

things.

MR. STRAUS: Okay. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Next we're going to go to 

David Epstein, and then Annie Kustermann -- well 

actually, let me ask first. Did we get Bill 

Denevan yet? We'll figure him out. So let's go 

to David Epstein and then Annie Kustermann. 

David, please go ahead.

MR. EPSTEIN: Hey, Steve, can you hear 

me?

MR. ELA: We can.

MR. EPSTEIN: Good, thanks. I'm 

Dave Epstein. I work with the Northwest 

Horticultural Council which represents organic 

growers, packers, and shippers of tree fruit in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the Pacific Northwest on policy and regulatory 

issues.

The Pacific Northwest produces over 90 

percent of fresh certified organic apples, 79 

percent of organic pears, and 93 percent of organic 

sweet cherries produced in the United States. We 

also submitted written comments for your 

consideration.

Controlling foodborne pathogens is a 

challenge to tree fruit production. Microbial 

pathogens must be controlled in the orchard and 

in water and food contact surfaces at the packing 

house. Food contact surfaces have been identified 

as a primary contributor to pathogen outbreaks on 

fresh produce.

We need effective sanitizers and 

disinfectants to prevent pathogens from becoming 

established in packing houses and processing 

environments, and subsequent cross-contamination 

on produce.

We are also concerned with the 

evolution of resistance of these pathogens, such 

as listeria, to sanitizers. Recent studies have 

focused on reduced sensitivity of listeria 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

following repeated exposure to single sanitizers.

The Food Safety Modernization Act 

requires producers to adequately sanitize food 

contact surfaces. The ability to utilize multiple 

sanitizers as well as to use different sanitizers 

on different types of food contact surfaces is 

essential to achieving effective microbial 

concern.

In the 2018 Farm Bill, Congress 

directed that the NOSB, while following the 

material review requirements established in the 

Organic Food Production Act, to establish 

procedures for timely consideration and review of 

materials directly related to food safety 

compliance for inclusion on the National List, and 

to be transparent and adhere to the best science 

and technical assistance available, including from 

other science agencies, to provide certainty and 

predictability to the agricultural community and 

consumers.

The NHC requests that the NOSB formally 

consults with FDA subject matter experts regarding 

the sanitizer needs of producers before taking any 

further action on this issue.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Both public health and FSMA require you 

to consider the inclusion of efficacious 

sanitizers and disinfectants on the National List 

to prevent foodborne disease outbreaks. We want 

organic production to continue to thrive in the 

Pacific Northwest.

We ask that NOSB members carefully 

consider the importance of these materials for 

organic tree fruit production and in meeting the 

mandates of FSMA so that we can continue to provide 

organically produced tree fruit to consumers. 

Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Dave. Asa has a 

question for you.

MR. BRADMAN: Yes, I'm just wondering, 

are there specific sanitizers in the pipeline that 

you're referring to? I mean, there are, of course, 

there is an existing menu of options available. 

And it sounds like you're expressing a concern 

that there's some limitations on that.

And I want to kind of understand the 

basis of it. I mean, one sanitizer we did look 

at last year, silver, I think, dihydrogen citrate, 

that did get voted down. I know there were 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

different reasons for that. I personally thought

some uses could be allowed but that the petition 

was too broad.

But can you be specific and, you know, 

are there materials in the pipeline that you want 

and don't have? That would be helpful. Thanks.

MR. EPSTEIN: Well, it's a good 

question. And I made this statement to be fairly 

general. We want the NOSB to, if you're going to 

be reviewing materials, to consider the mandates 

that we have to meet on the production and the 

packing end before you -- you need multiple 

products. We can't just have one or two good 

products.

I mean, right now I know you're looking 

at things like ozone and some other materials. 

I did not single out anything particular in this 

case. This is more to ask the NOSB to keep their 

eye on the ball, remember the mandates that you're 

getting from Congress via the Farm Bill, in terms 

of consultation with agencies such as the FDA, and 

make sure that we have these products that would 

prevent these foodborne outbreaks.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Thank you, Dave, as always, 

appreciated. And I think, yes, overall I've heard 

the Board talking about exactly that. And I guess 

we always appreciate any specifics you can give 

to us about if you're missing something or if 

something is redundant as well.

Because we certainly, I think the 

conversation is always we want to narrow the list, 

or keep the list as narrow as possible while also 

meeting exactly what you just said, making sure 

there are multiple venues open to maintain food 

safety.

MR. EPSTEIN: Right. And as those 

come under the scope of review we'll certainly 

continue to provide comment here and any, you know, 

we have a lot of folks looking at the different 

materials. If you want any feedback on thoughts 

on various materials for control of, say, listeria 

monocytogenes, I'm always working with folks at 

the university in order to stay on top of what's 

available and what we need. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Dave. We do 

appreciate it. Looks like, at this point, I 

believe we have two more speakers. But then I do 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

want to go around and give anybody we skipped a 

chance. We're going to go to Bill Denevan finally. 

Bill, go ahead.

MR. DENEVAN: I think I'm back in 

business here. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can, go ahead, Bill.

MR. DENEVAN: Oh, great. Sorry about 

that. Okay, so anyway, my talk is going to be about 

fire blight control and new materials. And I'm 

wanting to encourage the Board to allow the use 

of the ingredient kasugamycin in organics to 

control the fire blight on apples and pears.

This formulation is commercially 

called kasumin for conventional growers at the 

moment. This product uses a few disallowed inerts 

right now. The manufacturer is committed to 

creating an organic version as long as the basic 

ingredient, kasugamycin, is allowed to be used by 

the Board. 

Fire blight is by far the most dangerous 

disease that affects both apples and pears. It 

could kill young trees in one year and severely 

damage older trees and reduce their crop load.

Let me give you a little background on 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

my blight situation. I grew 30 acres of organic 

Bartletts for 35 years where I had to rip out, burn, 

spray my trees. I work as a grower rep for Viva 

Tierra, and I've seen thousands of acres of blight 

from Canada all the way to Cuyama.

And I'm also a board member of the 

California Apple Commission, and I hear the grower 

concerns. And constantly we have seminars, and 

I hear in the field that this is their biggest 

problem.

Until the year 2014, the NOSB allowed 

antibiotics to be used in production. And after 

that, we've had to improvise with brand new 

products that amounted to dangerous experiments.

During the last six years, at least 20 

new organic blight control materials have hit the 

market, and none of them have really turned out 

to be that good. They cause damage, they cause 

the trees to be -- either that or not work. There's 

11 recent studies that have decided -- check these 

new broad things, new materials for efficacy. And 

results from all these studies have shown that 

they're not as effective as the old antibiotics 

or the conventional kasumin.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Let's see, times are really tough for 

growers right now. The quantity and quality of 

farm labor is lacking. Global warming is causing 

warmer winters, the rising temperature is causing 

erratic bloom, like right now, allowing blight 

material to increase with a longer period of 

disease susceptibility. Instead of normal bloom 

of two weeks, we have a bloom that goes on for a 

month.

Orchardists plant their trees as a long 

term investment. It costs 30,000 to plant a modern 

orchard. We don't really begin to recoup our costs 

for four or five years with apples and seven years 

with pears.

Growers need some stability these days. 

They need to have confidence their trees will be 

protected from damage and death by having access 

to an effective organically approved blight 

product. And kasumin would be a game changer in 

that regard.

So that's pretty much -- it looks like 

my time has run out. Are there any questions?

MR. ELA: Are there any questions from 

the Board? Thank you, Bill. We will -- has a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

petition been submitted for that?

MR. DENEVAN: Yes, there was, 

yesterday, by Zea Sonnabend, a former member of 

your group, and the California Apple Commission.

MR. ELA: Yes. So we will obviously 

be reviewing that, so thank you for the input on 

that.

MR. DENEVAN: Okay.

MR. ELA: I'm going to -- take care, 

Bill. I'm going to do a --

MR. DENEVAN: All right.

MR. ELA: -- quick of the people we 

skipped. We have one more speaker. But I just 

want to check if Cali Alexander, Vamshi Chintha, 

Jorge Gomez, Emily -- nope, excuse me, Dennis 

Dean, Ki Song Lee, or Annie Kustermann are on the 

line anywhere?

If you are, let Michelle know. 

Otherwise, we're going to go to Alesia Bock, and 

she will be our final speaker today. Alesia, 

please go ahead.

MS. BOCK: I'm Alesia, can you hear me?

MR. ELA: We can.

MS. BOCK: Normally, the last speaker 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

was between you and the reception. But today, I'm 

between you and your kitchen. So thank you for 

letting me share today.

I'm Alesia Bock with Agrisystems 

International. And I am in an organic sustainable 

food consulting company in Columbus, Ohio.

I just wanted to thank the NOP and NOSB 

for your service, send a warm welcome to the new 

members. Your job is very important and, if 

nothing else, it's clear by now that these issues 

are not black and white. Your diligence and 

thoughtful review of all stakeholder comments is 

appreciated. I miss your smiling faces, and I look 

forward to seeing everyone in person again.

Second, I wanted to share comments 

regarding the EPA List 4 inerts. I agree with 

OTA's written comments, and I urge the NOP to 

implement the 2015 NOSB recommendation to resolve 

this long-standing discrepancy.

This is an organic stakeholder 

priority, and I think it would be very disruptive 

to organic production if EPA List 4 were delisted 

without a valid replacement system. We need a 

current and reliable framework, and the EPA SCIL 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

listings to be a great place to start. While we 

can't continue to reference an unsupported EPA 

list, organic producers need this critical tool 

to ensure they have pest control materials 

available.

Finally, in regard to sunset materials, 

I agree with comments received so far in favor of 

relisting. These materials have been vetted 

against OFPA criteria, are considered essential 

for the reasons listed by the commenters, and do 

not have a viable organic alternative at this time.

Keep in mind that sometimes no comment 

received for a sunset material does not indicate 

that it is no longer needed. Sodium bicarbonate 

is a great example where it is so clearly needed 

that no comments are necessary.

If sunset materials are removed 

prematurely, it does nothing but restrict the 

organic industry while conventional food 

production continues unabated.

It is important to remember that our 

organic toolbox has steadily gotten smaller. Only 

six synthetics have been added, but 77 have been 

removed between 2008 and 2018. While the National 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

List is small compared to conventional food inputs, 

it is critical to organic stakeholders.

As an example, this is not the time to 

reduce sanitation material options for organic 

processors. In light of COVID, it is even more 

critical to ensure that materials are available 

where they are needed, i.e. cleaning materials.

A robust supply, as the previous 

commenter mentioned, are not only necessary for 

healthcare workers but also for food producers, 

especially in regional hot spots. This is 

something to consider when evaluating commercial 

availability.

During this time of uncertainty, it has 

become clear how dependent we are on each other. 

But the organic industry is strong. We may have 

differences of opinion, but we agree on the 

overarching goal to ensure that consumers have 

access to healthy organic products. This helps 

all of us. Thank you again for the opportunity 

to provide comment.

MR. ELA: Are there any questions for 

Alesia?

I have one question, Alesia, just can't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

end the public comments without a question here. 

But if we were to transition from List 4 to the 

Safer Choice program, are there any 

materials -- what would you propose to, if there 

are some discrepancies between the two lists, how 

would you propose that we resolve those 

discrepancies as we move forward?

MS. BOCK: You know, kind of where we 

left it a few years ago was that this was going 

to be a combined effort between USDA, NOSB, EPA. 

I know that there might be some discrepancies on 

the new list versus the old one, but doing nothing 

is probably not an option either.

So I think we have to take them on a 

case by case basis. And I'm not sure within the 

framework of the regulations for OFPA how it would 

work, but it feels like it has to be a combined 

effort between the two agencies at a minimum.

MR. ELA: Right. Any other questions 

for Alesia?

All right, congratulations to 

everybody. I just want to appreciate all the 

commenters, and the Board, and especially the NOP 

staff in the background that nobody sees for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

hosting us and for all the comments. These things 

truly do help us deliberate on these often very 

difficult questions, and sometimes confusing. So 

the comments from everybody are greatly 

appreciated in helping us gain a collective wisdom 

of our stakeholders.

We are going to be recessing until April 

29th, at which point we will be having the formal 

public meeting of the NOSB with a discussion 

between the Board members. That meeting will be 

virtual, yet again. But it will be on a different 

platform. It will be on the GlobalMeet platform.

And if you have not received 

instructions of how to get on that, either check 

the NOP website or contact the NOP staff. 

Obviously the Board doesn't have lots of votes up 

for this meeting, but the discussions at this 

meeting certainly are going to inform the votes 

in the fall meeting. So this is an important 

meeting in terms of setting the stage for further 

votes.

I do want to say that these have been 

sort of strange times, and we hear loud and clear 

the importance of in-person meetings, and our 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

ability to talk to people and have other groups 

meet and things. We take that very seriously. 

And it's my personal hope that we continue to have 

in-person meetings.

But given the circumstances this 

virtual meeting, I think, is a great way to go. 

So with that, does anybody on the Board have any 

final comments that we need to address, or 

Michelle, or any of the NOP program?

DR. TUCKER: I wanted to say thank you, 

Steve, that was beautifully done. It's incredibly 

complex to run two days, five hours each of this 

many people coming on for three minutes, going off 

for three minutes. You are a classy, cool guy and 

we are so grateful. Thank you very much.

MR. ELA: And Michelle, can we make 

sure we get that captured in the minutes and on 

the transcript?

MS. ARSENAULT: We're recording.

(Laughter.)

MS. ARSENAULT: Allegra is on the line 

with us, writing down every word.

MR. ELA: I need to put that up on my 

wall. Thank you, Jenny. And again, the NOP staff 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in the background is what really makes this work. 

So with that we will recess until April 29th. 

Thank you all for your patience. Sorry to be ten 

minutes over, but appreciate all the comments. 

Everybody take care, and have a good night. 

Michelle, did you want to say one last thing?

MS. ARSENAULT: I did, yes. I just 

want to let folks know that we should have the links 

to get into the GlobalMeet meeting posted on the 

NOSB's meeting page by early next week, I hope.

And just for those of you still on the 

phone, just a heads up. There will be four 

separate links. The meeting is two hours in the 

morning and two in the afternoon for two days. 

So there will be a separate link for each one of 

those sessions, just so you keep an eye out for 

that. Thank you, Steve.

MR. ELA: And the meeting, yes, we're 

going to GlobalMeet. It's just to keep this 

organic community nimble and to keep practicing 

your powers of figuring things out on the fly. 

So thank you, everybody for doing that.

And we won't see you nor hear you next 

Tuesday, except for the Board. But we hope you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

attend, and follow us, and give us feedback. All 

right, take care, everybody.

MS. ARSENAULT: Thanks, everyone.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 5:11 p.m.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

+ + + + +

NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS BOARD

+ + + + +

SPRING 2020 MEETING

+ + + + +

WEDNESDAY

APRIL 29, 2020

+ + + + +

The Board met telephonically at 11:00 

a.m. EDT, Steve Ela, Chair, presiding.

PRESENT

STEVE ELA, Chair

SCOTT RICE, Vice Chair

JESSE BUIE, Secretary

SUE BAIRD

ASA BRADMAN

JERRY D'AMORE

RICK GREENWOOD

KIM HUSEMAN

MINDEE JEFFERY

DAVE MORTENSEN

EMILY OAKLEY

NATE POWELL-PALM

A-DAE ROMERO-BRIONES

DAN SEITZ

WOOD TURNER
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

STAFF PRESENT

MICHELLE ARSENAULT, NOSB Advisory Board 

Specialist, National Organic Program

DAVID GLASGOW, Associate Deputy Administrator, 

National Organic Program

DEVON PATTILLO, Materials Specialist, National 

Organic Program

DR. JENNIFER TUCKER, Ph.D., Deputy 

Administrator, National Organic Program; 

Designated Federal Official

BRUCE SUMMERS, Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service 

SHANNON NALLY YANESSA, Assistant Director, 

Standards Division, National Organic 

Program
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

CONTENTS

Call to Order ................................. 4

Agenda Overview ............................... 5

Introductions ................................ 27

Secretary's Report ........................... 41

USDA/AMS/NOP Update .......................... 54

Compliance, Accreditation, and Certification

Subcommittee............................ 95

Materials Subcommittee ...................... 101

Topics: Discussion document: Research

Priorities 2020

Crops Committee

Topics: Proposal: Paper (Plant pots and other

crop production aids) - petitioned .......... 116

Discussion Document: Wild, native fish

for liquid fish products .................... 143

Discussion Document: Biodegradable

biobased mulch annotation change ............ 158

2022 Sunset substances review:

Soap-based algicide/demossers ............... 180

Ammonium carbonate .......................... 181

Soaps, insecticidal ......................... 183

Vitamin D3 .................................. 184

Aquatic plant extracts ...................... 185

Lignin sulfonate ............................ 195

Sodium silicate ........................ 196

EPA List 4 - Inerts of minimal concern ...... 198

Arsenic ..................................... 226

Strychnine .................................. 226

Adjourn ..................................... 229
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

(11:01 a.m.)

MS. ARSENAULT: Hello, everybody. This 

is Michelle from NOP. I have one minute after the 

hour, actually, apologies for my tardiness. We're 

going to get started and I believe I'm going to 

turn the mic over to Jenny Tucker who will call 

the NOSB meeting to order.

DR. TUCKER: Hello, everyone, and 

thank you so much for joining us today. My name 

is Jennifer Tucker. I'm the Deputy Administrator 

of the National Organic Program which is part of 

USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service or AMS.

I am serving as USDA's Designated 

Federal Officer for this meeting. This session 

continues our spring 2020 National Organic 

Standards Board Meeting which started last week 

with two online public comment sessions.

Steve Ela, the board chair, will be 

introducing board members in a little bit. 

Right now, I'd like to briefly 

introduce and thank key National Organic Program 

team members. First, Michelle Arsenault, our 

Advisory Board Specialist. Michelle does an 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

amazing job with these meetings and given the 

specific dynamics of this online format, we truly 

applaud her commitment and skill. Now I know you 

folks are only listening but this is how you can 

applaud in Zoom. You wave both hands and that's 

the way you show applause. So everybody at home 

let's go ahead and do an applause for Michelle 

because we would be doing that together in the room. 

So occasionally, I will signal applause and that's 

how we do it.

I also want to thank David Glasgow, 

Associate Deputy Administrator, who has done a 

tremendous amount of work to bring us together like 

this today. 

Devon Pattillo, our Agriculture 

Marketing Specialist has been wearing several hats 

over the last few months, including supporting the 

Board's technical needs. Thank you so, so much, 

Devon, for all your work.

And finally, Shannon Nally Yanessa is 

our Standards Division Director and is leading that 

team beautifully.

Let's take a quick look at our agenda. 

Michelle, will you advance to that slide?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We're meeting from 11:00 to 4:00 

Eastern today and tomorrow with an hour break in 

the middle of each day. The agenda generally 

adheres to our standard format, except we completed 

comments last week. Here's the order of events 

on the screen.

Now, I'd like to turn the floor to the 

AMS Administrator, Bruce Summers. In that role, 

he leads the myriad of programs across our Agency 

from commodity-focused programs to transportation 

and marketing to laboratories to organics. 

Bruce is my boss and it is a true, true 

honor to work for him. He's an incredibly 

thoughtful, caring, smart, and committed leader 

and I am so grateful he is here.

Bruce, I turn the floor to you.

MR. SUMMERS: All right, thank you, 

Jenny. Good morning, everybody. And I want to 

say welcome to the board members and to the broader 

organic community who have joined us for this 

virtual meeting. It's great to be able to talk 

to you all this morning. I'd much rather be in 

the same room with all of you, but that just isn't 

possible right now, is it? 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I hope in October, it will be possible 

for us to get together in person again, but that's 

not certain either. So I think we have to be 

resilient, find other ways to do business, and 

embrace the technology, and keep moving forward. 

And I want to congratulate you all for 

agreeing to hold this National Organic Standards 

Board meeting virtually. It might have been 

easier to simply postpone the meeting, but I think 

it's really critical that we keep working, keep 

making progress, maintain our focus on carrying 

out our responsibilities to the best of our ability 

in this very unusual situation we are finding 

ourselves in. So I think it's great that you all 

are proceeding with this important meeting despite 

all the challenges, and I congratulate you, and 

I thank you for that.

You know, at AMS, we're working really 

hard not to miss a beat either. We just keep 

providing all the service to our stakeholders that 

they need and expect and we're continuing to make 

progress on high-priority issues that we were 

dealing with before the pandemic and we're trying 

not to drop the ball and keep all of those really 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

high priority issues moving forward.

A little bit about AMS's status during 

this situation. All of our employees that can are 

working remotely. That's presented some 

challenges, but thankfully we have all of this 

technology like Zoom and Microsoft Teams and Skype, 

so really, we've been able to do a great job. But 

I think it's important to note and what some people 

may not realize while all that can are working 

remotely, that's a very small percentage of the 

AMS staff. 

The vast majority of our employees 

don't work in an office. They work in food 

processing facilities. They work on terminal 

markets. They work on farms all over the country. 

They're along the border at points of entry and 

the grain elevators, inspecting grain for export. 

So for thousands of our AMS employees, they are 

not working remotely. They are out on the line, 

the grading lines, the processing lines, at the 

borders, doing the grading and auditing work that 

is so important including our market news reporters 

that are walking the terminal markets collecting 

that critical information.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I'd like to give a little bit of a 

shout-out to the market news folks. AMS and USDA 

market news is kind of a unique thing. Not even 

very many countries around the world have a similar 

service, but that data that is mostly given to us 

voluntarily from our industry stakeholders and has 

proven to be really invaluable in helping keep the 

Secretary and his team up to date on what's going 

on out in the marketplace as well as members of 

Congress, and sometimes the White House as well. 

So I'm proud of the job that all of our folks are 

doing, whether they're teleworking or out there 

grading products or collecting market news data, 

AMS is really operating wide open as best they can 

given the challenges. 

So it's not business as usual, but we 

are open and we are working really hard to maintain 

our level of service while at the same time 

balancing out the need to protect the health of 

our employees. So we're trying very carefully to 

follow all the CDC guidelines and keep our folks 

safe and healthy through this process.

For the National Organic Program, Jenny 

will provide, I think, a lot more detail in her 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

remarks, but I want to say how proud I am of the 

NOP staff that they've continued to move forward 

on important initiatives like strengthening 

organic enforcement, like origin of livestock, 

even new initiatives with electronic import 

certificates, just naming a few. 

So I really want you all to know we are 

doing everything we can to keep moving forward, 

keep the business open. I think the fact that you 

all are having this meeting today and tomorrow is 

an example of that. And so I think we're all doing 

our best to keep the business, so to speak, moving 

forward.

A few other details you may be 

interested in, AMS is lending a hand on a wide array 

of issues with respect to USDA's response to the 

COVID-19 situation. Many of you know, AMS 

purchases food. I mean that's one of our signature 

programs at AMS. In normal years, we buy that food 

for school lunch and Emergency Food Assistance 

Programs which is food going to food banks. 

We buy a lot of food, billions of 

dollars of food every year. In recent years, 

that's gone up quite a bit. The last two years, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

we've spent a lot of money and a lot of time 

purchasing food, surplus commodities that were 

impacted by the trade tariff situation. That's 

to the tune of a little over a billion dollars in 

2018 and now it's 2019 and 2020, we're talking about 

another billion and a half just for trade 

mitigation. In addition, we spend almost a 

billion dollars a year in moving surplus 

commodities into the Emergency Food Assistance 

Program. 

Well, now, with the new situation and 

you've seen the pictures on the news and you've 

heard the stories and I'm sure some of your guys 

that are producers are feeling this pain directly, 

but with the closure of the food service industry 

around the country, and the disruption to the 

supply chain that that's caused, there's a lot of 

food out in the countryside and it's having trouble 

getting into the retail sector which is where 

everyone is buying their food now. 

So you may have heard that AMS will 

start next month which is only a couple days away 

in May. We will be purchasing $300 million worth 

of food a month, $100 million for fresh fruits and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

vegetables, $100 million for dairy, and $100 

million for meat. And we're going to work with 

the food service sector that's been so devastated 

by the closure of restaurants and hotels and things 

like that, we're going to use the food services' 

logistics power, so to speak, and their staff who 

don't have as much work to do as they used to, to 

procure food, pack it into boxes, and then deliver 

it to nonprofit organizations that provide food 

to families in need. So it's a brand new 

initiative. We've never done anything quite like 

this before. 

We've had great support from the 

producer community, from the recipient agencies, 

and the food service folks are excited about this, 

too. So we are rapidly working through that 

contracting process. We hope to have it wrapped 

up this week to award contracts to food service 

distributors next week, and begin shipping food 

in boxes to food banks and other nonprofits the 

week after that. So by the middle of May, we should 

have a tremendous amount of high-quality food, all 

grown in the United States, ready to be shipped 

to food banks. And so we're really excited about 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

being involved in that program. It's a major 

effort, but one we are confident that we can 

deliver.

The other thing that AMS is doing with 

respect to COVID-19, we are working with our 

colleagues across the Department to work on the 

CARES Act legislation which calls for direct 

payments to producers. It's going to be across 

the board. Producers of specialty crops, dairy, 

meat, row crops, a very complicated structure we're 

trying to put in place, but we're working 

diligently, believe it or not, day and night and 

weekends, to get that program designed. We hope 

to have that published very soon and begin 

implementation. 

Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue 

has asked the implementation of that program start 

by the end of May, so a very short time line 

involving and impacting tens of thousands, 

probably hundreds of thousands of producers, 

including small, local and regional including 

organic producers. Really, hopefully, no farmers 

will be left out of that program. And a lot of 

details still to be worked out on how producers 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

can apply and work the process through, but we are 

working through all those details now. 

It's somewhat more complicated for 

specialty crops, for example, because specialty 

crops typically aren't involved in these kind of 

programs the way like corn and soybeans and some 

of those types of crops are. So they have a lot 

of work to do, but we are working as fast as we 

can to get that program stood up and ready to be 

implemented.

I don't want to use all the time here. 

I want to save some time for questions.

Jenny, let me just say thank you to the 

board, thank you to Chairman Steve Ela for 

continuing to represent the organic community 

through the NOSB. 

I always want to say at the end because 

I never want you guys to think we forgot about this. 

This partnership that we have with the NOSB between 

USDA and AMS and NOSB is really unique and extremely 

important to us. We certainly value your 

recommendations which you prepare for USDA, and 

we're just really pleased to have this relationship 

and be able to work with you all. And I'm so 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

thrilled that you all are having this meeting 

today. 

So thank you very much for your 

resilience and willing to try something brand new. 

And I know it's going to be successful. So thank 

you very much.

And Jenny, I'm happy to take some 

questions if anybody wants to delve into any of 

those issues further or anything else they might 

want to talk about.

DR. TUCKER: Chris, thank you so, so 

much. We are truly thankful to you for joining 

us today.

In a couple of minutes, I will turn it 

over to Steve Ela to facilitate some Q and A from 

the board for Bruce, but first, before I do that, 

let me thank the National Organic Standards Board 

myself. These 15 members are amazing people. 

They're bringing a diverse set of experiences and 

perspectives to the table today and we are 

incredibly grateful for their service and their 

good spirit and flexibility as we planned this 

meeting's approach. 

So particularly, a big thank you to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Steve, the chair of the board and the chair of this 

meeting. So let's -- I don't know if you can 

activate my camera again, Michelle, but we're going 

to do another applause for Steve to thank him for 

his service. 

And Steve, I'm going to turn it over 

to you for Q and A for Bruce and then for a formal 

roll call with the board. So applause to everyone 

attending. Thank you so much.

Steve, over to you. 

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jenny, and thank 

you, Bruce. I know your schedule is very busy and 

we appreciate you taking time to come give us a 

few minutes and I also appreciated when we had our 

new member training back in February when we all 

could still move around, but you came in and 

introduced yourself personally to the new members. 

I think it's important to give some context for 

what we all do.

So I'll just go right to some questions 

here. Emily has her hand raised. So Emily, would 

you address Bruce?

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you so much, Bruce, 

for your reassurances that organic producers, and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

direct to consumer growers, and diverse farm 

growers will be able to access the USDA's COVID 

funding, particularly the CARES Act. I'm 

wondering also if there are steps for purchases 

from the producers that might otherwise have a 

difficult time accessing some of that direct 

purchasing money. And what those steps might be 

that you know of now know of now and can share with 

us.

MR. SUMMERS: That's a great question, 

Emily. Thank you. I probably should have 

addressed that directly. So thank you for raising 

that.

So yes, the Box Program, the Farmers 

to Families Box that we're calling it, we 

definitely are working to set that up in a way that 

small, local, regional sectors can supply food into 

that program.

We also expect that many food hubs will 

submit proposals to be on the food service 

distribution side and so we're excited to have the 

opportunity to work with not only small producers, 

but also some of the food hubs that have been very 

successful and have very sophisticated 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

distribution systems already set up. That's the 

logistics we want to take advantage of. And so 

we have absolutely set this box program up with 

them in mind as well as conventional. But 

absolutely, expect them to have a big role in that. 

Thank you for that question. I should 

have said that directly, so I appreciate you 

letting me say that.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you.

MR. ELA: And Bruce, I know during the 

public comment webinar there was some rumblings 

among the group of -- I know we were personally 

able to accept the PPP loans as a number of the 

other growers said that their banks -- or people 

said that that was not allowed. I know that's been 

kind of readdressed at this point with the new 

legislation. But I know that there was certainly 

some confusion in the community, especially among 

smaller banks. So your support on keeping that 

moving I think is greatly appreciated and is a real 

help for all of us.

It looks like Nate has a question.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Thanks again, so 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

much for joining us, Bruce. We really appreciate 

your time. And I also wanted to thank you for 

mentioning the origin of livestock. As you well 

know at this point, the entire organic dairy sector 

or the entire organic industry is really eager for 

this final rule to be made and to clarify and clean 

up the origin of livestock component pertaining 

to the dairy sector.

And so I just wanted to emphasize on 

behalf of the dairy sector that we're really hoping 

this rule goes to final rule and we're able to have 

-- experience a little bit of a clean-up of the 

oversupply of milk that we've seen due to a lack 

of clarity in the respective transition status of 

continued transition of dairy heifers from 

conventional to organic, so I really appreciate 

your time today.

MR. SUMMERS: Yes, thanks, Nate. So 

on that, it will go to a final. I mean we are moving 

this. It's really in the final stages of clearance 

within the Department. 

So Jenny, this is a nice thing about 

being virtual, she can't kick me if I say too much, 

but I think she'll give you more details on the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

exact status of that, but it's getting very close 

to being able to leave the Department. It's on 

track.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Bruce. The oral 

comments, that was a continuous feed from our 

stakeholders of the importance of that rule. So 

we appreciate you shepherding that through. 

It looks like Scott has a question. 

Scott, we're not hearing you.

MR. RICE: Sorry about that. I had to 

unmute there for a second. Can you hear me now?

MR. ELA: Yes, we've got you.

MR. RICE: Great. Thanks again, 

Bruce. On a similar note to the origin of 

livestock, I had a question for you further on that 

strengthening organic enforcement rule that we're 

all eagerly awaiting. I understand that's in 

final, final clearance as well, but I just wanted 

to reiterate the importance of that rule, 

especially in light of kind of some adjusted 

day-to-day activities that the organic community 

is adapting to now. Certainly, certifiers looking 

at different ways of conducting our work, the NOP 

and Jenny and her team doing the same with 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

accreditation oversight and just became now more 

important than it already was in light of all those 

things. Hopefully, we can see that come out 

despite some of the challenges we're all seeing 

with the pandemic.

MR. SUMMERS: Yes, thanks for that, 

Scott. I don't really think that the COVID 

pandemic is going to slow that down. That's moving 

forward. The team has done a great job of kind 

of maintaining their focus on that. It's going 

to be a bit of a race, I think, to see which comes 

out right, origin of livestock or the strengthening 

organic enforcement. Maybe we can see both on the 

same day. Wouldn't that be a lot of reading all 

at one time? But they are getting very close. You 

probably maybe are getting tired of hearing that, 

but the strengthening organic enforcement is 

something that the Secretary has supported and he's 

excited about getting this out. And I think we're 

really close. So hang in there, but we're open. 

The Federal Register is open. OBPA and OMB are 

open, so these rules are moving forward.

MR. RICE: Thanks. I appreciate 

hearing that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Bruce, I have a question for 

myself and I think it came up during the National 

Organic Coalition meeting yesterday as well. I 

know there are a lot of different entities out there 

that have control, but certainly one of the main 

concerns has been farmers markets and their impact 

on specialty crop producers in making sure that 

markets are declared essential even though back 

in our state they are. The local health 

departments still have some jurisdiction and that 

has slowed some openings, but I think that anything 

the Department can do, AMS in general for making 

sure those markets are essential and of course, 

they're going to want to follow all of the proper 

protocols. 

Our argument has been that if people 

don't shop at a market, they're likely going to 

go to a grocery store. So having a market closed 

-- the only thing it does is drive people back to 

a grocery store and it doesn't really benefit the 

specialty crop producers or our consumers. And 

so really trying to help the various states and 

local entities find a good way to keep markets safe, 

but also open because otherwise we're -- otherwise 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I'd say we're back to the grocery store model and 

I think markets shouldn't have to go way above that, 

but we do want them safe. So anything you can do 

there that would be greatly appreciated.

MR. SUMMERS: Yeah, thanks for that, 

Steve. You know, I've heard some really 

innovative stories about what some markets are 

doing out in the countryside to stay open, but also 

maintain the social distancing and doing some 

things like that, additional hand-washing 

facilities and things, so it's kind of neat to see 

what's going on out there. 

You know, we have a USDA farmers market 

every Friday outside of -- on the side of the Mall 

right next to the administration building called 

the Whitten Building of USDA, and AMS is 

responsible for pulling that together and kind of 

managing that market from May until October. And 

it's closed right now because really there's nobody 

going downtown. Everybody in D.C. is primarily 

working remotely, other than a handful that 

actually go into the building. 

Of course, the museums are closed, so 

a lot of the tourists that are usually walking the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Mall this time of year aren't there. So it makes 

sense for the market to be closed right now. 

But as we look to what's going to happen 

this summer and what kind of reopening we're all 

going to try to implement in our states and cities, 

we're looking at what we can do at the USDA farmers 

market to implement the types of practices that 

would keep people safe and allow them to keep 

shopping. So we kind of view that USDA farmers 

market as a bit of a laboratory. That's why it 

was put up a decade or so ago. And so we just view 

this as another challenge. What can we do with 

USDA farmers market to maybe show what other 

markets are doing to ensure health and safety and 

maybe some other innovative things we can do. So 

we are wrestling with that from both angles, Steve, 

what's going on out in the countryside, but what 

are we going to do in Washington, D.C. and we hope 

we can provide some leadership there and can find 

a way to keep that open. 

So it's a really vibrant market. If 

you've ever been there on a Friday afternoon, it's 

a really neat thing to have right on the side of 

the Capitol Mall. It's something we're definitely 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

talking about and hoping we can get back in there 

at some point and get going on as we reopen and 

whatever reopen looks like, right? I know we're 

all grappling with that now.

MR. ELA: And I think as a national 

organization if you can guys can help highlight 

what is working and isn't working in the various 

states just so that people don't have to recreate 

the wheel on a state by state basis, but say well, 

California tried this. These are the protocols 

that are working and help kind of accumulate some 

of that data, it would be wonderful.

MR. SUMMERS: And so we're looking at 

some things we can do under our Transportation and 

Marketing Program where we have different grants 

and cooperative agreements. We work with a lot 

of universities. And we're looking right now, 

looking at possibilities of how we can help fund 

some research and identify best practices that are 

going on. We know that's only helpful if it's 

really quick feedback, so we're kind of looking 

at kind of some rapid response types of studies 

we can do and case studies we can pull together 

and then make them available to the primarily 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

local, regional organic sector of agriculture. 

So that's something we're kicking around. I hope 

we might have an announcement on that in a week 

or two. 

But no, there seems to be our -- we are 

-- and AMS is kind of neat, right? We look at 

agriculture across the whole board and I want you 

to know we are looking at issues and ways that we 

can work with the farmers markets and the food hubs 

and that local regional sector and organic sector 

to hopefully provide some resources that will be 

helpful immediately, not a year from now.

MR. ELA: Thank you so much. Jenny, 

it looks like I don't see any other questions from 

the board and personally and as board chair, thank 

you, Bruce, for taking the time to come in. It's 

a great contact and a great context of the board.

MR. SUMMERS: Thank you very much, you 

all, and I hope you have a great virtual meeting.

Jenny, anything else you need from me?

DR. TUCKER: Bruce, thank you so much 

for being here. It was great to have you be here 

with the board today. It makes it an even more 

special occasion so thank you for everything you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

do for the agency.

MR. SUMMERS: I don't know about that, 

but I appreciate the invitation and I appreciate 

your questions, you all. Take care.

DR. TUCKER: Be well. Let's give 

Bruce a round of applause here. Wave your hands. 

So thank you very, very much.

And Steve, the show is yours for the 

official roll call of the board members and then 

the various reports for the board.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Jenny. 

And thank you to everybody in the virtual audience 

and on the board. I know some of you are very used 

to virtual meetings, some of us aren't so much. 

So I think it's been a good morning for us all 

and keeps our brains nimble.

At this point I'd like to do a roll call 

of the board and have each of you do a short 

introduction of yourselves as we go through. So 

if you could at least turn your video on for the 

board members, if you would so like for each of 

these to be -- we'll turn the video off after this 

so that we can give the stakeholders a chance to 

see who has their haircut, who has a big beard or 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

not and it gives the stakeholders context. 

Sue, could we start with you?

MS. BAIRD: Yes, hi. I tried to start 

the video and could not. I'm Sue Baird and I'm 

from Missouri. I represent special interest 

groups. I am the Executive Director of 

Mid-America Food Hub. I'm also with Food Hub, 

Mid-America Organic Association, and I've had many 

years of experience in the organic world and thank 

you for having me.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Sue. Asa, 

continue.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. I'm Asa 

Bradman and I'm a professor at UC Berkeley in the 

Center for Environmental Research and Children's 

Health and have worked for many years on issues 

around environmental health and children, 

families, and farm workers, and other agricultural 

communities in California. I have a big of a 

corona hair here. I'm going to get my daughter 

to give me a haircut this weekend.

MR. ELA: I might have the board 

members say what year you're in. Asa is in his 

fourth year. Sue is in the fourth year as well.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Jesse.

MR. BUIE: Jesse Buie. I'm president 

of Ole Brook Organics in Brookhaven, Mississippi. 

I'm certified in mixed vegetables and melons and 

I also have my handling certification. I sit in 

the -- one of the organic producer slots. I think 

this is my last year. And my hair is much grayer.

MR. ELA: We'll have to do a study of 

board members, just like presidents, to see if our 

hair turns gray after being on the board.

Rick, you're next.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay, thank you. I'm 

Rick Greenwood, professor at UCLA. I sit in one 

of the environmental seats. I'm a California 

organic avocado grower which I know the apple

people hate, but have been a certified organic 

grower for about 20 years. And the only thing I 

can say is I have either the good fortune or the 

misfortune to be on the California Governor's COVID 

Testing Task Force which is taking way more time 

than I would like. But it's important work, as 

you know, because it certainly has touched 

everyone's lives. What we're trying to do is 

figure out ways to get things back to normal. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

In terms of hair, I don't have any, so 

who cares?

MR. ELA: Excellent. And Rick, you're 

in your third year, is that right?

MR. GREENWOOD: I think it's my 12th 

year, actually.

(Laughter.)

MR. ELA: It may seem like it. 

Jerry, I skipped over you, I apologize. 

So Jerry, you're next.

MR. D'AMORE: Not a problem. Jerry 

D'Amore, class of 2025, so brand new. I spent the 

last 20 years specializing in berry crops. Prior 

to that, 15 years of owning and operating a 

hydroponic farm that did a lot of lettuces and herbs 

and then later on tomatoes, cucumbers, and peppers.

I'm currently spending an awful lot of 

time on the logistical portion of our business, 

that piece that gets the produce from the farms 

to the distribution centers which has taken a hit. 

I'm not sure everybody recognizes the extent of 

that.

And I'm delighted to be on this board. 

It's an honor and a privilege. Thank you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Kim, you are next as a new 

member.

MS. HUSEMAN: Hi, good morning. My 

name is Kimberly Huseman. I, too, am part of the 

freshman class. This is my first board meeting 

as a board member. I sit on the handlers seat. 

 Currently, I'm the Director of Specialty 

Ingredient Purchasing for Pilgrim's. My 

background is in commodity trading and logistics, 

both on the conventional and the organic side. 

I'm really excited for this meeting and 

in the future ones. I think coming in especially 

in in the freshman class of a virtual meeting, this 

is, although a new environment for everybody, it's 

our first one. So it's exciting to be a part of 

this -- this new world too.

MR. ELA: Mindee, you are next.

MS. JEFFERY: So hello, everyone. I 

am a retailer. I've been around organic food 

retailing for about 20 years and believe me, if 

you could see the big white streak in my hair, but 

I really need somebody to shave the sides. 

