National Organic Standards Board

Policy Development Subcommittee

Miscellaneous updates to the NOSB Policy and Procedures Manual (PPM) 

August 13, 2013

Introduction 

The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) Policy Development Subcommittee (PDS) proposes to 

update and revise various sections of the Policy and Procedures Manual (PPM), including the Advisory 

Board Specialist job duties, election of officers, task force appointments, procedures for completing 

Subcommittee proposals and miscellaneous procedures. 

Background

The NOSB PPM is a guide meant to assist the Board members with operational procedures, roles, and 

responsibilities. The Policy Development Subcommittee revises the PPM as necessary to reflect 

changes in procedure and to provide clarification. During a comprehensive examination of the current 

PPM, several sections were identified as candidates for updating, and since the updates were not of a 

substantive nature, the PDS, in collaboration with the NOSB Vice Chair, chose to combine these 

revisions into one project. 

Relevant Areas in the Rule

The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, 7 USC 6518 (a), directed the Secretary of Agriculture to 

establish the National Organic Standards Board and described its composition, authority and duties.

Discussion

The PPM contains guidance about the Board’s standard operating procedures and policies, and the 

Policy Development Subcommittee in collaboration with the NOSB Vice Chair is charged with its 

ongoing review and maintenance. The PDS identified several sections in the PPM in need of revision 

based on minor changes in operating procedure, the need for clarity, or the need for copy editing. The 

PDS revised the following sections/topics in the July 25, 2013 version of the PPM: 

 

Section III, page 11 - Advisory Board Specialist job duties. The Advisory Board Specialist job duties 

were clarified, and made distinct from those of the Designated Federal Officer, as these two positions 

are not necessarily staffed by the same person 

Section III, page 12 - Election of Officers. The language regarding consecutive officer terms not 

being recommended was unclear, and was clarified by adding the term “historically”. e.g. “Historically, 

more than two consecutive terms in any given officer position has not been recommended” 

Section IV, page 16 - Task force appointments. The paragraph describing task forces was reworded 

slightly and reformatted with a bulleted list to make it easier to read. The original paragraph read as 

follows: 

As determined by the Board or Executive Committee, task forces shall be appointed to explore 

specific issues and present draft recommendations to the Board or to a committee. Task forces 

may include non-Board members of the public. Each task force shall include at least one 

member of the NOSB. Minutes shall be taken of task force meetings. Each task force shall 

submit a final report to the Board. Each task force shall be disbanded when its work has 

concluded or when the Board determines the task force is no longer necessary. 

The new paragraph reads as follows: 

Fall 2013 69 of 268
As determined by the Board or Executive Subcommittee and with approval/support from the NOP, 

task forces shall be appointed to explore specific issues and present draft proposals to the Board

or to a Subcommittee, and may include non-Board members. Each task force shall:

• Include at least one member of the NOSB

• Record and maintain meeting minutes 

• Submit a final report to the Board

• Disband when its work has concluded or when the Board or NOP determines the 

task force is no longer necessary.

Section V, page 20 - Procedures for completing Subcommittee proposals. The procedures were 

clarified by adding language about who was responsible for what action. For example, instead of “The 

draft proposal or discussion document is posted for public comment”, the sentence now reads “The 

NOP will post the proposal or discussion document for public comment” 

The original paragraph read as follows: 

PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 

Developing committee recommendations follows these broad steps: 

1. The committee prepares a recommendation or discussion document as agreed to in the 

committee work plan (see p. 32 PPM). 

2. The recommendation or discussions document is posted for public comment. 

3. During the Board meeting, the committee presents its recommendation for discussion by the 

full Board. 

4. At any point in the process prior to the Board’s vote on the status of the recommendation, the 

presenting committee may convene and vote to withdraw its recommendation, based on 

approval of this action by the majority of the members of the committee. 

5. Once presented, the Board votes on the committee recommendation. 

In order to be considered a voting item, all recommendations must be submitted to the NOP at 

least forty five (45) days prior to a scheduled NOSB meeting. This time is needed in order to 

allow the Program to publish a meeting notice and allow for public comment. 

The new paragraph reads as follows: 

PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING SUBCOMMITTEE PROPOSALS AND DISCUSSION 

DOCUMENTS

1. The Subcommittee drafts the proposal or discussion document based on workplan items 

(See Section V for detailed discussion about workplans)

2. The draft proposal or discussion document is voted upon by the Subcommittee members in 

order for it to pass from the Subcommittee to the full Board

3. The draft proposal or discussion document is posted for public comment 

4. At any point in the process prior to the Board’s vote a Subcommittee may convene and, by 

simple majority, vote to withdraw its proposal.