I currently work for Eastside Food 

Co-op in northeast Minneapolis and I feel grateful 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and if you could see the response of our local 

grocery community. We serve the local community.

I feel so humbled and grateful to be 

working with great teams across the country so we 

can provide food to this community and to seeing 

all the hard work and people being brave about 

showing up for work every day. So thanks for all 

the work you do all over the country, providing 

organic food to everyone.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Mindee. Dave.

MR. MORTENSEN: I'm Dave Mortensen and 

I am in my fourth year. I am serving the scientist 

seat of the board. I'm a faculty member and chair 

of the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Food Systems 

Department at the University of New Hampshire. 

I'm sitting up on the second floor of my house 

looking out. We had a hard frost here last night, 

so we're still kind of on the tail end of the winter 

into spring here. 

My work over the 30-plus years at 

several universities has focused on predominantly 

on farm and farmer participatory research focused 

on organic systems and sustainable agricultural 

systems, ecosystems and service measurements and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that sort of thing. Delighted to be here.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Dave. Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Steve. I'm 

Emily Oakley. I serve as one of the farmer 

representatives. I'm a full-time farmer in 

Oklahoma. I grow diverse organic vegetables and 

I sell those directly to consumers primarily and 

of course that's definitely been challenging in 

the last couple of months, but we are all adjusting 

to that. I am in my fifth and final year and I 

definitely have more --

MR. ELA: I just lost my audio --

Michelle, can you hear still hear me? Okay.

MR. BUIE: Did we lose Emily?

MR. ELA: Well, she just cut out, so 

we'll find out. I thought it might be me, but we'll 

move on to Nate.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Hi, everybody. 

Nate Powell-Palm. I'm based out of Bozeman, 

Montana. I'm part of the freshman class as well, 

first year. We are in the thick of planting our 

spring grains. We're raising yellow peas and 

spelts and durum and flax for fiber this year. 

And I'm really eager to turn the cows out on to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

pasture, but it's still a little bit short, so it's 

exciting when spring finally ramps up. 

I've been certified organic since 2008 

and run a first-generation grain and cattle 

operation. 

MR. ELA: Thanks, Nate. Scott.

MR. RICE: Good morning, everybody. 

Scott Rice. I'm the external affairs coordinator 

with the Washington State Department of Ag organic 

programs and I sit in the certifier's seat. I've 

been with WSDA for about 13 years and have been 

involved in all aspects of certification from 

review to a little bit of infection to our 

accreditation work. And this is my fifth and final 

year on the board.

 I am definitely sporting a little bit 

of COVID shag. I did update my headshot to be a

little more reflective of what I am now, but this 

is what I came up with and Michelle thought that 

maybe that wasn't the best option, so.

MR. ELA: I think Michelle was right 

when I saw that picture. 

A-dae, you're next.

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Good morning. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

A-dae Romero-Briones and I work for First Nations 

Development Institute. I run the native 

agriculture and food systems initiative. So we work 

with indigenous producers and community food 

projects across the country, Alaska, and Hawaii.

I sit in the consumer seat and I am in 

my last year, second to last meeting. Thanks.

MR. ELA: Thank you, A-dae. Dan, 

you're next.

DR. SEITZ: Hi, everyone. My name is 

Dan Seitz. I'm also in my fifth and last year. 

I serve as a public member consumer representative 

on the board. I live in the beautiful Berkshires 

of western Massachusetts. My regular work is 

serving as the Executive Director of the Council 

on Naturopathic Medical Education which accredits 

doctoral programs in naturopathic medicine and I'm 

also on the board of a food co-op in our town here. 

I've been involved with the alternative 

and natural health movement for about 30 years as 

an educator, accreditor, and regulator. And the 

great thing about natural health professions is 

that they understand the importance of real food 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

for keeping people healthy and building strong 

immune systems. 

And my formal professional background 

is in law and higher education. And just to say 

it's been an honor serving on the board and an honor 

serving with all of my colleagues. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Dan. Wood. 

Wood, we're not hearing you.

MR. WOOD: Sorry, I failed there on my 

first move as a board member. This is Wood Turner. 

I'm a senior vice president for impact with 

Agriculture Capital and AC Foods which is the 

grocer, packer, and shipper of a variety of 

permanent crops on the West Coast including organic 

blueberries and organic table grapes. I'm trained 

as an environmental and landscape planner and I'm 

focused on sustainability and climate solutions. 

I grew up in North Carolina, and after 

long stretches in Seattle and New Hampshire, I'm 

now based in California and am thrilled to be on 

the board. Thanks.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Thank you. Except for 

myself, have I missed anybody? I'm good at doing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that. 

Now I'll introduce myself. I'm Steve 

Ela, obviously chair of the board. I'm in my 

fourth year, and am a fruit grower out in western 

Colorado, on the far western side of the state, 

where we grow peaches, pears, apples, plums, and 

some heirloom tomatoes, and no avocados.

With that, I think that gets us through 

the roll call, and next I'll turn it over. I just 

want to do a little bit of housekeeping. 

For any votes we take today, I'm just 

going to go down the list and call on everybody 

so they can verbally vote. 

I believe we only have one vote 

scheduled so it's not a big deal, but just so our 

stakeholders know how we're going to handle votes. 

 

And then let me turn it over to Jesse 

for the Secretary's Report.

MR. BUIE: Okay. The minutes of the 

fall 2019 biannual public meeting have been 

distributed to the board members ahead of this 

meeting. Are there any corrections or comments?

Hearing none, the --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

CHAIRMAN ELA: Hearing --

MR. BUIE: Okay. 

CHAIRMAN ELA: Yeah, hearing none, 

we'll accept the minutes as they are. Thank you 

very much, Jesse. We do appreciate it. 

Okay, and next we will go down to the 

Chair's Report from NOSB.

So I'd just like to again start off by 

thanking the board, and the program, and AMS for 

allowing us to have this meeting in these 

extraordinary times.

Today I think I'd like to focus on three 

things. I want to talk about the nominations 

coming up. 

I kind of want to return to making sure 

we're all focused on the big picture of what we 

stand for in organics, and then talk a little bit 

about the consistency, and especially highlight 

again all the work on fraud and organic 

certification.

I know personally the great thing about 

an in-person meeting is that once I get there, I 

am focused strictly on NOSB things for the most 

part, except for in some of the off-hours when I'm 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

dealing with my own farm things.

I know it's a lot harder when you're 

working from home to not be distracted by other 

things, so I really appreciate all the board 

members and our stakeholders taking the time to 

carve out this meeting when I know that work things 

are right outside the door, kids are right there, 

and various other things.

So thank you for taking the focus even 

when we have many distractions, including the COVID 

crisis in our life.

I really wanted to look at the 

nominations coming up. We have five chairs open. 

As Michelle noted, we have two farmer seats, two 

public interest or consumer seats, one USDA 

accredited certification seat.

We're losing five great board members 

that have served in those seats, and I really hope 

our stakeholders and board members will encourage 

very capable and able people to apply.

I am especially concerned in the sense 

that we're losing people that really give us great 

diversity on the board. Jesse is from the south; 

Dave represents native populations. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And so I really hope that our 

stakeholders and both A-dae and Jesse will kind 

of beat the bushes down in those areas. I think 

it's really important that we have somebody from 

the south and somebody from native populations, 

and you know, and any of the under-served 

communities.

And it's a message to the NOP as well, 

and the program. And on up the chain, and I think

that those are very important aspects to the board 

that should be filled as we look at nominations.

But I think it's especially critical 

at this juncture that we keep the diversity aspect 

on the board.

Yeah, we certainly heard from some of 

the other growers on the public comment about the 

timing of the meeting. You know, obviously 

virtual meetings are much easier to attend, and 

we've seen some comments about the economics of 

attending meetings, and plane fares, and the hotel 

rooms, and such, so the virtual side of that really 

benefits. 

On the other hand, we all know how 

important it is, and the face-to-face 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

interactions, and the personal conversations, as 

well as to seeing body language, and all those 

things in a person-to-person meeting. So I'm 

hoping that this virtual meeting will not become 

permanent. 

I think our stakeholders have said how 

important those person-to-person meetings are, and 

I look forward to going back to the 

person-to-person format, but I think it will 

pay -- you know, in some way maybe we can work on 

how to keep some of that meeting, even when we're 

in person-to-person, be able to live stream it or 

webcast it, or something so that people can attend 

if they don't have the means or the time to attend 

the person-to-person meeting.

The other thing, and it struck me on 

one of the public comments, is that the NOSB really 

works so much on materials and managing, and 

looking at the National List, but we also work on 

the big picture, and that we don't want to lose 

track of the big picture in organics as we look 

at all these materials.

And I think that's a very good 

underlying mantra that I certainly took to heart.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And you know, we can get bogged down in these 

materials. They're all very critical and 

important to the organic industry, but we do 

continue to need to look at the big picture.

This meeting obviously was upended by 

the COVID crisis. I am very thankful that we had 

our new member training for our five new members 

right before all this hit because I think that 

member training being in person is critical, and 

the new members can chime in on that.

But I also know that inspections and 

certifications are being upended by this. You 

know, when talking to the program, a lot of the 

certifier audits are done desktop, and looking at 

possible fraud that can be done desktop so it is 

continuing, but we do know in-person inspections 

are important.

I know our certifiers are being nimble 

in how they approach certifications when they can't 

actually visit farms right now. But I also know 

it has an impact on new people wanting 

certification that have never had one before.

That truly requires an in-person visit, 

so I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but the organic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

community can continue to grow by welcoming in new 

people, people that have gone through the 

transition and maybe were very much looking forward 

to being fully certified.

I'm hoping that we'll find our ways to 

make that happen for those people, and also keep 

our current people that are certified whole and 

able to continue transactions. 

I mean, it was brought up with Bruce 

Summers, the insecurity of farms at this point. 

And you know, the dairy farmers certainly have been 

feeling that for a number of years, and they've 

let us know that.

But I think some people are doing very 

well, some people are really struggling, depending 

on their market streams, some people don't know 

yet.

But, you know, organic farming has 

always been about resiliency and ability to adapt, 

and I see that happening all the time with farmers, 

but I just want to highlight that there's a 

tremendous amount of insecurity out there among 

all of us just of what will happen this year 

economically, and whether we will have access to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

some of those federal programs, and how those will 

be distributed.

And so I'm going to, you know, ask the 

program and AMS to continue to help support us as 

organic farmers and what we do.

I truly believe we are more resilient 

than many other farms, but that doesn't mean we're 

bulletproof, and I recognize on our own farm, as 

well as many others, that that difficulty and 

uncertainty, we don't have an option to stop 

farming or close the business for a year, and I 

don't know anybody that does.

But, and so we all have to continue, 

and I'm going to recognize that.

You know, the organic community, we 

hear a lot of the divisions in our community at 

these meetings, and rightly so. You know, we have 

the NOSB to argue out the gray areas and such. 

But I also really want to recognize and 

remember that the USDA puts tremendous resources 

into this, that we have the backing of a large staff 

and of inspectors, and that is all being paid for 

through much of our tax money.

And so despite the divisions in our 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

community and the arguments over what is and isn't 

organic, I think it's always important to remember 

that it would be really hard to self-fund this 

program, like that was often done before the NOP.

And so I appreciate that support and 

the background that many of us don't see, and I 

always kind of want to remind our stakeholders that 

we have that, and it's not often seen.

In terms of consistency, we obviously 

on this board tend to deal with the 

inconsistencies.

It comes into play when there are 

inconsistencies between certifiers, whether it's 

paper pots, or hydroponics, or fatty alcohols.

We deal with those inconsistencies, but 

we know that those are the rare things and that 

most of what certifiers do are very consistent.

And again, I want to remind us of that, 

of you know, what we really do, we do it so well, 

and that often this board is the conduit for those 

inconsistencies.

And that's as it should be, that's why 

we're here, to listen to stakeholders and to listen 

to those arguments.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I truly believe that organics -- and 

I explain this to a lot of people that question 

organics and whether it's a meaningful label -- but 

there is no black and white between organics and 

conventional.

There's a continuum of gray areas. And 

our charge, and the NOP's charge, is to draw a line 

in that gray area somewhere and say this is organic 

and this isn't.

And I know we can argue whether that 

line should be an inch one way or the other, and 

we do argue that, and those are important 

arguments, but we really do distinguish the broader 

pool of organic from conventional, and soil 

building, and these various practices that really 

do help protect the environment and protect human 

health.

We may not always hit the mark exactly, 

but I think we do a darn good job of that.

With that, I hope that with the strength 

in organic enforcement coming out, the Origin of 

Livestock, as those documents come out and are put 

into rulemaking, and are published for public 

comment, I can't stress enough to our stakeholders 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

how important it is for you all to, and for members 

of the NOSB ourselves, to individually comment on 

those in that rulemaking process.

It is our voice that got them this far 

through the NOSB, and now they are actually out 

of the NOSB's hands and into the rulemaking 

process, and those comments on the rulemaking 

process can really make a big difference.

So I'll remind people that when those 

come out, to make those comments and help push them 

over the finish line. We all know how important 

those documents are. 

And finally, I just want to say that 

as we talk about fraud and the importance of how 

that affects our markets, and monitoring that, that 

we often are our best own inspectors and monitors.

I know so many of the fraud cases get 

brought up by other organic growers saying 

something seems strange, or something seems out 

of line, or this doesn't seem consistent.

And so especially in times of COVID when 

inspectors may not be able to be out as much, 

personally I hope that we, the board, and 

stakeholders will continue to self-police and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

monitor ourselves, and let the program know when 

there might be problems.

This is a truly unique meeting in many 

ways. It's virtual. I believe we only have one 

vote, which is highly unusual for an NOSB meeting.

It does make it easier, but when you 

look at the fall meeting, I think we possibly will 

make up for that in numbers of votes.

The Handling Committee, I don't have 

an exact count. It has six or seven petitions 

before them. It's a lot. It's a lot of work for 

the committee. The Crops Committee has several 

coming up, and of course, Livestock has a couple 

as well.

So I'm looking forward to working with 

the new board members, and their experience and 

their energy. We hope to make use of expertise 

of the outgoing board members as much as we can 

before they leave. And I really hope for, again, 

that diversity of nominations and selections. 

The board does important work, and it's 

kind of stunning sometimes to see what the 

collective wisdom of 15 people pops up with.

With that, I thank you all for being 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

nimble, for attending on short notice, for not 

always being able to know what the agenda was, or 

whether you should make reservations or not.

But it's good to be here. It's a 

pleasure to be chair of some really good people. 

And with that, that is my Chair's Report, and we'll 

move on. 

Are there any questions from the board 

real quickly before we move on to the National 

Organic Program Report that Jenny will give?

Great. With that, Jenny, I'd like to 

turn it back to you. 

I know you put a lovely report up on 

the Organic Integrity Learning Center, but I'm sure 

you'll add to that here. And I'd like you to take 

the floor.

 DR. TUCKER: Okay, thank you. And 

Steve, thank you so much for that terrific report. 

What a lovely sort of encapsulation, so thank you.

So National Organic Program update. 

As Steve just mentioned, this is sort of part two 

of our National Organic Standards Board update.

There is a longer update that's the 

standard length that we would generally do for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

these presentations. It's about 45 or 46 minutes.

 It is housed in the Learning Center. 

And so up on the screen right now is a look at 

what the different components of that presentation 

include.

That presentation's actually delivered 

by me and by a number of NOP staff members, so it's 

a good sort of state of the program.

If you don't already have a Learning 

Center account, the information on how to get one 

is up on your screen.

Once you go in, you will be able to click 

on a course called NOP Presentations. 

We've posted presentations from earlier this 

year, as well as this update presentation.

So today I'm going to keep it fairly 

short, and so we can continue to move ahead with 

the agenda.

Michelle, next slide. 

Okay. So yeah, Michelle, we seem to 

have lost a slide. 

I did have a slide on USDA response with 

the website for coronavirus right before that. 

Yeah.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I just want folks to note this website. 

Bruce gave an overview of what is going on right 

now. 

I would encourage you to keep an eye 

on the website for the department's coronavirus 

response. Things continue to evolve. Different 

agencies are finding different approaches and more 

flexibilities in different areas, which do impact 

organic farmers.

And so this is a good sort of 

centralized resource of what's going on in the 

department as USDA continues to monitor markets 

and supply chains. So I just wanted to highlight 

that website as a resource for you. 

Okay, Michelle, let's go back to where 

we were before. One more. Great, okay.

And so a real take-home for the past 

few weeks -- and Steve discussed this -- is how 

robust and resilient this public-private 

partnership of organic certification really is, 

particularly in these times of uncertainty.

And so the NOP is fully operational and 

teleworking. We're continuing our enforcement 

work. We are conducting desk audits with 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

certifiers and advancing mission-critical 

projects. Hosting this NOSB meeting is part of 

that work. 

We're also continuing to engage with 

the community virtually through telephones and 

Zoom meetings. We are periodically going into the 

office to get mail, but we do ask that any appeals, 

reinstatement requests, and complaints be 

submitted electronically.

And certifiers, if you're out there 

helping us get those otherwise paper documents to 

us would be helpful. Certifiers are also 

continuing their operation oversight. 

The process to become certified has not 

changed, and each step is critical to ensuring 

compliance. We are encouraging critical thinking 

about ways to ensure compliance in the current 

environment, and the regulations drive that 

compliance, and certifiers must remain true to the 

regulations during this period.

So, you know, for example, we've been 

asked if the onsite inspection requirement could 

be modified for new applicants for organic 

certification. The initial onsite inspection at 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

205.403(a)(1) is a fundamental requirement. 

A virtual inspection cannot replace an 

initial onsite inspection, and this may delay new 

organic certifications. I bring it up here 

because it is a question that we've gotten enough. 

I want to make sure that we are 

consistent in how certifiers are applying that part 

of the regulations. Once certified, an operation 

remains certified until the operation surrenders 

or is suspended or revoked.

And so 205.406 does address different 

approaches to managing the continuation of 

certification. And this is where different 

risk-based oversight approaches may be appropriate 

to ensure ongoing compliance until an onsite 

inspection can be conducted.

So any certified operations that are 

listening, if you have questions, you can contact 

your certifier with specific questions about your 

own certification status and inspection 

approaches.

I also want to mention community 

support. We've seen certifiers and other 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

organizations working together, the local regional 

level to connect farmers with each other and with 

buyers.

We've heard some farmers actually have 

very fast growing CSAs and need produce to meet 

consumer needs, while other farms that mainly sell 

to restaurants have lost a market access point. 

And so we are seeing farmers find each other, and 

we see certifiers creating support networks to 

connect them.

The Organic Integrity Database can be 

a useful tool for finding both buyers and sellers 

of specific commodities and specific geography, 

so that community support is vital to the organic 

partnership, and organic farmers are also part of 

that local and regional network often.

And so all three of these 

organizations, constructs, National Organic 

Program certifiers and the community continue to 

support resiliency and robustness.

Next slide.

Going to reiterate where we are with 

a couple of rulemaking updates. Bruce mentioned 

both of these.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So more specifically of where we are 

in the process on both of these.

Strengthening Organic Enforcement. 

This is a proposed rule. The Office of Management 

and Budget came back to us with questions. 

Those came from other agencies as well, 

so that's called inter-agency review.

We have sent the rule back to them, so 

it is with Office of Management and Budget now. 

As soon as they decide that it's ready to go, we 

will publish the rule and open public comment. 

So OMB is the final step to clearing 

the rule, and it will go to the Federal Register 

shortly after that. And again, we've talked about 

what that rule has in it in the past, but again 

I encourage you to submit your comments once it's 

published.

For Origin of Livestock, we have a draft 

final rule that is complete and is nearing the end 

of legal review. It then clears the department, 

and then goes to Office of Management and Budget. 

Now it will go through departmental review. That 

process has started. 

We've done many briefings on Origin of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Livestock with both the Under Secretary and 

Secretary's Office, so this is a rule that is sort 

of well understood throughout the department, 

which is why Bruce sounded confident in the speed 

at which it will move through departmental 

clearance.

It then does go to OMB. OMB officially 

gets 90 days to review rules for Strengthening 

Organic Enforcement. 

We got their comments at the very sort 

of end of that 90 days, so the 90 days is followed 

by whatever resolution period is needed to respond 

to their comments.

Next slide.

We sent out an insider on this, an 

Organic Insider on this last night, and so I did 

want to highlight it here. 

It is a major milestone in fulfilling 

the requirements of the Farm Bill. 

The electronic version of the NOP and 

the organic import certificate has been released, 

or in the process of being released in CBP's import 

shipment filing system.

It's optional for now. It was called 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

for in the Farm Bill. 

It will be proposed in the SOE proposed 

rule, and well, based on comments, we hope will 

be a final requirement once the final rule is 

published.

This will, once data starts being 

entered into the system, allow us to access data 

from import certificates and build analytical 

tools. 

And so U.S. importers that wish to 

request the NOP import certificate from exporters 

in other countries and want to include the import 

certificate in their import filings may start to 

do so.

And so we'll start this on a voluntary 

basis. We will have more outreach and pilot 

studies now that it is being deployed.

Interestingly, the way that the 

ACE system, that import certificate system, works 

is kind of like us in a public-private partnership, 

that once CBP deploys something, then there are 

a lot of software vendors and import filers that 

have to update their own software system.

So the fact that it's available through 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

CBP doesn't mean that every single software vendor 

has actually implemented that quite yet.

And so import filers who are interested 

in using the new certificate will need to contact 

their software vendors or their customs brokers 

to see what the status of that deployment is.

Again, we are developing technology and 

the rules sort of side by side here, so it happens 

that the technology's now just a little bit ahead 

of the proposed rule.

The proposed rule, once it comes out, 

will explain more how this import certificate 

process will work. It's just, we've deployed the 

technology before we were able to publish the 

proposed rule.

But once we get the proposed rule, it 

will articulate how this process will be required 

if it goes final.

Michelle, next slide.

I also wanted to reiterate the 

importance of nominations for the National Organic 

Standards Board. 

It continues to be open. We're 

actually about halfway through the announcement 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

period now, about halfway through. The submission 

deadline is June 1, 2020. 

We have gotten some applications in 

already. 

There are five vacancies, and you heard 

from the board members what year they're in tells 

you who is sort of rolling off, and what positions 

we'll be filling.

So two individuals who own or operate 

a farming operation or employees of those 

operations, two individuals who represent public 

interest or consumer interest groups, and one 

individual who is a USDA accredited certifying 

agent.

So we have the website up here for the 

nominations process, though if you just type in 

USDA NOP NOSB call for nominations process, you'll 

get to it through Google, as well.

So we do encourage nominations. We are 

interested in diversity in all of its forms, so 

I want to echo Steve's comment on that.

The ability to represent different 

populations, different geographies, different 

domains, different areas of expertise, different 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

perspectives, we welcome and value a diverse pool 

of candidates.

So please share this information with 

anyone you think might be interested.

Next slide. 

And this is actually also the last slide 

of this abbreviated presentation. We have 

continued to grow the program. 

During public comments last week, there 

was sort of a question of where are resources going 

at the program?

We have gotten additional resources 

over the last few years here, and we are using them 

to continue to build out staff, build out program, 

and invest in more compliance enforcement and 

surveillance capability.

So as part of that, we have officially 

sort of reoriented the program. International 

Activities and Trade Systems are two new divisions 

in the program.

International Activities used to be 

joined with Accreditation, but that division was 

getting too big for the activities involved, and 

ultimately overseeing international trade 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

arrangements is a very different kind of activity 

than the accreditation of certifiers.

So we split those two out. 

Cheri Courtney is leading 

International Activities, which has to do with the 

oversight of organic recognition and equivalency 

arrangements.

Trade Systems is led by John Veley. 

John came to us from Customs and Border Protection.

He has been the lead for this electronic 

import certificate system and will be responsible 

for all of that reporting and data analysis that 

will start being available through that system.

I introduced earlier Shannon Nally 

Yanessa in the Standards Division. She's leading 

that team beautifully.

Accreditation led by Robert Yang. We 

are staffing up significantly there as well, with 

new auditors and with new accreditation managers. 

We also added a more junior level 

position of accreditation specialists.

All of those job announcements have 

been coming out. We've been posting them on 

USAJOBS. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Those that are open to the public we 

have been doing organic insiders on. 

We will continue to do more job 

announcements in USAJOBS in the late spring and 

summer. 

Unfortunately, some of those job 

announcements probably hit at the beginning of this 

crisis when folks weren't looking so much at 

USAJOBS.

But if you might be interested in 

working with the National Organic Program, we will 

continue to be announcing job announcements in the 

late spring into the summer.

Jobs are only open for about seven days, 

so only a week long, and they are capped, and so 

do apply early if you are interested.

We are onboarding right now. We 

actually have four new employees take their oath 

of office virtually on Monday. 

We did a Zoom session to welcome them 

to the team. 

They have laptops and they're up and 

running, so we've actually had seven team members 

join us in the last month, and we'll have about 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that many or more join us before the end of June.

So that is where our resources are 

primarily going, is staffing up primarily in 

Accreditation and in compliance and enforcement. 

We also continue to use external 

support, many hands to support compliance and 

enforcement in other AMS programs and in other 

resources.

So I wanted to end by showing the 

expanded organization. Our goal is to reach 59 

people. Our target headcount is 59 people. We're 

going to be in the low 50s by mid-May. 

So that is sort of an executive summary 

of the broader presentation. 

Again, welcome you into the Organic 

Integrity Learning Center to see the larger, longer 

presentation presented by the full NOP staff for 

more details on some of our specific initiatives.

So, Steve, I will turn it back to you 

to facilitate questions and answers from the board.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Thank you very much, 

Jenny, and I appreciated you putting that up on 

the Organic Integrity Learning Center. 

I thought it was great to be able to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

actually see some of the other staff as well. It 

gives a much more personable approach to the 

program, and who is in charge of what, and I often 

hear these people's names, but it helps to see a 

face as well. So thank you for taking the time 

to record that and put it up. 

I know it is nice to be able to have 

people look at that on their own time, and as well 

as but we also very much appreciate your personal 

presentation at the board meeting. That has 

meaning as well. 

So let's open it up to questions from 

the board. Emily, go ahead.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Steve, and 

thank you, Jenny, and I'll just start by saying 

forgive me, this is a slightly long question that 

I actually wrote it out, which I don't normally 

do.

So I will try to be as brief as I can, 

but we did hear in both oral and written testimony 

that confusion and differing interpretations 

remain about whether the three-year transition 

period is applied to greenhouses and other growing 

facilities.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I wanted to reference some of the 

written testimony we received. 

One commenter referred back to the 

NOP's memo on this topic of June 3, 2019, and 

pointed out that the memo documented that the OFPA 

definition of a farm, Section 6502, as a farm or 

portion of a farm or a site where agricultural 

products or livestock are produced.

And this is tied to 205.202, that states 

that any field or farm parcel from which harvested 

crops are intended to be sold, labeled, or 

represented as organic must have had no prohibited 

substances applied to it for a period of three years 

immediately preceding the harvest of the crop.

So in my understanding of that, the farm 

is any site where agricultural products are 

produced, and any farm parcel must have had no 

prohibited substances applied to it for the three 

years preceding harvest.

Agricultural products, be they 

transplant seedlings, lettuce grown on greenhouse 

benches, or any other conceivable scenario are 

grown on farm sites, be they greenhouses, 

basements, or any other conceivable facility that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

must go through the three-year transition period.

So I have two questions. One, is that 

an accurate understanding? 

And two, I understand that this may not 

be how all certifiers have applied this rule in 

the past, but I ask can the NOP make clear the rules 

now, and state that going forward, all producers 

must adhere to them?

So thank you, Jenny.

DR. TUCKER: Thank you very much, 

Emily, for the question, and I share your love of 

205.202, which does really lay out this concept 

of fields and farm parcels from which harvest crops 

are intended to be sold, labeled, or represented 

as organic must have had no prohibited substances, 

as listed in 205.105, applied to it for a period 

of three years immediately preceding harvest of 

the crop.

So those are the rules and certifiers 

need to apply the regulations. 

As I said in my update, the rules drive 

compliance, and so 205.202 certainly applies to 

all operations, so certifiers use those 

regulations and the handbook to implement those 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

requirements. 

We continue to talk with certifiers and 

with different kinds of operations, and we believe 

that those regulations are being implemented.

And so we're continuing to listen to 

feedback from the community, but the regs and the 

handbook continue to hold.

MS. ARSENAULT: Steve, I think you're 

on mute.

CHAIRMAN ELA: You are so right, 

Michelle. Thank you. 

MS. ARSENAULT: You're welcome.

CHAIRMAN ELA: I see that Nate, you're 

next, and then Dan, but Nate, if you'll allow me, 

I'm going to go to Dan and then come back to you. 

So Dan, please go ahead.

DR. SEITZ: Jenny, thank you for your 

incredibly hard work and the knowledge you bring 

to the NOP.

I want to ask a slightly broader 

question about the rules around greenhouse growing 

and container growing. 

From what I can see in my five years, 

or coming on five years of service, there probably 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

has not been a more divisive issue than the question 

of whether hydroponics should be allowed to be 

certified organic.

And I don't think that this philosophic 

divide that we've seen there will ever be bridged.

But it still continues to be a sore 

point or a point of contention among many people, 

and I think that was seen by many of the comments 

during the NOC meeting on this past Tuesday.

I can really understand that the NOP 

wanted to hold off on developing production 

standards for container growing for hydroponic 

growing after the vote was taken by the NOSB on 

this issue. 

I think there needed to be a lot of dust 

that settled during that time, and just a chance, 

as you pointed out, for certifiers to carry out 

their regulations.

But now that a certain amount of time 

has passed and there still seem to be some 

fundamental questions around how these operations 

should be regulated, I'm just wondering if it might 

be the time to return to the question of whether 

it would make sense at least to look at whether 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

production standards need to be developed for 

hydroponic operations.

And I'm thinking that if the NOSB and 

the NOP worked on this, this might also be able 

to at least address to some degree the philosophic 

divide. 

Again, I don't think that that will ever 

be solved. 

It's such a fundamental piece, and the 

understanding around the need to promote soil 

fertility is such an important value that people 

hold.

I'm just wondering whether there might 

come a time that it would be helpful to address 

this as a way of helping the community to heal that 

divide, at least to some degree?

DR. TUCKER: So thank you, Dan. 

That's a very sort of thoughtful summary. 

This is a topic that is very 

contentious, has been very contentious, and has 

been explored extensively by the board, that there 

was a hydroponics and other production method task 

force that took time to really look at this issue 

and lay it out.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

The board had a few meetings where they 

looked at this issue in some depth.

One of the slides in the recorded 

presentation online towards the end is we put 

together what's called an NOP civics slide. 

It sort of shows how we move from the 

Organic Foods Production Act, to the regulations, 

to implementing the regulations, enforcing the 

regulations, and one of the parts of that diagram 

is the legal process.

And so lawsuits are a tool by which a 

policy is challenged and questioned. I think it's 

generally well known at this point that there is 

an active lawsuit now on the topic of hydroponics 

and rulemaking.

And so we are obviously interested to 

see how that plays out. I think it does reflect 

the energy around this issue in the community.

And I think sometimes, as with past 

lawsuits, outcomes of lawsuits can provide 

clarity. Let the courts sort of determine what 

the path will be on that.

So for right now, this topic is not on 

the NOSB work agenda. I continue to listen to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

feedback. 

Again, when we're working with 

certifiers, we are monitoring implementation of 

the current regulations, including our favorite, 

205.202, and we'll continue to do so.

Thank you for the question.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Nate, you have a 

question.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Hi Jenny.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Nate?

MR. POWELL-PALM: Oh, can you hear me?

CHAIRMAN ELA: There you go, yep.

MR. POWELL-PALM: All right.

CHAIRMAN ELA: We can now. Go ahead.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Just a quick 

question. 

I believe during the public comments 

webinar, the question was brought up about the 

Dairy Compliance Project, and I'm not an organic 

dairy farmer myself, but consider myself an 

honorary organic dairy farmer, and close to that 

community, and an avid consumer of organic dairy 

products.

So I pose this question sort of on 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

behalf of the organic dairy community, and that 

is in 2020, I think you mentioned this is the third 

year of the Organic Dairy Compliance Project, and 

that there are a lot of unannounced inspections 

planned for 2020.

In the face of COVID-19, I was just 

wondering if you could speak to how those 

unannounced inspections, as part of the project, 

if they will continue, how they will continue? 

If there's any way you can speak to 

that, as I think it's a really exciting thing for 

the organic dairy sector to make sure that we have 

the support of the program to really keep 

everything shipshape and compliance as tight as 

possible.

DR. TUCKER: Thank you. Thanks for 

the question. 

So the Dairy Compliance Project, we are 

in our third year, and it started actually before 

we all ended up coming home, so to speak.

The Dairy Compliance Project had 

started, in fact, a week before we ended up starting 

to work out of our homes.

We had a team in California doing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

training with state folks, with county folks, with 

other AMS personnel, trained in livestock.

So and it was a fairly big group, so 

I think this feeds into the fact that we started 

the project early this season in the third year, 

maximizing sort of the learning from the first two 

seasons.

We've already started desk reviews of 

organic system plans, which is a first step before 

we tend to go out onsite so we can see what does 

the OSP say? What have certifiers approved? 

We have many, many hands that are poised 

to support this project as we kind of restart.

We have NOP employees now that are 

located in parts of the country where travel will 

be -- once we're able to start traveling again in 

a safe way, we have folks that are near the ground 

that will be able to go out earlier than perhaps 

we might otherwise if we were all coming from D.C.

So I think having remote both NOP 

employees, but also broader AMS employees that have 

been trained to do the Dairy Compliance 

Project -- as Bruce mentioned, an awful lot of AMS 

employees are not based in D.C., they're based all 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

over the place.

So we would see being able to get out 

much earlier than we would if we were only running 

this project out of D.C. 

So again, we have many hands, and more 

importantly, many hands that are geographically 

distributed, and so that will reduce our travel 

risk in doing those unannounced inspections once 

reopening is safe.

And in many areas, I know there are 

inspections going ahead right now in parts of the 

country where oversight staff are collocated with 

operations.

So I have a lot of confidence in us 

continuing that 2020 program in a way that protects 

the market and ensures fairness.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Thank you.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Dave, it looks like you 

have a question.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes. Good morning, 

Jenny, and thanks for the update. That was really 

helpful.

I just wanted to return to Dan's 

question. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Not really to his question 

specifically, but to a dimension of that question 

that I think we need to take a look at as the board.

Well, just maybe to preface the point 

I'm going to raise, is you indicated in response 

to Dan that we had a task force, we discussed things 

a lot.

Much of that happened at least before 

I was on the board, but what has not happened since 

the hydroponic vote is there's been really I would 

say virtually no discussion, no coordinated 

discussion addressing the criteria that we would 

like to see farmers follow in soil and in 

liquid-based production systems.

And I think broadly that's what Dan is 

asking for. 

And then to get specific, we've had a 

number of very thoughtful comments during the 

course of the public comment period about 

substances that we use in production systems that 

we would define as being highly soluble.

Certainly in hydroponic systems where 

we're delivering nutrient solutions in water, 

substances of high solubility is the way that those 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

nutrients will be provided to the plants.

There have been rules in the past that 

the NOP has made that actually restrict the use 

of a number of those, or put constraints on them.

I think for that reason alone, the board 

should be taking a critical look at how fertility 

inputs used in these production systems are 

managed, and how it is that we determine what is 

allowable and what is not.

So I guess I continue to believe that 

we have not had sufficient discussion and 

sufficient vetting of methods since we conducted 

the hydroponics vote.

And I would like to think that we could 

dive back into this and really sort out some very 

important sustainable production practices that 

are consistent with the organic label.

DR. TUCKER: So I think I'm off mute. 

Yeah, there I am. So thank you. I appreciate 

the follow-up.

These are important questions that 

continue to be raised in this specific setting. 

When we are out there in sort of the 

world talking with organic groups and organic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

producers, organic handlers, they tell us that 

their immediate top priority is in enforcing the 

rules that we have of deterring fraud. 

There is a phrase that I tend to hear 

is that they are more concerned about oversight 

of grains than they are of greenhouses.

And so as a program we are focused on 

those issues. 

Strengthening Organic Enforcement 

includes a number of provisions that came from the 

board. 

I think there continues to be work that 

the board will be able to do in helping advance 

those oversight compliance and fraud related 

items. 

So I think right now, that is where the 

emphasis is. 

Again, the legal system is going to give 

us its perspective on this topic, which will 

perhaps also reveal next steps.

MR. MORTENSEN: I really am thankful 

for the work NOP is doing on behalf of the issue 

of fraud. 

I certainly was one of the people 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

pressing, you know, or just asking for more work 

in that area, so I don't contest that point at all.

I guess what I am not comfortable with 

is since, of course, if we ask grain producers, 

they're going to say fraud's most important.

If we talked with folks growing 

vegetables, I think that you would hear many people 

say that I'm just concerned that we have standards 

that we have defined and that we follow that are 

consistent with the label for vegetable and fruit 

production.

And I know it's my view that the board 

could take this on and it wouldn't overwhelm the 

board to be doing this background work.

My sense is, at least in the Crops Group 

when we've discussed it, there is enthusiasm for 

taking it on.

And please, other board members, 

challenge that statement if that's not accurate.

DR. TUCKER: So --

CHAIRMAN ELA: It looks -- go ahead, 

Jenny.

DR. TUCKER: I just want to say I 

appreciate the feedback. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We do have a very robust set of organic 

regulations that have guided certifiers in doing 

consistent certification. 

I appreciate the ongoing feedback on 

this topic from the board.

CHAIRMAN ELA: It looks like Rick has 

a question.

MR. GREENWOOD: Yeah. Thanks, Steve. 

Jenny, first of all, thanks again for all of your 

comments.

We had talked actually yesterday at our 

administrative meeting. 

I had raised the issue of more residue

testing.

So because enforcement is such a big 

issue now, is there any interest in the NOP 

increasing residue testing, and possibly even more 

random testing as a way to get better enforcement?

DR. TUCKER: Yeah, thanks Rick so much 

for the question.

The program does do residue testing. 

It is mainly to support our investigation, so our 

compliance and enforcement investigations, 

particularly when it will substantively support 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

enforcement action.

So our primary oversight at the program 

level is over the certifiers' control systems, 

ensuring that their control systems are operating 

properly to do their own sampling and testing, and 

to assess fraud.

And we do give noncompliances when 

certifiers are not implementing residue testing. 

They in turn apply a risk-based focus 

in doing residue testing, as do we to support 

enforcement activities.

We also provide funding to a laboratory 

to support certifier testing. So for example, we 

required additional testing as part of the Black 

Sea enforcement efforts. 

Those yielded positive outcomes, and 

so we assisted financially that additional 

sampling and testing process.

With the success of the Dairy 

Compliance Project, we are now talking about how 

do we then take that approach and increase 

risk-based surveillance of other commodity 

markets, such as grains?

And so how could we do even more 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

sampling and testing at the NOP level of domestic 

grains, for example, which we know are an 

enforcement challenge.

So our sampling and testing is really 

oriented towards achieving the risk-based positive 

outcomes that help us get bad actors out of the 

market.

That's happening both at the NOP level, 

and also at the certifier level. 

And so we keep a close eye on how 

certifiers are implementing that residue testing 

program to make sure the system broadly is doing 

that type of surveillance and enforcement work.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay, thank you. 

I know that risk-based testing yields 

more positive results, but it just seems that the 

potential for random testing and letting everyone 

know that's organic certified that there is also 

a component of random testing might keep some 

people who are on the borderline of thinking about 

doing something that isn't correct from doing it.

That's the point of my comment.

DR. TUCKER: Yeah, I would say 

unannounced inspections are also a good forum for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that, that often when certifiers are out doing 

unannounced inspections, so that is sort of a mode 

of surveillance, that you know, complements 

risk-based, but when they're doing unannounced 

inspections, often they are collecting samples as 

part of that.

And so that may not be the outcome of 

an investigation, but would go more to what you're 

talking about in terms of, okay, we're coming for 

an unannounced inspection, I'm about to take all 

of these samples.

So I think sampling and testing plays 

a very, very important role in the control system. 

A final plug for the Integrity Learning 

Center, we are going to be launching a sampling 

and testing course later this year. 

That is an area we have found that certifiers 

could use some more learning support on, you know, 

how to plan out the sampling and testing so that 

is has maximum defensibility in court, if it should 

go to an enforcement action.

So that's something that came out of 

our peer review audit, was the need for more 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

training related to residue testing, and we'll be 

delivering that in the Learning Center later this 

year.

So I appreciate the question very much.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay, thank you very 

much, Jenny.

CHAIRMAN ELA: We are essentially out 

of time with Jenny, according to our agenda, but 

Wood has had his hand up for a little bit, so Wood, 

let's go to you, and then we will move on and let 

Jenny off the hot seat. 

So Wood, go ahead.

MR. TURNER: Thanks, Steve. It's less 

of a question and more of a comment, and thanks 

to Jenny for the great update. 