Fall 2013 70 of 268
5. During a subsequent Board meeting, the Subcommittee presents the proposals and 

discussion documents, as well as a summary of public comments, for discussion by the full 

Board.

In order to be considered for a vote during an NOSB meeting, all proposals must be voted on by 

the Subcommittee and submitted to the NOP at least forty five (45) days prior to a scheduled 

NOSB meeting. This will allow the Program to publish a meeting notice and accept public 

comment. 

Section VII, page 26 - Misc procedures. Several sentences in this section were rewritten for clarity 

and syntax. “Subcommittees identify the possible need for a presentation at the NOSB meeting. NOP 

may also identify needs for presentations and candidate speakers”, was changed to “Subcommittees, 

the NOSB or the NOP may identify the need for presentations and candidate speakers regarding 

subjects of interest or concern to be addressed at NOSB meetings”. The sentence “Invited speakers 

must provide objective information” was struck from this section as the NOP noted that there are 

situations in which speakers are invited because they hold a differing view. 

Summary of Recommendation 

The Policy Development Subcommittee (PDS) proposes to update and revise the sections described 

above in the PPM to reflect minor changes in operating procedure, and improve clarity through 

formatting and copy editing: Advisory Board Specialist job duties, election of officers, task force 

appointments, procedures for completing Subcommittee proposals and miscellaneous procedures. 

Committee Vote

Motion: To accept the proposed amendments to the Policy and Procedures Manual described above.

Motion by: John Foster

Seconded by: C Reuben Walker

Yes: 4 No: 1 Abstain: 0 Absent: 1 Recuse: 0

Approved by Colehour Bondera, Subcommittee Chair, to transmit to NOSB August 13, 2013

Fall 2013 71 of 268
 NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS BOARD 

 

POLICY AND PROCEDURES 

MANUAL

 

 

 

Adopted October 19, 2002

*DRAFT* Revision August 13, 2013. 

Administrative updates are described in the accompanying proposal and are incorporated into 

the draft PPM presented here. 

Miscellaneous updates are described in the accompanying proposal and are also illustrated in 

the draft PPM as follows: Text highlighted in yellow and struck out indicates original text. Text 

highlighted in green indicates the new proposed text.

Previous revisions: August 18, 2005; March 29, 2007; November 30, 2007; May 22, 2008; November 19, 2008; 

May 6, 2009; November 9, 2009; April 29, 2010; October 28, 2010; April 29, 2011; December 2, 2011; August 13, 

2013.

Fall 2013 72 of 268
NOSB POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 4

SECTION I.................................................................................................................................................................. 5

NOSB VISION STATEMENT ................................................................................................................................ 5

NOSB STATUTORY MISSION ............................................................................................................................. 5

NOSB MISSION STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................. 5

DUTIES OF THE BOARD AND OFFICERS.......................................................................................................... 5

Duty of Care..................................................................................................................................................... 6

Duty of Loyalty ................................................................................................................................................ 6

Duty of Obedience .......................................................................................................................................... 7

PROFESSIONAL AND ETHICAL STANDARDS............................................................................................................... 7

• Professional Conduct............................................................................................................................ 7

• Conflict of Interest.................................................................................................................................. 8

COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD.................................................................................................................... 9

BOARD MEMBER STANDARDS......................................................................................................................... 9

CONDUCTING BUSINESS................................................................................................................................... 9

SECTION III..............................................................................................................................................................11

ROLE OF THE DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICER (DFO)/ADVISORY BOARD SPECIALIST (ABS) .......... 11

NOSB OFFICER RESPONSIBILITIES............................................................................................................... 12

ELECTION OF OFFICERS ................................................................................................................................. 13

EXECUTIVE SUBCOMMITTEE.......................................................................................................................... 14

BOARD MEETINGS............................................................................................................................................ 14

SECTION IV .............................................................................................................................................................15

BOARD SUBCOMMITTEES............................................................................................................................... 15

STANDING SUBCOMMITTEES......................................................................................................................... 15

Certification, Accreditation, and Compliance Subcommittee (CACS) .................................................... 15

Crops Subcommittee (CS) ........................................................................................................................... 15

Handling Subcommittee (HS) ...................................................................................................................... 15

Livestock Subcommittee (LS)...................................................................................................................... 16