I just wanted to acknowledge the 

previous comments by Dave and Emily in particular, 

and just wanted to suggest that, you know, I think 

it sheds some light on different transitions. 

You know, they're more senior on the 

board. 

Several of us are coming into this 

conversation sort of new to the conversation, at 

least in this context, on greenhouses and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

hydroponics.

And I just wanted to acknowledge that 

I'm supportive of what Dave is suggesting, and hope 

that the program will be open to efforts that we 

make in the months and years ahead to focus on some 

of those standards a little bit more formally.

So I just wanted to make that point.

DR. TUCKER: Thanks so much for the 

comment, Wood. Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN ELA: Thank you, Jenny. We 

appreciate your report as always. 

It does give us insight into the program 

and where things are heading, and I think even 

though enforcement continues to be really one of 

the hot buttons because it really does protect the 

label, it's been great to see some of the 

enforcement actions you guys have taken, and I know 

are continuing to take.

And in many cases I know you can't talk 

about methods and things until they actually 

happen, but we do appreciate the work of the staff 

and the fact that Congress did appropriate more 

money for that. 

I think it's really critical to helping 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

protect the integrity of the label. 

So thank you, Jenny, for both being the 

officer for the meeting and for giving us your 

update.

DR. TUCKER: Thanks so much, Steve. 

I appreciate the time.

CHAIRMAN ELA: With that, we are going 

to move on to reports from committees. 

We have several committees, like for 

example, Policy Committee, that does not have a 

report at this meeting because they did quite a 

bit of work prior to this meeting.

But we do have two committees that don't 

have huge updates.

And one thing I do want to note that 

I did not note at the start is that Michelle did 

ask for any conflicts of interest among the board 

for any of these committees and reports, and there 

are no conflicts of interest.

So we don't have to deal with that, so 

I just want to make sure we get that on the record 

that there are no conflicts of interest.

With that, we're going to move on to 

Compliance, Accreditation, and Certification 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Subcommittee, often called CACS.

And if I didn't have that spelled out, 

I would often forget what the abbreviation is, but 

Scott, would you like to give a short update of 

what has happened on the CACS Committee over the 

past six months?

VICE CHAIR RICE: Sure, Steve. Thank 

you. 

CACS, as Steve noted, does not have any 

proposals or discussions to bring forward to this 

meeting, but that's not an indication of some of 

the discussions that we have had.

Certainly have had a lot of the 

conversations around the COVID-19 pandemic. 

I wanted to touch on that, and you know, 

some of this has been discussed by Jenny and Steve 

already, but I think it's worth reiterating.

You know, I wanted to touch on the 

certification community's response to the pandemic 

and what we're seeing.

And certainly certification oversight 

and upholding organic integrity are all essential 

roles for certifiers.

But when the shelter in place orders 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

started rolling out around the country, and 

restaurants and schools, corporate campuses 

closing, and farmers' markets shuttered, we saw 

markets disappear pretty much overnight, as I'm 

sure you all have seen. 

It was clear that there was much more 

to be done than our usual certification activity.

And just reiterate that it's been 

amazing to see the immediate response of certifiers 

and many others in the organic community to work 

together, connecting the community with resources 

to help keep their business going and their 

communities fed.

As Jenny noted in her NOP update, 

farmers have been quick to network and share ideas, 

helping identify gaps in supply that those who lost 

markets might be able to fill.

And certainly that work continues now. 

At the same time, the certification community saw 

that a business as usual approach to our oversight 

activities wasn't going to work.

And with social distancing in place and 

our ability on hold, rather, to stand side by side 

with a farmer or a processor and chat with them 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

as they explain their operations, creativity and 

ingenuity quickly kicked in.

The Accredited Certifiers Association 

and International Organic Inspectors Association 

have come together in what is the ACA's largest 

working group to date, brainstorming and forming 

plans and best practices to continue our activities 

and uphold organic integrity while keeping our 

staff and our organic community safe. 

These interim practices are already 

being trialed with remote desk audits, physically 

distant site inspections, and other creative and 

practical measures.

All those efforts are rooted firmly in 

regulations, as Jenny noted. 

Though there may be creativity and 

unique approaches, they are all based in our USDA 

organic regulations, ensuring that the organic 

produce and products meet the standards that 

consumers expect.

And I'll add to Steve's comments that 

with the regulatory requirements that new 

operations have an in-person inspection, we're 

hoping that we'll be able to welcome those 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

operations into organic production beyond site to 

help induce those soon.

That's one of the bigger challenges 

that we've seen, since we certainly don't want to 

close out those eager to enter the market.

Similarly, Dr. Tucker noted in her 

update how the NOP has adopted remote approaches 

to certifier oversight so that the import 

accreditation work at USDA can continue.

That's been great to see. 

CACS will continue to stay informed on 

certification and accreditation activities during 

this challenging time, and we're of course ready 

to assist.

Finally, like many of us, CACS is 

eagerly awaiting the release of the Strengthening 

Organic Enforcement rule, as we heard from Bruce 

Summers this morning. 

It's in its final stages, and I guess 

we've been eager for quite a while, because we've 

heard it's in the final stages for some time, but 

really hoping to see that soon.

And I expect and anticipate there'll 

be plenty for this subcommittee and the board to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

dive into as we see the effects of that rule roll 

out across the industry.

With that, I'll yield the floor back 

to you, Steve.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Thanks, Scott. I 

appreciate that, and yeah, this is certainly a 

committee that ebbs and flows with strengthening 

the organic enforcement.

I remember a few years back, your 

workload was very significant, and so it's kind 

of interesting to see how that goes back and forth. 

I know once that rule comes out, we will be back 

on track. Well, we're not off track, but this 

committee will certainly have more to do.

And I'll just again remind everybody 

that this is Scott's last year on the board, and 

his work on this has been greatly appreciated, and 

we hope that there will be a number of certifiers 

that apply for this seat because that work is going 

to be incredibly important going forward.

Are there any questions for Scott 

before we move on to the Materials Subcommittee?

I'm not seeing any. We'll move on to 

the Materials Subcommittee. Dave Mortensen is the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

chairperson, and, Dave, let me turn it over to you.

MR. MORTENSEN: Thank you, Steve. So 

we have wanted to just walk through some of the 

highlights of the updated research priorities, a 

little bit about our process, and some of the 

feedback we've received in the public comment.

And then Emily Oakley was going to give 

us a brief update on the status of the marine 

materials work that she's been spearheading and 

that the subcommittee's been working on.

The research priorities process, the 

process by which we reach these research 

priorities.

And just briefly, the idea is that these 

research priorities then are something that it's 

used by groups, private and public, to fund 

research and that help craft a research agenda 

through which or to which money would be directed.

The process we go through is a process 

where we discuss this amongst the board members 

and solicit input from stakeholders, and we get 

a fair amount of input from stakeholders, both 

through the public comment process, through the 

meetings that we have twice annually, and also as 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

we work on problem-solving as a board, we sometimes 

realize there are data gaps or processes that would 

be better informed if some research was conducted 

or could be conducted to help address things.

A good example of that is our interest 

in seeing more efficacy work, where different 

things are compared with respect to how well they 

perform.

That's just one example that's arisen 

over the last two years or so.

This past round, we got 27 public 

comments in the written record reflecting on our 

current set of research priorities.

And I would say that pretty much all 

of those public comments have been, you know, of 

the flavor that have thanked the board for doing 

due diligence and trying to incorporate the kinds 

of feedback that we've been getting over the last 

several years to shape the research agenda.

There are also some suggestions on ways 

that we could improve the document. 

In this current go-round, we have added 

a number of new things. 

The ecosystem service provisioning one 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

was one that I think really got momentum when we 

were working on the incentive to convert native 

ecosystems.

And I think it was really punctuated 

by one of the students at the University of 

Minnesota who came and presented to the board at 

our meeting in the Twin Cities several years ago, 

pleading for a sort of holistic farm-based 

ecosystem service assessment of how organic farms 

function.

Interestingly, that research priority, 

we got a lot of public feedback on identifying that 

one as a very important one for us to be investing 

in.

Some of the comments that we've gotten 

on ways to enhance the document or enhance the 

statement of the research priorities include some 

concern about the document having gotten longer 

with having added new things to it, and three or 

four thoughtful public comments about urging us 

to consider ways of perhaps prioritizing some of 

those objectives in the priorities.

So that was one. 

There were several also encouraging us 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to think not only about the nature of the research 

that needs to be done, but also how it should be 

done, and by that, several people encouraged us 

to frame some of the priorities in a more holistic 

framework, and be a bit more explicit about how 

the research would be done, urging us to add 

language about participatory farmer involvement 

in some of these research priorities.

There was some indication that folks 

would like to see us expand the soil health, where 

we have now added this new microbial inoculants, 

conditioners, and amendments to soil, that framing 

that in a broader soil health framework could be 

helpful, and then some comments about adding 

phthalates to the agenda on dairy.

So I think we have a great research 

priorities document. 

I think that there's some suggestions 

about ways that it could be tweaked some to 

strengthen it further, and generally the reaction 

to it, you know, has been quite favorable.

And that is what I had planned to 

present on the research priorities. 

The subcommittee has been working on 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

this together and we get input on each of these 

discipline-specific topics from the subcommittees 

that work in those areas. 

Livestock, et cetera.

So now we want to move on, Steve, to 

just a brief update from Emily Oakley on the marine 

materials.

MS. OAKLEY: Thanks, Dave.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Emily, just I'll jump 

in before we go on to marine materials. Are there 

any --

(Simultaneous speaking.) 

MS. OAKLEY: You wanted to discuss 

research priorities at all first?

CHAIRMAN ELA: Yeah. Are there any 

questions on research priorities from the board?

CHAIRMAN ELA: I'm not seeing any 

questions, but I do want to just clarify for sure 

to our stakeholders. 

I think we all got it, but the fact that 

we're discussing research priorities at the spring 

meeting rather than just the fall meeting, I know 

there's been some confusion on this even among the 

board itself, and there might be in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

stakeholders.

We chose to put the research priorities 

out as a discussion document in the spring, and 

then we will actually pass them in the fall. 

We realized last fall that you all gave 

us some great input on the research priorities and 

some changes, but because we can't make significant 

changes before we vote, that last fall, you gave 

us those great ideas, but we actually could not 

incorporate them into the research priorities that 

we voted on last fall because that would've been 

a significant change. 

So we chose to change the research priority 

process a little bit, bring it up as a discussion 

document for the spring meeting, and we'll probably 

continue to do that so that stakeholders could 

provide comments, we could take it back to the 

committee and incorporate those comments, and then 

have a document that we will vote on formally in 

the fall, and then that will be the document that 

goes out to the various entities that are 

conducting research, such as NIFA and some of these 

others.

So I just want to make sure that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

everybody knows that this document will come up 

again, and some of the public comments we received, 

the committee will take those under consideration 

as to whether to incorporate them or not, and then 

we'll have a formal vote next fall.

So Emily, go ahead.

MS. OAKLEY: Thanks, Steve. I just 

want to say that my rural internet is not so great 

right now, so you just cut out. 

I hope I don't cut out, and if I do, 

I apologize for that.

So yes, we did receive public comments 

on marine materials, although we don't obviously 

have a document from the Materials Subcommittee 

on that this meeting, but we are reviewing aquatic 

plant extracts as part of the sunset process.

And we did receive comments from a 

number of folks requesting or suggesting that we 

look at all marine uses across all subcommittees 

more broadly within the Materials Subcommittee, 

and sort of try to look at the bigger picture of 

that, as you were discussing earlier, Steve.

And I think that ideally, that would 

be feasible. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I think practically there are probably 

some concerns about that simply because, for 

example, fish environments, and you know, research 

on that topic is maybe a bit different than seaweed.

And if we were to categorize all of 

those materials into one really large work agenda 

item, I think it might pose some challenges in terms 

of discrete recommendations and potential rules 

for that.

But we will discuss it on the Materials 

Subcommittee further, and there's a sort of subset 

of stakeholders that have been very active on this 

topic from the beginning, with whom I regularly 

discuss, and try to do some pretty, you know, 

frequent email discussions over the course of the 

year.

And we will circle back and discuss this 

further if there's anyone who is interested in 

joining us in those conversations.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Thanks Emily. As we 

saw from public comments --

(Simultaneous speaking.)

CHAIRMAN ELA: Say that again, Emily?

MS. OAKLEY: Oops, sorry. Can you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

hear me? 

CHAIRMAN ELA: Yes. Yeah, we got your 

whole comment, so you hung in there. And I just 

wanted to thank you. 

I know from public comments there were 

obviously a number about marine materials and the 

need for comprehensive review across 

subcommittees, whether it's kelp, or the various 

fish oils, and you know, alginic acids, and such. 

And obviously, the Materials Committee is the place 

to do that. 

When I first came on the board, you were 

working on that, and it really is a difficult topic 

to make it all encompassing. I look forward to 

what you're going to do this year, and that 

certainly you will leave your mark on the NOSB by 

tackling all this. 

It is a hugely complex subject, and I 

hope you also reach out to the various 

subcommittees on their individual work so that we 

can continue to coordinate and be a unified voice 

in what we do.

So does anybody have questions for 

Emily?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I don't see any. We're all being easy. 

Dave, do you have anything else for Materials 

Subcommittee?

MR. MORTENSEN: No, that's it for now. 

Several of the new members are quite interested, 

and we've been discussing that we will be getting 

back to work on excluded methods, but nothing else 

to report at this time, Steve.

CHAIRMAN ELA: That sounds great. 

Well, the good news is we're about five minutes 

ahead of time.

So we will I think go ahead and break 

for lunch. We will reconvene in an hour at 2:00 

Eastern Time. I'm sorry. These time zones. 

See, the advantage of an in-person 

meeting is we don't have to adjust time zones, which 

we'll inevitably mess up the chair.

But, so we'll reconvene at the top of 

the hour in whatever time zone you are. 

Enjoy your lunch, and we will see you 

in an hour and five minutes. Thank you very much.

MR. BUIE: Hey, Steve.

CHAIRMAN ELA: Actually, Jesse has a 

question before we move on. I'm sorry. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. BUIE: No, do we have to log out 

and log back in, or can we stay?

CHAIRMAN ELA: I believe you can stay 

on.

MR. BUIE: Okay.

CHAIRMAN ELA: The log in information 

is the same, so you can just leave it up, and then 

come back to it. 

MR. BUIE: Okay, thank you. 

CHAIRMAN ELA: Yep. We'll see 

everybody after lunch.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 12:58 p.m. and resumed at 

2:00 p.m.) 

MR. ELA: So why don't we reconvene? 

Michelle, do we need to do a roll call after lunch, 

so we know who's here? I guess that might be a 

good formality, since we possibly could have a vote 

on this next section.

So maybe let me go through the list of 

people -- assuming I can find it -- and we'll just 

have a verbal roll call. So, Sue, are you out 

there?

MS. BAIRD: Yes, sir, I'm here.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Okay. Asa? Asa, are you out 

there?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: Okay, great. Yes, we got you, 

Asa, thanks. Jesse?

MR. BUIE: I'm here.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Jesse. Jerry?

MR. D'AMORE: Here as well, sir.

MR. ELA: Great. I am here. Rick?

MR. GREENWOOD: Yes, I'm here.

MR. ELA: Okay. Thanks, Rick. Kim?

MS. HUSEMAN: Yes, I'm here.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Kim. Mindee?

MS. JEFFERY: Here.

MR. ELA: All right. Thank you, Mindee. 

Dave?

MR. MORTENSEN: Here.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Dave. Emily?

MS. OAKLEY: Here.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Emily. Nate?

MR. POWELL-PALM: Here.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Nate. Scott?

MR. RICE: I'm out here.

MR. ELA: All right. A-dae?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Here.

MR. ELA: Thank you, A-dae. Dan?

DR. SEITZ: Hi, I'm here.

MR. ELA: And then, Wood?

MR. TURNER: I'm here, Steve.

MR. ELA: All right. I think that means 

that we have everybody. So we'll go ahead and get 

started on the Crops section here. I wore my 

special fruit shirt in honor of the Crops.

(Laughter.) 

MR. ELA: Well, that's me, I'm Mr. 

Wardrobe, everybody knows me for that. I always 

worry that if people look back on the pictures of 

the NOSB each year, they'll see I've worn the same 

shirt every year.

But anyhow, let's move into the Crops 

Subcommittee. Jesse is chair, and Jesse, would 

you like to take over?

MR. BUIE: Okay. Good afternoon, 

everyone, and I think we're all in the afternoon 

time zone, maybe with the exception of A-dae.

But our documents that we're going to 

discuss this afternoon are priority, as evidenced 

by public comments and many hours of subcommittee 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

discussions.

So, Steve, you are first up with paper 

pots and I'll let you take it from here. I think 

you're on mute.

MR. ELA: Let me get myself unmuted here 

and trying to find the right screen at the same 

time. All right.

So we appreciate the paper pot 

discussion -- or, actually, proposal. We got lots 

of comments on that and we appreciate all the 

thoughts that went into it.

We spent a lot of time on the 

terminology -- Devon helped us a bunch as 

well -- but obviously, the broader stakeholder 

group, the meeting of the minds came up with some 

excellent comments. So I'm just going to kind of 

try and summarize the comments as best I can. They 

were extensive.

We had a number of people that said we 

should just pass the proposal as it stands, and 

then, a number of other people said that it does 

need some tweaking. 

We did have one commenter -- I think 

Oregon Tilth, along with a couple others -- did 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

mention that our delay in getting this passed, that 

there are a number of farmers that would like to 

invest in the labor-saving technology, but due to 

the uncertainty about the future allowance of them, 

they are waiting for a final decision to make the 

investment. And we certainly take that comment 

seriously.

And I'll just lead off by saying my 

recommendation -- after I go to this -- is that 

we actually do send this back to subcommittee. 

There are enough minor tweaks -- I think we're 

really very close, but there are a number of minor 

tweaks that would amount to substantial changes 

that would prevent our voting on it today. But 

that will be up to the Board.

But I see no reason we should not be 

able to have a -- if we do send this back to 

subcommittee, that we should not have a vote next 

fall on it, which would give time for the -- well, 

NOP has to go through rulemaking, but it would at 

least indicate the intent of the NOSB that paper 

pots should be allowed.

So moving on through some of the other 

comments. There were comments that we've noted 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

about seed tapes and other products, and -- but 

that it was unclear that we were -- they wanted 

to make sure we weren't limiting only to the things 

we listed, so there were several suggestions that 

we should change that wording to, including but 

not limited to.

And certainly, we are not intending to 

limit it to the things listed, so I think 

that -- even though I think, to me, the intent was 

not to limit it strictly to that, I understand the 

comments about that, of saying but not limited to.

There were several comments that were 

worried that other products besides paper pots 

might not be able to meet the bio-based 

requirement. And that was especially seed tapes 

and cloches and collars and such that if those 

manufacturers were unwilling to test, then they 

might be taken off the market. So a lot of people 

said they supported listing, but were worried about 

that consequence.

Unfortunately, we did not hear from any 

of those alternative paper planting products and 

it would have been really helpful if we would hear 

from them. So I hope people can reach out to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

them -- if we do send this back to 

subcommittee -- and make sure that those do meet 

the requirements.

It was our feeling that they would, 

because those products are applied dry to the soil, 

so they don't need to have as much integrity as 

pots that are used in the greenhouse and have to 

withstand water and such.

But that -- we take those comments to 

heart and I would love to hear from seed tape 

manufacturers and others, whether this annotation 

would fit that.

In terms of terminology, certainly 

we -- the subcommittee and Harriet Behar did a lot 

of work on this before I took it over.

It's subtle, because you think, oh, 

this will be a slam dunk, it'll be easy to list 

this, and then you realize on a number of levels 

that paper itself is a synthetic fiber, because 

it goes through a number of processes to be made 

into paper. And so it's not just easy to say, other 

synthetic fibers, because paper itself is

synthetic.

It also gets complicated because 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

bio-based products -- such as some of those made 

out of corn -- can be bio-based but extremely not 

biodegradable.

And a couple folks pointed that out, 

that asking for a 100 percent bio-based future 

could actually lead to products that would not 

biodegrade, even though they are bio-based, and 

that non-bio-based products can be made to 

biodegrade. So it gets complicated in that 

respect.

It also -- a number of people commented 

in our terminology, when we said primarily of 

cellulose-based paper and no less than 85 percent 

bio-based content, and people were wondering if 

those were meant to be synonymous or if they were 

two different aspects. We actually did mean that 

it was supposed to be two separate things.

We've had comments that we could have 

up to 60 percent -- or maybe slightly more -- of 

cellulose content in the pot, so that would meet 

the primarily, but then the rest would be bio-based 

non-cellulose content.

But I think certifiers specifically 

asked about that, in terms of being able to make 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

sure that certifiers are consistent, and I think 

that was a good comment and we'll try and correct 

that.

And they also asked does this include 

modified forms of cellulose? And our intent was 

exactly that it was cellulose-based, but it could 

include any cellulose-based fiber, including some 

of the ones that kind of mimic synthetic fibers.

The other comment was that we noted 85 

percent, but that -- or that 15 percent of the 

ingredients can be strengthening fibers and 

adhesives and then moving towards 100 percent 

bio-based.

A number of people asked if that just 

included the fibers or included the whole product. 

And we purposefully said fibers in that because 

we found it was going to be really difficult to 

cover all the adhesives and the exact percents of 

some of these other additives. So we did 

purposefully put fibers in that, but we can look 

at that a little bit more.

Another issue -- and NOC brought this 

up, along with others -- is that we should spell 

out which specific additives would be allowed, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

especially in the adhesives.

They were worried that what makes it 

easy right now could lead to being overwhelmed 

further on down the road, just as we are with the 

inert ingredients and ancillary substances. So 

they wanted us to be very specific about the 

reinforcing fibers and adhesives.

And my editorial comment on that is it 

gets really difficult because different products 

are going to use different adhesives, and we found 

that almost a black hole that we weren't sure how 

to get out of.

They also noted that only nonsynthetic 

reinforcing fibers should be allowed. At this 

point, from my understanding talking to the various 

manufacturers, there is not a product on the market 

that would meet that, that some of the reinforcing 

fibers do have to be synthetic.

We're hoping that, down the road, we 

could move towards that goal and maybe -- and I 

think part of the point of that comment is that 

the goal would be 100 percent nonsynthetic 

reinforced fibers for the strengthening 

ingredients.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We also can't really go to 100 percent 

cellulose-based, because the question is, if you 

use hemp or cotton, those are not technically 

cellulose-based at that point.

Moving on, the next issue was testing. 

And referencing the ASTM D6866, ACA asked if that 

listing was current and worried about further 

upgrades to that listing. If we specifically 

point to one --- another standard that could be 

altered in the future, that certainly is a problem 

and we'll try and think about that.

The other was whether that would be the 

only requirement or there could be some 

equivalents, such as if people submitted the actual 

composition of the pot and it was 100 percent 

cellulose or 100 percent coconut coir or something 

else that is known to be bio-based, if that can 

substitute for the ASTM analysis and if the label 

claim of a third-party certification would be 

sufficient to confirm compliance.

And a number of certifiers were very 

worried about how they would assess whether 

compliance with this claim was.

My thought was that just as we allow 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

manufacturer attestations that they meet those 

standards, that this would be similar on this. 

But obviously, something that people are being very 

worried about.

We did have -- Cornucopia did note that 

they would like paper pots to be only derived from 

recycled papers, with non-synthetic --- without 

synthetic non-cellulose fibers when they are 

commercially available, and that petroleum-based 

fibers would be disallowed.

On the other hand, OPWC supports the 

provision of allowing use of virgin paper, 

recognizing that these are unique products that 

need the extra strength of virgin paper.

Finally, moving on down the list, we 

did have comments on the terminology of 

incorporated into -- excuse me, of degradation into 

the soil.

And it was suggested we should change 

the degradation word into incorporated into the 

soil, just because we are not referencing any 

biodegradation standard and how do we define that 

they actually do degrade into the soil?

And I find that this is probably a good 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

comment, that we're really trying to separate out 

from the comments last fall of aids that were 

intended to be removed versus aids that were 

intended to be incorporated into the soil. So that 

seemed like a reasonable comment.

ACA said, production aids -- or 

planting aids that were not removed prior to 

decomposition in the soil. So several people made 

that comment.

OPWC also noted that paper-based 

planting aids that prohibit colored or glossy inks 

is really kind of outdated, and even though that's 

the listing for newspaper, we could upgrade this 

listing.

And they suggest that prohibiting 

glossy papers and colored inks and being a little 

more specific on that. And that is certainly 

something to take under consideration.

Finally, moving through the commercial 

availability clause that we set, people noted that 

that may not be appropriate for this section and 

that the form of the product could easily be used 

to claim that commercial availability is not there, 

so if you want a specific type of pot or shape, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that form might not be available in the 100 percent 

bio-based content.

And it was also noted that 100 percent 

bio-based content may not lead to what we're 

looking for, that, again, because bio-based versus 

cellulose-based versus how things biodegrade, that 

that wording probably wasn't appropriate and 

probably should be taken out.

I think our dilemma on that is, how do 

we -- if we make this annotation for paper pots 

and, just as the manufacturers noted, that within 

three to five years, they feel they will not need 

those synthetic strengthening fibers, that they 

can move to hemp or something else, how do we make

this annotation react to that changing landscape 

and have -- down the road, not have to move back 

to a change in the annotation, which becomes a work 

agenda item, and to have this be more of a fluid 

listing that adapts to future possibilities.

Last thing is we had determined as a 

subcommittee that we did not need to say 

specifically that paper pots shouldn't include 

antimicrobials, fungicides, and fertilizers, that 

that was referenced elsewhere enough. But we did 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

have several people, including certifiers, say 

that we should include that language, even though 

it's referenced elsewhere.

And several people said we should make 

sure that, in saying that, that we should be 

allowing those that are already included on the 

National List. So they thought we should 

specifically say they cannot include 

antimicrobials, fungicides, or fertilizers, 

unless they are listed on the National List.

So there is the whirlwind synopsis of 

the many pages of public comments on paper pots. 

It is not an easy topic, as we have found out.

We -- obviously, the Crops Subcommittee 

is committed to working on this and making it work 

for current products, as well as be adaptable to 

the future, where we hope better, more natural, 

quote/unquote, products come out.

With that, I would open it up for 

questions, but ultimately, Jesse, I would suggest 

that at the end of the discussion, we make a motion 

to move this back to subcommittee for a few further 

tweaks.

MR. BUIE: Okay. I just had one 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

question. And you can see everybody, I can't see 

all the hands, so you will recognize the hands?

MR. ELA: I will recognize the hands, 

but --

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- go ahead with your --

MR. BUIE: Yes.

MR. ELA: -- your comments.

MR. BUIE: When we got started on this 

process, it appeared that -- well, it appeared to 

me that hemp was going to be the salvation for this 

whole process. What's -- I mean, what's the 

thinking on that now?

MR. ELA: From our discussions with the 

manufacturers, yes, that is true. I think they 

thought that would be a fairly easy transition --

MR. BUIE: Yes.

MR. ELA: -- from where they are 

currently. And the current products are not there 

yet, using hemp. I think that we heard an oral 

comment, as well as written comments, they think 

in three to five years, they will be able to move 

that direction, but they are not there yet.

So if we pass this -- if we worded this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

annotation to specify a nonsynthetic strengthening 

fiber, such as hemp or cotton, at this point there 

would not be a product, in terms of paper pots, 

on the market that would meet those standards.

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: So that's the concern of trying 

to make it workable now and also tighten -- raise 

the bar in the future.

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions from 

committee members? Emily, it looks like you have 

one.

MS. OAKLEY: This was actually a comment 

for the new members. There is a 2017 supplemental 

TR on newspapers and other recycled material that 

you might find helpful.

If you haven't had a chance to look at 

that, that can provide a little bit of background 

and nuance that might help explain also some of 

the public comments, if you haven't seen that yet.

MR. ELA: Yes, very good comment. Wood, 

it looks like you have a question.

MR. TURNER: I do, Steve. I did find 

the comments on virgin paper to be compelling and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I wanted to hear you or someone speak to that, just 

help me understand.

I also understand that virgin paper is 

going to have fiber length and strength that you 

can't deliver with recycled paper, but I think, 

conceptually, I'm just concerned about not somehow 

supporting the need for recycled paper products 

in the market and, certainly, in organic use.

And I just wanted to hear -- I read the 

comments and tried to understand the perspective, 

there's very limited comments on this topic, but 

I just wanted to hear someone who's a little closer 

to it speak to that a little bit.

MR. ELA: Yes, good -- very good 

question, and really, was one of the differences 

between the newspaper listing and what we're 

working on here.

And I think you nailed it, that the 

quality of recycled paper -- you really have to 

use a very high quality recycled paper, if even 

that works, to achieve the -- as you said -- the 

fiber length or the structural components that you 

need in this.

The word we got from manufacturers was 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that you really just couldn't make the pot that 

would hold up through the greenhouse conditions 

without that virgin paper.

I think we also heard, for example, from 

the University of Maine on the paper mulch that 

they were working on, during the oral comment 

section, and that --- I think they were pretty clear 

that that would require virgin paper, not -- or 

a certain percent of virgin paper, and that 

recycled paper just didn't have the quality to make 

that mulch work.

And I mean, that was an interesting 

presentation and certainly want to learn more about 

it, but that could actually be a biodegradable 

mulch that would fit the criteria, possibly.

MR. TURNER: Thanks.

MR. ELA: Does that --

MR. TURNER: I --

MR. ELA: -- answer --

MR. TURNER: Yes, I mean --

MR. ELA: --- the --

MR. TURNER: --- it does. I just want 

to make sure I -- I've obviously heard and read 

all those things as well, I just wanted to get a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

little more color on it. So, yes.

MR. ELA: No colors allowed.

MR. TURNER: No colors allowed.

(Laughter.)

MR. TURNER: It's just -- yes. It's a --

MR. ELA: Yes.

MR. TURNER: -- lingering question for 

me. Thanks.

MR. ELA: I know the Ellepot people have 

mentioned that they -- that, like, the paper mill 

they use sources sustainably grown trees, you know, 

and to a sustainability standard.

And I think we heard a number of 

commenters say that the market share of these 

products, even if all mulch were -- plastic mulch 

were switched to paper mulch, we're looking at a 

very, very small part of the virgin paper market. 

But that doesn't mean that we ignore that. Rick?

MR. GREENWOOD: Steve, I think 

I'll -- I'm speaking for the entire Crop Committee, 

I'll never look at paper the same. For everyone 

that's out there, it's a very, very complicated 

process and just saying paper pots doesn't cover 

what we've been looking at.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So I want to thank all of my colleagues 

for digging into this, because it really is one 

of the more complicated topics I think we've looked 

at.

MR. ELA: This is obviously material 

that lends itself to puns in terms of digging in, 

we really are trying to dig these in.

But -- and I think, in following up on 

that, one of the reasons we did say primarily 

cellulose-based is that there are now papers on 

the market that are called paper, that are really 

not cellulose-based, that are plastic-based 

papers.

And so we were trying to not -- knowing 

that on the market or -- you know, this terminology 

gets clouded, to make sure that we really did try 

and limit it to cellulose-based papers and not, 

quote/unquote, paper in general. Emily?

MS. OAKLEY: Thanks, Steve. And thanks 

for your comment, Wood.

And I think that for a lot of growers 

who are currently using this product or who want 

to, they probably also, as Rick said, don't fully 

comprehend or know necessarily all of the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

background that we've come to learn about the 

complications of paper and adhesives.

But I did just want to throw out there, 

we have discussed in the past as well that the first 

use of these products, especially the paper-chain 

pots, in particular, is as a transplanting tray 

in the greenhouse.

And then, the second use of that is once 

it gets put into the field. So it is conceivable 

that you could argue that it is a recycled paper 

product by the time it enters into the field, 

although I understand for some that might be 

stretching it a bit.

But it is definitely a complicated 

issue and one that at first looked very simple, 

but it's not.

MR. ELA: The things we get ourselves 

into. Mindee, you have a question?

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you. Being new and 

not in the history of this conversation and the 

Crops Subcommittee, I'm curious about the presence 

of ASTM D6866 as a requirement, in the National 

List, and wondering if testing as a part of organic 

systems in the regulatory framework is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

precedent-setting?

One of the things I love about the 

organic system is it's process- and 

input-oriented, and not so testing-oriented. So 

I'm curious about the Board's perspective on 

whether that's a radical change for organic 

regulation.

MR. ELA: And I can reply to that, but 

I think if somebody else from the Board, if other 

members of the Crops Committee or the full Board 

want to chime in on any of these things. I mean, 

this is our chance for discussion and I certainly 

don't want to take up all the Crop Subcommittee 

time. But great question.

Biodegradable bio-based mulch was 

referenced to a standard. Of course, that has 

gotten us in some trouble, in terms of having no 

products that actually met it.

But I don't think that -- the 

referencing to the standard was not the issue 

there, it was referencing the percentages and types 

of things that went to the standard.

We obviously know any time we reference 

to an outside standard, most standards 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

change -- just like with List 4 inerts -- we take 

the chance of referencing to an old standard. And 

I guess I'd have to sit down with the Program and 

see if we can put wording in that is something like, 

that standard or equivalent, or, you know, if that 

standard's upgraded, be able to stay with that 

movement.

I guess I personally see -- even though 

it is a standard and it is a test -- it's a way 

of making sure that advancing some of the 

certifiers' questions of consistency by giving a 

very clear line of what we want.

And so that it takes away some of the 

interpretation that gets us in trouble down the 

line, of when one certifier says this and another 

certifier says that.

So while it is very procedure-oriented, 

I think at some point, we do have to be very clear 

and technical to make sure that everybody is on 

the same page, but also knowing that, you know, 

like whether it's meant to be incorporated into 

the soil and some of these other things are left 

a little more open. But it's a good question.

Are there other questions from the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Board? Maybe we should move on.

Jesse, I would make the motion that we 

move this -- send this back to subcommittee for 

further revision.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Is there a second?

MR. MORTENSEN: Second.

MR. BUIE: Can I ask the name?

MR. MORTENSEN: Dave Mortensen.

MR. BUIE: Dave, okay.

MR. ELA: Yes. Okay.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Are we ready to vote? 

Any other questions?

MR. ELA: The way we can handle the vote 

is, I'm just going to read down the list of Board 

members and they can say aye or nay or abstain. 

So --

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- if we're ready to vote, I'll 

go ahead and --

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- move down the list.

MR. BUIE: Okay. So we have a motion 

on the floor to return to -- motion and a second 

to return back to the subcommittee. Okay. We can 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

start the vote.

MR. ELA: Okay. Sue?

MS. BAIRD: Yes.

MR. ELA: Asa?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes.

MR. ELA: Jesse?

MR. BUIE: Yes.

MR. ELA: Jerry?

MR. D'AMORE: Yes.

MR. ELA: Rick?

MR. GREENWOOD: Yes.

MR. ELA: Kim?

MS. HUSEMAN: Yes.

MR. ELA: Mindee?

MS. JEFFERY: Yes.

MR. ELA: Dave?

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes.

MR. ELA: Emily?

MS. OAKLEY: Yes.

MR. ELA: Nate?

MR. POWELL-PALM: Yes.

MR. ELA: Scott?

MR. RICE: Yes.

MR. ELA: A-dae?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Yes.

MR. ELA: Dan?

DR. SEITZ: Yes.

MR. ELA: Wood?

MR. TURNER: Yes.

MR. ELA: And the Chair, Steve, votes

yes.

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: Scott, do you have a count?

MR. BUIE: It's 15 yes, zero noes, zero 

abstentions, zero recusals, no absence. So the 

motion passes.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jesse, in your role 

as Secretary, I should have asked you and not Scott, 

I apologize. Okay. And with that, I think Jenny 

may have one comment to make before we move on.

DR. TUCKER: Thank you so much. I 

wanted to clarify for the organic 

community -- because I'm sure we will get 

questions, so if I can answer that question now.

Given this vote and the fact that this 

will go back to subcommittee, from the Program's 

perspective, we will continue to allow paper pots 

during this deliberation period.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And so we had sent out a note to all 

certifiers saying that these would continue to be 

allowed while the Board considered its work. That 

was based upon a resolution on the Board, the fact 

that this listing is very close to an existing 

listing, and certifiers make decisions in good 

faith on this particular material.

So I just wanted to clarify that the 

current status of temporary allowance will 

continue while the Board continues its work. 

Thank you.

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Jesse. Thank you, 

Jenny, for clarifying that.

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: Jesse, it's back to you.

MR. BUIE: Okay. At this time, we want 

to go to our next discussion, wild native fish for 

liquid fish production. Emily?

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Jesse. So this 

work agenda item came out of the sunset review of 

liquid fish products that took place in 2018 and 

questions that were posed to the stakeholder 

community regarding the existence of any 

fertilizers that use wild native fish harvested 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

exclusively for fertilizer.

And at the time, there was indication 

that there might be products that were using whole 

native wild fish harvested exclusively for 

fertilizers.

So we added this -- with the NOP's

approval -- to our work agenda, received a TR, and 

the TR came back with additional information that 

provided more clarity on how these fish products 

are used.

So the TR is very extensive -- and I 

welcome anyone to refer to it if they'd like 

to -- but in essence, it helps explain that there 

are no fish per se that are harvested exclusively 

for the use of fertilizer, but there are fish that 

are harvested for a combination of meal, oil, and 

solubles, and that that might be perhaps some of 

the area in which there was an expectation that 

some were harvested exclusively for fertilizer.

But before I go into that, I will say 

that the TR did indicate that a majority of 

materials that are available or that are OMRI 

listed include fish waste -- which is waste left 

after market fish are processed for human 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

consumption -- or a combination of fish waste and 

bycatch and mortalities, or a combination of fish 

waste, meal, oil, and solubles.

But there is a subset -- about 32 

percent -- of the products that are OMRI listed 

that are some combination of meal, oil, and/or 

solubles and that is from the wet reduction 

process.

So the wet reduction process, in a very 

simplified version, is that whole fish are cooked 

and pressed, the solids and liquids are separated. 

The solids become the meal. The liquids are then 

further separated into oil and solubles. And 

then, the solubles are evaporated and 

concentrated.

And a lot of the products contain 

solubles. And we did hear from stakeholders who 

produced fish fertilizer, using exclusively 

solubles.

We sent some questions out to the 

stakeholder community to try to get their feedback 

on thoughts for where the Crops Subcommittee should 

go from here.

We had initially expected that we would 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

look at an annotation possibility, if there were 

in fact materials that were using fish harvested 

exclusively for fertilizer. But given the TR's 

results, we wanted to hear from the community as 

to what our next steps should be.

We did get some feedback that the 

discrepancy between the TR and the Spring 2018 

public comments needed to be resolved. And we did 

go back and ask the TR authors -- one of whom was 

OMRI -- to help clarify that.

And I think we feel like we understand 

what that resolution is. It's, as I've just 

explained, this breaking down of fish into meal, 

oil, and solubles, so that, for example, if a 

fertilizer is using solubles, meal and oil could 

have gone to other uses, primarily livestock feed 

uses. So not exclusively, again, for fertilizers.

We did get comments saying that we 

should just rely on the TR results and take no 

further action at this time.

We also got comments saying that some 

producers think that what they're using is the 

result of byproduct, presumably from human 

consumption only. And I can attest as a farmer 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

having used these products in the past that that 

was my initial expectation of them.

Then, we did hear that using the waste 

products -- the solubles derived after the oil and 

the meal -- does provide an economic incentive for 

this fish harvesting and that that's something we 

should consider.

We did hear from an inspector who has 

done an inspection of these facilities and he 

provided some detailed written comments about 

that.

And he believes that the TR is doing 

a disservice by attempting to separate fish stocks 

that are harvested for meal from those that are 

harvested for solubles, because, in his comments, 

those are basically both for agricultural 

purposes, either livestock feed or for fertilizer. 

And he said that this was low-hanging fruit and 

something that we could and should act on.

We did hear from several producers of 

fish fertilizers who use only exclusively 

post-consumption scraps, so fish waste from human 

use intentions.

And we did get some comments saying that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

oversight is certainly adequate, in their view, 

in the U.S., where they are harvesting and sourcing 

their fish, but that there might be issues 

internationally, where government oversight may 

not be as strong.

And we did hear, finally, from some who 

felt that we might want to look at an annotation 

that restricted use to only from fish waste 

products derived from human consumption, but only 

if that requirement is enforceable and verifiable.

So that is sort of the overarching 

summary of the public comments. And I think the 

CS will come back and we will have another 

discussion about potential next steps and where 

that might lead. And I wanted to open it up if 

there are any questions from the Board.

MR. ELA: All right. Are there any 

questions? Asa has a question.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you, Emily, for that 

clear description of the issues. I just kind of 

want to expand on one concept.

And I think there were some thoughtful 

comments in the public comments also that the use 

of waste to produce liquid fish products could add 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

kind of a marginal increment of profit that then 

could make harvesting wild fish for a given purpose 

profitable overall, and that without that 

secondary market, it might mean the original 

harvesting might not be as viable and there could 

be less of it.