Materials Subcommittee (MS)...................................................................................................................... 16

Policy Development Subcommittee (PDS)................................................................................................. 16

TASK FORCES................................................................................................................................................... 16

AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES.............................................................................................................................. 17

SECTION V ..............................................................................................................................................................18

DUTIES OF SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRS............................................................................................................. 18

DUTIES OF SUBCOMMITTEE VICE CHAIRS ................................................................................................... 18

TRANSITION OF SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRS, VICE CHAIRS, AND MEMBERS (NEW AND CONTINUING).. 18

PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING SUBCOMMITTEE PROPOSALS AND DISCUSSION DOCUMENTS ............. 20

Guidelines for Writing Subcommittee Proposals and Discussion Documents ..................................... 21

Presenting Subcommittee Proposals and Discussion Documents at NOSB Meetings ........................ 21

NOSB-NOP COLLABORATION ........................................................................................................................ 21

SECTION VI .............................................................................................................................................................24

NOSB PROCEDURES.............................................................................................................................................24

SUBCOMMITTEE WORKPLANS....................................................................................................................... 24

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURES................................................................................................................... 26

Surveys Conducted on Behalf of NOSB Subcommittees......................................................................... 26

Public Comment at NOSB Meetings:.......................................................................................................... 27

SECTION VIII ...........................................................................................................................................................29

NOSB PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIC PRODUCTION AND HANDLING .............................................................. 29

Fall 2013 73 of 268
NOSB GUIDANCE ON COMPATIBILITY WITH A SYSTEM OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND

CONSISTENCY WITH ORGANIC FARMING AND HANDLING ........................................................................ 31

MATERIALS REVIEW PROCESS...................................................................................................................... 32

Evaluation procedures for substances petitioned for addition to, or removal from, the National List32

Definitions...................................................................................................................................................... 32

Phase 1: Receipt of petition and examination of petition for completeness and eligibility

........................................................................................................................................................................ 32

Phase 2: Determine whether or not a third party technical review is required...................................... 33

Phase 3: Evaluation by a Third Party Expert ............................................................................................ 33

Phase 4: Sufficiency Determination........................................................................................................... 33

Phase 5: Action by the Subcommittee conducting the review (Crops, Livestock or Handling) ......... 34

Phase 6: Action by Full NOSB.................................................................................................................... 34

TECHNICAL REVIEWS...................................................................................................................................... 35

WITHDRAWAL OF A PETITION BY THE PETITIONER................................................................................... 36

TECHNICAL ADVISORY PANEL (TAP) CONTRACT PROCEDURES ................................................................. 36

PRIORITY OF PETITIONS GUIDELINE............................................................................................................. 37

• BOARD PROCEDURES FOR THE MATERIALS’ REVIEW PROCESS-PETITIONS .................................. 38

BOARD PROCEDURES FOR THE MATERIALS’ REVIEW PROCESS - SUNSET............................................. 38

Chart 1: Sunset Review – NOP Posts an ANPR......................................................................................... 40

Chart 2: Sunset Review – NOP Collects and Forwards Public Comment to the NOSB ........................ 40

Chart 3: Sunset Review – NOSB Subcommittee Reviews Evidence for Delisting................................. 40

Chart 4: Sunset Review................................................................................................................................ 41

Final Rule Process........................................................................................................................................ 41

HANDLING TECHNICAL ERRORS AFTER AN ITEM HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER .. 41

APPENDICES AND RESOURCES..........................................................................................................................43

APPENDIX A - DECISION MAKING GUIDELINES FOR THE NOSB....................................................................43

APPENDIX B - FACA FACTS................................................................................................................................ 44

APPENDIX C - PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE AT A GLANCE ...................................................................... 45

APPENDIX D - BASIC CHEMISTRY...................................................................................................................... 46

APPENDIX E - FORMS............................................................................................................................................51

APPENDIX F - INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN A PETITION......................................................................53

APPENDIX G - TECHNICAL ADVISORY PANEL (TAP) CONTRACT PROCEDURES........................................57

STATEMENT OF WORK........................................................................................................................................... 57

AGENCY NEED ...................................................................................................................................................... 57

Phase 1: Data Gathering and Compilation (120 days) ............................................................................. 59

Phase 2: Evaluation against Criteria (100 days)....................................................................................... 60

Phase 3: Recommendation (42 days) ........................................................................................................ 60

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD....................................................................................................................... 60

OTHER EVALUATION FACTORS............................................................................................................................... 61

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................................................. 61

APPENDIX H - RESEARCH PRIORITIES FRAMEWORK .....................................................................................62

Fall 2013 74 of 268
INTRODUCTION

 

The primary roles and duties of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) members 

include but are not limited to: 

• Serve as a link to the organic community

• Advise the NOP on the implementation of OFPA 

• Approve all materials which appear on the National List

• Protect and defend the integrity of organic standards

Board members are entrusted with the responsibility to act as fiduciaries to act in the best 

interests of all members of the organic community and the public at large. The Board’s 

success relies upon the ability to understand each other’s respective roles, and to develop 

successful working relationships. 