So just, you've kind of addressed that, 

but it's a slightly different take on -- or an 

additional take on some of these issues about

whether it's solely harvested for fertilizer and 

liquid fertilizer products.

MS. OAKLEY: Yes, I think that's a really 

good point and that was brought up by many public 

commenters.

And I think that was some of the initial 

issue that the CS had with this TR, concern that, 

you know, were we sort of splitting hairs, so to 

speak, about the fish meal versus oil versus 

solubles? And probably where some of the original 

confusion arose from -- or, I thought maybe 

confusion's not the right word.

And we did get comments saying we 

shouldn't be degrading one ecosystem -- the marine 

environment -- to promote the health of another, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of the agro ecosystem.

So I do agree with what you're saying 

and I think that's part of the nuance that we need 

to discuss on the subcommittee as we decide where 

to go from here. Thank you for bringing that up.

MR. ELA: A-dae, you had a question?

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Yes. So I'm not 

part of the Crops Subcommittee, but I'm really 

interested in this topic, because I think this has 

a lot of implications for indigenous communities 

who do subsistence hunting and fishing.

Of course, I think there's a lot of 

indigenous people who are dependent on a lot of 

these wild fish stocks. So it is semi-troubling 

to me that we have -- we would utilize wild fish 

stocks for commercial purposes, not necessarily 

for inputs into agriculture, because I think that 

is a long-flowing system.

When we think about the salmon that have 

basically created all the fertile grounds in 

California, like, I think that connection between 

ocean life and agriculture has always been there. 

And we should, as organic communities, should be 

not only supporting that system, but should be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

figuring out ways to ensure that that connection 

remains.

But I do worry that by placing wild fish 

stocks into like a commodity-type of system, that 

there would be opportunities for exploitation.

And so I just wanted to ensure that, 

moving forward, I do appreciate the comments about 

oversight and I do think there has to be some 

oversight or some safeguards to ensure that there's 

not exploitation within that system.

I know that's so hard, but we should 

at least attempt to do that, in terms of not having 

wild fish that are important to indigenous 

communities solely being caught for fertilizers. 

I know it's so complicated, I know it's a 

complicated situation, and --- but I appreciate 

the conversation that the Crops Subcommittee is 

having.

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, A-dae. I think 

those are really good points and they were also 

brought up by some public commenters as well. And 

a lot of these fish that are harvested for the meal, 

oil, and soluble industry are the food for other 

larger fish that are key to fisheries for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

communities and local communities around the 

oceans.

MR. ELA: And Asa, I wanted to circle 

back, did you finish the comments you wanted to 

make on that?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes, I actually -- I said 

something else on mute, but actually A-dae brought 

up some of those issues. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Okay, great. I just wanted 

to make sure I hadn't cut you off. So other 

questions from the Board?

I have just, I guess from the Chair, 

a similar question, Emily, and I think you've kind 

of covered it. But I've been -- the TR is like, 

okay, we don't have a smoking gun here anymore, 

we thought we did.

And I know in the public comments, it 

came back to OMRI's testifying several years ago 

that there were products made exclusively from wild 

fish harvested for fertilizer.

I did find, when we found the TR 

sufficient, the terminology in it -- and you just 

noted it -- about the fish meal and fish oil and 

solubles, that the solubles aren't -- people aren't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

harvesting fish exclusively for those, but it seems 

that, yes, there might be fish harvested 

exclusively for fish meal, fish oil, and solubles.

And even though those are three things, 

they may be all destined for the agricultural 

market.

And so, I mean, do you see any way -- how 

do you think we should proceed with trying to sort 

this out and, I guess, the second part of that 

question is, do we do any harm by trying to put 

an annotation in or do we just cloud the waters 

further?

MS. OAKLEY: That's a good question. 

I've been grappling with this one myself and I was 

unsure if we were going to discuss it now or on 

the subcommittee call.

But I think my personal inclination 

would be that we should explore the feasibility 

of an annotation that is limited to use for -- of 

products that are fish waste, bycatch, or fish 

waste plus meal, oil, and solubles, but that we 

might try to explore the restriction of fish used 

from the meal, oil, and soluble industry 

exclusively.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Simply because -- as you pointed out, 

as Asa pointed out, as commenters pointed 

out -- even if not all of those products are in 

any given fertilizer material -- although some 

fertilizers could contain all three, meal, oil, 

and solubles -- it certainly is an important part 

of the economic aspect of harvesting those fish 

and does give a revenue stream for the solubles 

that would not necessarily otherwise be there. 

And certainly, the other uses are largely 

agricultural.

So I think it is a complicated issue, 

but I would like to see if we could have a discussion 

at the subcommittee level to see -- or here now -- to 

see what people think about the feasibility of 

exploring an annotation to restrict exclusive use 

from meal, oil, and solubles.

MR. ELA: And have we gotten any further 

clarification on that kind of discrepancy between 

OMRI's comments that there were and then, the TR 

that there weren't, or is that still kind of a 

question mark out there?

MS. OAKLEY: Yes, we have gotten some 

additional clarification and I think -- having 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

spoken with someone about that, I think their 

comment would be this is the benefit of the TR, 

because the TR is going to go into much greater 

depth than can be provided in a 30-day comment 

period covering a multitude of issues.

So the TR is the definitive word on this 

issue. And I think that the TR authors explored 

this further and determined and figured out that 

the meal, oil, and soluble industry is -- as we've 

learned -- slightly more complicated and not as 

basic as exclusively used for fertilizer, but it 

does have this livestock feed use for it as well.

So I think -- does that answer your 

question as to whether or not --

MR. ELA: Yes.

MS. OAKLEY: -- like what the 

discrepancy is -- okay.

MR. ELA: Yeah, no, that's fine, 

it -- there were some public comments on that as 

well and I had kind of forgotten where we ended 

up on that. So thank you for clarifying. It looks 

like Dave has a question.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes. Rick earlier 

commented that paper was more complicated than he 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

understood and I completely agree with Rick about 

that. I also have come to learn that the fate of 

fish is more complicated than I understood, with 

respect to harvesting.

And I had a bit of -- I would have to 

say, I came to this particular issue with a bit 

of a bias that I was fairly certain we were 

harvesting fish solely for the purpose of their 

use in fertilizer. Certainly, historically, we 

have done that, but we didn't find a compelling 

argument to support that.

But I like what Emily is proposing here, 

which is to look carefully at the distinction of 

fish harvested for meal, oil, and other byproducts 

and solubles for fertilizer.

And I like -- I think from a ecological, 

sustainability point of view, it would be nice if 

we could understand better what species we're 

taking and what the impact of taking them is. I 

know historically we've overfished some species 

for fertilizer use. Menhaden is an example that 

we came across, that's historically, now, back in 

the 40's and earlier.

So anyway, I like what Emily is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

proposing, at the end, when you 

were -- Steve -- asking where do we go from here?

MR. ELA: Looks like, Jesse, that is all 

the questions I see from the Board.

MR. BUIE: Okay. All right. Our final 

discussion document is biodegradable bio-based 

mulch and, Asa, that's your ball game.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. This is 

another complex topic. And as you know, we put 

out a discussion document that Harriet actually 

worked on very extensively. Harriet, I hope 

you're listening and I read through your comments.

I'll provide kind of a summary here of 

some of the comments we've had so far, and I'm 

hoping we can then discuss further about perhaps 

future plans and that can inform discussions in 

the subcommittee going forward.

So bio-based mulch, as we know, is 

generally a plastic material that is an alternative 

to polyethylene to function as a mulch, primarily 

for weed suppression, although there are some cases 

where it seems to prevent leafhoppers or other 

disease vectors. So it also involves pest 

control.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And the issue we've been struggling 

with is that the current annotation limits it to 

100 percent bio-based materials. I know many of 

us are familiar with that, but I thought this 

summary might be helpful for some of the new 

members.

And the reality is, we've discovered 

that many of the current biodegradable mulches 

have -- do not have 100 percent bio-based 

materials. In fact, in some cases, they can be 

a majority source to petroleum or non-biological 

source material, but are still biodegradable or 

mostly biodegradable.

And I think to summarize some of the 

comment we've gotten on this discussion document 

would be to say that there's a lot of ambivalence 

in the community about these materials we've kind 

of taken together.

I think to summarize one comment from 

Beyond Pesticides is the sentiment that synthetic 

mulches should not replace organic mulches. And 

that we need to avoid harm from cradle to grave 

impacts. And that because of especially the 

petroleum content for these biodegradable mulches, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that raises concerns about these materials.

But kind of the flip side of this is 

that the petroleum products themselves are used 

heavily in organic production. We've heard a lot 

about plastic use, plasticulture, and the use of 

polyethylene films.

I certainly know decades-long organic 

farmers in California who still rely heavily on 

these materials, really, people I consider 

pioneers in organic. And plastic is used really 

everywhere. Well, maybe that's too general, but 

plastic films are used in many different settings, 

primarily wherever there's annual crops.

And I think that there is a tradeoff 

there -- when we're talking about this new 

product -- about the concern that we're actually 

still using lots of petroleum products in organic, 

we're just not allowing it to go into the soil, 

which I think is the real crux of the concern about 

this material.

Going a little back to some of the 

comments -- some of the comments about these 

materials, they're petroleum-based.

There's some concerns that the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

degradable plastics are produced by genetically 

modified organisms, and that's raising concerns. 

Although, there is a related comment -- which I 

tend to agree with actually -- that we should not 

be regulating the end product in this case.

There certainly are other cases where 

materials produced from genetically modified 

organisms are still allowed in organic and that 

the ban on organic is related to genetically 

modified organisms in production.

This is, again, another complicated 

area and I think raises some foundational concerns 

about the use of this material.

The crux of the challenges with this 

material are that we don't really know to the extent 

how they're fully degradable in actual use in 

natural environments. We've had extensive 

comments on this.

NOP has funded research on this, which 

has been very useful and informative, but there 

are still some outstanding concerns about whether 

the biodegradable mulches would fully degrade in 

different environments, such as a dry hot climate 

versus a moist damp one, and that -- in some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

situations may result in residues persisting in 

soils, providing kind of a new kind of microplastic 

in the environment.

And then, also, can simply erode or be 

carried away by animals or blow into water, break 

apart before it can be removed or break apart as 

it's being plowed and end up in waterways, and could 

essentially be a new source of plastics in the 

environment.

In terms of the -- whoops, get back to 

my notes here. In terms of some of the 

suggestions, I thought there were a lot of very 

interesting and thoughtful comments about where 

we should go from here.

A number of commenters noted that we 

have kind of potentially a way forward with regard 

to the discussions around paper pots. There, 

we've come up with a suggestion that we should have 

85 percent bio-based, at least.

And there was some suggestion that 

perhaps that could be a guideline for the use of 

bio-based films or basis for content for bio-based 

films, that maybe we should come up with some 

standard where we allow a portion of bio-based 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

material and a portion of petroleum or other 

synthetically-derived content for the 

biodegradable material, but not -- kind of step 

away from our current requirement that requires 

100 percent biologically sourced material.

There is a lot of frustration that 

we -- that there's a material listed and as it's 

listed with the 100 percent bio-based requirement, 

there's no product that can fill that requirement. 

And that, essentially, because of that, that 

situation really is untenable and really just 

contradicts the process of the National List.

One recommendation would be that if we 

don't allow some fraction of non-bio-based 

content, that really we should remove it from the 

National List.

This was kind of an approach that was 

I think designed to encourage the development of 

100 percent bio-based material, but five years 

later or more, we still haven't succeeded, and 

therefore, it should not be present on the list.

There were some interesting 

developments with paper products -- which actually 

do meet the requirement of 100 percent 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

bio-based -- and I think it's interesting to see 

where that goes.

Again, that also can be informed by some 

of the discussions we've had with respect to paper 

pots, especially the use of virgin pulp material.

In terms -- getting back to going 

forward, I can say very strongly that many of the 

comments submitted really implore -- and I 

emphasize that word, implore -- the Board and the 

Program to allow use of these materials.

That there is such demand for use of 

films in organic production and that the 

environmental and potentially health implications 

of the heavy use of polyethylene materials is so 

great that even if we allow some 

synthetically-derived content in these 

biodegradable mulches, we essentially would be 

allowing kind of the lesser of two evils, in that 

the evils associated with polyethylene films is 

so great that this material is really advantageous. 

Let's see.

I really appreciated some of the 

comments from the OPWC, which really kind of 

recommended a phased approach to evaluating this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

material and implementing it.

They do support allowing this material 

and changing the annotation to allow non-bio-based 

source material in the biodegradable films, but 

kind of posturing an incremental approach to get 

these materials out there, but then also move 

towards ultimately a fully bio-based content.

So this could result in an annotation 

that provides a minimum of bio-based content and 

then, also moves forward to how we can get to and 

support -- encourage the development of products 

that are 100 percent bio-based.

I kind of see this as analogous to 

listings on 606 and trying to move them off of 606 

to require sourcing materials that are fully 

organic for many processing or other uses. Let's 

see.

Another of the questions we posed in 

the discussion document asked about uses related 

to incorporating nutrients and potentially 

pesticides -- of course, organically 

approved -- into these materials and whether that 

could be useful.

I think the answer to that was kind of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

yes, in some cases, but really, I think that's not 

a relevant question right now.

I think the first question is how do 

we as a Board move forward on this issue? And do 

we want to keep the current annotation that limits 

it to 100 bio-based? Do we want to flex on that 

and allow use of these materials, perhaps with the 

goal of long-term encouraging movement towards 

bio-based materials? Or do we want to take it off 

the National List because there are not products 

that currently fill that requirement?

So I think that provides an overall 

summary of comment and input. It reflects 

discussions we've been having now for over a year. 

But I think more input from the Board will be 

valuable. And there, of course, will need to be 

more discussion in the Crops committee about 

whether we want to come up with a proposal to vote 

on for the fall.

So I think at this point, I want to open 

it up for comment and discussion from other Board 

members.

MR. ELA: Are there questions from the 

Board or comments? Okay. Mindee, go ahead.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you, Asa. I was 

wondering if you could unpack what you said about 

GMOs and the relationship of synthetic fibers, and 

I think you said limited to in-production 

prohibition, and I wanted to understand what you 

were meaning a little better.

MR. ELA: Asa, you're on mute.

MR. BRADMAN: There are concerns in the 

annotation that limits the use of feedstocks that 

are derived from excluded methods.

And one comment, which I actually tend 

to agree with in this context, suggested a change 

that, rather than excluding, disallowing use of 

feedstocks derived from excluded methods, that the 

final project must not contain organisms derived 

from excluded methods.

So, I mean, this is a challenging issue 

within the organic community. The concern is, is 

that GMOs are being used to produce some of these 

materials from petroleum products that then become 

the biodegradable component of the films.

And this was a recommendation and I 

think that we need to consider about whether the 

key issue here is not the production method, but 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the end product. I mean, there might be an analogy 

here where we allow vaccines that are produced by 

GMO organisms if there is no other alternative.

So I think that the analogy here would 

be that some of the biodegradable plastic materials 

that are components of the film may be derived using 

GMO organisms or from organisms that have been 

produced using excluded methods.

So I think this is something as a group 

we need to discuss. And I hope that provides some 

clarification.

MR. ELA: Other questions?

MS. JEFFERY: Just, I have a follow-up.

MR. ELA: Sure, go ahead, Mindee.

MS. JEFFERY: Do you mean that if there 

are, for instance, genetically modified corn

stalks becoming part of a synthetic fiber, that 

that's less of a concern than the end product?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes.

MS. JEFFERY: Okay. So in that --

MR. BRADMAN: But that, I mean, that 

raises another issue here. I think there's two 

things.

One is not necessarily, like, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

cornstarch from corn that was grown 

conventionally, I mean that raises its own set of 

issues, but from what I understand is that the 

petroleum products can be processed using 

genetically modified organisms to produce some of 

the polymers and other biodegradable materials for 

this material.

And correct me, someone out there, 

correct me if I'm wrong in terms of whether they're 

being used to process the petroleum source material 

or also the bio-based, like cornstarch or other 

source material as well.

MS. JEFFERY: Yes, I think we're 

thinking about the same thing, in the sense of 

there's sort of two trajectories there in that you 

can have genetically modified organisms producing 

fibers and you can have GMO corn stalks going into 

fiber production. And I just wanted to hear that 

we're looking at that from both perspectives in 

this context.

MR. BRADMAN: Right.

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you.

MR. BRADMAN: And just wanted to 

emphasize too that there's tremendous interest and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

demand for access to this material. And again, 

I think there's a lot of ambivalence in the 

community about taking a petroleum-derived product 

and putting it in soil. And that just raises 

questions. Although, we already do it with other 

petroleum products.

MR. ELA: Dave, you had your hand up. 

Do you still want to ask a question?

MR. MORTENSEN: I don't really have much 

to add, I was going to -- I agree with what Mindee 

and Asa -- Asa was just asking someone to weigh 

in to confirm what he was saying. I agree with 

both what Mindee and Asa were saying.

My recollection of some of the 

presenters on this subject, a year or so ago, and 

reading about it, was that there are microbial, 

transformed microbial populations that work on the 

carbon substrate.

And that when we asked questions about 

the carbon substrate, the answer we got was that 

crop feedstocks would be used as the carbon 

substrate and because there isn't that much in the 

way of bio-based plastic being produced, they had 

little control over the source of the feedstock 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and they admitted that probably most of it was 

genetically modified in origin, like maize stubble 

and things like that.

MR. ELA: Other questions from the 

Board? Asa, I have one myself. Besides the 

petroleum-based issues that we all wrestle with 

and, I mean, as you noted, we allow the 

non-recyclable, non-biodegradable mulch, so in 

some ways we don't have an issue with petroleum 

there, because we allow that.

But it still comes back to some of those 

issues, too, of whether we're getting full 

biodegradation in the soil. And in different 

climates, arid climates, whatever, if we're going 

to have plastic fragments and such.

Do you think that there -- we've had 

comments from certifiers and things saying, well, 

we should just, rather than getting too technical 

and trying to cover all soils and all climates, 

that we should just have certifiers verify that 

they're not seeing plastic fragments in the soil 

after -- I mean, a lot of people are saying after

a year.

From what I've heard, I'd almost think 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

we'd have to say two years, since I don't think 

it breaks down that fast.

What do you think about that or do you 

have comments or thoughts on that -- besides the 

petroleum issue, we have this actual 

biodegradation issue. How should we move forward 

on that, do you think?

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I think there are 

some really good comments on those issues. And 

I think those can actually potentially form the 

basis for a way forward, from OPWC, from NOC, and 

from others as well.

In some ways, I think we have, 

potentially, a blueprint that could involve 

certifiers working with producers. I think 

there's going to be a learning curve with these 

things, and that was emphasized in the comments.

We could actually request removal, that 

was one suggestion that came up in public comments, 

removal of the material like we remove polyethylene 

film, but then, it could be composted in a, perhaps 

even in a certified facility or some other way.

Certainly, if it's used every year, 

then if we say it has to be done in two years, it's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

going to be a little hard to tell, because there 

could be leftover from the previous year. So 

there's some challenges there.

But there were actually some excellent 

comments that we can look at as a Subcommittee that 

I think provide an outline of steps to take, in 

terms of monitoring use, providing guidance to 

certifiers, and having certifiers work with 

producers.

And there can be kind of a feedback in 

that relationship that can also potentially inform 

policies proposed by the Board down the road. So 

but, yes, I think there are approaches to using 

the material.

Also, removing it at the end of the year 

would mean that it's not eroding or getting blown 

into waterways or out into the atmosphere, although 

some of it might break up a little bit, but that 

would be hopefully minimal.

So I think, again, to repeat myself, 

I think there are approaches we can propose.

MR. ELA: Yeah, and I seem to have a -- I 

appreciate your thoughts on that. And I brought 

up, do we remove it?, and I seem to have a note 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in my head from previous years that there was some 

concern that it would degrade enough that it 

wouldn't be very easy to remove.

But maybe we could ask that a certain 

percentage of it be removed, at least, so we reduce 

the load or the potential, I don't know. But it 

looks like Emily has a question.

MS. OAKLEY: Thanks, Asa. I thought you 

did a really great job encompassing the complexity 

of this issue.

And I just wanted to say to the point 

that we are allowing plastic right now in the form 

of plastic mulch, it's getting removed and there's 

something inherently challenging about the notion 

of allowing plastic that degrades into the soil.

I do agree with Steve, I think, although 

I don't know this product, my assumption is that 

people want to use it because they don't have to 

remove it, because it saves on labor and time and, 

therefore, expense of removal.

So I'm not sure if it would be possible 

to remove it, I think it might be friable enough 

by the time the season is over that it would not 

necessarily be feasible.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Although, in some environments, it 

might, because I do know from the panel that we 

had last year that in a desert environment, it could 

take a decade or more to degrade because of the 

lack of moisture necessary to help the 

decomposition process.

I've said this in the past, but I just 

want to reiterate it again, that I think many 

farmers who want to use this material may not 

understand what a low percentage of bio-based 

content it has. And some may know, but I think 

some would be surprised by the small amount of 

bio-based content that's in there.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I think that's a good 

point. I mean, originally, when we first started 

discussing this, numbers like 15 or 20 percent were 

being raised.

My understanding that in some products, 

it's increased to more like 50 percent and that 

there is a movement towards more bio-based 

materials.

I agree with the statement about, or 

the point that when we use polyethylene films, they 

are removed from the soil. But they certainly are 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

not removed from the earth.

When I look at, for example, strawberry 

production in Monterey and Santa Cruz County, by 

both large growers and also very small, really 

down-to-earth organic farmers, it's still based 

on plasticulture. And the plastics are being 

removed from the farm, but they're being put back 

into the earth in another location, in a landfill.

And so we just have to keep that in mind 

and that it's not really removing it. Maybe from 

the patch of soil that's certified organic, but 

it's going into a bigger waste dump that will 

persist for years and decades.

MS. OAKLEY: Could I just quickly follow 

up, Steve?

MR. ELA: Go ahead.

MS. OAKLEY: Okay, I --

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Okay.

MR. ELA: Sorry.

(Simultaneous speaking.)

MS. OAKLEY: I just wanted to say I 

wholeheartedly agree with that, Asa. I think 

that's a really great point. And these materials 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

are extremely complicated.

And I have used them for small-scale 

strawberry production. I don't anymore, but I 

used them for maybe three or four years and was 

really diligent about removing them, and yet, I 

still find pieces ten years on in the soil.

MR. ELA: All right. I'm not seeing 

further questions and we probably should move on. 

Thank you, Asa. I'll turn it back to Jesse.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Thank you, Steve, 

Emily, and Asa, for great work and robust 

discussion from the Subcommittee.

Let's now move into our 2022 Sunset 

Review. First is a soap-based algicide, 205.601 

synthetic substances allowed for use in organic 

crop production. Rick, you're first up.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay, thank you. My 

comments are based on the written comments and last 

week's webinars for the algicide/demossers. 

There were no comments related to delisting this 

product and there were a handful of support. So 

basically, nothing to say that it needs to be 

delisted, that I saw.

MR. ELA: Okay.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay.

MR. ELA: Are there any questions from 

the Board? I don't see any, Jesse, so --

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- go ahead.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Ammonium carbonate, 

205.601 synthetic substances allowed in use in 

organic crop production. Dave?

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes. So this is a 

material that's used in baits, either alone or in 

combination with yeasts, as an attractant for 

flies.

Like Rick's review of his last product, 

we had 16 written public comments. All of them 

either supported relisting or were, quote-unquote, 

not opposed to relisting.

About a third of those 16 written 

comments indicated that ammonium carbonate is not 

something that's used very much in their area. 

It's clearly something that's used more in systems 

where there is poultry and livestock production 

for fly management.

And so based on what was supportive 

comments about it and none that were raising flags, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

this one also has a strong consensus for relisting.

MR. ELA: Are there questions from the 

Board? Dave, I have one, not seeing any others, 

and I'm going to get my fruit shirt right in here 

for this. But it's certainly one that is used for 

trapping in the fruit industry as well, for --

MR. MORTENSEN: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- for fruit flies. And there 

are a number of them, but it can be a component 

that helps. It's obviously fairly broad, but 

there are a few things that that really is the only 

choice, in terms of trying to trap, because there 

aren't specific pheromones or other things. So --

MR. MORTENSEN: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- I think, for that reason, 

I think it's fairly important to keep it on the 

List. And it's not --

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes.

MR. ELA: -- applied, it's kept in a 

trap, so it's not a broad --

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes.

MR. ELA: -- application.

MR. MORTENSEN: Thanks, Steve.

MR. ELA: Any other questions? Okay, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Jesse, go ahead.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Soap, insecticidal, 

205.601 synthetic substances allowed in use in 

organic crop production. That's for you again, 

Rick.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay, thank you. 

Again, comments based on the webinar and written 

comments, no one recommended delisting it. And 

the certifying agents mentioned that they have, 

of the ones that responded, over 100 users of this 

product. So there was support for its continued 

listing in the sunset process.

MR. ELA: Any questions from the Board 

on soaps? We're all into handwashing these days, 

it's always good to keep our insects clean as well. 

Jesse, your turn.

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. GREENWOOD: That's pretty, Steve, 

that's pretty bad.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Vitamin D3, 205.601 

synthetic substances allowed for use in organic 

crop production. That's you, Wood.

MR. TURNER: It is, Jesse. This -- so 

vitamin D3 is listed as something to be used as 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

a rodenticide. We've had about a dozen written 

comments on this, pretty strongly weighted towards 

the relisting or no position.

Eleven comments all alluding to the 

fact that it really is essential for a lot of 

producers in organic, has historically not been 

the source of any bird toxicity.

There were several comments that 

pointed out that members have said, members of 

different organizations have said that the 

material is fairly ineffective, although we had 

over 100-plus actual growers saying they were still 

using it in the context of larger pest management 

strategies, with other mechanical tools as well.

So there was a strongly worded request 

for delisting from Beyond Pesticides that alluded 

to the painful death that it causes in rodents and 

did suggest that there was some toxicity to 

non-target animals.

So I think that research, some of the 

research came out of the New Zealand plant 

protection, out of that document. But in general, 

it's pretty strongly weighted toward relisting our 

position. That's what I have.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Are there questions from the 

Board? I am not seeing any. Congratulations, 

Wood, you have now made your first presentation 

on the NOSB, so you're off and running.

MR. TURNER: An auspicious start.

MR. ELA: Yes. Back to you, Jesse.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Great job. Okay. 

Aquatic plant extracts, 205.601 synthetic 

substances allowed for use in organic crop 

productions. Emily?

MS. OAKLEY: Thank you, Jesse. So this 

material is what helped prompt in part the marine 

materials discussion that started five years ago, 

so it is a little bit more complicated.

But we did receive a large number of 

comments on this material, and also from producers 

using this material and certifiers, listing the 

number of producers that use it.

And it's very clear that it's a widely 

used material, across crops and across regions and 

across scales. So it is definitely one that 

farmers have been using for a long time.

We did receive comments that growers 

have experience with this material and that it's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

been a part of fertility management since before 

the NOP, that it's pretty essential for people.

We heard from some producers who 

appreciate that we're exploring the environmental 

impact, or potential environmental impacts, of 

harvesting and want to continue using this while 

we explore that. We heard that it's small amounts 

that are used, but by a large number of growers.

And in response to some of our 

questions, we were informed by several 

manufacturers of aquatic plant extract materials 

that the nonsynthetic forms require more biomass 

to achieve the same benefits.

And we have been -- or we did hear from 

another commenter that natural extracts are 

available and that alternatives exist, so we should 

perhaps not allow these materials.

And I think it's timely and helpful that 

this is up for sunset review while we're very much 

in the thick of exploring possible annotation for 

this, which is obviously separate from the sunset 

review process, but it does help us see how 

essential these materials are for growers and how 

widely used they are, but also support for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

continuing to explore environmental impacts. Are 

there any questions?

MR. ELA: Are there any questions from 

the Board? Emily, I will ask one. And it 

doesn't -- I mean, the Board, in the last few years, 

just looking through the notes, I think it was 2015, 

actually split pretty much five to six on whether 

to delist it.

They -- I mean, as you noted, these 

extracts are widely used, people love them, they've 

been used well before the NOP came into effect.

I mean, there's a number of claims of 

all these beneficial micronutrients and such, 

which are hard to get in a cohesive whole otherwise, 

but yet, the Board really, obviously, was in a 

quandary of whether to continue these, even though 

I'm sure the comments of use were very similar then. 

We obviously had a lot of comments on this go-round 

of the comprehensive review of marine materials.

And that -- you personally have put out 

a number of discussion documents on this and I know 

it's so hard to wrap our hands around and I know 

you, probably, and the Board has kind of spun out 

on, how do we address this?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Do you have any guesses, comments, 

thoughts on how we move forward on this, to make 

some progress without just chasing our tails, but 

also knowing that it's an incredibly diverse topic?

MS. OAKLEY: Yeah, thanks. I would like 

to be able to move forward in the fall with a 

proposal for an annotation, in my ideal world, 

given that it's my last meeting and the amount of 

time that has been spent on this up until now.

I do take into sincere consideration 

the comments made by some stakeholders to aggregate 

all marine origin materials into one broad work 

agenda item. But as you discussed, I think that 

might be a challenge and it would be harder to make 

discrete recommendations for each of those.

So in terms of the 2015 sunset review 

and the divided vote, it's my understanding that 

that's what led to the 2016 TR, which was 

cross-subcommittee in its scope, so it looked at 

Handling, Livestock and Crop uses.

And just to the point, I'm trying to 

address this on a broader level, Jean Richardson 

was the lead on that subject and did work on 

her -- worked very, very hard through the last 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

couple of months of her term and came up with two 

proposals that came out, one in Handling, one in 

Crops, to try to look at nomenclature.

And ideally, I think it was also 

hopefully intended to address environmental impact 

on some level as well. But that was very 

challenging. And trying to do cross-subcommittee 

work is certainly feasible, but it comes with a 

lot of restrictions.

So what's taken place since the fall 

expert panel on marine materials is that I have 

crafted a draft annotation, basically considering 

the scientists' recommendations from that panel 

that address harvest areas, method, species, 

bycatch, and regrowth.

And then, address verification in two 

possible ways, either in material evaluation 

programs, similar to the one used for highly 

soluble liquid fertilizers, or organic 

certification. But we need to explore economic 

impact of that.

And I had been attempting to send this 

out to a number of marine scientists who specialize 

in seaweeds to just get their feedback on the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

wording of this annotation and make adjustments 

as needed.

But whether that comes out as a proposal 

or a discussion document will depend on the 

Materials Subcommittee's review of it.

But it is work that is happening behind 

the scenes that you don't see right now, but I am 

trying to build as much scientific agreement on 

the annotation wording as I possibly can before 

bringing it forward.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Emily. This is going 

to be -- we know it's a bear and we know it's one 

that also, like so many things in the organic 

community, that some of the bigger concept 

discussions, it's so hard to find consensus, and 

yet, they potentially really do affect the Earth 

and the world we live in.

So I guess I just want to say thank you 

for taking this on, from when you first came on 

the Board. And as a heads-up to the rest of the 

Board and new members and members down the road 

that this is one that Emily's going to pass on.

But I think it's an important topic, 

and sometimes, I just want to throw up my hands 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and say, let's forget about it and move on to other 

things, and then, I come back to that bigger picture 

idea of, we can't ignore some of these big picture 

things just because they're not easy.

So thank you, Emily, for your work on 

that. Are there other questions for Emily on this?

MS. OAKLEY: Steve --

MR. ELA: And, Emily, I guess, one last 

question. In the --

MS. OAKLEY: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- absence of that bigger 

picture idea, I'm guessing that you're -- we're 

not up for a vote with this, but that you're 

comfortable with moving it forward for relisting?

MS. OAKLEY: Yeah. I mean, I think 

that, I'm hoping, as I said, to come forward with 

a proposal, if it all works out, that would be an 

annotation to the listing, which obviously is 

separate from the sunset, because that's what we've 

been working on, me and others, Jean and others 

as well, for a number of years.

So, yes, my goal would be to have a 

proposal that would address some of the potential 

environmental impacts and at the same time, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

separate from that would be a sunset review and 

relisting.

And I did just want to say in response 

to your great comments about the overall impact 

that we have on the environment and also just the 

comments that people would like to see a broader 

holistic approach to this, one of our commenters 

on the oral testimony said, don't let the perfect 

be the enemy of the good, and I think that that's 

actually a really appropriate analogy for this 

situation as well.

Of course, we need to get it right, but 

we have to do that in a manageable way and something 

that is enforceable and actionable.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Emily. It looks like 

one more question from Dave, and then, we'll move 

on. Go ahead, Dave.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yeah, Steve, this is 

really more a comment and a thank you to Emily for, 

if we were at a meeting face-to-face, I am sure 

that Emily would have convened already a breakfast, 

during which time ten or 15 people would have sat 

around a table sharing their views on this subject, 

some supporting the work and others with a, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

perhaps, less supportive view about some of this.

But for the last several years, she's 

worked tirelessly to move this along and I thank 

her on behalf of the Subcommittee and Committee 

for all the work she's done on this.

MS. OAKLEY: Oh my gosh, you guys have 

to stop thanking me, because I don't really do that 

much compared to many other people. But thank you, 

it's nice.

MR. ELA: Yes, and I just saw somebody 

noted that, saying that you should be noting Jean 

because it's her birthday today. So happy 

birthday, Jean. We appreciate your work on this.

MS. OAKLEY: And you, yes, you got this 

thing going. Thank you so much.

MR. ELA: Jesse, back to you on --

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- the next item.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Lignin sulfonate, 

205.601 synthetic substances allowed for use in 

organic crop production. Again, we're back to 

you, Rick.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay. Thank you, 

Jesse. Yes, this is a chelating agent and dust 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

suppressant. No comments, again, either public 

or from the webinar on delisting. And the 

certifiers, taken as a whole, mentioned they have 

over 200 users of the product. So, again, I'd say 

that's pretty strong support for continuing to list 

lignin sulfonate during the sunset. Any 

questions?

MR. ELA: Are there questions from the 

Board? And I'd just like to point out that this 

was one that was modified through rulemaking, it 

used to be listed as well for the use in flotation 

of pears, similar to sodium silicate, and that was 

one that did get altered in the past. But 

(telephonic interference). So I don't see any 

other questions, so, Jesse, back to you.

MR. BUIE: Okay. Sodium silicate, 

205.601 synthetic substance used in organic crop 

production. And that's you, Steve.

MR. ELA: Yes, thank you very much. And 

one of the reasons that sodium silicate was a 

controversial one in the last review of it, it is 

used to float pears out of the dump tanks, because 

pears are heavier than water, so you need to change 

the density of the water to get them to float.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We did receive a couple comments in 

favor of it, both from the Northwest Horticultural 

Council and then Harold Austin, who's also a fruit 

grower up there, in support of it.

Basically, while there are mechanical 

ways to get pears out of dump tanks, there was 

concern that many of the smaller pear processors, 

those mechanical ways are very expensive to 

retrofit the packing lines and that it is 

acceptable for use in organic production, 

especially for those smaller packing lines, and 

it would cause some harm to take it away.

Lignin sulfonate was taken off for 

that, in the last delisting, so it really left just 

the one material, sodium silicate.

So we did have two comments in favor 

of it. We did have one comment from Beyond 

Pesticides saying it should be delisted and that 

we should take it off the List.

We didn't receive any comments in terms 

of its use in fiber processing, which it's also 

listed for. So they noted, without support for 

that fiber processing use, it should be delisted.

So, but basically, people in favor of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

it and one against. So any questions on that? 

Not seeing any questions, so, Jesse, back to you.

MR. BUIE: Okay. EPA List 4 inerts of 

minimal concern, 205.601 synthetic substances 

allowed for use in organic crop production. And 

that's a big one. Asa?

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. I got the two easy 

topics today. So my hope today is that I can kind 

of present an overview of comments and that all 

of us should be thinking about where we want to 

go and vote on in the fall related to this sunset. 

And then, in particular, discussions within Crops 

and I guess Livestock, as well.

I want to start out by saying, and I'm 

sorry, Jesse, if I take too long, let me know, but 

there's a lot of comments and views on this.

MR. BUIE: Use the time, we're in good 

shape for time, I think, yes.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you.

MR. ELA: And I'll jump in on that, Asa. 

We've got until the top of the hour and we only 

have two more materials after this, that should 

be pretty straightforward. So you can -- I'm kind 

of balancing 15 or 20 minutes for this discussion. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So --

MR. BRADMAN: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- FYI. Counting questions.

MR. BRADMAN: I want to just lay out, 

too, one of my biases, I think all ingredients for 

every pesticide formulation should be publicly 

available, that we shouldn't have confidential 

business information or other ingredients that 

aren't listed, that really we should know what's 

being put on our food.

And I think that should be universal 

in pesticide formulations, both conventional and 

organic, but especially in organic.

I want to -- there's dozens of comments 

on this issue, very high level of interest and 

concern. I would say there's pretty much 

universal dissatisfaction with the current 

situation.

Words like embarrassment, we used the 

work broken in our sunset review about the current 

situation, we have a reference in the National List 

to a list, generally List 4 in EPA for, 

quote-unquote, inerts that are not of 

toxicological concern, that we have a broken system 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

where we reference a list that's not maintained 

by EPA.

I'm sorry for the new members, I think 

you've heard that we have this situation where, 

quote-unquote, inert ingredients -- and I really 

hate the term inert. Really, we should be using 

adjuvant, because these are active material.

Certainly, when we reviewed iron 

phosphate, for example, for slug control, the 

active ingredient really wasn't active without an 

additional material. And that's often the case 

for many formulations.

So I think the current situation, 

again, where we have this reference to a list that's 

not maintained, is problematic. And especially 

because that list includes substances that I think 

by any standard do not comply with OFPA criteria.

NPEs are really the kind of poster 

substance for that. And I know, personally, I 

would have a hard time voting for a list that 

includes NPEs, even if it's just in principle.

And I think the question we need to ask 

ourselves when I'm done talking is do we want to 

hold our nose and relist List 4? Or maybe we should 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

not and use that as a mechanism to kind of move 

the process forward?

Words that come up, I meant, broken, 

unconscionable delay from the National Organic 

Program in implementing existing NOSB 

recommendations on this issue.

We've had recommendations from the 

Board in 2010, 2012, and 2015, and we kind of have

a foundation for how to move forward on this. And 

I'm hoping that the level of concern, especially 

raised at this meeting and with the sunset, can 

encourage the NOP to establish an agenda item and 

reformulate the plan. Let's see.

Overall, I think, again, like some of 

the comments on bio-based mulch, the organic 

community has provided an excellent blueprint to 

transparently implement NOSB recommendations.

NOC, Beyond Pesticides, Organic 

Producer Wholesale, and many other organizations, 

I think have provided excellent comments that 

really provide a detailed roadmap for how we can 

move ahead on resolving this.

One of the main proposals from 2015 is 

for the NOP to work with EPA and the Safer Choice 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

program, which derived from the Design for the 

Environment Program at EPA, to basically develop 

a list of materials that are acceptable for 

pesticide formulations, but also meet OFPA 

criteria.

And I think there's going to have to 

be a give and take and kind of circular discussion 

between the NOP, the NOSB, and EPA to establish 

that. But that specific recommendation, I think 

is really something that we can move forward on.

This does put requirements on EPA. One 

recommendation to create a new section of the Safer 

Chemical Ingredients List, that I think there was 

a title provided for it in comments, which I really 

like, Ingredients Other Than Active Ingredients 

in Pesticides Used in Organic Production.

But that would essentially provide a 

mechanism for us to both review inerts and then, 

provide a reference for adding or, I must say, 

removing materials on that list.

One of the big, I think, challenges here 

is the sentiment that the NOSB is not positioned 

to provide reviews of individual compounds that 

are potentially available as inerts.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And I agree with that at some level, 

but there has been some really thoughtful proposals 

and discussions in the past that I think would allow 

grouping of some inerts, limiting the effort for 

groups that are less toxic and ensuring that 

there's a more thorough evaluation of individual 

chemicals that do potentially pose risks.

There is -- one of our questions and 

one of the issues raised is our current situation, 

where we refer to kind of an un-maintained EPA list 

for inerts, one of our questions was, is that 

stifling innovation?

And the answer is, yes. One certifier, 

or perhaps it was OMRI, excuse me, mentioned that 

there are products out there that aren't being 

developed, because there's not a reliable 

alternative to List 4 and formulations that may 

include, well, let's call them adjuvants or inerts, 

that aren't on the list are not being developed, 

yet those materials may in fact meet most of our 

concerns under OFPA.

So I think the question is, yes, there 

is evidence out there that the current use of -- the 

current broken system is stifling product 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

innovation. And I think that should really be kept 

in mind.

There were a number of concerns, 

though, that if we were to actually recommend 

delisting the List 4, that that would create 

turmoil in the current pesticide market for organic 

use, and that would ultimately lead to a reduction 

of available materials, increasing costs, and 

limit the access to useful materials that many 

consider essential for organic production.