This manual is designed to assist the Board in its responsibilities. New Board members are 

encouraged to review this manual in depth as well as to become familiar with the Organic 

Foods Production Act (OFPA), 7 CFR Part 205, and the NOSB New Member Guide. Existing 

members are advised to periodically review the contents to refresh their understanding of the 

Board’s role and their duties. 

 

New policies and revisions to existing policies and procedures will be incorporated into the 

NOSB Policy and Procedures Manual periodically, as determined by the Board. 

 

 

Fall 2013 75 of 268
SECTION I 

 

NOSB VISION STATEMENT 

 

The NOSB’s vision is an agricultural community rooted in organic principles and values that 

instills trust among consumers, producers, processors, retailers and other stakeholders. 

Consistent and sustainable organic standards guard and advance the integrity of organic 

products and practices. 

 

NOSB STATUTORY MISSION 

 

“To assist in the development of standards for substances to be used in organic production 

and to advise the Secretary on any other aspects of the implementation of this title.” (OFPA, 

Sec 2119 (a))

NOSB MISSION STATEMENT 

 

To provide effective and constructive advice, clarification and guidance to the Secretary of 

Agriculture concerning the National Organic Program (NOP), and its implementation, and to 

represent the consensus of the organic community. 

To carry out the mission, the Board will: 

 

• Assist in the development and maintenance of organic standards and regulations 

• Review petitioned materials for inclusion on, or deletion from, the National List of Approved 

and Prohibited Substances (National List)

• Recommend changes to the National List 

• Communicate with the organic community to provide timely information concerning the 

NOP, making reasonable use of a variety of communication channels, including but not 

limited to conducting public meetings and soliciting and receiving public comments.

• Communicate and coordinate with, and provide support to, the NOP staff

DUTIES OF THE BOARD AND OFFICERS 

 

The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA) defines the following specific 

responsibilities for the Board starting at Sec 2119(k) 

 

(1) IN GENERAL -The Board shall provide recommendations to the Secretary regarding the 

implementation of this title. 

(2) NATIONAL LIST -The Board shall develop the proposed National List or proposed 

amendments to the National List for submission to the Secretary in accordance with section 

2118. 

(3) TECHNICAL ADVISORY PANELS -The Board shall convene technical advisory panels to 

provide scientific evaluation of the materials considered for inclusion on the National List. 

Such panels may include experts in agronomy, entomology, health sciences and other 

Fall 2013 76 of 268
relevant disciplines. 

(4) SPECIAL REVIEW OF BOTANICAL PESTICIDES -The Board shall, prior to the 

establishment of the National List, review all botanical pesticides used in agricultural 

production and consider whether any such botanical pesticide should be included in the list 

of prohibited natural substances. 

(5) PRODUCT RESIDUE TESTING -The Board shall advise the Secretary concerning the 

testing of organically produced agricultural products for residues caused by unavoidable 

residual environmental contamination. 

(6) EMERGENCY SPRAY PROGRAMS -The Board shall advise the Secretary concerning 

rules for exemptions from specific requirements of this title (except the provisions of section 

2112) with respect to agricultural products produced on certified organic farms if such farms 

are subject to a Federal or State emergency pest or disease treatment program. 

(Additional Duties included in OFPA but not limited to): 

6518(n) PETITIONS. The Board shall establish procedures under which persons may 

petition the Board for the purpose of evaluating substances for inclusion on the National 

List. 

6509(d) (2) STANDARDS. The National Organic Standards Board shall recommend to the 

Secretary standards in addition to those in paragraph (1) for the care of livestock to ensure 

that such livestock is organically produced. 

 

To fulfill their responsibilities, Board members agree to adhere to the following Duties as 

 described in this Manual--Duty of Care, Duty of Loyalty, and Duty of Obedience. 