Because of that concern, a number of 

groups are recommending that we relist List 4, that 

we vote for it.

Essentially, the argument essentially 

is we should hold our nose and not break the current 

system, which is already broken, but really use 

this as an opportunity to move the debate forward, 

well, really, not the debate, the discussion, and 

more importantly, move the programmatic steps 

forward that need to be taken to actually solve 

this issue.

There are comments from some growers. 

And I almost -- I think we need some discussion 

here, but I think this is overstated. I'll give 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

you an example here.

Inert ingredients are in every pest 

control substance we use. If you take away inert 

ingredients, kiss off more than half your food.

That's really a kind of extreme view 

of what could happen or what's going on here, with 

respect to List 4.

If we take our 2015 or other proposals 

to work with EPA and develop essentially a new list 

of inerts without toxicological concern, it's very 

likely that many of the materials on List 4 would 

be on a new list that could be managed, for example, 

under the Safer Choice Program.

So I think, in most cases, in many 

cases, existing pesticides, their formulations 

would not change. And then, if there are any 

materials on List 4 that don't make it to a new 

jointly created list, then they shouldn't be in 

products approved for organic production.

One of the examples there is NPEs, it's 

my understanding with OMRI that they're not 

approving products with NPEs, but the point is that 

that's potentially out there and available for use 

in a number of pesticide products.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And there, of course, may be, 

potentially are other current materials on List 

4 that we don't want in organic.

And I think, really, the key here is 

that, given the scale of our industry and the 

importance of materials to control pests in, of 

course, hopefully, a much less toxic and 

environmentally friendly way, we need a system that 

works.

Some of the comments from the BPIA and 

related stakeholders was that a proposal to change 

the process with List 4 inerts could be extremely 

disruptive. It was sometimes compared to the Food 

Quality Protection Act of 1996, that kind of 

changed the way we regulate conventional 

pesticides.

I just want to say, I think that the 

1996 change for conventional pesticides was a 

needed disruption. And I think we have a situation 

where we need a disruption to our current system 

here.

And that the concerns about, one of the 

concerns raised about making changes to this here 

is that will require a lot of regulatory work, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

re-registering materials, both at the federal 

level and the state level, like California, and 

that that is at least a ten-year process and 

extremely expensive.

But again, I want to raise the point 

here, and I hope in our discussions today and as 

the Subcommittee prepares for a vote in the fall, 

that, again, if many of the inerts on List 4 

ultimately transfer to some new system, that there 

won't be changes in formulations and there won't 

be a need for the kind of regulatory challenges 

that are being raised.

Of course, that's going to vary, 

depending on whether a given inert is exempt or 

not from a food tolerance, and perhaps might also 

depend a little bit on label requirements for 

current organic pesticides that do have a food 

tolerance.

I believe pyrethrin and a few other 

compounds do have an EPA food tolerance and if there 

were some registration changes there or 

formulations, that would require some challenges, 

and I think -- though we can try to quantify what 

that effect is.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So one of the recommendations -- let's 

see -- one kind of simplified recommendation from 

the BPIA was to keep List 4, but then, limit 

inerts -- keep List 4 and then, also allow other 

inerts that have an EPA tolerance exemption.

And I encourage everyone on this issue 

to make sure we kind of read each other's comments.

I also want to mention that some folks 

submitted additional comments by email and other 

ways after the webinars last week. And it's my 

understanding that those comments are now on the 

public docket.

So I think it's really important that 

this discussion be transparent and that those of 

us engaged in it make sure we have a clear 

understanding of what different groups are 

proposing, and from that, hopefully we can distill 

an effective approach or recommendation.

And again, as a Board, I think we're 

going to have to decide whether we want to relist 

List 4, a little redundant there, but approve 

relisting of List 4 and the current situation, but 

tie that to a strong recommendation to move forward 

programmatically, or whether the current situation 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

is really just not acceptable, and if we vote to 

delist it, there won't be an immediate change, but 

I think that could also set in motion the 

programmatic steps to move forward.

MR. ELA: Asa, can I open it up to 

questions now? Just --

MR. BRADMAN: Yes.

MR. ELA: -- keeping an eye on time. 

And I also, before I open it up to questions from 

the Board, I want to see if Jenny Tucker has any 

comments on this, because it really does kind of 

involve, as you said, not just whether we vote to 

delist, but how do we move forward and how that 

might affect how the Board feels. So, Jenny, do 

you have any thoughts?

DR. TUCKER: Just a quick comment. We 

are certainly aware at the program level of the 

problematic nature of this now very outdated 

reference.

I think a lot of thought was put in a 

few years ago, and this was, yeah, a few years ago 

now, as to the next best step. At the time, it 

was -- we did talk about doing rulemaking on this 

item.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And at that time, it would have been 

not only a significant rulemaking, but an 

economically significant rulemaking, which is a 

very big deal. At that time, we decided, based 

on that, that there were other priorities that 

needed to be advanced at that time instead.

I think the landscape out there has 

shifted a bit at this time and so I think that it 

may be now more ripe for rulemaking. Certainly 

intently aware of this issue at this time.

So I appreciate the Board's work on it, 

and the Board's sort of acknowledgment of the 

complexity involved in this item. So this has 

involved a lot of very detailed thought and work 

and I appreciate that focus.

MR. ELA: Jenny, in terms of --

MR. BRADMAN: Can I follow up with --

MR. ELA: Yes, go ahead, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: Jenny, I'm not sure what 

the economic concerns were, though I can imagine 

they were substantial. But again, this kind of 

cross -- it can potentially go both ways.

Actually, it was the OMRI comments, and 

in their comments, they note that there is a minimum 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of three brand name products that were formulated 

with ingredients that did not appear on List 4 or 

4B or the 2004 EPA List of Allowed Inert 

Ingredients. However, they were included on the 

scale as a green circle or assigned List 4 status 

after 2004.

So the point here is, here are three 

products that could potentially be valuable in the 

organic market and would have potentially an 

economic benefit to growers and the organic 

community, but are not available.

So there's both costs in terms of how 

do we restructure a regulatory environment for 

existing materials, but also, there's kind of a 

cost if we don't do anything as well.

DR. TUCKER: Agreed. And a rule would 

look at both costs and benefits. Again, the 

landscape has changed enough in the last few years 

that quantifying both the costs and benefits and 

understanding what the real world dynamics are at 

this time, again, may make this a more ripe topic 

for taking on through rulemaking.

MR. BRADMAN: Right. And --

MR. ELA: So, Jenny --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. BRADMAN: -- just one last comment. 

Just there's the larger issue here, too, that 

pesticides are -- the word pesticide and organic, 

people don't realize that they can go together.

And to the extent that we can support 

a pesticide industry that still is true to the 

ideals of the organic philosophy, I think is 

extremely important.

And if we can move forward in a way that 

removes things like NPE as potential actors, we 

really promote the integrity of organic, which is 

really a key function and something that is a big 

focus of our work.

DR. TUCKER: Appreciate that feedback 

and that comment, in particular, thank you.

MR. ELA: Jenny, this is Steve, I have 

a question, in terms of kind of procedures. 

Obviously, this sunset, so we have to vote on it 

next fall, kind of up or down.

And I think Asa laid out the playing 

field that we know some of these are -- well, it's 

rare to have a listing that is multiple materials, 

that always is problematic.

But a lot of the Board, I think, would 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

like to vote them down, or vote to delist them, 

just because of some of the problems, but also 

recognizing that it's very important to relist some 

of them as well, and that it's not a simple 

procedure, that it's going to take a lot of 

cross-department work and pollination and such to 

figure out how to deal with this.

Do you have any suggestions for how we 

proceed?

DR. TUCKER: I think this is an 

interesting problem. And I've been thinking about 

this and I'm not doing hypotheticals, because I 

get in trouble with hypotheticals, and I do want 

to just sort of talk through the challenge here.

So the Organic Foods Production Act 

does not allow us to add a synthetic to the National 

List without a board recommendation, right? So 

if you were going to vote to delist this particular 

item, you would need to propose listing something 

else in order for us to list something on the 

National List.

We don't have the authority to list a 

synthetic on the National List without you, without 

a recommendation from the Board. So it would need 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to be a recommendation with some kind of a -- so 

remove this listing, but add this other thing.

So I hate to make that too simplistic, 

but there has to be -- it does need to reflect that 

complexity in order for us to be able to have a 

mechanism to add something to the List that is 

recommended by the Board. Does that make sense?

MR. ELA: So in other words, we need to 

work with you to figure out how to proceed and 

what -- if we were going to say to delist this, 

we also need to have a work agenda item of how to 

add something else, to give you the green light 

to move ahead on some of these other things.

So it sounds like we're not going to 

solve that today, but, certainly, the Crops 

Subcommittee needs to, and the whole Board of 

course and myself, need to work with you on the 

best way to run this down --

DR. TUCKER: Yes.

MR. ELA: -- and figure out how to do 

it.

DR. TUCKER: That was a good summary.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Jenny, that really 

helps, that gives us some ideas. Asa, it looks 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

like, do you have your hand up for something else 

and then, we -- we're quickly running out of time 

here, I want to make sure we get comments from the 

rest of the Board as well.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. I'll stop. I'll 

stop.

MR. ELA: Does anybody from the rest of 

the Board have questions, comments? Wood, go 

ahead.

MR. TURNER: Steve, I'd rather give my 

time to Asa to finish his comment.

MR. ELA: We'll make sure Asa gets 

another shot here, we're not going to cut him off.

And I'm comfortable, if everybody else 

is, if we have to go ten minutes over and have a 

robust discussion on the topic, it's rare we all 

get together, I'd rather go a little bit over time 

and make sure we actually have a strong discussion 

this. So, Wood, go ahead.

MR. TURNER: No comment, Steve, I just 

want to hear from Asa.

MR. ELA: Okay, fair enough. Scott?

MR. RICE: Thanks. I'd also like to 

hear from Asa, as well. I appreciate his -- he's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

pretty experienced and has deep insight on this. 

But as this is the same listing I've got on the 

Livestock side of things, share a lot of the same 

concerns and appreciate your insights into this, 

again, Asa.

But I happen to think, we've been 

without a National List Manager for a period of 

time here and I can't think of a better thing for 

that individual to jump into once the Program has 

that person hired up and would love to -- and think 

it ideal to engage with that individual in maybe 

helping the Board kind of take all of this public 

comment and kind of insight and help us shape how 

best to move forward.

Because I do think we have, as has been 

noted, a lot of great ideas from previous Boards, 

a lot of great ideas from this Board, and of course, 

public comments.

And I think we, as a Board, often are 

faced with these very complex kind of issues to 

tackle and I think that's fantastic, we all bring 

a lot of expertise and experience to the Board, 

but I also think this is one of those ideal

opportunities to really draw on the Program 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

strength and especially their relationships with 

the likes of EPA and other agencies to really help 

us in that process. So I just wanted to offer that.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Scott. Asa, back to 

you.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you, Scott. And I 

really want to reiterate what you said and also 

note that even in the public comments, there was 

the mention of really the need for a List Manager 

here.

And again, I think that in many of the 

public comments that were submitted, there was a 

very clear and I thought very reasonable roadmap 

to what steps need to be taken.

And I think as a Board and also as an 

agency, we should all go back and look at that and 

use that, or maybe some combination of those 

suggestions, as a roadmap and come up with a 

timeline on how we can move forward.

I also wonder, there was some concern 

about staffing within EPA, and back in the day, 

I've worked with a number of state agencies in 

California and we've had situations, for example, 

where one department will fund or support a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

position in another department to achieve a 

specific task or program.

And I wonder if perhaps EPA could help, 

I'm sorry, USDA could help EPA designate a staff 

member or help support a staff member that then 

could be the liaison between the EPA Pesticides 

Program, and perhaps also the Safer Choice Program, 

and USDA to kind of operationalize some of the 

roadmap that's really needed.

I think there are concrete steps that 

can be taken. And again, these things cost money, 

but if we look at the scale of the pesticide market 

and industry, I think, like we spend money on 

enforcement for fraud, I think this is a situation 

where we need to spend some money to strengthen 

the integrity around pesticide use and pesticide 

development and that, overall, there will be an 

economic return to the community.

MR. ELA: This is Steve and I'll jump 

in. I agree, Asa, this obviously is not going to 

be something the NOSB works on in a vacuum. It's 

going to be a hand-in-hand process with NOP and, 

ultimately, the EPA.

And I'd like to point out, we already 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

have somebody at EPA that does review some of these 

things, that worked with List 4 things, in terms 

of how that complies with OFPA. So it's not 

a -- this isn't a brand new idea, that there is 

some work together.

I want to make sure that, personally, 

that when if we move to Safer Choice and SCIL list 

and things, that we also, again, guard against that 

we highlight that and then EPA changes something 

else and we're back in the same boat, that somehow 

we keep a way to work hand-in-hand as those things 

migrate, without locking them in.

So but I think these are -- I think we 

definitely need to talk with Jenny and the Program 

Manager with the National List Manager, that's 

going to be very important moving forward.

I have a concern in that I think OMRI 

submitted their testimony that 153 of their 

distinct ingredients would migrate to Safer Choice 

or the SCIL list, but 212 of their distinct inert 

ingredients do not appear on the SCIL or 25(b) list.

I mean, that worries me a little bit, 

when we have -- if it were five or ten, I think, 

oh, that's -- we can work around those. But 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

there's certainly a number of materials, some of 

which, as you noted, maybe shouldn't be in organic

pesticide products.

But I think we're going to have to have 

a, my personal opinion is we're going to have to 

have a fairly long phase-in time. I don't know 

if I agree with ten years, like somebody said, but 

we're certainly going to have to be sensitive to 

the time it takes to transform and re-register.

And we already know that the organic 

market, even though it seems huge, is small enough 

that IR-4 and these things, it is sometimes hard 

to get some of these materials into the organic 

market.

I mean, even the Northwest conventional 

horticulture industry, as big as it is, still has 

a hard time getting materials registered, because 

wheat and soybeans and corn are so much bigger.

So I want to make sure as we proceed, 

we don't shoot ourselves in the foot, but I think 

we have to proceed. Other questions from the 

Board? A-dae, you have a question?

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: It's more of a 

comment. I do think the NOSB does have to be very 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

deliberate and diligent about process here. I 

mean, if we -- I understand the need for cooperation 

between USDA, NOP, and the EPA.

But, like, as demonstrated in the past 

couple weeks, like, EPA or federal agencies have 

their own political pressures and sometimes, like 

with the Clean Water Rule from EPA, how it's been 

really rolled back or even how a lot of the EPA 

regulations are put on hold in times of an epidemic.

Like, I do think it warrants some 

discussion with NOSB on the power dynamics and 

getting clear, I guess, a clear sense of how 

powerful or not powerful our recommendations are, 

in that kind of dynamic, because we do want to 

safeguard against, I guess, political rollbacks 

of processes and regulations. That's certainly 

something that we have to consider moving forward.

MR. ELA: Other comments, questions, 

from the Board? I'm not seeing any. Do you have 

any last very quick comments, Asa?

MR. BRADMAN: No. Well, I just, I think 

A-dae just made a really good point. And one of 

the recommendation from the BPIA was that review 

should be based on information, health information 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and other information considered by EPA, when we're 

looking at substances.

And I know I'm in a situation where EPA 

is now not using certain kinds of epidemiological 

and other research in their risk assessments. And 

there's some complex issues there.

But I think the standards for 

information, when we look at impacts on the health 

and human environment for the NOSB and for organic 

in general, should be very high.

And that if we work with EPA, I would

just want to make sure that those high standards 

would be incorporated into any working 

relationship to address these questions about 

inerts and potential, how we evaluate them in terms 

of yay or nay in terms of organic.

MR. ELA: Great. Thank you, Asa. I'm 

not seeing any other questions. And I think we 

should move on. Thank you, Asa, that's a great 

synopsis of a very complex topic, appreciate it. 

Jesse, back to you for the last two materials.

MR. BUIE: Okay. And, Asa, another 

great discussions. These last two can be pretty 

quick.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Arsenic, 205.602. On arsenic, we 

received seven public comments. Seven public 

comments were received, all in support of not 

removing arsenic from its prohibited status on the 

National List.

Both the Crops Subcommittee and the 

full Board voted not to remove arsenic from 205.602 

nonsynthetic substances prohibited for use in 

organic crop production. And I think that was in 

2017. Are there any questions on arsenic?

MR. ELA: Jesse, I'm not seeing any 

questions, so it looks like you can move ahead.

MR. BUIE: Okay. And then, strychnine 

is the final substance for review. And the same 

public commenters commented on strychnine. And 

again, they were all in support of not removing 

strychnine from its prohibited status on the 

National List.

And the Crops committee and the full 

Board voted also not to remove it in the vote in 

2017. Any questions?

MR. ELA: Jesse, I'm not seeing any 

questions.

MR. BUIE: Okay. And --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: So turn it back to you and --

MR. BUIE: Okay.

MR. ELA: -- I guess then --

MR. BUIE: Okay. Well --

MR. ELA: -- you can turn it back to me.

MR. BUIE: Okay. And that ends the 

Crops Subcommittee discussions and I turn it back 

to you, Steve.

MR. ELA: Thank you, Jesse. And, Jesse, 

you've done a great job with chairing the Crops 

Subcommittee this year. It's greatly appreciated 

and I've been very glad not to have to do that, 

so thank you for your hard work in keeping things 

straight.

MR. BUIE: Thank you, sir.

MR. ELA: You've been great.

MR. BUIE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: With that, this is the end of 

our virtual meeting for today.

We will reconvene tomorrow morning 

again, at 11:00 Eastern Time, and we will be working 

with the Handling Subcommittee in the morning, and 

then, Livestock Subcommittee and the final meeting 

wrap-ups after lunch tomorrow.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Appreciate everybody hanging in there 

and all the attendees, it looks like we have 129 

people out in the audience.

Greatly appreciate all the comments 

that have been submitted, and as you can see, the 

stakeholders and all the time you took to submit 

items has been very appreciated by the Board. We 

know you all deal with distractions as well during 

this pandemic.

So with that, I'll look forward to 

seeing the Board tomorrow. And just for the Board, 

we do have a post-meeting wrap-up in a half hour 

here, to see if we need to modify any procedures 

or things, and that's certainly optional.

But thank you, again, to everybody, and 

we will talk to you tomorrow. Take care.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 4:13 p.m.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

+ + + + +

NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS BOARD

+ + + + +

SPRING 2020 MEETING

+ + + + +

THURSDAY

APRIL 30, 2020

+ + + + +

The Board met telephonically at 11:00 

a.m. Eastern Time, Steve Ela, Chair, presiding.

PRESENT

STEVE ELA, Chair

SCOTT RICE, Vice Chair

JESSE BUIE, Secretary

SUE BAIRD

ASA BRADMAN

JERRY D'AMORE

RICK GREENWOOD

KIM HUSEMAN

MINDEE JEFFERY

DAVE MORTENSEN

EMILY OAKLEY

NATE POWELL-PALM

A-DAE ROMERO-BRIONES

DAN SEITZ

WOOD TURNER
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

STAFF PRESENT

MICHELLE ARSENAULT, NOSB Advisory Board 

Specialist, National Organic Program

DAVID GLASGOW, Associate Deputy Administrator, 

National Organic Program

DEVON PATTILLO, Materials Specialist, National 

Organic Program

JENNIFER TUCKER, Ph.D., Deputy Administrator, 

National Organic Program; Designated 

Federal Official

SHANNON NALLY YANESSA, Assistant Director, 

Standards Division, National Organic 

Program
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S

Handling Subcommittee

Discussion Document: L-Malic acid

reclassification......................... 8

Discussion Document: Ion exchange filtration . 24

Discussion Document: Fish oil annotation ..... 34

2022 sunset substances review:

Kaolin ....................................... 48

Sodium bicarbonate ........................... 49

Waxes - nonsynthetic (Wood resin) ............ 51

Ammonium bicarbonate ......................... 56

Ammonium carbonate ........................... 56

Calcium phosphates (monobasic, dibasic,

and tribasic)........................... 58

Ozone ........................................ 60

Sodium hydroxide ............................. 63

Carnauba wax ................................. 64

Glycerin (CAS #56-81-5) ...................... 70

Inulin-oligofructose enriched ................ 72

Colors (18) .................................. 76

Kelp ......................................... 94

Starches: Cornstarch (native) ............... 105

Starches: Sweet potato starch ............... 105

Orange shellac-unbleached ................... 116

Turkish bay leaves .......................... 118

Whey protein concentrate .................... 125
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Livestock Subcommittee

Discussion document: Fenbendazole

-petitioned ................................. 133

2022 Sunset substances review:

Butorphanol ................................. 161

Flunixin .................................... 162

Poloxalene .................................. 164

Formic acid ................................. 165

EPA List 4 - Inerts of Minimal Concern ...... 166

Excipients .................................. 169

Strychnine .................................. 174

Magnesium hydroxide ......................... 174

NOSB work agendas/Materials update .......... 176

Other business and closing remarks .......... 182

Adjourn ..................................... 187
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

11:02 a.m.

MR. ELA: Why don't we go ahead and get 

started for the day. It's the top of the hour and 

top of the day to all of you, and thank you to the 

Board for being willing to sit through four to five 

hours of sitting time. I think one of the biggest 

problems with virtual meetings is Michelle always 

buys us snacks, and we don't get to pass our snacks 

around. I miss that, Michelle.

In honor of today, I put on my -- I had 

my fruit shirt yesterday for Crops. I put on my 

Handling shirt in honor of fermentation processes 

here today and the brining of olives. So we'll 

move into Handling. But before we move into 

Handling, I would like to do a roll call of the 

Board so we can get on record all of the Board 

members that are attending today. I believe we 

have them all, but we'll make it formal by reading 

it into the record. So Sue, are you there?

MS. BAIRD: I am here. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Asa?

MR. BRADMAN: Present.

MR. ELA: Jesse?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. BUIE: Present.

MR. ELA: Jerry?

MR. D'AMORE: Good morning, yes.

MR. ELA: Rick?

MR. GREENWOOD: Present.

MR. ELA: Kim?

MS. HUSEMAN: Here.

MR. ELA: Mindee?

MS. JEFFERY: I'm here.

MR. ELA: Dave?

MR. MORTENSEN: Good morning, NOSB 

colleagues and attendees.

MR. ELA: Emily?

MS. OAKLEY: Present.

MR. ELA: Nate?

MR. POWELL-PALM: Present.

MR. ELA: Scott?

MR. RICE: Good morning, present.

MR. ELA: A-dae?

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Present.

MR. ELA: Dan?

DR. SEITZ: Good morning, present.

MR. ELA: Wood?

MR. TURNER: Back at it, Steve.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: There we are. And myself as 

Chair, Steve, so it looks like we have whole Board 

here. So our schedule for today is we're going 

to have two hours set aside for Handling and then 

have an hour for lunch. And then after lunch, we

will go to the Livestock Subcommittee and then our 

work agenda and any wrap-up items.

So we're in the home stretch here. So 

thank you to all our attendees and Board members 

for being part of this. I thought we had some great 

discussions yesterday. And certainly, while most 

of our -- oh, I guess not all of our discussions. 

A lot of our discussions are on materials. There 

are some that are obviously a little thorny, and 

I thought we had some good talks about some of the 

issues before us. But we also had some great 

discussion documents.

So with that, I would like to turn the 

program over to Asa as Handling Subcommittee Chair. 

Asa, would you like to start out with the 

discussion documents? And Asa, you may be on mute.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. Can you hear me 

now?

MR. ELA: We can hear you now. Go 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay, apologies. 

Welcome to everyone, and I just want to reiterate 

some of the conversations we had post-meeting 

yesterday. But it's really amazing that we can 

actually have a meeting right now and still work 

on these issues. And I'm just kind of amazed at 

the technology and possibility.

So with that degree of awe, we have a 

lot of substances and issues to talk about with 

the Handling Subcommittee today, and we're going 

to just follow the order here in the agenda. And 

we're going to start with the L-malic acid 

reclassification. And Scott, I think you're on 

board for that.

MR. RICE: Thanks, Asa. This is a 

discussion document that considered a change to 

the classification of L-malic acid from a 

nonagricultural nonorganic non-synthetic allowed 

substance to a nonag synthetic allowed and moving 

that from 605(a) to 605(b). This was made in 

response to recommendations for this change that 

were made in a number of comments that we heard 

submitting -- excuse me, submitted last year during 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the substances sunset review in spring and fall 

2019 as well as the 2019 technical report on L-malic 

acid. That report found that most commercial 

quantities of L-malic acid are derived in part via 

a process of enzymatic conversion of synthetic 

fumaric acid.

The 2019 sunset commenters noted that 

while supporting documentation may state -- one 

second here, I just lost my screen -- may state 

that the L-malic is produced naturally via 

enzymatic fermentation, that that statement refers 

only to the second half of the process. It's the 

first half of the production where the 

determination gets a little bit sticky.

So the predominant industrial process 

to produce L-malic is a two-step procedure, and 

that production of fumaric is either synthetically 

from petroleum or by fermentation of carbohydrates 

and the enzymatic conversion of fumaric acid to 

L-malic acid is by immobilized microbes producing 

the enzyme fumarase. This is the part of the 

production that some point to as the basis for the 

nonsynthetic determination of the listing. In 

certification, it's general practice to go just 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

one step back in a material review. And in this 

case, we only go one step back. We do not consider 

how we got the fumaric acid in the first place.

But to get that fumaric acid, there are 

two options for obtaining it in the first step. 

The first is the fumaric acid precursor is 

obtained through fermentation of a carbohydrate, 

and that's, for instance, with the Rhizopus 

species. That would be the nonsynthetic source.

The fumaric acid precursor could also 

be obtained as a synthetic product from maleic acid 

of petroleum origin. And that, of course, is then 

when we see -- that would be the synthetic source. 

So if you're clear on that, we can turn to sort 

of the comments and responses to the questions that 

we asked.

Some consider that fumaric acid to be 

the substrate and not the source of L-malic acid, 

arguing that the source is the immobilized microbe 

or the culture broth, if you will, that produces 

the enzyme fumarase. That approach also argues 

that the NOP decision tree justifies not going back 

any further in the production process, and that 

would deem the substance, again, nonsynthetic. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

That view also argues that there should not be any 

further review unless the National List requires 

it, as we see for yeast listed at 605(a).

If verification of the substance is 

required, then that would deem the substance 

synthetic and reclassification would be logical. 

In answer to one of our questions, 

reclassification could indeed affect the listing 

of other substances produced through microbial 

fermentation such as the L-lactic and citric acid, 

gellan gum, gibberellic acid, just to name a few.

No matter to where commenters fell on 

this, it's pretty clear that most agree that the 

decision tree in the NOP's guidance needs to be 

a little clearer in order for consistent decisions 

and interpretations to be made. The guidance on 

materials produced through fermentation hasn't 

placed restrictions on the use of synthetic growth 

media in the production of the nonsynthetic input, 

and commenters suggest that we as a Board offer 

clarification on the use of the decision tree to 

classify microbial products and byproducts.

Additionally, some note that any 

additional restrictions on substrate for a source 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

should be included in an annotation, as is the case 

for yeast again. If we moved in that direction, 

there would be a need to give sufficient time for 

operations to transition and change to that source, 

as we see when changes like this go through. As 

noted in the discussion document, the predominant 

source of L-malic acid used right now is the 

synthetic form with certifiers verifying that it 

was not produced using the big tree and that it 

is not DL or D-malic acid.

Comments indicated there doesn't 

appear to be sufficient quantities of a 

nonsynthetic L-malic acid available at this time 

to meet current demand and also that it's not clear 

how much time would be required for such sources 

to become available. Commenters also suggested 

that the listing be synthetic, but one option is 

to add an annotation to require a nonsynthetic form 

when such a form is commercially available. And 

also noted in the discussion document, and again 

in this round, some commenters opposed the move 

of L-malic acid from 605(b) straight over to 605 

-- or to 605(b), believing at first it should be 

removed and then repetitioned for inclusion at 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

605(b), or as I just noted, with 605(a) with an 

annotation, limiting its use to forms produced 

through nonsynthetic methods. That last one did 

not include necessarily a commercial availability 

suggestion.

So moving forward on this one, it's 

clear products of fermentation create confusion 

and disagreement. I think before we can really 

resolve this particular issue as it relates to 

L-malic acid, we need to come to agreement on how 

to approach the synthetic-nonsynthetic 

classification of the fermentation byproducts. 

It's not such a cut and dried starting point when 

we're talking about the starting material or the 

medium or substrate or broth or whatever we want 

to call it because to get to that starting material, 

we have other inputs that come into that process 

as well.

In order to get clarity, we -- again, 

I think we need to revisit the 5033 decision tree 

for classification as it relates to products like 

this and get a little more specific on the starting 

point. The negative of that is that might get us 

a little far into the weeds. But as one commenter 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

pointed out, this is the only example of a 

nonsynthetic for which the primary source is 

petroleum or that the primary source is a 

synthetic.

So that gets us back to the use of an 

annotation to limit sources to nonsynthetic when 

commercially available, to hopefully drive folks 

to use those sources, and drive those sources to 

become more available. So that's kind of where 

we're at on this one. I would open it up to 

discussion, but I see obviously a little more work 

to do on this thing in the subcommittee.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Scott. Are there 

questions from the Board?

(No audible response.)

MR. ELA: So Scott, I've got a 

question. So could you just repeat kind of what 

you just said? I need to get this clear in my head. 

Without -- if we don't go down the path of really 

revisiting the classification tree which, of 

course, opens up a quagmire, but may need to be 

done, I don't know. I mean, that's its own 

discussion. But if we don't do that, then restate 

kind of what our choices are. And it was just kind 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of what you just said in the last 30 seconds.

MR. RICE: Yeah, sure. I think 

probably the most straightforward would be to move 

it to 605(b) and include that annotation that a 

nonsynthetic source be used when commercially 

available. I think that's about as cut and dried 

as we could get on this and do a big sidestep on 

opening up that larger discussion on how far to 

go back or how to interpret that decision tree.

And again, I think it's a fair point 

that this is sort of, kind of an odd man out in 

that it's a bit of an exception. I think we've 

seen success with -- I think with yeast and an 

annotation on that, submitting it or restricting 

it from petroleum sources. So yeah, I think that's 

probably the most straightforward way, and you 

could argue if that's best or certainly not the 

only way.

MR. ELA: Looks like Mindee has a 

question.

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you. I think that 

we can't afford to ignore fermentation right now 

given the levels of substrate questions in GMOs 

and the second wave of GMO technology with 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

synthetic biology and lots of things. They're 

talking about fermentation and the fermentation 

process puts out a product. I think that we kind 

of have to tackle it and look at it from a larger 

perspective of protecting organic systems from the 

new wave of GMO technology. So if those things 

can happen at the same time in this process yet 

looking at fermentation really carefully, I highly 

advocate for that.

MR. RICE: Yeah.

MR. ELA: That topic certainly -- oh, 

go ahead, Scott.

MR. RICE: No, go ahead, Steve.

MR. ELA: Well, I mean, it came up with 

biodegradable mulch as well of using GMO systems, 

produce something, whether that -- where leads us. 

But go ahead, Scott, if you have more to say on 

that.

MR. RICE: I guess I would just say I'm 

certainly not opposed at all to really diving into 

this. Just know that it is a larger conversation 

and one that I think will require more discussion 

and maybe some more input. But I think that we 

got a lot of great comments and useful comments 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

on kind of a path forward, and I think that gives 

us a bit of direction on this, so it's certainly 

not insurmountable.

MR. ELA: Other questions from the 

Board? Asa, you have one.

MR. BRADMAN: I just have more of a 

comment. We had kind of some sidebar 

conversations about this the last meeting --

in-person meeting. And my sense is, is that the 

issue of fermentation products is large and 

challenging but of concern in that that is an issue 

that we should be thinking more about and 

addressing. And maybe this material can help move 

us in this direction.

I know for simplification right now, 

I think, Scott, your cut and dried suggestion might 

help us deal with malic acid right now. But as 

a Board, I think we do need to think about the larger 

challenges. GMOs come up in a lot of contexts too. 

I mean, they come up in vaccines, plastics, 

fermentation products. So there's some 

substantive issues there.

MR. RICE: Yeah, agreed. I think I --

(Simultaneous speaking.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. RICE: Sorry.

MR. ELA: No, go ahead, Scott.

MR. RICE: I would just agree. It'd 

be kind of kicking the can down the road until this 

kind of came up again. And so yeah, your point 

is well taken. We're going to have to deal with 

it at some point.

MR. ELA: I'm a little worried about 

this being spoken by somebody in their fifth year. 

Sue, you have a question. Sue, we're not hearing 

you. We still don't --

MS. BAIRD: How's that?

MR. ELA: -- have you, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: Is that better?

MR. ELA: That's much better, yes.

MS. BAIRD: Okay.

MR. ELA: Go ahead.

MS. BAIRD: Yes. Just a comment 

echoing the same concerns that Asa just expressed. 

We'll find it in livestock. We saw it in 

vitamins. We're going to see it today in 

excipients. Anytime you see anything produced 

with fermentation, you're probably going to be 

raising -- and as you said, we saw it in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

vaccines. We're going to be raising issues with 

GMOs. Are we going to ignore it, or are we going 

to tackle it at some point because they are probably 

there if we're using fermenting processes.

MR. ELA: Dave, you have a question?

MR. MORTENSEN: Yeah, not really a 

question, maybe a reflection. And I agree with 

Asa that it seems to me that maybe another way of 

thinking about what we're really challenging 

ourselves to sort through is where is the boundary 

before which we're concerned about something in 

a process. In some cases, we think about a 

boundary of a pesticide, that should this be 

allowed in organic or not. We'll look at some of 

those this afternoon.

And in other cases, it's the boundary 

of at what point do we say this is allowable up 

to this point. And anything that came before that 

is not something that would lead us to not accept 

it. It does seem that it's like where do you draw 

the line on some of this. I do think it would be 

helpful for us to have that discussion in the way 

that others are saying. I agree.

MR. ELA: Other -- Mindee?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you. Just in the 

sense of I was in a retail location in the ten years 

when GMOs received the most attention and when we 

had to work the hardest to help the consumer 

understand what was going on with the non-GMO 

project verification and what was the organic 

system doing. And now that I'm in another part 

of the country, in another retail environment, I 

see how far away organic is from not only helping 

retail grocery people who are committed to the food 

movement but customers to understand the huge 

difference in what organic does in the food system 

as opposed to just being non-GMO.

And we cannot afford to lose this 

landslide any more than we already have in consumer 

perception. I think that the technology is 

developing so quickly in the second wave of GMO 

technology in the sense altering organisms to spit 

out new kinds of GMOs and the synthetic biology 

CRISPR-types of technology. The customer doesn't 

really understand how much that's already in the

food system.

And then when they begin to, if organic 

isn't ahead of the curve of protecting itself from 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that and able to communicate that really well, 

we're in a lot of trouble with the consumers. And 

I've lived that for the last 15 years, so I want 

to overemphasize it because I'm standing there 

talking to the people all the time.

MR. ELA: Fair enough. Dan, you have 

a question.

DR. SEITZ: I just want to echo what 

Mindee just said. Being on the Board of a food 

co-op, there's really -- with a food policy, there 

are few questions that come up more than, how do 

I know whether there are GMOs in this food, and 

then also a subsequent, how do I know whether this 

was grown with highly toxic pesticides?

MR. ELA: All right. Great questions, 

great discussion, and thank you, Scott. I have 

to say this is one of those topics. I'm just 

reading the comments where I just get very confused 

very easily. So I appreciate you making that much 

clearer to me at least. I think I don't see any 

further questions. So Asa, why don't we move on. 

And Asa, you're on mute, I think.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. Sorry. 

Thank you, everyone, for the discussion. And our 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

next topic is ion exchange filtration. And Steve, 

I think we have your initials first on that. So 

you want to lead off?

MR. ELA: I will do that. This is one 

that came up not because of a sunset or a petition 

but one that came down from the program in terms 

of trying to help resolve a discrepancy between 

how certifiers and the programmer are looking at 

something. Basically, really we have a lot of 

great comments. They did range from kind of the 

whole gamut of how we should approach this.

And really, it boils down to we have 

a column. There are -- for the sake of just 

visualizing something, there are beads in that that 

have ions attached to them -- permanently attached 

to them. And as a material, such as corn syrup 

or whey protein or something like that, passes by 

those beads, they suck up ions out of that liquid

or substance and exchange them with like a hydrogen 

or hydroxide ion or something else.

So they're clean, filtering in essence, 

kind of chemically filtering those substances and 

pulling those impurities out of the substance and 

attaching them to the resin in exchange for a fairly 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

simple ion that arguably does or doesn't change 

the material. And so given that kind of process, 

they are slightly different than a straight 

mechanical filter where you're just literally 

sieving something out. And yet they also are a 

filter of their own type.

And so the argument really comes down, 

what do we need to have on the National List? Is 

it simply the material that once those resins 

become, quote-unquote, clogged with the 

impurities, another material has run over those 

resins to recharge them, basically strip those 

impurities off and to recharge them with -- I'm 

just going to say for sake of simplicity -- the 

hydrogen or hydroxide ion. Do we just need to have 

those recharge materials on the list, or do we need 

to have the resins themselves on the list or 

anything used in that process?

And the public comments basically fall 

into the three categories. We just need to list 

the recharge materials that are used to recharge 

those resins. We need to list -- on one extreme, 

we need to list everything that's in that process. 

On the other extreme and in between, it's kind 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of some things yes, some things no.

Given that kind of simplistic overview 

of where things fall, part of the argument really 

comes down to FDA and their definition whether the 

resins are a food contact substance. And if 

they're listed as a food contact substance, then 

according to NOP protocols, they do not need to 

be listed on the National List. And so people use 

boxes and handling materials and things as 

parallels to that. Arguably, slightly different, 

but it's true. If it's a food contact substance, 

then we cannot just say this needs to be on the 

National List.

However, there is some interpretation 

that these resins are also secondary direct food 

additives. And if they're secondary direct food 

additives, by protocol, those do need to be listed 

on the National List. And the confusion really 

comes down to that FDA lists them as both.

And so just to give a little more 

background, OMRI really in their memo to us or their 

statements to us, they found in 2002 that ion 

exchange is a chemical process because these ions 

are being exchanged. Ion exchange resins are 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

processing aids, so those secondary processing 

aids, and that ion exchange resins are functionally 

different from other polymers used in packaging. 

So those statements served as the basis for OMRI's 

current policy, but they also note that if the 

classification of ion exchange resins is as food 

contact substances rather than processing aids, 

they might have to revisit those thoughts.

Let me just scroll down here. It also 

was noted within the NOP that some secondary direct 

food additives -- according to FDA guidance, some 

secondary direct food additives also meet the 

definition of food contact substances. So that 

keeps the water -- this is going to be a bad pun 

-- very muddy and unpurified. And so I think the 

bottom line is really that definition, and I don't 

know if we have -- I believe we have a TR out on 

this that may help with that. But which way we 

go really depends on kind of the FDA definitions 

there.

One of the commenters was a law firm 

that argued very vehemently that they are secondary 

direct food additives, and therefore we must list 

the resins. And then others argue, again, citing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

FDA guidance, that they are simply food contact 

substances. There are a large number of products 

that are made using ion exchange filtration. They 

range again from whey protein to infant formula 

to corn syrups and a number of others.

So it is a widely used technology in 

the organic world. So the decision we make could 

have fairly wide implications. And again, the 

comments from some certifiers where we think 

everything should be listed including the resins. 

Some companies agreed with that to the opposite 

end of just list the recharge materials and go on.

I think that the final thing I'm going 

to say is that the NOP has written that more 

broadly, material conflicts between certifiers are 

rare. But when they occur they are often complex, 

and initial information is not always the complete 

picture. The NOP recognizes that we need to 

enhance our process to allow for earlier 

information gathering and increase organic 

stakeholder engagement when these complex 

conflicts occur. And this is certainly one of 

those where it really does come down to kind of 

both sides being right, but yet we do need to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

resolve this. So with that, I will open it up to 

questions from the Board.

(No audible response.)

MR. ELA: Any questions? I'm not 

seeing any at this point. Asa, you have one.

MR. BRADMAN: Just a couple thoughts 

on this. One, food contact materials have been 

a concern for the Board. I mean, for example, some 

of the debate around EPA and maybe even in the 

future, the potential for phthalates or other 

materials to come from food contact materials and 

contaminate or affect the food that's being 

packaged, those are real concerns and have been 

on our agenda, at least for BPA, and hopefully will 

in the future also be. So I think even if it's 

simply considered a food contact material, it's 

also something we need to think about.

And then to me, I think is there 

chemistry involved? And it seems like the answer 

to that is yes, there's chemistry involved here. 

So it's a little bit more than just a food contact 

material. Whether there's a concern about any of 

these substances being listed and somehow taking 

away a process that might be essential to some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

organic products, I still think it's worth 

considering this. And there'd be a lot of work 

involved, but maybe listing these is appropriate.

MR. ELA: Yeah, and that's -- I think 

that's a fair argument, Asa. I think there is some 

chemistry involved personally. It's very minor, 

but it is a chemical exchange. And I think Beyond 

Pesticides noted this is very similar to a water 

softener where you're exchanging sodium. The 

resin has sodium attached, and that is being 

exchanged with calcium and magnesium.

I'm not sure that I buy the argument 

-- and again, this is me personally. I think the 

resins are relatively -- I was going to say inert. 

That's not the right word, but stable. And 

literally, the resins are essentially permanent, 

and then it's just their charge on those resins, 

ionic charge that allows for the exchange of the 

ions.

So I think there is a pretty good 

argument that those resins really aren't part of 

the chemistry except for the fact that they have 

a charge attached to them. Clay mineralogy is 

where I come from in geology, and that's you alter 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the structure of the clay by exchanging those 

magnesium, calcium, potassium, salt ions. But the 

clay itself, I mean, except for the attachment of 

those things, is quite stable. And there again, 

I think that you pegged some of the arguments that 

some people say those resins do break down slightly 

and just like what you see in packaging. Rick, 

you have a question.

MR. GREENWOOD: Yeah, I just wanted to 

echo what Asa said in relation to the BPA. I mean, 

if we're worried about contact of one chemical, 

which I think we are, then I think this is obviously 

something that needs to be looked at. And he also 

mentioned phthalates, and one of my experiences 

is trying to find decent water for analytical 

chemistry.

If you have any water that's touched 

plastic, you find huge spikes of phthalates and 

you end up having to use glass-distilled water. 

So contact really is an issue. And if we're 

concerned about the quality of the product, I think 

we need to be concerned about all of it.

MR. ELA: Fair enough. Good points 

from both of you. Other questions from the Board? 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I don't see any more. So Asa, I think this is 

something we'll look at the TR and we'll probably 

come back with probably some kind of final report 

in the fall to submit to the program. We may --

it'll be an interesting discussion. I think we 

may -- I don't know if we'll clear the waters or 

not. But looks like Scott has one final comment 

or question.

MR. RICE: I just wanted to make sure 

you saw Jenny had something, I see her --

MR. ELA: I think she was going to say 

something, and then we answered it. But I'll give 

-- Jenny, is there anything you want to add to that?

DR. TUCKER: No, Steve. I appreciated 

your sharing the background of how this came to 

be a work agenda item. So thank you for that, and 

that covered it.

MR. ELA: You're welcome. All right. 

And this is -- it's certainly one of those things 

that just kind of like our discussions about 

degradable mulch now where the program is a two-way 

street. I appreciate the program just not making 

unilateral decisions but actually kicking things 

back to the NOSB so that we can get stakeholder 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

comments engaged and see what the nuances of a 

complex topic are. So Asa, back to you.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. And I think 

the next item up is the fish oil annotation and 

that's in my court. So to dive right in, I just 

want to provide a little background, especially 

for the new members. In -- I think it was in May, 

spring last year, the subcommittee and then 

ultimately the Board approved to re-list fish oil, 

excuse me, on the National List.

But among Board members, there was 

concern about exploitation of marine resources and 

whether this was another situation where we're 

using marine products that could have implications 

on the environment. So for some members, it was 

actually contingent -- agreeing to re-list it was 

contingent on also an agenda item that would allow 

us to address questions about sustainability and 

potential overexploitation of fish oil and the fish 

that it's produced from. Sorry, I don't feel very 

articulate this morning.

But -- so this was added to our work 

agenda. I want to mention too that in the vote 

that spring, no one voted against re-listing fish 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

oil. Two people abstained, and then the rest were 

all in support. And there's been some objections 

to fish oil, and I'm sympathetic to those as well 

in terms of whether this product -- some of these 

products are a gimmick and not really consistent 

with -- not essential and therefore not consistent 

with organic principles.

I know I tend to think of this as a 

consumer choice issue and especially when we talk 

about infant formula and things like that. So 

we're not really dealing with this larger issue 

of whether fish oil should be allowed or not, but 

whether we want to annotate the listing to 

introduce some environmental sustainability 

concepts into the material that's sourced.

And if you -- for those of you who've 

reviewed our discussion document, kind of the idea 

here is that we use third party classifications 

to determine whether a given source of fish oil 

is sustainably harvested. And the idea proposed 

in the discussion document was one within U.S. 

waters to use the NOAA categories of fish 

exploitation and overfishing, overfished or 

rebuilt as a characterization of a marine 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

population.

Or in situations where their material 

is being sourced from outside U.S. waters, use the 

Food and Agriculture Organization definitions 

which in the discussion document are described as 

underexploited, moderately exploited, fully being 

kind of a stable but maximum harvest but 

potentially sustainable and then additional 

categories of overexploited, depleted population, 

and a recovering population. And the proposed 

idea was to source from populations where in the 

U.S., they were not overfished or overfishing was 

occurring. And then using the categories in the 

FAO, if a population was categorized as overfished, 

depleted, or recovering, then fish oil derived from 

organisms from that population would not be 

permissible.

There are also other private marine 

animal standards. There's the Marine Stewardship 

Council, Friend of the Seas. Many of you may be 

familiar with the Monterey Bay Aquarium program. 

So there also are a number of third party, in many 

cases, nonprofit organizations that are also 

trying to define standards for sustainability for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

marine fish and other populations. In terms of 

for our thinking, one of the points from one of 

the manufacturers of these materials is that almost 

all the fish oil that comes into the U.S. is from 

outside U.S. waters. So it would be most 

applicable to the UN FAO categories.

One thing I want to also mention here 

is that we received a number of comments on these 

issues, and most of them were from organizations, 

either nonprofit watchdog groups like BP and NOC 

or from some big producers and then also from some 

of the organizations. Very few comments from 

consumers which I think was kind of interesting. 

Of course, many consumers don't follow the nitty 

gritty of this.

But I kind of see this as a consumer 

choice issue that people tend to want the material. 

And also, it's something that's on the ingredient 

list and labeled. And if you don't want it, you 

can buy milk that doesn't have it or other products 

that aren't fortified with it. Some of the 

consumer products are very basic, basically, keep 

it sustainable but not much beyond that.

Some of the comments in terms of from 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

larger organizations are, one, clarify -- there 

needs to be clarification, whether we're talking 

about wild versus farm populations, and that this 

is really part of this larger discussion of marine 

resources that we're having as a Board. And this 

should be folded into a larger kind of structure 

of our discussions on these products. And I agree 

with that at some level.

In some cases with ocean resources 

where pulling nutrients out of the ocean to put 

them on land as an input to either feed the soil 

or foliar applications. We're feeding the plant, 

not the soil there, also as a feedstock for cattle 

and other uses. And then in this case, this is 

a little bit more like fishing where we're pulling 

a resource out of the ocean to feed people.

The -- some of the industry sources are 

concerned about this crop. CROPP Cooperative is 

concerned about loss of product. And from their 

perspective, they don't feel like NOAA and that 

FOA definitions are necessarily appropriate. And 

those concerns were echoed by some of the producers 

and trade organizations like DSM and GOED, the 

global organization for these omega-3 fats, GOED.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

They have some concerns about, again, 

the NOAA and FOA being appropriate, also partly 

because just functionally they may have different 

standards for defining what's sustainable or not. 

They may have different temporal assessments of 

populations. We might be looking at one report 

that's five years old or eight years old and another 

one that's one year old.

There's concerns about whether how 

certifiers would deal with this. As a side note 

here, one certifier said that they would ask for 

an affidavit from their producers that they had 

sourced the material from some sort of -- or the 

source material met their criteria, just a little 

side note on certification issues. But that the 

proposal as it stands could create some, I guess, 

confusion and difficulty in implementation.

Some of the major producers like DSM 

and GOED actually kind of harmonized their 

recommendation, and none of them are against some 

sort of reference or annotation that addresses 

issues of sustainability. And there was support 

for the idea of sourcing fishing industry --

sourcing material from the fishing industry 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

byproduct only. And also, there's a suggestion 

to replace the reference to FOA and NOAA with a 

more simplified statement, certified as 

sustainable by a third party certifier. And 

again, that ties in with some of our discussions 

with other marine resources.

I should mention that the proposal for 

our annotation is to limit fish oil sources to 

byproduct. In other words, there's concern like 

we've had in other situations that we don't want 

fishing exclusively to produce fish oil, that it 

should be a byproduct and, again, some sort of 

reference to sustainability. I think -- let's 

see.

There's some concern that if we make 

this too complex, it could result in removal from 

some of these products from the market. It was 

also suggested by CCOF that, is an annotation 

really necessary if U.S. and internationally there 

are already protections for fisheries? So that's 

-- I kind of want to throw that out there. So I 

think that's kind of a summary of the issues here, 

and maybe now we can open this for discussion. 

Thanks.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Thanks, Asa. Are there 

questions from the Board? Emily has one.

MS. OAKLEY: Thanks, Asa, for your work 

on this, and I definitely think we should circle 

back together between crops and handling just a 

little bit to see where both of us might be headed 

with this. But I also just wanted to say it was 

heartening to hear how much support there was for 

the byproduct only provision within the 

annotation. So that seems like an easy first step 

at a minimum.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I agree with that. 

And some of the same issues come up, though, with 

byproduct are having the fish oil as one of the 

revenue streams. Is it part of a larger system 

that may be exploiting this resource? So we have 

that question as well.

One thing I wanted to add too is that 

some of these omega-3 fats that people are 

interested in adding to their diet are also 

potentially available from algal oils. Looking 

on this issue, I know that's also potentially 

controversial. And, like, Horizon Organic and I 

believe some other products use algal derived 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

omega-3s. That raises its own sort of issues in 

terms of really an industrial production system 

there.

But there is potentially a non-fish 

source for some of these omega fatty acids to also 

consider. But I'm sure many hearing -- being 

reminded of this right now might be groaning a 

little bit about the tendency to use kind of these 

industrial methods to produce something that may 

not -- it's not natural to many products and may 

not be necessary.

MR. ELA: We have a question from Sue 

and then one from Dave. Go ahead, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: Hi, I just want to commend 

you and Emily for all the work you've done on these 

issues and spent hours and hours, you can tell, 

doing work and research on it. I was just thinking 

we're seeing this in crops. We're seeing it in 

livestock. We're seeing it now in handling, the 

very same issues of sustainability of our aquatic 

and fish populations. And how do we limit our 

harvest of these in a sustainable manner?

And perhaps one way -- and I know it's 

harder to do. But perhaps one way would be to --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

instead of addressing them in each individual 

category, perhaps we could address it by a new 

definition and in writing into our definitions 

statement about what we consider to be sustainable 

harvest of some of these crops. Just a thought 

and it may not work, but it seems as if we're 

addressing the same one all across all of the scopes 

and categories.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Sue. Dave?

MR. MORTENSEN: Yeah, it seems to me 

that -- and I think it's a point that you made in 

your summary, Asa, that there are dependent aims 

here. The idea that yesterday we were discussing 

the merits, or lack thereof, of paying a great deal 

more attention to fish harvested for fertilizer 

use when one of the other values in it is oil. 

And then companies would tell us, we don't harvest 

fish solely for fertilizer. We also harvest them 

for oil or for solubles.

And so it's almost -- in some ways, it 

seems like the argument is somewhat circular that 

we're harvesting them for fertilizer and also for 

oil so that the at the end of the day, we could 

fall into the trap of just harvesting them for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

things -- for each -- any intended end use, it would 

not be acceptable to us. But perhaps if you've 

got two or three uses, then you say, well, we're 

not harvesting it for fertilizer. It's for 

something else. And therefore, the use for 

fertilizer is just a byproduct of the process.

That part of this conundrum in my view 

needs to be teased apart pretty carefully so that 

we don't find ourselves thinking something is okay 

because there's three valuable outcomes, any one 

of which is unacceptable. But three taken 

together is better than one. That's a concern I 

have.

And then I also would -- in addition 

to the algal sources of omega-3s, we also have them 

in walnuts and flax seed and other things. So 

there are some interesting alternatives that we 

could be looking into. But I guess that first 

point is just one that I continue to struggle with.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I agree with that, 

and I think your point about plant sources is 

important. I mean, we do have this algal methods 

for producing some of these materials from algal, 

essentially almost fermentation processes. And 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

during the oral comments, I mentioned the plant 

sources to one of the commenters.

And I guess their concern there is that 

the precursors to some of these omega-3 acids are 

not -- in the body, there's relatively low 

efficiency. So it doesn't -- I think it doesn't 

meet the goals for what people want in milligrams 

per kilogram, say, in these products. But I agree. 

It seems to me if a manufacturer could produce 

these materials differently from plant sources, 

that would solve the problem.

MR. ELA: All right. And I just want 

to say to the Board and just to be clear. I often 

say questions, but I mean questions or comments 

interchangeably. So don't take my syntax exactly. 

So if people do have questions or comments, that 

is fine. And it looks like we have another one 

from Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Thanks, Steve. Yeah, I 

do. I just really want to echo what you said 

because that was a really articulate way of 

phrasing the issue because we're looking at meal, 

also, for livestock feed. So it's across all three 

uses.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And absolutely if we were to parse them 

individually for harvest, that might be more easy 

to determine unacceptability. But because there 

are these three potential streams of use and then 

revenue, it does complicate the issue. But I think 

you're right. It's important for us to explore 

this further, especially because these are 

foundation species within the ecosystem in many 

cases.

MR. ELA: All right. Asa, I am not 

seeing any more questions. And looking at the 

clock, we probably should move on. So thank you 

for that. So back to you, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. So now we're 

shifting over to summaries for the 2022 sunset 

reviews. And I think we are first on deck with 

Kim and kaolin.

MS. HUSEMAN: Thank you, Asa. So with 

kaolin, there were very few comments on the written 

commenters, and I didn't hear so much also in the 

oral comments. But kaolin is -- it's a fine clay 

consisting primarily of aluminum silicate. It 

does have a few comments, I guess, just a couple 

from certifiers saying they do have a couple of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

handlers that are using the product.

Like, I think I would be curious to know 

if the material is essential in inorganic 

production, or if there are some alternatives, or 

if it is essentially needed. But other comments 

that were made, the only thing that came about was 

kaolin is also produced in nanoparticles. And 

there was a comment for annotation to specifically 

allow uses and also them to prohibit the use of 

nano kaolin. Any other comments? That was all 

that was mentioned on this product.

MR. ELA: Are there questions from the 

Board? I am not seeing any. Congratulations, 

Kim. You have now done your first official 

presentation. Welcome to the Board. Asa, back 

to you.

MS. HUSEMAN: Thanks, Steve.

MR. ELA: And Asa, you're on mute.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay, sorry. Well, that 

was great, and it's always nice to have an easy 

one. My first thing, I think, was BPA. So moving 

on to sodium bicarbonate and Mindee.

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you. For the 

record, I have on two pair of cozy pants. And there 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

were lots of comments about sodium bicarbonate, 

especially from the certifiers. I really 

appreciate the detail of how many people and 

they're using this substance pretty ubiquitously.

There were some considerations around 

the difference between the trona process and the 

Solvay process in that one certifier only allows 

the trona process because the Solvay process is 

viewed as synthetic. The ACA has commented that 

they would support considering reclassifying as 

synthetic, and this might be a substance we would 

want to look at how that is today in the common 

formulation, whether or not a change is warranted. 

And that the substance is really essential across 

many categories in lots of different uses, and 

people support relisting it.

MR. ELA: Are there questions? I am 

not seeing any. So congratulations, Mindee, on 

your first presentation. Asa, back to you.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. Thank you. Our 

next topic is ammonium carbonate, I think in the 

same family as the bicarbonate. And Mindee, 

you're on deck for that too.

MS. JEFFERY: Oh, okay. I thought we 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

were going with waxes next, but --

MR. BRADMAN: Oh, I'm sorry. 

Actually, you're right. Oops. I skipped ahead, 

sorry. Yes, waxes. And Kim, actually, you're on 

deck now.

MS. HUSEMAN: Mindee, I was going to 

let you go ahead. Just kidding there. But okay, 

so the next one that I have is the wood resin. 

So waxes, and I'll speak to this a couple more times 

through the handling sunsets. But this one in 

particular is used for a lot of fruit coatings. 

It's one of many -- or one of few other options 

that are available for use.

Reading through the comments, there are 

some questions and concerns. Most of the 

commenters do want this product to be relisted, 

and it is quite useful for ensuring or try to help 

with bruising. There's an annotation that would 

be suggested to state that the word, resin, is not 

extracted using volatile synthetic solvents. So 

that statement came up from a few different 

commenters with some concern that there may be 

production with the use of synthetic solvents, 

volatile synthetic solvents. So that would be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

something to look into further.

And then another comment that was made 

is the purchasing of organic fruits and vegetables, 

the consumer perception is they're 100 percent 

organic product. But should there be some 

labeling or something that's noted stating that 

there is a wax coating on the product itself? So 

that would be something to look into, I think, a 

little bit further. But overall, the listing of 

the product back onto the National List is 

supported, and that's all that I have.

MR. ELA: All right. Are there 

questions? Asa, you have a question.

MR. BRADMAN: I just want to echo the 

comment that you just raised about whether there 

should be some sort of labeling. And I actually 

personally think that is something to consider. 

I have always felt uncomfortable with especially 

products like apples.

Not to single them out, Steve, but where 

you might have some sort of wax cover on the fruit 

that you really can't remove. It's different from 

an orange or an avocado if they're present there. 

But you eat the whole thing. And to me, that's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

a unlabeled ingredient, and it should be labeled.

MS. HUSEMAN: And this same sentiment 

will come up again as I go through a couple other 

products. But I hear what you're saying, Asa. 

I want to look into this further for that same 

reason.

MR. ELA: Yeah, and as an apple grower, 

I mean, we do not wax all apples. I think a lot 

of organic apples aren't. But we often get the 

question because apples have a natural pectin on 

the skin which is why you can shine them on your 

shirt and make them shiny. But it doesn't -- that 

fades after a while and you have to reshine them.

But we often get questions like, what 

is on this? And for us, since we don't put anything 

on it, it's the natural wax. But if you're going 

to ship them and want them to stay shiny for a much 

longer period of time, then some processors, as 

you noted, Asa and Kim, do add that. And I would 

tend to agree. I wouldn't have any problem having 

that labeled so people would know and so people 

would know ones that are not waxed. Looks like 

we have Emily and then Sue. So go ahead, Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Thanks to Kim and Asa. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I just wanted to echo Asa's comments and those 

raised by commenters just regarding the fact that 

it is, in essence, an ingredient that we're 

ingesting that is unlabeled. And I would be 

interested to see what you guys discuss in terms 

of the possibility of the potential labeling.

MR. ELA: Sue?

MS. BAIRD: Yeah, and I appreciate that 

concern. I do want to point out that it's not 

something that we can change in annotation during 

the sunset review. It would be something that 

would have to be done later. And if we -- I think 

it would be -- it just has to be a voluntary thing. 

I think if the producer wants to voluntarily label 

that there's no wax on it, that would be acceptable. 

It's a truth of labeling thing, and it would be 

allowed.

I think if we required a labeling --

if we decided to require a labeling of a wax product 

on fruits or wherever we're going to put this wax, 

I think it would be a little more challenging 

because we would have to go into either the labeling 

section. We talked about that for hydroponic 

products. We'd have to change a whole section of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the labeling section of the regulations, or we'd 

have to add a new annotation. And neither of those 

things are pertinent to the sunset review.

MR. ELA: Any other questions? I'm 

not seeing any. So Asa, back to you.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. So next up, 

we have ammonium bicarbonate with Mindee. And 

since we have a bicarbonate and carbonate in a row, 

when we finish the first, why don't we go directly 

to the second. And Mindee, I think you're on deck.

MS. JEFFERY: Thank you. So for 

ammonium bicarbonate, not a lot of use for some 

of the certifiers who reported. And others said 

that it's commonly used. There was support 

expressed for relisting, and some -- the one 

expression of it's really important as a leavening 

agent and essential as the alternatives are not 

identified and it could threaten the ability to 

remain organic. Beyond Pesticides noted that it 

should be a candidate for delisting because of the 

emissions of ammonia and carbon dioxide. So a 

little of both.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for 

Mindee on ammonium bicarbonate? I'm not seeing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

any. So Asa?

MS. JEFFERY: So that's me again, 

ammonium carbonate?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes.

MS. JEFFERY: And less information on 

ammonium carbonate and more certifiers saying, no 

member use listed, little or no record of use, no 

handlers using the substance currently. So that 

was three certifiers. And then same concern about 

the emissions of ammonia and carbon dioxide 

expressed, and one support for relisting from 

Taylor Farms, Earthbound Farms. So similar but 

maybe less usage expressed for ammonium carbonate.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for 

Mindee? Mindee, I have one question. I 

originally did this writeup, but it was back in 

November, I think. And I can't remember. Is 

ammonium carbonate simply a substitute for 

ammonium bicarbonate, or are there distinct uses?

MS. JEFFERY: I'm just seeing as a 

leavening agent, and it looks like similar uses 

under use.

MR. ELA: I'm just wondering if we 

would shake the apple tree too much if maybe --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

we're not voting today. But down the road, vote 

to delist ammonium carbonate but keep ammonium 

bicarbonate if we would raise too many hackles. 

But that might be something to look into.

MS. JEFFERY: So this is your --

MR. ELA: With --

MS. JEFFERY: -- official announcement 

that if hackles are going to be raised, they better 

say it?

MR. ELA: That might be a good 

interpretation of that comment. Yes, it's always 

good to get comments to justify why we should do 

one thing or another. Asa, back to you.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you, Mindee. So 

next, we're on to calcium phosphates. And Jerry, 

I think you're on board for this material.

MR. ELA: Jerry, we're not hearing you. 

Still not hearing you, Jerry. Let's see here.

MR. D'AMORE: How about now?

MR. ELA: That's much better. Go 

ahead, Jerry.

MR. D'AMORE: Thank you, and thank you, 

Asa. There were 16 total public comments. Most 

of them were written and nearly all of them 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

supporting a relisting with only one strongly 

opposing. The product is widely used and 

considered essential by many stakeholders.

In terms of concerns, there are 

concerns about human health, particularly the 

cumulative effects of phosphates. Only one 

commenter sees human health as a disqualifier. 

Some questions about organic sources but not to 

the extent of inulin-oligofructose which I have 

a little bit later and I'll talk about it then. 

Some discussion also around commercially 

available organic sources of supply but with 

general consensus that there is not a reliable 

consistent alternative at the moment. And that's 

it.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for 

Jerry? I am not seeing any. Congratulations, 

Jerry. You have now joined the group of having 

given at least one or more presentations.

MR. D'AMORE: Thank you, sir.

MR. ELA: Back to you, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. So our next 

material is ozone. And Scott, you are on deck for 

that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. RICE: All right. Thanks, Asa. 

Ozone, we did get, between the certifiers that we 

heard from, about 51 operations that use it in their 

businesses. It's a common disinfectant that's 

highly effective and generally regarded as safe. 

Some conveyed its importance in their operation 

in controlling microbiological microorganisms or 

effects rather.

There was one comment expressing 

concern around the use of the irrigation water 

treatment and the offgas that is produced and its 

potential for adverse health effects on workers. 

But overall, this is seen as a material highly 

regarded and widely used. And that's it.

MR. ELA: It looks like Rick has a 

question.

MR. GREENWOOD: Yeah. Hey, Scott, I 

have ozone for the 2023 sunset for water 

sterilization, and I found a 2002 TR. Did you find 

anything newer than that? Or my question is, do 

you think we have enough information, or should 

I request a TR for the review for 2023?

MR. RICE: Yeah, thanks for that 

reminder, Rick. I was going to mention that. In 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

our discussion, we noted on this particular use 

that the most recent was a technical advisory panel 

report from '95. And we did suggest that NOP 

contract, an updated ozone TR in advance of the 

next review. So it's hopefully on the program and 

Devon's radar. But that would be helpful. Thanks 

for bringing that up.

MR. GREENWOOD: Okay, good. Well, 

then I'll request it too, and then we can go forward 

just to see if there's any new information.

MR. RICE: Excellent.

MR. ELA: Asa, looks like you have a 

question.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, just to emphasize 

that ozone does have some potential health problem 

as a criteria air pollutant. It's associated with 

respiratory and other problems in general 

populations and places especially during the 

summer when it's hot. I think this like other 

materials for food safety and things like that in 

the organic community, there needs to be adherence 

to standard procedures to protect workers.

I think this use is tiny in terms of 

its contribution to lower surface level 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

atmospheric ozone and the kind of things we have 

from -- problems we have from combustion cars and 

things like that. But just a reminder that some 

of these sanitizers and other materials we use have 

potentially serious occupational health concerns.

MR. RICE: Indeed. Thanks, Asa.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions? 

And just on that note of what Asa said, we know 

stakeholders have long asked us for a larger review 

of all the sanitizers on the National List and 

potential new ones and food safety issues as well 

as environmental risks, as Asa just mentioned. 

And we were planning on having a panel discussion 

at this meeting and put it off because we did not 

feel a panel discussion be as widely and as useful 

in the virtual environment.

But at this point, we are planning on 

having that discussion at the fall meeting as long 

as we have a live meeting. So just want to let 

people kind of know the future plans of trying to 

at least get the three panelists in to discuss that 

larger question. No other questions, Asa, so back 

to you.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. So we're now 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

moving to sodium hydroxide. And Mindee, we have 

you on deck.

MS. JEFFERY: Great. I'm excited for

the TR results to come through. We've been working 

on that one, and good responses from stakeholders 

generally supporting the relisting of sodium 

hydroxide, essential for soap, body care, 

beverages, baby food. Juice producers 

association supports relisting it. Happy Family, 

thanks for your comments. Beyond Pesticides noted 

that the annotation only lists prohibitions and 

suggests investigating the essentiality of sodium 

hydroxide and potentially in the future annotate 

the listing to limit it to those essential uses.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for 

Mindee on this? Not seeing any, go ahead, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. And now 

we're moving on to the carnauba wax with Kim.

MS. HUSEMAN: All right. So back to 

waxes again. This is another wax that can be used 

on fruits and vegetables. It's also used in gummy 

bears and jelly beans as a coating. Very mixed 

for relisting or delisting from the commenters.

If I go through the people that said 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to delist, there's several comments saying that

the commercial availability is sufficient. This 

is actually one of the waxes that there is an 

organic form that's approved. There's, through 

the USDA, Organic Integrity Database, between 15 

to 19 depending on the comment. So I would say 

over a dozen suppliers.

And again, back to the same comment that 

was posed in the wood resins is that there's reason 

to believe that it can be processed using volatile 

synthetic solvents in a nonorganic form. So 

again, a reason to want to delist it and only have 

the organic form available but, again, at the very 

least, to annotate. And I know it's during sunset 

annotations, but having the not extracted using 

volatile synthetic solvents. And the other point 

of fruits coated with waxes, having labeled or just 

bringing that again to the attention that, is that 

organic? So that was on the side to delist.

On the side to relist, the opposite is 

true of concerns that there's not enough organic 

supply. Also important to point out that some 

countries from an export perspective if you're 

exporting your products is that some countries only 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

allow certain formulations of waxes. And so 

having the ability to use one of three, and there's 

one more that I have to present on, using -- being 

able to have that multitude of tools in the toolbox 

allows for export to different countries.

And then finally wrapping it up was that 

the carnauba wax may not be as effective in some 

applications as in others. We did have one 

commenter say that in the production of jelly beans 

and in their manufacturing that it was the organic 

form had been working well. They've been using 

it for the last six years. They had heard from 

other industries maybe that it wasn't as effective.

And then we did have a certifier say 

that there's several handlers that list this 

product in their organic system plan. Most use 

the organic form, but the blended processing aid 

containing the carnauba wax is not certified 

organic. So some mixed reviews on this wax.

MR. ELA: Questions for Kim? Kim, I 

have a question. So -- or actually, I have a 

question I think is really more directed to Scott 

or Nate. Like, for this wax when you're looking 

at let's say a processor is using it, are you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

looking at whether it's organic or synthetic form 

and documenting -- making them document that 

there's not commercial availability?

MR. RICE: Yeah, if it's on 606, we're 

going to look for whether there's an effort to 

source the material organically.

MR. ELA: So there would be some 

differentiation between those two forms as the 

inspection is occurring.

MR. RICE: You're going to see that 

that's been explored and determined prior to the 

inspector actually getting there, and there's not 

going to be a lot of (telephonic interference). 

So usually, that's an established ingredient 

that's going to be fairly static. But I concur 

with Scott. That's going to be established and 

confirmed at inspection.

MR. ELA: Thank you for that 

clarification. Looks like Wood has a question. 

Wood, we're not hearing you.

MR. TURNER: Sorry, I lost the feed 

there for a second. Can you hear me now?

MR. ELA: We can. Go ahead.

MR. TURNER: Just a question. I know 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

this is -- forgive me. You're literally apples 

and oranges. But we were thinking about sources 

of sort of marine materials and sort of how 

different inputs are -- how different ingredients, 

different materials are sourced. Whenever I see 

that the source of the material is Brazil, it gets 

my hackles up.

And so I just want to make sure we're 

asking the same questions about sort of how this 

materials is -- where this material comes from, 

what's involved in getting that material to market 

in the same we are in other areas. I don't know 

if anybody has any background on that, but I'd like 

to know more about that.

MS. HUSEMAN: I don't have any 

background, Wood. But I will echo and agree that 

when you speak to sustainability and especially 

the region in which we're discussing, that should 

be addressed at the least.

MR. TURNER: Thanks.

MS. HUSEMAN: I have nothing else to 

follow with, Steve.

MR. BRADMAN: So Steve, are you there?

MS. ARSENAULT: Steve, if you're 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

talking, we cannot hear you.

MS. HUSEMAN: Or I guess I can turn back 

to Asa.

MS. ARSENAULT: Yeah, Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: Steve, if you can hear 

us, let us know. The next topic we have is a 

complex one, colors, and you're on board for that, 

so --

MR. RICE: Steve conveniently left 

during this session.

(Laughter.)

MS. ARSENAULT: So Steve said he'll be 

back in. It seems that he lost his sound feed. 

So Asa --

MR. BRADMAN: Okay.

MS. ARSENAULT: -- while he figures out 

his technical difficulties, you want to move on 

to glycerin?

MR. BRADMAN: Sure.

MS. ARSENAULT: Skip over colors?

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, that sounds good. 

So we'll move on to glycerin. And Jerry, you're 

on deck for that.

MR. D'AMORE: Great. Can you hear me 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

now?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes.

MR. D'AMORE: Well, thank you. I will 

share with you that ten minutes ago, I completely 

lost my screen and I had no control. So I need 

to be muted and unmuted, please. And I just didn't 

-- it's reverted back to my calendar, and I don't 

want to touch anything because I could mess that 

up entirely then. So thank you.

Glycerin, we had 18 public comments. 

Again, nearly all of them were in written form, 

and nearly all of them supported renewal. It is 

so widely used and considered essential by many 

stakeholders. The key question was about the 99 

percent pure designation but all seem comfortable 

with the written material discussing the make of 

the one percent, namely, water, remaining fatty 

acids, and some portion of the ancillary substance 

for the processing aids.

One concern expressed as a question. 

So a direct question to me as the interviewer is, 

quote, is the current supply of organic glycerin 

really immature, or are you keeping the increased 

supply potential undermotivated by keeping it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

listed it under 606? So that's what I have on that.

MR. ELA: All right. I think I'm back. 

I don't know what happened there. Other 

questions of Jerry? Asa has a question.

MR. BRADMAN: I kind of have just a 

general comment. I feel like having been on the 

Board now for a couple years that there's a lot 

of concern about listing on 606, preventing markets 

from developing for organic resource material. 

And it's hard to evaluate that. And also, when 

do we make the cut?

We certainly have it coming up with whey 

protein concentrate. Well, it's actually come up 

before and with other materials. And I wish we 

had some criteria to kind of -- to evaluate that, 

and maybe that's not possible, product by product. 

But that's just a real common concern about, does 

606 create this perpetual lack of organic resource 

material? I know it's not specific to glycerin.

MR. D'AMORE: If I may, could I 

continue with that lead in of yours? Steve, I'd 

like to go next with my next one anyway and then 

give it back to you. Would that be acceptable?

MR. ELA: That is fine with me if it's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

fine with Asa.

MR. BRADMAN: Absolutely.

MR. D'AMORE: Thank you. So this is 

inulin-oligofructose, 23 public comments. Nearly 

all of them, again, were written. About 75 percent 

in favor of renewal, a good 15 percent really 

opposed to renewal, and 10 percent expressing 

concern. It is still fairly widely used.

So as with glycerin, most of the opposed 

to renewal were concerned about the potential for 

an organic alternative with some being adamant that 

alternatives would be relatively available or 

reliably available were we to phase out 

inulin-oligofructose from 606. So that follows 

directly on what you just said, Asa.

So if I may, I'm going to give you a 

comment of my own that is maybe a little off-topic, 

and that is that as I joined the team, I was 

initially overwhelmed by the science but have 

gotten to the point where I know the science is 

knowable if you spend time looking at it. And 

where I'm reading guidance and I wasn't going to 

get into this. But Asa, with your lead-in, is I'm 

concerned about understanding our emphasis. Not 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

our science, but our emphasis.

I have seen that we're very concerned 

with our stakeholders having the tools to work with 

in the organic framework. I also see that we are 

committed to continuous improvement and 

innovation. But does one trump the other?

And here, I won't be a coward. I 

usually embrace the statement, don't let the 

perfect get in the way of the good. And I would 

normally protect the tools. With that said, I will 

be seeking a sense of emphasis on all three of my 

sunsets with the help of the team. Thank you.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for Jerry 

on this? I know it's been a material where we've 

gotten conflicting statements, and so it's not 

entirely noncontroversial. How was that for a 

double negative? Sue, go ahead.

MS. BAIRD: Just a comment. Jerry, 

thank you. I think we're all conflicted on the 

Board the same way. We all go in, except maybe 

Asa and Dave, a little intimidated by the science. 

We learn that we can rely on TRs and all those 

things for the science.

We all want to protect all the tools 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that we can for our farmers, and yet we're all 

absolutely concerned that we maintain organic 

integrity. So you articulated it well, and I 

commend you for being up front in saying that. 

We're all there with you. So that's just my 

comment.

MR. D'AMORE: Thank you, Sue. 

Appreciate it.

MR. ELA: There's a comment, question 

from Scott.

MR. RICE: Yeah, I just wanted to offer 

again. I know it is a challenge with 606 materials 

and whether this is creating incentive or perhaps, 

for lack of a better term, excuses. But I would 

just also offer we, on the certification side, are 

going to be looking for the use of an organic 

version or material, if you will, or at least some 

work and effort at finding that.

We have seen success stories with 606, 

and I think a more memorable one is hops. And we 

went from one of the main things somebody thinks 

about when you're drinking a beer is hops, then 

it seems sort of nonsensical to have that as the 

ability to use a nonorganic version in an organic 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

beer. But we saw that that industry developed, 

and we were able to see that exit 606. So there's 

definitely, I think, successes with 606 but 

certainly some challenges and recognize your 

concerns, Jerry.

MR. D'AMORE: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Other questions? I'm not 

seeing any. So back to you, Asa. Thanks, Jerry.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you, everyone. 

And now we're going to move on to colors with Steve 

which also has a lot of these issues around organic 

versus non-organically sourced material. Thanks, 

Steve.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Asa. It was 

convenient to drop out right at the perfect moment 

on a controversial subject. I may drop out of here 

just for the excuse. Colors, I took this over from 

Tom and Lisa, and it's one that certainly has a 

lot of nuances and kind of goes back and forth.

It's actually 18 different colors, each 

individually listed on the National List. So why 

we often talk about as one listing, there's 

actually 18 different listings. And in the 2015 

sunset, the Board voted to delist a lot of these 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

colors -- the Subcommittee, excuse me, voted to 

delist a lot of these colors and keep just a few 

of them. And then when it got to the full Board 

discussion and the vote, things became much murkier 

and whether sufficient forms and quantities and 

specific colors were available.

From what I can tell, and this is not 

something we use in our handling operation, but 

there are very specific attributes to some colors 

in terms of form and consistency of the color that 

are very important to product manufacturing. 

There've been a lot of comments based on whether 

there's significant organic production of some of 

these materials. But from some of the comments, 

written comments and oral comments, part of the 

issue is that some of the crops have to actually 

be specifically grown for colors. The color isn't 

a byproduct of the crop.

And so there just isn't enough 

incentive at this point to grow those crops for 

color production versus fresh market. That 

argument can be made, but that incentive is based 

on price. And if there were higher price for 

colors, that they might be more available and that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the market -- the growers wouldn't market things 

fresh market if there was a higher value in the 

color production. And that's a valid argument, 

but it also -- at this point, the form and function 

and number of these colors seems to still be an 

issue.

We got a fair number of comments, and 

all I can say -- I'll go kind of through each one 

individually. But it really is -- we really 

received some conflicting comments on individual 

colors. And I would hope -- I know that the IFAC 

person on the oral comment gave a fairly general 

comment, and he committed to getting us more 

detail.

I think what I'm going to have to do 

is between now and the fall is reach out directly 

to some of these both users and manufacturers 

because in the case of some of them, they gave a 

listing of all the colors they wanted relisted but 

didn't ask for all 18. They would ask for 14, and 

I don't know if by process of elimination it was 

a mistake that they missed those 4 or they were 

subtly saying, relist 14 but we don't need the other 

4 relisted, without actually saying that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So just in my initial -- kind of going 

through color by color, beet juice extract, that 

was one that appeared in 2015. There were comments 

even from the Board that that was a keeper. And 

there are definitely conflicting data at this 

point. There are a number of Organic Integrity 

Database listings. Beyond Pesticides noted 47 

listings for this.

There was one company that makes colors 

that says, delist this. We have sufficient 

supply. But then other companies, like one 

company that makes colors said, we make colors, 

but we don't have enough of this. A gummy bear 

manufacturer specifically asked to keep this, and 

they were pretty proud of where they said they were 

able to find some that they would ask or they found 

sufficient supply.

Beta carotene seems to be one pretty 

consistently that people say they need to keep, 

so that one is maybe a little bit -- I'm going to 

say clear even though it's a color. Black currant 

juice, again, conflicting data. There are users 

of it. Scott's group, WSDA, mentions the gummy 

bears there is -- but they say there is a sufficient 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

supply. Another color company says there isn't 

sufficient supply. So that one is conflicting.

The same for black/purple carrot juice, 

again, conflicting data. Some people say keep it. 

Some -- Stonyfield, for example, says this is one 

they have not been able to source. And then you 

go down and the gummy bear company says there's 

sufficient supply, and another color manufacturer 

says there's sufficient supply. And Beyond 

Pesticides notes 47 listings in the Organic 

Integrity Database.

Blueberry juice, this is one that seems 

to probably keep it, although there's a little bit 

of conflicting data, same for carrot juice. 

Cherry juice may be available but maybe should keep 

it on the list. Gummy bears seems to have done 

some fairly good research on this, says, keep them. 

A couple of other companies say, delist them, and 

23 listings on the Organic Integrity Database.

Chokecherry juice seems to probably be 

a keeper. Elderberry juice is a real question 

mark. Some say keep. Some say delist. And the 

same for grape juice, grape juice skin extract 

similar. Probably keep it, but a few question 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

marks are on that.

Paprika, dairy farmers say they have 

sufficient supply already. So that looks like one 

that we maybe most likely could delist. We also 

have one company that makes paprika for colors, 

and they say they have sufficient supply. So 

that's one that would indicate to me a couple 

companies saying there's sufficient supply and 

that a company that uses it saying there's 

sufficient supply, although the company that uses 

said they might like to keep it on. So I don't 

know if that is a -- if it's right on that edge 

of having enough.

Pumpkin juice, again, organic 

integrity listings, but maybe keep it. Purple 

potato juice is probably a keeper at this point. 

I'm not seeing a lot of confusion there. Red 

cabbage extract, again, Organic Integrity Database 

listings but maybe keep it, although there again 

one company -- color company says, delist it.

Red radish extract, probably keep it, 

and that seems to be fairly consistent. Saffron 

has conflicting data, again, where a couple 

companies say they want it relisted, another one 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

says delist it. And then finally with turmeric 

extract, Stonyfield noted that they have 

sufficient supply. Another company says delist 

it. Beyond Pesticides notes 40 listings on the 

Organic Integrity Database, but then two 

companies, including the dairy farmers, say they 

would like it relisted.

So I think the bottom line on this is 

really I just tried to go through the comments and 

made up a spreadsheet with color by color. It's 

confusing. There's conflicting information. 

I'm sure certifiers -- I am guessing that it is 

not hard at this point for a company to make an 

argument that form or function is not available, 

and yet it also seems like a number of these colors, 

if push came to shove, there might be able to be 

more organic supply. Not all of them. There are 

certainly some that do not.

And I do buy the argument that there 

may not actually be enough organic fruit or 

vegetable production to make enough of these. I 

think that could be the case, and we've seen that 

in other products as well. So very confusing. 