Duty of Care 

The Duty of Care calls upon a member to participate in the decisions of the Board and to be 

informed as to the data relevant to such decisions. In essence, the Duty of Care requires that a 

member: 

• Be reasonably informed - It is the duty of all Board members to seek and study the 

information needed to make a reasoned decision and/or recommendation on all business 

brought before the Board. The NOP will provide some of that information, but other 

information must be developed from independent sources. 

• Participate in decisions - Board members are bound by responsibility to be active 

participants in decision making. Absence from a meeting is no protection from the 

responsibility for decisions made at the meeting. 

• Make decisions with the care of an ordinary prudent person in a similar position - The law 

requires Board members to exercise the judgment of an ordinary prudent person who may 

be faced with a similar issue. 

Duty of Loyalty 

The Duty of Loyalty requires Board members to exercise their power in the interest of the 

organic community and the public at large, and not in their own interest or the interest of 

another entity or person. In dispatching their Duty of Loyalty, Board members must: 

• Address conflicts of interest - Board members bring to the NOSB particular areas of 

expertise based upon their personal and business interests in organic production and 

Fall 2013 77 of 268
marketing. Because Board members may have interests in conflict with those of the public 

they must be conscious of the potential for such conflicts and act with candor and care. 

Board members must abide by the NOSB conflict of interest policy. 

• Recognize corporate opportunity - Before a Board member votes upon an issue in which 

they have a direct financial interest, that Board member must disclose the transaction to the 

Board in sufficient detail and adequate time to enable the Board to act, or decline to act, in 

regard to such transaction. 

Duty of Obedience 

Board members are bound to obey the tenants of the laws and regulations governing organic 

production, processing and marketing. To this effect, Board members must: 

• Act within the requirements of the law - Board members must uphold all state and federal 

statutes, including the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA – 5 U.S.C. App. 2 et seq.) 

• Adhere to the responsibilities of the Board as defined by the Organic Foods Production Act 

of 1990 

• Adhere to the requirements specified in the NOSB Policy and Procedures Manual 

 

Professional and Ethical Standards 

As appointees of the Secretary, NOSB members must maintain high professional and ethical 

standards both within and outside of the NOSB. Areas of particular concern include 

professional conduct and conflict of interest. 

• Professional Conduct 

NOSB members shall:

o Observe ethical principles above private gain in the service of public trust

 

o Put forth an honest effort in the performance of their NOSB duties

 

o Make no commitments or promises of any kind purporting to bind the Government 

o Act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any organization or individual

 

o Along with task force members, refrain from engaging in any financial transactions using 

nonpublic information*, must not allow the improper use of nonpublic information to 

further his/her own private interest or that of another, whether through advice or 

recommendation, or allow the unauthorized disclosure of nonpublic information 

 *Nonpublic information is defined as information that a Board member gains by reason 

of participation in the NOSB and that he/she knows, or reasonably should be expected 

to know, has not been made available to the general public. This includes information 

Fall 2013 78 of 268
that is “routinely exempt from disclosure in 5 U.S.C. 552 (Freedom of Information Act) or 

otherwise protected from disclosure by statute, Executive Order or regulation; is 

designated as confidential by the agency or program; or has not actually been 

disseminated to the general public and is not authorized to be made available to the 

public upon request.” 

o Along with task force members shall keep confidential all information identified by 

petitioners as confidential business information. 

o Speak with one voice to the maximum extent possible. Although there may be 

disagreements, NOSB members have the responsibility to support the integrity of the 

process, whether or not they agree with the final outcome. While NOSB members retain 

the right to express minority opinions, the public airing of dissension could strain 

interpersonal relationships and create distrust and conflict among NOSB members. 

Such stresses could undermine the NOSB’s ability to effectively carry out its role as a 

governmental advisory board 

o Represent the segments of the population from which they were selected, while also 

representing the greater good of the population as a whole

 

• Conflict of Interest 

The NOSB recognizes that members have been specifically appointed to the Board to 

provide advice and counsel to the Secretary concerning policies related to the development 

of organic standards and the creation and amendment of the National List. NOSB members 

are appointed because they have professional expertise that enables them to advise the 

Secretary. This professional expertise may, at times, present a perceived conflict of 

interest. To prevent overt advocacy for direct financial gain and the appearance of selfinterest or the appearance of wrongful activity, the NOSB has adopted the following conflict 

of interest policy. 