I think, as I said, I need to reach out to more 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of these companies and really try and tie them down.

I would also be very interested to hear 

from certifiers as to what they're seeing in terms 

of this being on 606 and commercial availability 

being important as to whether some of these 

companies that are using the nonorganic form what 

they're seeing and have they made a rigorous 

attempt. But again, some of the companies also 

said, give us three to five years and we'll have 

a lot of these ready.

Of course, that was what was said in 

2015. So it's definitely a chicken-and-egg thing 

of, do we force the issue or do we keep kicking 

the can down the road? So with that, I would take 

questions. Dave, looks like you have one.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes, Steve. This is 

the case where we would vote on individual colors 

in the fall. Is that right?

MR. ELA: I think so. It's a mess. 

But ultimately, they're each listed separately. 

So yes, that would be, I think, the proper way 

to go. So it'll take some time, but there could 

be differences between individual colors as well. 

So that would be the plan at this point. That 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

could change. Asa, you have a question.

MR. BRADMAN: Maybe just a quick 

follow-on. It seems to me that if suppliers and 

users are -- well, the users, those that are 

incorporated into production methods, are finding 

adequate sources of the color, then it would be 

an important flag that we could consider delisting. 

And then on at least one of these, if not more, 

the boundary question comes up again that we 

discussed earlier.

For example, beets, I think 95 percent 

of beet production in conventional beets is 

genetically modified. So if -- not if. I think 

Mindee's point earlier was I think a very 

thoughtful one that we could consider at least on 

one or several of the colors as well on, what is 

the conventional system that yields the fruit that 

yields the color that would be used in organic food?

MR. ELA: Yeah, good point, Dave. And 

I really think on some of these, there were 

certainly some comments from people that said, oh, 

this -- the price of this color is 40 percent more 

than conventional. Well, that's okay. It is, but 

that's -- 606 does not say that it has to be the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

same price. It says, organic supply.

And I suspect that some of these colors, 

if we delisted them, there might be sufficient 

organic supply. But yeah, it is higher price and 

that's the way it is. The list doesn't 

differentiate by that. Others truly seem to be 

not available in particular colors or hues or 

quantities. So it is a real mixed bag. Asa, you 

have a question or comment?

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I had a few 

comments I think that yielded some questions. I 

should say also full disclosure right now, I'm 

working on a risk assessment of the FDA artificial 

food dyes. But I don't think that's a conflict 

here, and I'm certainly not profiting off of that.

So one thing, I mean, colors seems to 

me are not essential, although they have a lot of 

purposes in products. And I think that's a point 

here. In terms of the comments, there are a few 

things I didn't quite understand. Like, there was 

some argument that some of the organic sources were 

not -- didn't yield the same quality colors as the 

nonorganic.

And there's also a question about 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

whether you can get the desired hue with organic 

versus nonorganic. And it didn't seem like an 

availability issue. It was more, like, what the 

ultimate product was. And I wonder, why can't we 

have different hues in organic?

Also, could producers contract for some 

of these products? I mean, in general, if I look 

at yogurt or some other product, it seems to me 

the color is just a tiny fraction of the content. 

So in terms of cost to the food, I can't imagine 

that it would increase substantially the price of, 

say, a dairy product if they used organic versus 

not organic.

And for the producer, I can see that 

they would have a more expensive product. But if 

there's a market for it, it'll get sold. So I don't 

quite understand the obstacles to producing these 

materials from an organic source.

MR. ELA: Yeah, fair enough 

assessment, Asa. I think on the grape colors, 

there was a comment that literally all of the 

organic production of grapes would have to go into 

producing those colors to have enough supply. And 

that may be the case. I don't know all the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

technicalities of that, but we sort of saw that 

with, what was it, orange -- some of the orange 

stuff a couple years ago where there was 

transportation and supply issues.

But I agree with you. I think some of 

this is -- some of these are -- well, I don't want 

to say truly needed, but they are truly needed for 

consumer acceptance and others, there's an ease 

issue that it's easier to use some of these 

nonorganic colors. But it's a real mixed bag.

And like I say, I don't have -- this 

is not my technical expertise. But I think we do 

need more public comments on this that are very 

specific by color, and we asked those questions 

very specifically because the Board really got 

bogged down in 2015 on this. So Jerry, did you 

have a question?

MR. D'AMORE: Yes, sir. I still can't 

control my screen, but you were kind enough to leave 

me unmuted. So thank you. I have a procedural 

question. I just don't know what we're allowed 

to do and what we can and can't do. Can we put 

varying dates on the -- does everything have to 

be pass/fail on this? Does it have to be five 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

years, or can we use various phase-out timing for 

the substances as they show promise for an 

alternative or not?

MR. ELA: Five years till the next 

sunset unless there's -- I mean, there could be 

a work agenda item, I suppose, in between. But 

it's generally a five-year sunset cycle.

MR. D'AMORE: So all of them would be 

under a five-year. Do we do them individually, 

or is it a group of five -- they're all grouped 

in five years?

MR. ELA: The sunsets we review this 

year get a five-year extension.

MR. D'AMORE: Okey doke. Thank you.

MR. ELA: And Scott, do you have a --

yeah. Scott, do you have a question on that or 

a comment?

MR. RICE: Yeah, just a quick follow-up 

on that. For a little background, Jerry, when we 

look at kind of throwing time frames into sunset 

materials, methionine was one of those that we 

tried doing that, and it really messes with the 

sunset process because you get these dueling dates 

and it creates some significant challenges for the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

program. I see Jenny just said that she could 

offer something on this.

DR. TUCKER: Just very briefly where 

there might be time flexibilities. If the Board 

voted to remove something during the sunset 

process, during the rulemaking process, we could 

put an implementation timeline that would give 

people time to phase it out of their operations. 

That would happen as a result of public comment 

during the rulemaking process. So the Board's 

review is every five years. In rulemaking, there 

can be varying implementation periods depending 

on what the phase-out needs were because that would 

have cost implications for reformulation 

sometimes.

MR. D'AMORE: Thank you. I could have 

asked my question better. That's perfect. Thank 

you.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Jenny. That's very, 

very helpful as well. So other comments, 

questions? And Jerry, especially if you're not 

able to raise your hand, just jump right in at some 

point and give me a heads up. We don't want to 

ignore you. And any other Board member, if you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

have a question and I'm not recognizing you, don't 

be hesitant to jump in. Asa, it looks like you 

have another comment, question.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I just wanted to 

follow up on this question of functionality, and 

one thing I'd like to hear more about from 

stakeholders is the use of the colors in products 

and as a liquid versus powders. There was some 

reference to that in one of the comments, and I 

know in the synthetic color wheel, there's 

straights and lakes. Lakes are the solid form, 

and I'm just curious if that is a factor in whether 

we're using organic or nonorganic source material.

MR. ELA: Great comment, Asa, and that 

was one of the things that hung up the 2015 Board. 

They were ready to delist a lot, and that issue 

came up of how -- what did you call it, straights 

versus lakes?

MR. BRADMAN: Straights versus lakes, 

and lakes are a little bit different with respect 

to synthetic colors. But generally, we're talking 

about liquid versus solid powder form.

MR. ELA: Excellent. Yeah, that was 

a big issue where the Subcommittee voted to delist. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And it got to the full Board, and it looked like 

a lot of these are going to be delisted. And that 

exact question came up of form and there may be 

commercial availability of one form and not of 

another.

And that's where the Board then pretty 

much ultimately decided to relist all these colors. 

But it was because they didn't have full 

information on things like that. So I think I had 

really hoped that we would get more information 

from this.

And so it's another one of those shots 

across the bow of the color industry and users that 

information really helps us make decisions. And 

I have an inclination to propose delisting things 

unless we get people that really chime in and say, 

wow, I have really done the research and this is 

not available. And it happens in rulemaking 

sometimes, but I would rather hear it now. So just 

as a note to stakeholders, give us information 

that's really useful. That's all I have, Asa, and 

I don't see any further questions. So go ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. So our next 

material is kelp with A-dae.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Sure, okay. So 

we got a lot of public comments about kelp. I have 

-- it's hard to count the comments. I have, like, 

75-plus because kelp was also mentioned in comments 

about other materials. Specifically, there were 

comments in -- or references when folks talked 

about fish oil, when they talk about the proposals 

for marine materials.

And generally, there was -- again, it's 

hard to numerically talk about kelp because it was 

mentioned in other proposals. And it's hard to 

say the large majority is for delisting or the large 

majority is for relisting. I would say that there 

are comments on both sides about delisting and 

similar comments that suggest just relisting as 

stated.

I will note some of the comments. 

Specifically, the comments from NOC were really 

helpful. NOC referenced the listing of kelp under 

606 and mentioned that NOSB does have a 

responsibility to look at the impacts of kelp on 

ecosystems and also mentioned the numerous kelp 

and seaweeds that are listed separately.

So in general, there were a lot of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

comments that said kelp was listed too -- is not 

well defined and too generic and that we need to 

look at that. And I would also note IOIA had a 

wonderful diagram in their comments, and let me 

pull it up for just a second because it's worth 

mentioning. And that diagram did give a great 

overview on what is considered marine, algae, kelp 

which are all interchangeable terms.

And so we have different listings that 

could all be applied to kelp, although this is 

specifically for the 606 listing that we're 

reviewing. We do have other listings such as kombu 

seaweed, wakame seaweed which have already been 

reviewed but are still considered kelp. And so 

the comments mainly focused on the ill-defined term 

of kelp. And again, NOC suggested delisting kelp 

under 606 so that there could be a greater chance 

of monitoring, I guess, ecological impacts under 

-- not 606 but under 205.07(b) which is the 

wildcrafting.

So in general, again, just to rehash 

what I just said because it's a very -- there were 

a lot of comments. Many of the comments came 

directly in reference to the 606 listing, but kelp 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

is also mentioned in many other areas like the 

marine materials proposal, the fish oil 

annotations. We have reviewed other species of 

kelp and wakame and kombu seaweed. And generally, 

there's a sense that kelp is not well defined and 

should not be relisted, although there are some 

comments that say to relist as is.

MR. ELA: Looks like there's a 

question, comment from Emily.

MS. OAKLEY: Surprise. Just kidding. 

So I was wondering what you got -- or what your 

sense was in terms of the responses for Question 

3. Are there sufficient organic supplies of kelp 

available for human consumption? That's the first 

question.

Then I just also wanted to echo what 

you were saying in terms of nomenclature and use 

of kelp which is part of what spurred the 2016 TR 

during their 2015 sunset and helped kind of craft 

the proposal that Jean and the Handling 

Subcommittee came out with, that I'll note got put 

back out there for the fall 2017 meeting when public 

commenters said that they needed more time. But 

we did not hear back at all in the fall. But it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

is a challenging issue in terms of nomenclature 

and one that is kind of overwhelming, quite 

frankly.

But I will sit in on one of your Handling 

Subcommittees when you guys are discussing this. 

If you could let me know when it's coming up 

because I'd like to hear what you guys say. But 

then back, yes, to my first initial point which 

is the question, what are your thoughts on your 

third question? Are there sufficient organic 

supplies of kelp available for human consumption?

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: There was a 

specific comment that referred to the regeneration 

of kelp and that it occurs pretty fast. But there 

were comments that said that we need to delist 

specifically because it's hard to monitor the 

consumption and the gathering methods of kelp 

currently because it's listed under 606 which is 

production for approved use in organics. NOC did 

suggest we delist it from 606 so that we have a 

better idea about availability and gathering 

techniques to ensure that they are environmentally 

sound and supportive of ecological environments.

But the comment specifically about the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

regeneration of kelp suggested that there is enough 

for human consumption and that it regenerates 

pretty fast. But we still need to take a look at 

the ecological harmony of how it's gathered. If 

anybody else wants -- has a different read, please 

add. But that's my reading of the comment.

MR. ELA: Are there other questions? 

Emily, I don't know if I just didn't lower your 

hand or you have another comment.

MS. OAKLEY: I did just have another 

comment. So last fall when we were relisting some 

seaweeds and handling, it was a complicated time. 

But I think we relisted some things that were 

definitely on the Organic Integrity Database as 

available as organic. And kelp, as broad of a term 

as it is and as challenging of a term as that may 

be, is also on the Organic Integrity Database and 

a large number of handling listings. So I think 

it might behoove us to do a little bit more research 

on that front before our vote in the fall.

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Absolutely. 

It's so complicated and it's only complicated by 

the fact that, again, as commenters said, kelp is 

so ill-defined and we have relisted certain species 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

of kelp already in previous sunset reviews. So 

there's somewhat of a conflict and not a clear 

understanding, I think, of how we're handling kelp 

generally or how we're handling -- or how we give 

permissions for specific types of kelp which are 

listed separately.

MR. ELA: Any other questions? All 

right. Asa, I think it's five minutes after we 

were scheduled to break for lunch. I think we have 

some extra time this afternoon anyhow because I 

don't think we'll have other business and some of 

these other things will go fairly quickly. So I'm 

going to say that we're going to break for lunch 

at this point since I know especially East 

Coasters, it is getting later there. And we will 

come back and finish the last five handling 

materials after lunch and then move on to the 

Livestock Committee. So Asa, is that okay with 

you before I make it?

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, totally fine.

MR. ELA: Okay. So why don't we break 

for lunch. We will come back actually at 2:00 

o'clock Eastern Time, so only 55 minutes, and we 

will start at the top of the hour. So thank you, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

everybody, and we will see you after lunch.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 1:06 p.m. and resumed at 

2:00 p.m.)

MR. ELA: Hello, everybody out there. 

It looks like we've got a bunch attendees. It 

sounds like we have the whole Board, but I am going 

to do a roll call for the Board just to read it 

into the record. And I would like for all those 

attendees to note that it is -- we're still in 

handling, but we will have the livestock section 

here first.

So I have my livestock shirt. I don't 

actually have a livestock shirt. But in honor of 

livestock, I have a cow and chick on the apron that 

Rick sent me to promote California avocados. So 

is that a good enough nod to you, Rick? Did I help 

your marketing effort?

MR. GREENWOOD: Yeah, that's pretty 

good. We'll work on you. Maybe next year when 

you're Chair again, we'll do something else.

MR. ELA: Oh, thanks. On that note, 

we'll do a roll call. So Sue, I can see you. It 

sounds like you're here. Okay. Sue is here. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Asa?

MR. BRADMAN: Hello.

MR. ELA: Jesse?

MR. BUIE: Present.

MR. ELA: Jerry?

MR. D'AMORE: As well.

MR. ELA: Rick?

MR. GREENWOOD: Here.

MR. ELA: Kim?

MS. HUSEMAN: I'm here.

MR. ELA: Mindee?

MS. JEFFERY: Yes.

MR. ELA: Dave?

MR. MORTENSEN: Yes.

MR. ELA: Emily?

MS. OAKLEY: Present.

MR. ELA: Nate?

MR. POWELL-PALM: I'm here.

MR. ELA: Scott?

(No audible response.)

MR. ELA: Scott, do we have you?

(No audible response.)

MR. ELA: You were here before. We'll 

come back to Scott here. A-dae?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Here.

MR. ELA: Dan?

DR. SEITZ: Here.

MR. ELA: Wood?

MR. TURNER: Here.

MR. ELA: And Scott, are you out there?

MR. RICE: I am. Can you hear me?

MR. ELA: There we are. Yeah, we've 

got you now. And --

(Simultaneous speaking.)

MR. ELA: Well, we know you're there. 

And Steve is here as myself, so it looks like we 

have the full Board. And we will continue with 

the Handling Subcommittee. Asa, I will turn it 

back over to you to start with.

MS. ARSENAULT: Steve?

MR. ELA: I think we're down to orange 

shellac. Yes?

MS. ARSENAULT: Sorry. If I can --

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Michelle.

MS. ARSENAULT: If I can just 

interrupt. I just got a couple messages from Board 

members saying they froze. So Board members, you 

can turn your video off. It might be a bandwidth 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

issue, and that usually helps. Let me know if it 

doesn't.

MR. RICE: Yeah, mine just totally 

crashed. I'm solely on Chrome now.

MS. ARSENAULT: All right. Thank you.

MR. ELA: All right. Asa, are you 

ready?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes, so I think we're at 

orange shellac. And Kim, you're on board for that. 

Hello, Kim?

MS. ARSENAULT: So Kim is the one who 

froze. So Kim, it looks like she dropped off the 

call. She may be trying to call back and restore 

her connection.

MR. ELA: Okay. Well, maybe, Asa, why 

don't we move to starches.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. I'm on board for 

starches, so I will move ahead. Kim, we just heard 

a ding. We're going to cover starches and then 

go back to orange shellac, if you can hear me. 

So let me look at my notes here.

So just to summarize some of the 

comments, cornstarch, of course, is used in 

processing as a thickener and a number of different 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

purposes in producing food products. A few 

things, one, kind of a real issue with cornstarch 

right now in particular is again this issue of 

listing on 606 and whether there's enough 

organically sourced material that can fill the 

needs of the organic community.

And I had done a search on the word 

cornstarch, a number of commenters pointed out when 

you look at cornstarch as two words, you get 

additional listings on the OID database. In fact, 

it jumps up to 55 total from just about a dozen 

looking at cornstarch as one word. So my bad 

there. And I think that just underscores the 

question, do we have enough organically sourced 

material to take it off of 606?

It's commonly used, but some -- there's 

definitely a lot of interest about this material. 

Stonyfield submitted some comments that some of 

the organically available cornstarch did not work 

in yogurt production, and it seemed like that was 

a characteristic of the material. It sounds like 

there's slightly different -- well, not slightly 

different, but there are different forms of the 

starch -- cornstarch products.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I think in one comment, there was up 

to eight different and maybe even more, and that 

for some reason, the organically sourced material 

did not work. Although I must say in the comments 

from Stonyfield, there wasn't quite an explanation 

of why -- what was the reason. I think that'd be 

helpful if someone is listening for the next round 

of comments for the vote that we understand why 

it didn't work and what was needed to make it work.

There were a number of other comments. 

The Association for Dressings & Sauces, 

basically, there's often a statement that there's 

not enough organic available. But there's been 

really no kind of market analysis or justification 

for those statements. So I'd like to hear about 

that.

There's a number of aggregate comments 

that were summarized in the OTA submissions, and 

they assert that the organic alternatives are not 

sufficient because, one, some manufacturers aren't 

able to find organic forms and that consistency 

for supply is not reliable, that there's been 

shortages at least in the past ten years, although 

I wonder if that is still going on. And then again 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

this issue of functionality and that some forms 

of cornstarch are essential.

Some of the trade organizations, others 

have -- look at my notes here a little bit -- that 

you just kind of do the numbers and look at the 

number of certified acres of corn in the U.S. that 

there's just not enough kind of source material 

for cornstarch and that some of the organic 

starches available now are mostly imported from 

Europe. And that when we look at the proximity 

of where organic corn is grown to the mills 

producing cornstarch, there's just not enough kind 

of infrastructure to support that, kind of like 

I think we heard about orange rinds last year.

IFAC states that their members are 

proactively seeking ways to promote organically 

grown corn, but there's no -- I'd like to hear much 

more detail on what they are doing to actually 

promote it beyond just the statement and again 

really justification of why there is not enough 

organic supply. There seems to be some forms of 

cornstarch that may be unique, and there was --

well, actually, I'll skip to that in a moment.

Given the comments I made about supply, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

there are suppliers. I mean, one company, 

Marroquin Organic International, note that they 

produce almost 8,000 metric tons of cornstarch. 

I'm assuming that's all organic. Another 

company, Puress, believes that the cornstarch and 

when we get to sweet potato starch should be removed 

from the list because there are organic 

alternatives available, that organic pea starch 

is also an alternative.

But also related to some of the 

statements by the trade and organizations and other 

companies, there's no real market analysis what 

the supply and demand is, and I know that would 

helpful. We've asked for that kind of information 

for whey protein concentrate, and it's often hard 

to get. But it'd be interesting to have a better 

idea of what's available, how much, what's used, 

and where the gaps are.

One suggestion coming from NOC and also 

BP was that if there are forms that continue to 

be unavailable in organic form, maybe we should 

have an annotation that specifically addresses the 

need for those forms. So in other words, 

cornstarch would be taken off 606 except for maybe 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

some categories. One is high amylose.

Honestly, I'm not quite sure what that 

means. I'd like to have a little better definition 

of what the differences of cornstarch --

definitions of cornstarch are that are in lower 

supply. And then apparently, some have 

freeze-thaw properties that are also useful for 

processed food products. So that would also be 

an approach to annotate the listing, get the 

majority off of 606, but have some special cases 

for forms that are in low supply. So that's the 

end of my comments. And Steve, I'll just jump in 

and say I think we're ready for comments or input 

from Board members.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Asa. Questions, 

comments from the Board? Dave has his hand up. 

Go ahead, Dave.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yeah, thanks, Asa, for 

that review. I thought that was very helpful, and 

this is an example to me, just to pick up on your 

point about where we've discussed this in the past. 

Orange rinds, I also remember we had a very lengthy 

discussion about sausage casings.

And in a case like this where directly 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

consuming the corn, and I believe the latest 

statistics indicate that something like 89 or 91 

percent of maize produced in the U.S. is 

genetically modified with multiple gene inserts 

of a variety of traits. I have trouble wrapping 

my head around the idea that it could be that 

limited in availability, that there isn't enough 

organic corn to drive the production of organic 

cornstarch. And as far as high amylose or there 

are different -- there would be different cultivars 

of maize that farmers would choose to grow to meet 

a certain niche market, high amylose being one of 

those.

So this one, to me, unlike some of the 

other ones, oranges, where things are perishable 

or there's the actual production of things is 

highly distributed or it's hard to aggregate the 

material, here, we're talking about a 

nonperishable maize crop relative to oranges or 

sausage casings. That seems to me to be tractable 

for this to be working off of the 606 listing.

MR. BRADMAN: Yeah, I think you make 

some really good points there. One thing I should 

note that all the producers assert that they're 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

not using GMO corn. And that's pretty well 

regulated and also enforced by certifiers. So it 

sounds unlikely that there's GMO corn that's being 

sourced for the cornstarch products that are being 

used.

I also want to hear again too, can't 

producers contract with growers to produce the 

forms of corn they need? One of the producers or 

trade agencies noted that costs are higher for 

organic corn and that yields may be 50, 60 percent 

of nonorganic corn and that creates kind of a 

bottleneck for availability of organic material.

But one, cost is not our primary concern 

here in terms of promoting organically produced 

products. With organically produced product, 

more of it, the price will also go down. And then 

-- well, I'll just leave it at that. So yeah, I 

agree this is another one of those conundrums.

MR. MORTENSEN: Thanks, Asa.

MR. ELA: And Asa, you had your hand 

up, and I'm assuming you made the comment that you 

wanted to make?

MR. BRADMAN: Yes.

MR. ELA: Looks like we have a question 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

from Nate.

MR. POWELL-PALM: I just wanted to jump 

in a little bit to that and just make a comment 

as both an inspector of many grain farms and as 

a grain farmer, I don't foresee this one as really 

a bottleneck issue. It's very easy. It's an 

annual crop. It's a shelf stable crop.

We've -- it might be a broad statement, 

but we're really good at growing organic corn in 

the States. Like, we're getting incredible yields 

on organic acres. And so I would be hard pressed 

to think that this isn't one that would be very 

addressable, and there's plenty of source material 

out there and a great opportunity for organic grain 

farmers looking to up their game as far as varieties 

and other growing opportunities. So that's just 

my two cents from the grain world.

MR. ELA: Other questions from the 

Board? I am not seeing any, Asa. So would you 

--

MS. BAIRD: Could I --

MR. ELA: -- like to move on?

MS. BAIRD: I'm sorry. I've got my 

hand up.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: Oh, I'm sorry, Sue. I missed 

it. Go ahead.

MS. BAIRD: Just a comment, 

reflection. The reason we're having so much --

so many problems with fraud from corn shipments 

from the Ukraine and different areas is because 

we are limited in our corn -- organic corn supplies. 

To be able to meet the demand for livestock feeds 

and other things, they are having to import their 

corn.

That being said, I do agree. Perhaps 

this would be -- if they grew it on a contract for 

the higher, different attributes of that corn, 

perhaps that would give a reason. But then you 

would have to sort that at the processing facility, 

and there's such -- this is what I've heard over 

the years of comments anyway. There's such a small 

demand, the organic industry is so small that 

companies are not willing to stop their production 

and to make these organically, colors or for 

whatever reason -- and I think we're talking about 

starches instead of colors and I apologize for 

that. But there's just not enough demand in the 

organic world for the companies, the processing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

facilities to want to stop production and go into 

that. That's what we've heard in the past.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Sue. And I 

apologize for not seeing your hand. All right, 

Asa, back to you to continue.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. I really don't 

have many more comments related to sweet potato 

starch. Some of the same issues were raised with 

sweet potato starch. There were very few comments 

about sweet potato starch. Some were kind of 

generically supportive to keep it. There was some 

argument that, like cornstarch, there's enough 

organically sourced material available to support 

the current standards in food products that are 

made. I think Puress was one of those groups that 

supported removing it from the list.

Again, I think I would like to get more 

information on the market demand and kind of help 

with analysis of that. We're trying to also find 

out more information on where it's produced, and 

it seems like a lot of the sweet potato's starch 

may be produced in East Asia. For this sunset 

review, I wasn't really able to find good 

information on where we're sourcing this material, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and I'm hoping that we can get some additional 

comments on this and maybe we'll have some better 

input on that for the fall meeting.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for Asa? 

Asa, I'm not seeing any, so back to you.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. Thank you. So I 

think we have to shift back to orange shellac. 

Kim, if you're online now, it looks like I see your 

mic active.

MS. HUSEMAN: Yes. Thank you, Asa. 

I apologize for the technical difficulty I had 

earlier. But with orange shellac unbleached, it 

falls under the same type of category as far as 

a product that is used to poach fruits. Unlike 

the two waxes that are produced by wood chips and 

palm leaves, orange shellac is produced through 

the secretions of the lac insect. So it's got 

quite a few different properties.

As I look through the comments, a few 

things that came about. Handlers did list this 

as several -- sorry, several handlers, a few that 

might be handlers under one organization and 9 

under another. It is used in the jelly bean 

manufacturing process.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

One comment was the material was 

essential because it prevents jelly beans from 

sticking together. Organic alternatives are not 

sufficient because other alternatives have not 

provided functional equivalence. And if the 

material were to be prohibited, organic jelly bean 

production would be discontinued or would be 

adversely impacted.

Most comments were for the relisting. 

There was an aspect that was brought up. The TR 

that had been done previously, I believe 2014, 

mentioned a number of possible ancillary 

substances, including the toxic antimicrobial 

morpholine. So the comment was it was important 

to identify which of the ancillary substances are 

allowed in organic shellac to be used on organic 

produce. So I would say those are -- it kind of 

encompasses the overall comments. And yeah, but 

for the most part, it was in support to relist.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for Kim? 

I am not seeing any, Asa. So back to you.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. Thank you.

MS. ARSENAULT: Asa, you're on mute.

MR. BRADMAN: Can you hear me now? 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Sorry. I think we then want to move on to Turkish 

bay leaves. Thank you.

MR. RICE: All right. This appears to 

be one of the few ingredients we're reviewing today 

that doesn't appear in jelly beans. At least that 

I've counted.

This is Turkish bay leaves. I'm sure 

many of you are well familiar with these in a stock 

pot or as a flavoring in soups and stews. This 

is also a material that was unanimously voted by 

the Board to be removed at the last sunset review.

During the rulemaking portion of that 

sunset process, we had one manufacturer put a 

public comment in saying that the bay leaves that 

they required for their product were not available 

and wished to see this still remain on 606, and 

that is where it remained.

In terms of public comments this time 

around, we've had a number of certifiers report 

no operations listing with the exception of one 

noting four. We did have in response to OTA sunset 

surveys one of their operations noted or one member 

noted they use bay leaves in a wide range of canned 

soups. But that respondent stated that there is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

full availability of organic forms and there would 

be no impact from removal because organic forms 

can be used and are available.

So I would say aside from those 

comments, numerous letters and comments supporting 

the removal of Turkish bay leaves from 606. And 

I would see us moving in that direction in the fall 

barring any new information that we receive. But 

it sounds like this is perhaps one of the success 

stories of 606 in the supply meeting the demand 

and having a state of supply that would justify 

its removal. Thanks.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for 

Scott? Dave, go ahead.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yeah, Scott, a point 

of clarification. I don't understand a point here 

that would be helpful just to know. If Turkish 

bay leaves weren't listed on 606 and a food producer 

was searching for organic Turkish bay leaves and 

couldn't find them, could they use conventionally 

produced Turkish bay leaves without it being listed 

in this way if the certifier approved so?

MR. RICE: They would not be able to, 

and the certifier would not be able to do so because 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

bay leaves would not appear on 606, where it would 

have to live in order for that producer to use it 

in a nonorganic form.

MR. MORTENSEN: Okay. Thank you.

MR. RICE: Yeah.

MR. ELA: Wood, do you have a question, 

comment?

MR. TURNER: I do, Scott. Just out of 

curiosity from a process perspective, did the 

producer or the person -- did the producer that 

intervened during rulemaking last cycle, did they 

weigh in this time?

MR. RICE: It's not clear that that 

individual is the -- or that manufacturer is the 

one that participated in the OTA survey of sunset 

materials. So I can't answer that question, 

unfortunately.

MR. TURNER: I guess I'm just curious, 

Steve and others, how do we -- I just want to 

understand how that happens and how someone --

during our thorough process, we're doing a careful 

review here in the NOSB process. And then 

something happens during rulemaking like that that 

changes the outcome. And I just -- I don't -- we 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

can talk about it another time, but I just wanted 

to raise the question. I don't quite understand 

how that happens.

MR. ELA: I can jump in, Scott. Would 

you rather?

MR. RICE: Yeah, I'm happy to answer. 

Or if you'd like to, go ahead.

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Scott.

MR. RICE: Yeah. This was -- I would 

say generally speaking, the sunset process has 

worked in that we have these two periods of comments 

to learn what the status is of the supply. In rare 

instances such as this one, we've seen in that 

rulemaking step an operation step forward to 

whether they made comments during that process or 

not. And to that, I'm trying to remember if they 

had or not and that was just not persuasive to us. 

I'm trying to recall.

But the rulemaking process doesn't stop 

with our recommendation. So whether we like it 

or not, there's continued opportunity for 

comments. But that's also an opportunity for --

be it us or you as an individual or interest groups 

or whomever who had commented during the sunset 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

process that the NOSB undergoes, these exceptions 

are a reminder that it's important to be 

participating in the rulemaking process all the 

way through final rule because even one comment 

during that proposed and final rule process can 

have -- can be persuasive to USDA. Does that help 

answer that question?

MR. TURNER: Thanks, Scott. Yeah, 

apologies to everybody for the request for a primer 

here. But I just want to make sure that the 

community understands that process and that we all 

understand that process because I think it's just 

a good reminder. Thank you.

(Simultaneous speaking.)

MR. ELA: Yeah, this is Steve. No need 

to apologize. I think I was going to make a similar 

comment anyhow that we've seen several things. 

It used to be once we went through the NOSB process 

and received lots of public comments saying it's 

available or delisted, it's okay. But that pretty 

much is what followed. 

But we've seen over the last number of 

years a couple products like this that basically 

one person stepped in during rulemaking and made 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

a comment and derailed the process. It's 

certainly their right.

But on the other hand, if 30 companies 

had jumped in at the same time in that rulemaking 

process and said we have no problem finding an 

organic source, then USDA would have to take into 

account, well, 30 people said there's no problem 

and one company said there is. What's going on 

here?

And so I think it continues the stress 

even though we feel like we've done our due 

diligence in commenting to the NOSB that, as Scott 

said, it's important for our stakeholders to pay 

attention to the rulemaking process and weigh in 

those same comments during the rulemaking process 

because the comments to the NOSB do not carry 

forward through that rulemaking process.

I think it's something also where the 

NOSB has learned in our cover letters, when we 

finish this process and let's say we vote to delist 

this, in the cover letter with the writeup that 

we've already done that we send to the NOP, it's 

very important to stress, we received X number of 

comments from a company that's saying this was 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

readily available. And this is how we justified 

our vote, rather than just saying we voted to delist 

it.

We're learning that we kind of give our 

rationale so that the NOP has a written document 

from the NOSB justifying why that is in addition 

to our vote and our previous writeup. That gives 

them fodder to make -- help justify their 

decisions. So it's an excellent question, Wood. 

Are there further comments, questions? Not 

seeing any, Asa, let's move on.

MR. BRADMAN: Okay. So we have our 

last material today in handling, whey protein 

concentrate. And, A-dae, you're on board for 

that.

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Yes, whey protein 

concentrate. So we received approximately 30 

comments regarding whey protein concentrate, and 

I say that hesitantly because there was a lot of 

comments that came in a form letter. So I was 

hesitant to count them because they all said --

pretty much said the same thing.

But we had several very poignant 

comments. I do want to point out Harriet Behar's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

comments, and let me just summarize really quickly, 

who went through a very detailed sort of history 

about whey protein concentrate, specifically about 

-- she was very specific about the votes in previous 

NOSB reviews about delisting. And she says that 

she doesn't understand why it hasn't already been 

delisted.

Other comments in general, I think the 

large majority was for delisting whey protein 

concentrate. There were a few comments that 

suggested relisting as is. Another notable 

commenter was CROPP, the CROPP Cooperative, and 

they're a major supplier of whey protein 

concentrate.

And in one of the questions we asked 

to commenters was about the supply of organically 

produced whey protein concentrate, and they did 

say that they are a major producer of this product 

and that they produce so much whey protein 

concentrate that it actually spills into the 

conventional market. And they -- there were 

several certifiers that said there was 

approximately about six or seven folks who had this 

in their organic systems plan. So it is used by 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

several organic producers. And then to further 

complicate the conversation, we do just -- I would 

just like to note we do have a petition that was 

submitted to delist whey protein concentrate which 

is a whole separate process.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for 

A-dae? A-dae, I'll jump in. I found it fairly 

compelling that the CROPP Cooperative jumped in 

and said we have lots of supply. We can make more. 

We're already selling some on the conventional 

market because we have too much. To me, that was 

-- I mean, they're not small. I found that a pretty 

strong comment. Looks like Dave has a question, 

comment.

MR. MORTENSEN: Yeah, I guess I agree 

with what Steve was saying. And I guess the other 

thing that strikes me and just -- even just since 

the last review where the NOSB voted unanimously 

to remove, the economic and production constraints 

that organic dairy farmers are under would seem 

to argue that we have a much stronger case now than 

before to delist because of the need to support 

the organic market that can provide this from what 

we can tell.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

So I know out here the milk contracts 

are being capped and limited. Farmers are getting 

less for their milk, organic milk. So I would hope 

that we would do what we could to support that 

industry, the organic one.

MR. ELA: Looks like --

(Simultaneous speaking.)

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: I will note in our 

subcommittee discussions, this goes back to Asa's 

earlier comments about 606 category ingredients 

in that this category can either be seen as a 

detriment to organic production of certain 

ingredients or a safehouse until that market is 

more robust. And I think that is the case for whey 

protein concentrate. Like, it's outgrown 606.

MR. ELA: Looks like Emily has a 

question, comment.

MS. OAKLEY: Yeah, I think in the 

discussion you guys really addressed it. I was 

wondering what the prospects for success of 

delisting it might be this time around. But that 

might also be a question for the program, but it 

sounds like that's the direction the subcommittee 

will be going in. And hopefully, that will be the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

will of the stakeholder community as well.

MR. ELA: Any other questions, 

comments from the Board?

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: I do just want to 

address Emily's comment because in Harriet's 

comments, she does note that she doesn't -- she 

was a pretty strong advocate in our Handling 

Committee before she left why -- she doesn't 

understand where that breakdown in the process went 

because NOSB in the past has suggested delisting, 

and it just hasn't been delisted. So that is an 

area that is not quite understood.

MR. ELA: Asa, go ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: I don't know if that's 

something that the program can comment on now.

DR. TUCKER: I'm back. Steve, do you 

want me to comment on this at this time?

MR. ELA: Go ahead, Jenny.

DR. TUCKER: Yeah, I've been following 

the conversation here. I think it's been a very 

fruitful and productive one. I think -- I've 

forgotten exactly who said it so well before. But 

always remembering this is a two-phase process 

where the Board does its consideration and sends 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

a recommendation to the program, and the program 

then does rulemaking.

And that rulemaking process follows 

APA, the Administrative Procedures Act, and a whole 

other host of rules related to rulemaking which 

also includes economic analysis, regulatory impact 

assessment. And so the criteria during rulemaking 

can be different than the criteria during NOSB's 

review. That makes it a two-phase process where 

different things are considered. The public has 

the opportunity to comment all the way.

And so I think that's been said here 

a couple of times of how important it is for the 

community to participate, not only in this process 

but also in rulemaking. The reverse also applies. 

Sometimes we'll get comments during rulemaking 

from folks who weren't even really aware that the 

NOSB meeting process was happening.

So both parts of the process are vitally 

important, equally important, and need to balance 

one another procedurally. But it could end up that 

rulemaking does result in a different outcome than 

the NOSB recommendation because rulemaking is a 

part of the process. That's why the Board has 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

certain authorities and why the Secretary has 

certain authorities. Both matter.

MR. ELA: Thanks, Jenny. I think 

that's a great point. Asa, I don't see any other 

comments. So back to you.

MR. BRADMAN: Thank you. So I think 

that actually wraps up our Handling Subcommittee 

issues for today. So I think we can turn it back 

over to you.

MR. ELA: Great. Thank you very much, 

Asa. Handling definitely has their work cut out 

for them on these various sunsets and discussion 

documents. I know there's another handful of 

proposals, petitions that are on our table as well. 

So thank you for keeping track of all that. 

You're doing a great job. With that, we will jump 

right into Livestock. Sue, turn it over to you?

MS. BAIRD: Thank you, Steve. 

Livestock Committee for this session considered 

one petition which we turned into a discussion 

document, and then we had eight sunset reviews. 

The first is a discussion on fenbendazole.

Fenbendazole is currently listed on 

205.603(a)(23) as parasiticides. It's prohibited 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

in slaughter stock, allowed in emergency treatment 

for dairy breeder stock with an organic system 

plan. Approved preventative management does not 

prevent infestation. In breeder stock, treatment 

cannot occur during the last third of gestation. 

If the progeny will be sold as organic, it must 

not be used during the lactation period for 

breeding stock. It's allowed for fiber bearing 

animals when used a minimum of 90 days prior to 

harvesting of fleece or wool that is to be sold, 

labeled, or represented as organic.

And then specific to fenbendazole, 

205.603(a)(23)(i), for CAS No. 43210-67-9, milk 

or milk products from a treated animal cannot be 

labeled as provided for in Subpart D for this part 

for two days following treatment of the cattle, 

36 days following treatment of goats, sheep, and 

other dairy species. The petition was received 

asking that annotation be amended to allow the use 

of fenbendazole for laying hens and replacement 

hens.

I'm going to go into a little bit on 

the technical summary. Fenbendazole was first 

approved in 1983 for use in cattle, including beef 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

animals and dairy cows, as a treatment and control 

of several types of gastronomical worms, including 

lungworms, stomach worms, ground stomach worms, 

barber pole worms and small stomach worms and 

intestinal worms, hook worms, threat-necked 

intestinal worms, small intestinal worms, bankrupt 

worms, and nodular worms.

In October 2015, FDA gave formal 

approval for the use of fenbendazole for use of 

treatment and control of the A which is Ascaridia 

galli in broiler chickens and replacement chickens 

intended to become breeder chickens and for the 

treatment and control of the adult A. galli and 

H. gallinarum in breeding chickens.

And then on January 15, 2018, FDA gave 

the approval which extended the use of fenbendazole 

under the trade name of AquaSol for the treatment 

and control of the adult Ascaridia galli in broiler 

chickens and replacement chickens and for the 

treatment and control of adult A. galli and -- yeah, 

right -- H. gallinarum in breeding chickens and 

laying hens. And that application was sponsored 

by Intervet Inc. which operates in -- of Merck, 

and this petition was submitted by Merck.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

I went into and did some research on 

this and found that a freedom of information 

summary supplemental to New Animal Drug 

Applications, the NADA, 141.449, and I've got the 

website, where they actually applied for the 

fenbendazole for the chickens, breeding chickens 

and laying hens. It states in here that FDA has 

established the acceptable daily intake, the ADI, 

which is defined as the maximum amount of chemical 

that can be ingested daily over a lifetime with 

no appreciable health risk.

The unit of ADI for the chemical 

substance is micrograms per kilograms of body 

weight per day. And the safe concentration in eggs 

is calculated by partitioning the acceptable daily 

intake, the ADI -- well, the safe concentrate of 

any product. Meat is 50 percent partitioning. 

Milk is 40 percent partitioning, and eggs is 10 

percent partitioning.

And they determined the safe 

concentrations for the total residue of 

fenbendazole in the individual parts of the birds 

as such: 4 ppm for muscles, 12 ppm for livers, 24 

ppm for skin with fat and natural proportions, and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

2.4 ppm for eggs. I did not see how they determined 

that was safe in this particular petition, and I'm 

sorry I didn't research it any further to find out 

how they determined what was a safe level.

There were -- these were based on a 

study, and they quoted two different study dates, 

October 25, 2010 to February 1, 2011. They did 

studies of 15 birds that were fed a consecutive 

of five days, and they found residuals observed 

on day seven which would be the second day of 

withdrawal. And how they determined that was did 

some radioactive residues, and they found 6.38 

percent of that total fenbendazole showed up as 

a residue.

The second study was done January 23, 

2013 to May 13th, 2013. They selected Leghorn hens 

39 weeks of age at treatment, and they dosed those 

hens at a 20 percent fenbendazole suspension orally 

at a dose of 1.5 micrograms of fenbendazole per 

kilogram for body weight for 12 days. And they 

found that at the end of that time, they found that 

-- at zero days withdrawal times -- in other words, 

on that day 12 of feeding, they found that that 

resulted in a tolerance of 1.8 parts per million 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

which was, they said, total residues of 

fenbendazole in eggs and treated chickens at zero 

day withdrawal was well below their safe 

concentrate of 2.4 ppm of residues in eggs. In 

other words, they found 1.8, and that was below 

2.4.

So based on those studies, the 

substance was approved for use in conventional 

poultry production such that the amount of active 

ingredient was determined to be 200 micrograms per 

milliliter of fenbendazole for oral administration 

in drinking water. It must be administered orally 

to chickens via the drinking water at a dose at 

1 microgram per kilogram body weight which would 

be 0.454 micrograms per pound of body weight for 

five days. Remember they tested it at 1.5 

micrograms, but they determined that it's safe at 

the 1 microgram.

So conventional poultry producers 

typically administer fenbendazole to pullets age 

17 weeks of age or before they're giving outdoor 

access to ensure that birds have no internal 

pesticides before they go outside and before they 

start their egg production. And when birds 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

receive access to outdoors, they come into contact 

with the soil which, in turn, of course, gives 

contact with the internal parasites. So many 

producers find a need to retreat their flocks after 

a second period of time after they've had access 

to soil and after they come in contact with the 

internal parasite.

So that's the technical background of 

how fenbendazole in laying hens came about in the 

first place. And for the organic summary, in May 

of 2012, fenbendazole was added to the National 

List of Organic Materials for use in organic 

livestock. And then in 2016, NOSB recommended 

that the annotation for fenbendazole would be 

amended to include -- and that's where I just read 

at the very beginning. They added fleece and wool 

fiber animals, and they changed 90 days --

originally, fenbendazole was 90 days withdrawal 

for dairy cows and they reduced it to two days, 

and they allocated a 36-day withdrawal for goats 

and sheep. And on January 28, 2019, NOP issued 

the final rule stating that.

In spring of 2018 -- oh, okay. So the 

final rule says that it has to -- cannot be labeled 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

as provided and has to have -- it's only for 

emergency use. In spring of 2018, NOSB 

recommended clarifying, quote, emergency use for 

synthetic parasites in organic livestock 

production. And as such, emergency treatment to 

allow synthetic parasiticide use in livestock.

A livestock emergency is an urgent, 

nonroutine situation in which organic system 

plans, preventative measures, and veterinarian 

biologics are proven by a laboratory analyses or 

visual inspections to be inadequate to prevent 

life-threatening illnesses or to alleviate pain 

and suffering. In such cases, a producer must 

administer the emergency treatment. Must 

administer emergency treatment. Organic 

certification will be retained providing that such 

treatments are allowed under 205.603 and the 

organic system plan is changed to prevent a similar 

livestock emergency in the individual animals or 

the whole herd flock in future years as required 

under 205.238(a).

And then 205.238(b) says, parenthesis 

4, organic livestock is provided in 205.238(b)(1), 

(2), and (3), and only in the event of emergency 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

where management strategies have been proven 

insufficient to prevent or control parasites 

within the accepted threshold for this specific 

parasite, age, and species of the animal. These 

management strategies include but are not limited 

to grazing systems and living conditions that 

prevent infestation and reinfestation, forage 

height diversity, use of allowed nonsynthetic 

botanicals, biologics, and minerals to maintain 

parasite levels below treatment thresholds, and 

could include monitoring and documentation of 

parasites through use of methods such as fecal 

monitoring and the FAMACHA for sheep and goats.

This petition stated that many organic 

layers have meaningful direct access to the soil, 

and this is one area where birds that are truly 

out grazing the land are at a disadvantage than 

birds on concrete porches. With the shifting 

demand for eggs from hens with humane 

certifications for free range or pasture raised 

production models require up to 108.9 square foot 

per bird of outdoor access. Many laying hen flocks 

are seeing large internal parasite infestations. 

When birds are out grazing, they're scratching 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

and digging in the dirt for worms. And in return, 

they're picking up intestinal parasites.

The petition further stated that the 

studies on sustainable worm control strategies in 

commercial laying hen flocks are scarce. They 

quoted one study that was conducted in Denmark in 

2010 which compared a randomly selected group of 

organic chicken flocks with conventional 

confinement flocks in deep litter.

And the study was conducted from 1999 

to 2007, and the results were as such. Cage layers 

had 4 percent, up to 5.9 percent of infestation 

-- mortality from infestation. Confined deep 

litter production had 9 to 12.1. Free range 

production had 6.6 to 11.4. But they found that 

organic egg production has 9 to 18.4 percent 

mortality due to infestation of parasites.

The question was asked on, are 

alternative cultural methods sufficient to control 

the parasites? The most common alternate cultural 

material that is being used is diatomaceous earth. 

The petition quoted several egg layer producers 

that stated that its effectiveness as an internal 

control has not been reputably documented. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Diatomaceous earth has no effect on lungworms and 

is additionally not appetizing to the poultry and 

could be a lung irritant. In fact, CROPP in their 

public written comment stated diatomaceous earth 

has associated health risks to both farmers and 

the birds, potentially causing respiratory damage 

when used.

Some producers stated that they had 

tried feed grade oregano which they find not very 

effective. They did say that high doses of liquid 

oregano were shown to improve the lack of 

infestation. But they said it was not a remedy 

for the worm issues. Natural product -- this is 

a quote. Natural products are not only effective, 

but I've seen decreases in feed consumption and 

egg production that directly follow some of their 

uses.

I'm not going to dwell too much on the 

toxicity of fenbendazole. That was all covered 

-- that has been covered in the TR that was for 

-- that was conducted in 2015 for the mammal --

mammalian and livestock. But they did state 

there's no detectable impacts on dung beetles. 

It's been shown to be of low acute toxicity with 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

oral LD50 values, it was greater than 10,000 

micrograms per kilogram, so very low toxicity.

The petition made the comment that 

they're concerned that the organic consumer is 

losing confidence in the organic egg production. 

The inability to treat parasite outbreaks poses 

a risk to food quality that can undermine consumer 

confidence in the organic field. Roundworms 

become effaced along the edges of the yokes and 

makes their way into sellable egg cartons. While 

the presence of accidental avian roundworm in 

cooked eggs is not a public issue as worms are 

species-specific, it certainly upsets the 

customers and sullies the confidence of organic 

labels.

I researched the international 

acceptance of fenbendazole for laying hens. In 

Canada, they state poultry flocks could be treated, 

but laying hens with more than one treatment per 

12 months lose organic status. EU didn't 

specifically list fenbendazole, but it falls 

within the any synthetic applications, and they 

say twice the labeled withdrawal time which is 

zero. So I guess two times zero is zero. Japan 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

has a withdrawal time of two days prior to slaughter 

for food, milk, or egg collections or twice the 

period of drug withdrawal.

This topic received a lot of public 

comments, and some of them I've summarized into 

basically three -- four topics. There were -- I 

think there's two major concerns. One is the human 

health concerns with a residue of below 2.4 ppm 

in the eggs and zero withdrawal time. The comment 

was made, and I think rightfully so, consumers 

expect there's not going to be any chemical 

residues in organic foods. We find that there are 

chemical residues in a lot of organic foods, and 

we've already talked about that.

Some of the concerns in the health 

issues is that would there be -- would we start 

seeing a parasite resistance to fenbendazole in 

humans as we have seen now over time with 

antibiotics that used to be given routinely to 

poultry? There's some research going on now using 

fenbendazole for cancer treatments, although I did 

question Merck on that and they said that they 

didn't see an issue with that because cancer 

treatments are done with SPC eggs. So they didn't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

think that would make a difference. But anyway, 

these are the concerns.

And the other thing is that 

fenbendazole is used for human treatment for 

internal parasites. So we know that it is a 

treatment that is being used for internal 

parasites, especially in third world countries. 

There were several studies on that. So would we 

-- if we allowed fenbendazole to be given, would 

there be a parasite resistance to that?

Center for Food Safety made this, and 

I'm going to quote them. And I don't normally use 

people's names that present it, but it is public 

record. And I think some of these quotes are 

pretty important, these comments.

They said, to be clear, the FDA does 

not require a withdrawal time for the eggs. But 

to be clear, they also do not require withdrawal 

time on the label for milk from dairy cattle either. 

But within the organic program, we follow a 

precautionary principle that guides our decision 

making, not what the conventional market requires. 

And the organic rules often does not reflect the 

FDA rule.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Beyond Pesticides gave a very in depth 

and very informative public comment, and they 

stated that there is other research that indicates 

that fenbendazole, after chronic exposure, may 

cause or contribute to immune system effects, 

livers, tumors, and birth defects. And they also 

found a European study that said that oxfendazole 

sulfone -- I probably am not saying that correctly, 

but that is a metabolite of fenbendazole. 

Residues were detected in eggs from the first day 

after treatment up to eight days after the last 

treatment.

To get a zero residue, it takes eight 

days after the last treatment of fenbendazole. 

The highest residue was determined one to two days 

after the last treatment. No residues above the 

limit of quantification was detected at nine days. 

And they said their -- this suggests that 

fenbendazole is permitted for use in organic 

poultry eggs should be discarded for 14 days after 

application, five days after treatment plus nine 

days of withdrawal time.

So number two, I heard this from a lot 

of the certifiers, from OTA. The definition for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

emergency has not been adopted by NOP. So 

therefore, there's no way to really regulate the 

usage of that parasiticide.

Cornucopia stated that they were not 

really opposed to using fenbendazole. They 

understood that this has become almost a life and 

death situation for our poultry operations that 

are giving the recommended amount of outdoor access 

and pasture. But they said that they were afraid 

without the emergency definition being adopted 

that there'll be a lot of fraud in using that 

parasiticide.

ASPCA which I just love this one. They 

express that they love outdoor access for hens. 

They agreed with NOSB that a system approach is 

needed for this research as evidenced by how 

closely this issue relates to fenbendazole 

position discussion comment. So I thought that 

was an interesting thing.

Number three is that many of them said 

that we needed a separate TR for inclusion for the 

laying replacement hens. We heard that concern 

in the fall of 2019, and we have requested a limited 

TR. We heard in public comments that it has been 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

completed, but the Livestock Subcommittee has not 

seen those results. We eagerly await to see what 

that has to say.

There was a comment by Center for Food 

Safety that was afraid that these birds could end 

up as slaughter hens, and it kind of caught me by 

surprise. I wasn't sure how to respond to that. 

I was not -- I should have read my listing better. 

But it is prohibited in slaughter stock. That 

prohibition is for all parasiticides. So even if

this annotation -- the amended annotation would 

be voted on and approved, then it would never end 

up in slaughter stock because that's there.

There were a lot of the producers, and 

I've given you all the negatives, and there were 

a whole lot of them. CROPP supported it. They 

said roundworms are a reality, and outdoor access 

production systems, especially in wetter years 

which is becoming the new normal. OTA said the 

producers needed it to be added to their toolbox. 

PCO supported it, and MOSA stated that it would 

be a useful tool in their toolbox.

It appears that we are having a huge 

concern from our producers that they're picking 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

up a lot of worms. Merck showed the slides during 

our public comment time that showed what the guts 

are looking like in these poultry. So that's my 

presentation. I'll open it up for questions and 

discussion.

MR. ELA: Thank you. So are there 

comments from the Board or questions? Dan has one, 

and then I see Nate and then a few others after 

that. So go ahead, Dan. And I want to do a time 

check on things we don't have a lot of time. But 

I do want to have discussion on this.

DR. SEITZ: Sure. Just a few comments 

rather than a question. So I'm not close to 

considering this, but I would be very reluctant 

to vote on it for a number of reasons and would 

need to be better persuaded. First of all, once 

we vote something on, it's very difficult to 

delist. It takes a two-thirds vote. And as we 

were just discussing a few minutes ago, even if 

it were to be delisted, it might be -- that might 

be derailed in rulemaking.

I'm concerned that this would be used 

wholesale on flocks instead of targeted, and 

there's no way that you can use this targeted for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

chickens obviously. But it's very different from 

the meat producing situation. We did receive a 

number of comments from producers and 

associations that said it was unnecessary, that 

the operations they were certifying, for example, 

were not saying that this was a need.

Also, a number of commenters said that 

there were good cultural methods, not only in terms 

of natural medicine, so to speak, but just in terms 

of good pasture practice. And then I'm concerned 

about adding a substance that would have a residue 

in eggs. There was a lot of discussion around, 

well, if you cook the eggs, maybe that won't be 

there. But I have to say I use raw eggs for 

mayonnaise and hollandaise sauce, I mean, many 

people use that.

And I also felt there was a certain 

amount of sensationalism in presenting this with 

the worms in eggs. I mean, all of us would, of 

course, find that a disgusting image to -- where 

if it was on our -- if we cracked open an egg. 

But certainly in my experience of decades of eating 

local eggs, organic eggs, that's not something I've 

seen. So I just want to say that this is a very 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

-- from my standpoint, I need to be persuaded, 

further persuaded before I would vote for this.

MR. ELA: Okay. Nate and then Jerry. 

So, Nate, go ahead.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Thank you. Just a 

question for Sue. Sue, do you have -- did you find 

in your research any information about whether or 

not there's a correlation between a given number 

of square feet of outdoor access per bird and the 

respective worm parasite load? If there is a 

minimum amount that reduces that load or relieves 

that load?

MS. BAIRD: Nate, I did not see that 

correlation. I'm sorry.

MR. POWELL-PALM: All good. I just 

wanted to make sure I didn't miss it.

MS. BAIRD: No, I didn't see any 

correlation.

MR. POWELL-PALM: Thank you.

MR. ELA: Next up, we have Jerry and 

after that Dave. And then it looks like Dan has 

another question. Go ahead, Jerry.

MR. D'AMORE: Steve, my question has 

already been asked. But I'd like to make a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

statement that I would not dare make if I were a 

longstanding member of this Board because I'd have 

to be smarter than this question. But just 

listening, my question would be is it possible at 

all to have an organic egg? That's it.

MS. BAIRD: I'm not sure I'm following 

that. Absolutely, we have organic eggs. But is 

it possible to have organic eggs without worms? 

I would say yes, but it does -- from what the 

petition is saying that it's becoming a lot bigger 

problem than -- as we give them more access to 

outdoors, they're becoming -- it's becoming more 

of a problem to have the worms picked up by the 

birds as they scratch and peck and eat. And so 

therefore, we're seeing this problem now that we 

didn't see in the past.

MR. D'AMORE: Yeah, and I'm sorry. I 

guess the most astounding thing to me in listening 

to you was the tolerance that's built up of the 

substance and what that means down the road. 

That's the one that just -- again, to these 

brand-new ears, was the biggest red flag I heard.

MS. BAIRD: Right. Agreed.

MR. ELA: Dave? Go ahead.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. MORTENSEN: Thank you for that very 

comprehensive review, Sue. It was helpful to hear 

all the things that you went through to look at 

this. At the last -- when we had the panel 

discussion with the presenters, I was really 

bothered by this notion that was pretty much 

through the talks that this is basically IPM --

this is organic IPM for chickens.

Based on the things that the folks 

presented to us, they were basically arguing that 

this was needed to be some sort of a routine kind 

of cleansing of the birds which in my view raises 

questions about foundational management system, 

the cultural management system upon which the birds 

are being raised. I thought that the NOC comments 

were very, very helpful in thinking through how 

it is that we go about defining emergency and how 

it is that, when an emergency arose, we would have 

a deliberate process by which we would go back and 

look at the management practices that gave rise 

to the emergency so as not to have an emergency 

every time a new thing is in the chicken house.

That IPM argument, I heard the same 

argument 20 years ago in conventional ag on ways 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that we were going to reduce herbicide use in grain 

crops. And the fact was if you use this 

threshold-based thinking and don't change the 

system, it's a justification for routine use of 

pesticides. And I'm afraid that that's what we're 

looking at here if there isn't a way that there's 

a feedback to the foundational cultural practices 

that underpin poultry production in the first 

place.

MS. BAIRD: Yeah, thank you, Dave. I 

agree. And that was probably one of the most heard 

comments is that we don't have -- we have not --

NOP has not accepted any definition for emergency. 

So what are emergencies? And I agree with you 

that NOC did a great job of delineating some of 

the methods that we might use to determine what 

a true emergency is.

I thought it was interesting that 

Canada said, well, you can give it one time in their 

life. That might be a way we might -- if we move 

at all on this, might be something that we would 

have to say. There's -- I'm really interested to 

see what this TR has to say. And I think that until 

we get that, we may be just guessing at stuff.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MR. ELA: It looks like Asa has a 

question. Okay. And then A-dae, and then after 

those two questions, comments, we need to probably 

move on. I see late on time here. So Asa, go 

ahead.

MR. BRADMAN: I have just a quick 

comment. And the comment is I worked in California 

with the Healthy Schools Act in the state, 

Department of Pesticide Regulation. And one issue 

in that setting was what defines an emergency. 

And when dealing with IPM and childcare facilities, 

this issue came up repeatedly that the emergency 

option was being abused in a way and pesticides 

were being used that were inappropriate. So I 

think just another example, this issue of defining 

what's a crisis is spot on.

Number two, I think in comments -- in 

response to comments earlier in this meeting, you 

kind of implied that a withdrawal period wouldn't 

be workable. And you mentioned that there was an 

eight-day period to go down to zero and that in 

Japan they have a withdrawal period. And I'm 

wondering if I understood that correctly. And if 

the Board were to allow this, is there -- is a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

withdrawal period feasible?

MS. BAIRD: I talked to several of the 

egg producers that are here in Missouri. I haven't 

talked to the others. They stated -- first of all, 

I said, well, what is the difference? We do a 

withdrawal. You sell it on the commercial market 

as free range eggs.

And they said -- they kind of laughed 

at me, in fact -- that's not the way that works. 

We contract for our eggs. They've already 

contracted for free range eggs. We can't move it 

into the free range market because that's already 

taken up. And because it's not like a large 

mammal, we can't just separate one -- ear tag one 

chicken and say, okay, you're out. It's the whole 

flock or none.

So from what I understand, the margin 

is so small on these eggs. Prices of eggs have 

gone -- in fact, at one point, one of the gentlemen 

told me they're getting 19 cents a dozen for their 

eggs. There's -- they can't just -- we're talking 

about a house that's got 8,000 birds in it, and 

they may have three or four houses. So you're 

talking about 8,000 times two or three, 24,000 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

dozens of eggs a day. Where are you going to dump 

them because there's no market for them? So from 

what I'm hearing, withdrawal time is not really 

where we should be looking.

MR. ELA: All right. Let's go to 

A-dae, and then we'll move on to the sunsets. 

A-dae?

MS. ROMERO-BRIONES: Yes. Okay. 

Yeah, so I just wanted -- this is, like, a really 

hard subject for me. One, because I feel like I 

don't have a good handle on both the livestock 

practices or the lasting effects of fenbendazole 

on any of our egg or meat. So I always err on the 

side of caution.

Like, if I don't understand it, how are 

other people in the organic consumer category going 

to understand it? And so I just wanted to make 

a plug that the need for livestock producers on 

the Board is really important, and it would be so 

helpful for us at this time in reviewing this type 

of ingredient. Thanks.

MS. BAIRD: Thank you, A-dae.

MR. ELA: Thank you. I don't see any 

further questions, Sue. So why don't we move on 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to the sunsets. And thank you for -- it's such 

a complex topic, and thank you for going through 

it for us.

MS. BAIRD: Well, thank you. As you 

know, I inherited this one from Ashley, and boo 

on Ashley for going off the Board at this time. 

So our first sunset substance is butorphanol. 

Scott?

MR. RICE: Thank you. Starting out 

here with butorphanol. It's a treatment for pain 

prior to surgery in animals. We received the 

majority of commenters supporting the relisting 

of this. Certifiers provided data, but it doesn't 

show a large number of operations using this, but 

also today it's important as a veterinary medicine 

tool in instances where it is needed.

Several dairy and dairy organizations 

advocated for its continued use or rather listing 

to ensure welfare of animals as well as the safety 

and welfare of the vets during the procedures to 

keep those animals sedated. One organization 

noted that information in the technical advisory 

panel about the impacts of this and its metabolites 

when excreted was not covered. More info would 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

be helpful, and that organization proposed that 

all metabolites be evaluated as well as any extra 

label use.

The alternatives are out there, 

including xylazine. But those were noted as not 

as not as effective. Similarly, herbal remedies 

are available, but again, not as effective to 

prevent acute pain. And that is that.

MR. ELA: Any questions for Scott? 

Scott, I am not seeing any. So Sue, back to you.

MS. BAIRD: The next substance is 

flunixin which is mine. It is used as a 

disinfectant sanitizer and medical treatment as 

applicable in accordance with approved labeling 

except for use under 7 CFR Part 205. NOP requires 

a withdrawal period of at least two times that 

required by FDA. It is a potent non-narcotic, 

nonsteroidal analgesic agent with 

anti-inflammatory activity and also lowers fevers.

So there were in public comments, we 

actually had 19 different organizations that

commented on it with all of them saying yes. 

Several of the certifiers listed how many of their 

operations were actually using flunixin, and it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

was pretty high numbers.

There was a comment by Beyond 

Pesticides that says it's more potent than aspirin, 

so why not just use aspirins? They said it was 

not clear for the effect of human health, and they 

did note that residual effects are prohibited in 

horses for slaughter. So that was all the comments 

that I got on flunixin. All of the producers said 

yes.

MR. ELA: Any questions, comments? 

Not seeing any, Sue. So back to you.

MS. BAIRD: Magnesium hydroxide, 

Jesse.

MR. BUIE: And Sue, can you come back 

to that, please?

MS. BAIRD: Yes, sir.

MR. BUIE: Thank you.

MS. BAIRD: Not to worry. Poloxalene, 

Dan.

DR. SEITZ: Hi, yes. So poloxalene is 

used to treat bloat, and we got about ten comments 

in favor of relisting. Half of them were explicit 

saying, yes, this should be relisted. The other 

half said that in our association, this is used 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

by farmers.

There were a couple comments 

questioning whether there mightn't be some natural 

approaches, nonsynthetic approaches to treating 

bloat. But by and large, the commenters made clear 

that even the best, most careful farming practices 

would be -- would not prevent -- would not always 

prevent bloat. So in that sense, it might be 

needed rarely but it was essential to producing.

MS. BAIRD: Very nice.

MR. ELA: Any questions for Dan on 

this? All right. I am not seeing any. So Sue, 

back to you.

MS. BAIRD: Let's go to formic acid for 

Nate.

MR. POWELL-PALM: All right. So used 

for -- formic acid is used as an external pesticide 

within honey bee hives as well as a local 

anaesthetic. And there are about a dozen 

comments. There were a few certifiers who said 

that they didn't have any operations who use formic 

acid. One certifier said that they had one. And 

overall, those who commented were in unison that 

it should be relisted.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

We had some very -- a very good in-depth 

comment from Harriet noting that if we're going 

to -- though we don't have an apiary standard yet, 

we're going to encourage the continued production 

method of using organic practices by beekeepers 

and hope that one day we do have an apiary standard, 

that this is an important tool. And so it seemed 

fairly unanimous that folks were in favor of 

keeping it as allowable. Any questions?

MR. ELA: Are there any questions for 

Nate? I'm not seeing any questions. And you as 

the final person of the new five, congratulations 

on for your first presentation. Sue, back to you.

MS. BAIRD: Jesse, did we want to go 

to you? Did we want to go forward? Are you ready?

MR. BUIE: No, I've got a little crisis 

at the clinic. Just give me -- just come back to 

me.

MS. BAIRD: Okay. EPA List 4, inerts 

of minimum concern, Scott?

MR. RICE: Okey doke. Thank you, Sue. 

Well, we had a discussion on this yesterday with 

the Crops Subcommittee and very much appreciate 

Asa's comments and thoughts on this and his 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

excellent work. So I don't know that we need to 

dive in too much here just because of that. We 

are kind of looking at the same thing.

I would just reiterate there is 

universal dissatisfaction, as Asa noted, with the 

presence of List 4 still on the National List and 

again had those repeated recommendations from the 

Board over the years, 2010, 2012, 2015, the latter 

of which went into quite a bit of depth on kind 

of giving us a roadmap here to how to move forward.

Those recommendations and as well as 

a lot of comments that we really appreciate from 

the community again offered some really good 

pathways forward and receiving positive signals 

from the program that they're ready and willing 

to take this on, whereas in the past, there was 

not so much of that. And as noted yesterday, the 

National List -- new National List Manager coming 

on board with the program in the near future will 

hopefully have the bandwidth for this and see it 

as an excellent project for that individual to take 

on and ensure that this can finally move forward.

And I guess to close, just reiterate 

Jenny's cautionary note yesterday that while it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

might be tempting to simply delist that -- delist 

this rather, and I can certainly see that sending 

a message that we are beyond ready for this to 

finally move forward, we do need to keep in mind 

that OFPA does not allow the addition of materials 

outside of the Board's actions and that any removal 

would require the addition of something to take 

its place to prevent disruption in the marketplace. 

And again, would also just refer back to Asa's 

comments that maybe that is the impetus that this 

needs, but just to offer that. With that, I will 

turn it back to you, Sue.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for 

Scott? I'm not seeing any and agree. We had a 

lengthy discussion yesterday. So hopefully, our 

stakeholders were able to tune into that. These 

two are pretty parallel and really address the same 

-- kind of the same issues.

So for the fall, I think we'll -- we're 

certainly going to have a discussion with the 

program and how best to proceed. But we'll have 

-- we'll probably kind of -- in the fall as well, 

probably try to not combine these. But they will 

certainly go in parallel. Sue, back to you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. BAIRD: The next material is 

excipients, and that's mine. Excipients are 

allowed only for use in the manufacture of drugs, 

used to treat organic livestock when the excipient 

is identified by FDA as generally recognized as 

safe, grass. Two, approved by FDA as a food 

additive. Or three, included in FDA review and 

approval of a new animal drug application or new 

drug application.

There are about 8,000 different 

excipients listed under the FDA list. But in 205.2 

for the organic excipients, are defined as any 

ingredient that is intentionally added to 

livestock medications but do not exert therapeutic 

or diagnostic effects and the intended dosage, 

although they may act to improve product delivery, 

e.g. enhancing absorption or controlling releases 

of that drug substance.

They are used in the NADAs, the New 

Animal Drug Applications, approved by FDA, and 

they're also used in animal health care products 

that do not carry the NADA registration. They 

are used in new drug applications and drugs 

marketed for human consumption that may be also 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

administered to animals, such as aspirins. 

They're common in almost all therapeutic products, 

veterinarian use, and in some cases in that product 

is greater than the actual active substance in the 

dose.

They are derived from natural sources, 

or they could be synthetically manufactured by 

chemicals. They are derived from genetically 

modified organisms or they may be manufactured by 

other means. They range from simple whole food 

products to highly characterized organic and

inorganic molecules or to complex materials that 

are really difficult to fully characterize 

chemically.

So there's such a gamut, range of 

materials and uses for these excipients that it's 

really hard to categorize. We've got a lot of 

public comments on this. I really -- both written 

and public. Most of those public comments are 

stating that NOSB really needs to further address 

this issue of certifiers are interpreting them 

differently and allowing their clients accordingly 

different leeways in the use of excipients.

NOC did an incredible job. And if you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

have not read them, I would encourage you to read 

their summary of issues and inconsistencies among 

the certifiers and how to regulate the excipients. 

Some of those issues they identified were, what 

is the difference between direct and indirect, how 

are they used or why it's with the annotation 

because the annotation doesn't say whether it's 

direct food additives. It only says, approved by 

FDA as a food additive.

Accordingly, some certifying agents 

permit the use of indirect food additive in health 

care products that are intended for external 

application such as teat dips. Others don't 

permit them at all. Still others permit indirect 

food additives in all types of health care 

products, including oral and injectable formulas 

-- oral injectable formulas.

Injectable vitamins and minerals don't 

appear on the National List. But certifying 

agents appear to be consistently permitting their 

use with excipients as part of that formula. 

Further, there's confusion about whether 

excipients appear in FDA inactive database for 

NADAs and NDAs to be used in illegally marketed 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

drugs as well or if only those that are on that 

data list that contain excipients can be used.

Most of the certifiers say that they 

are using the best practices for common materials 

review issue document that the ACA has developed 

because of all of this confusion. And PCO made 

the statement, while perhaps not a large concern 

to the public, the discrepancy among certifiers 

on allowances of certain excipients, indirect food 

additives, grass, NADA inventory materials, does 

a disservice to our operations and allowance of 

these materials or not should be clarified.

A lot of the certifiers sent in their

numbers. PCO said they had 895 products approved 

that had excipients. QCS said they had 341 

livestock materials. MOSA says they list 560 

products with 4,839 uses of excipients. NOFA had 

94. WSDA said they had 67 producers that list 

excipients. So this is kind of a problem we 

probably need to address.

MR. ELA: Are there questions for Sue? 

Sue, I'm not seeing any questions. I think you 

pretty well summarized the issue there. It's a 

tough one.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. BAIRD: Yeah, it is a tough one, 

and the certifiers, a lot of them gave a method 

perhaps to identify just the problem children and 

maybe address those as individual problem children 

and kind of at least take a bite on the elephant 

that way.

MR. ELA: Makes sense. All right. 

I'm not seeing any questions, so we'll move on. 

Back to you, Sue.

MS. BAIRD: The next one is strychnine. 

Nate?

MR. POWELL-PALM: All right. So 

across the written comments, very consistent 

support for relisting. There were a few 

nonresponses, a few folks who just said that they 

had no comments from their constituents. But a 

really great point that was brought up, I think, 

the ripple effect for organics is that IOIA noted 

that strychnine, of course, moves up the food chain 

and can begin to poison anything that would consume 

a rodent that was intentionally controlled with 

strychnine but that it radiates out into the 

environment. And so it seemed fairly unanimous 

across comments that the community is in unison 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

on this.

MR. ELA: Are there any questions? I 

am not seeing any questions. So Sue, why don't 

we wrap back around to magnesium hydroxide. And 

if --

MR. BUIE: I'm ready.

MR. ELA: -- Jesse is still dealing 

with --

MR. BUIE: I'm ready.

MR. ELA: -- things in the clinic --

okay, great. Sue, back to you.

MS. BAIRD: Magnesium hydroxide, 

Jesse.

MR. BUIE: Okay. And I apologize for 

that. When you're available, they will come and 

get you. Magnesium hydroxide has been on the list 

for about over 15 years. Comments were 

overwhelmingly in favor of keeping it. The NOSB 

found magnesium hydroxide to be compliant with APA. 

And at that time, the past review, they did not 

recommend removing magnesium hydroxide from the 

list. Are there any questions?

MR. ELA: Are there any questions? I 

am not seeing any. So Sue, back to you.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

MS. BAIRD: I think that's it. So 

Steve, back to you.

MR. ELA: Back and forth. All right. 

That concludes all the Subcommittee 

presentations. Thank you to all. We're going to 

run just a little bit late here. I'm going to guess 

we're going to go about 20 minutes over our allotted 

time, but I think that's important given that we 

had some robust discussions on some of these more 

thorny topics.

And I certainly wanted to take this 

opportunity to have all the Board members and 

especially the new Board members but all of us have 

a chance to have those discussions. We've always 

had comments from the Board that it is so hard to 

get us all together in a transparent fashion and 

have discussions on some of these topics that are 

really thorny and that make us all use our expertise 

and our stakeholders' expertise to try and make 

the best decisions that we can, even though 

sometimes it makes us uncomfortable.

Michelle is going to put up our work 

agenda, and we're just going to go through that 

pretty quickly. And one of the things that I just 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

want to say, we appreciate our stakeholders so 

much. Before we go to the work agenda, Michelle 

just sent me a note that came in before we decided 

to go virtual, for Lynn Coody and noting that she 

had not missed a meeting since 1992, and she only 

missed that one because she was giving birth to 

her son, I believe, or her -- yeah, her son.

So pretty darn impressive. And Lynn, 

I know you're out there. I'm glad you didn't miss 

this meeting either. So Michelle, should we go 

on to the work agenda? And I've got to close a 

few windows here to be able to see it.

MS. ARSENAULT: It's projecting. So 

hopefully, you can see it.

MR. ELA: Yeah, I got all the chat and 

windows. So it's there. It's just a matter of 

seeing it. So why don't we go for stakeholders. 

Looks like under the Crops Subcommittee -- well, 

first of all, under CACS, we've got the fraud 

issues, integrity to the supply chain. And 

hopefully, we would love to see by the next meeting 

SOE out there. And we know everybody has been 

asking for that.

So that's a little -- that's on the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

to-do side depending on what goes on. And then 

crops, we've got the various petitions of paper 

pots, sodium carbonate lignin, chitosan, and 

biochar, that presumably, paper pots we already 

discussed and put it back to subcommittee, but that 

should go to a vote. The other three are newer 

petitions and we intend to go to a vote, but that 

could -- that will depend a little bit on TR 

requests coming in and further work by the 

subcommittee because those are fairly new 

petitions.

We also have liquid fish products, 

annotation on crops along with the biodegradable 

bio-based mulch. Those annotations I think at 

this point, it's our intent to come forward with 

recommendations. But of course, that can always 

change since those are fairly difficult topics. 

And then we have all the sunsets that we went 

through at this meeting collecting information. 

And we will go to a vote on those, of course, in 

the fall.

Finally, coming down into Handling, 

Handling has a bunch of petitions that we just 

received. And so low acyl gellan gum will probably 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

go to a vote along with whey protein concentrate. 

And then the CPC, I won't pronounce that. But 

I guess we'll have to learn that by the next 

meeting. That is one that will probably be a 

discussion. We'll be waiting on, I think, a TR 

on that as well. Can we go to the next slide?

Phosphoric acid and zein, however you 

say it, probably a discussion with documents, again 

in part due to TRs coming in. And then we have 

a bunch of new -- well, several topics that we 

discussed today as well, L-malic acid and ion 

exchange filtration. And so we'll probably go to 

a vote on those, but we'll see for sure.

A bunch of Handling -- sunset 

substances in Handling that we've discussed, those 

will go to a vote. And then finally in Livestock, 

we have the fenbendazole petition which should 

likely go to a vote. I think the TR is almost in 

our hands. We haven't seen it yet. And then the 

sunset materials in Livestock as well that will 

go to a vote in the fall.

Finally, Materials, Emily has talked 

a little bit about marine materials in organic 

crops. So we're hoping to get a document out on 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

that. I believe Mindee is going to take over 

excluded methods. That could be a vote or a 

discussion. We'll schedule it as a vote right now, 

but we know how sometimes those things go to a 

discussion document rather than a vote.

And as I mentioned earlier, we're 

hoping to have an expert panel for assessing 

cleaning and sanitation materials across all the 

committees. That panel was supposed to be at this 

meeting, but we delayed it to the next meeting since 

we felt pretty strongly that these kind of panels 

are much better in-person than virtual. We really 

-- and bringing those three people for that panel, 

we really want to make the most use of them that 

we can.

And we know that our organic committee 

has been wrestling with the sanitizer issue of what 

to accept, what shall we reject, and how should 

we make sure that we meet all the food safety 

requirements that are quite critical to our 

community and also remember that these are often 

biocides and that we also want to stay with the 

ideals of OFPA as well.

And then finally, the Materials 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Committee will bring forward the research 

priorities that we had a discussion document on 

at this meeting and finalize those with a vote. 

So that looks like what our work agenda will be 

coming up for the next year -- or next six months. 

Excuse me. Some of the committees have their work 

cut out for them with a lot of things on the agenda. 

And as you can see, while we only had one vote 

at this meeting to send the paper pots to the 

subcommittee next fall, the antithesis of that with 

tons of tons of votes.

And are there any questions from the 

Board on the work agenda? All right. I am not 

seeing any. As we wind up this meeting, I know 

we had a few technical glitches today with people 

getting dropped and coming back on. To all those 

that that happened to, thank you for being very 

seamless and in going back and forth. Hopefully 

you did not miss much.

And to the new members of the Board, 

as I stated at the start, I know that this is a 

difficult way to start a meeting. You're all 

experienced hands at this point. You did an 

excellent job on your presentations, and I hope 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

the nervousness that you expected before -- that 

you experienced before this meeting, know that we 

all share that same nervousness now and we're all 

in the same boat together and that you are no longer 

on the newbie list but are experienced. Asa, you 

had your hand up. Do you want to make a comment?

MR. BRADMAN: I just wanted to 

mentioned that I think for CPC, we'll have a 

discussion document in the fall and a TR. And that 

wouldn't be a petition vote until spring of 2021.

MR. ELA: Great. Thank you for that, 

Asa. Appreciate it. We will get that corrected. 

In closing, I also just want to thank the program. 

They, as always, do a lot of work and it's great 

to see them adding staff members and being able 

to -- especially in terms of the fraud but in terms 

of figuring out these other issues that are so 

important to us. There are a tremendous number 

of resources going in to supporting our organic 

community.

And in particular, Devon and Michelle 

and Dave and Jenny and Angie, thank you for all 

the background work and the figuring out of what 

platform and how to hold these virtual meetings. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

That is not an easy thing to do, and I know you 

all have been keeping things in the background 

going when sometimes there were some glitches that 

we never saw on the front. So just huge thanks 

for that, and I know you all have other things to 

do in your day jobs besides hold virtual meetings. 

So thank you for that support.

With that, I would like to -- I know 

Jenny always likes to have a little bit of time 

here at the end. So I will turn that over to Jenny, 

and then we will finish up the meeting after that. 

Jenny, do you want to make any comments?

DR. TUCKER: Thank you so much, Steve. 

And I'll keep this very short. There's just two 

main things. First of all, I want all of us to 

take a moment to thank you. And so Board members, 

if you are able to activate your cameras and do 

the double wave to Steve to applaud him and thank 

him for his terrific, terrific work.

So Steve, you have been amazing through 

this time, and we're so grateful to have you as 

such a calm, cool, collected guy. You've just done 

amazing throughout this meeting. And so thank 

you. I just want to make sure we said that and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

we all got a chance to applaud you.

And then finally, in closing, I did want 

to say -- I shared this with my own team last night 

-- that on a personal note, I live literally two 

blocks away from where we were supposed to meet 

in Crystal City. And I took a walk after the 

meeting last night, walked right by the hotel that 

we were supposed to meet in. And so I fully 

expected to walk to work for this particular event, 

and it did, in turn -- it turned out that I did, 

in fact, walk to work but under very different 

circumstances than I think any of us would have 

imagined.

I want to acknowledge everyone on the 

line today, Board members, audience members, 

staff, all of us are kind of living our own very, 

very unique stories in this particular moment in 

time. And yet we all still came together for this 

community ritual of collaborative engagement, and 

that just means the world to me. This has been 

a remarkable few days that I will not forget.

So thank you to all of you, in the 

audience, on the Board, Steve, my team. You are 

an amazing collective community, and I'm 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

incredibly grateful. So Steve, back to you.

MR. ELA: Thank you very much, Jenny. 

And I can only say again that the background staff 

makes this all easy. To the Board, like I said 

at the start, I know that we all have distractions 

and you've handled that very well. And we'll keep 

our fingers strongly crossed for an in-person Board 

meeting this fall. I know things will continue 

to adapt and change as they still are very rapidly.

With that, I would like to read one 

poem, and now I can't remember I got it from Gary 

Snyder or Wendell Berry. I was looking at both. 

They're two of my favorite authors. I believe 

this is Wendell Berry, but I could be wrong. But 

I would like to read it, and then we will close 

the meeting.

It is, the rising hills, the slopes, 

of statistics lie before us. The steep climb of 

everything, going up, up, as we all go down. In 

the next century or the one beyond that, they say, 

are valleys, pastures, we can meet there in peace 

if we make it. To climb these coming crests one 

word to you, to you and your children: stay 

together, learn the flowers, go light.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

And I think that applies very well to 

statistics and working for our children and 

grandchildren and trying to make the best decisions 

we know in terms of resiliency and climate change 

and viruses and moving forward. So with that, 

unless there's anything else from any of the Board 

members to add, I will declare this meeting 

adjourned and we will hope to see you in Cedar 

Rapids next fall.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 3:52 p.m.)