 

Be it resolved by the National Organic Standards Board: 

Members of the Board shall refrain from taking any official Board action from which that 

Board member is or would derive direct financial gain. Board members shall disclose their 

interest to the Board and the public, when they or their affiliated business stand to gain 

from a vote, which they cast in the course of Board business. Under certain circumstances, 

the Board may determine whether it is appropriate for the member to vote. 

Members of the Board shall refrain from promoting for consideration any material, process 

or practice, for which the member is or would derive direct financial gain arising out of such 

Board action. The act of promoting such material, process or practice shall include private 

discussion with members of the Board advocating the value of the material, public

discussion and/or written advocacy. 

A "direct financial gain" is defined as monetary consideration, contractual benefit or the 

expectation of future monetary gain to a Board member, including but not limited to, 

financial gain from parties who manufacture, distribute or hold exclusive title to a formula 

Fall 2013 79 of 268
for a material or product, process or practice.

SECTION II

 

COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD 6518 (b) 

The Board shall be composed of 15 members, of which: 

(1) four shall be individuals who own or operate an organic farming operation; 

(2) two shall be individuals who own or operate an organic handling operation; 

(3) one shall be an individual who owns or operates a retail establishment with significant 

trade in organic products; 

(4) three shall be individuals with expertise in areas of environmental protection and resource 

conservation; 

(5) three shall be individuals who represent public interest or consumer interest groups; 

(6) one shall be an individual with expertise in the fields of toxicology, ecology, or 

biochemistry; and 

(7) one shall be an individual who is a certifying agent as identified under section 2116 of 

OFPA. [§2119(b)] 

BOARD MEMBER STANDARDS 

• Participate in meetings - Members must make a commitment to attend meetings of the 

Board. 

• Serve on Subcommittees, as assigned - Each member must be willing to serve on 

Subcommittees as assigned by the Chair, and to participate in the work of those 

Subcommittees. 

• Be informed about Board business - Board members are expected to seek and study the 

information needed to make reasoned decisions and/or recommendations on all business 

brought before the Board. 

• Fully disclose any conflicts of interest - Members having any commercial or immediate 

family interests that pose a potential or perceived conflict of interest must disclose that 

conflict to the Board and abide by any decision of the Board regarding the situation. 

CONDUCTING BUSINESS 

• Quorum - As specified in OFPA, a majority of the members of the Board shall constitute a 

quorum for the purpose of conducting business. [§2119(h)] A majority of the members of a 

Subcommittee, including the Executive Subcommittee, shall constitute a quorum for the 

purpose of conducting business. 

• Decisive votes - As specified in OFPA, two-thirds of the votes cast at a meeting of the 

Board at which a quorum is present shall be decisive of any motion [§2119(i)]. Following 

Robert’s Rules of Order, all abstentions will be recorded as such and will not be included as

Fall 2013 80 of 268
part of the total vote cast. Similarly, all Board members who recuse themselves due to 

conflicts of interest, or are absent, shall be recorded as such and their votes will not be 

counted towards the total number of votes cast. Both abstentions and recusals will be 

considered in order to establish a quorum.

# Votes Cast # Recusals and 

Abstentions 2/3 Majority*

15 0 10

14 1 10

13 2 9

12 3 8

11 4 8

10 5 7

9 6 6

8 7 6

Fall 2013 81 of 268
SECTION III

 

ROLE OF THE DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICER (DFO)/ADVISORY BOARD SPECIALIST

(ABS)

The Designated Federal Officer assigned to the National Organic Standards Board and its 

Subcommittees, under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (U.S.C. App.2) and its 

implementing regulations (41 CFR Part 101-6.10), is the National Organic Program’s Advisory 

Board Specialist (ABS). The position of Advisory Board Specialist (ABS) (formerly the 

Executive Director) was added in 2005 to facilitate contact between the NOP and the NOSB. 

Advisory Board Specialist duties include but are not limited to:

• Ensuring that all FACA and OFPA requirements are implemented. 

o Managing calendars and workplans to facilitate Subcommittee and Board activities

o Arranging, facilitating, and documenting the NOSB Subcommittee conference calls

o Ensuring Board members have all necessary materials and information to provide 

informed, structured and timely recommendations to the NOP 

o Conducting meeting planning activities for the semi-annual Board meetings, 

including preparation of Federal Register notices and press releases, and facilitation 

of public comments 

• Approving and calling the meeting of the NOSB

• Approving the Semi-annual meeting agenda

• Attending the meetings

• Adjourning the meetings when such adjournment is in the public interest

• Chairing the meeting when directed by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary’s 

designee

o Coordinating the Board nomination and chartering process

o Facilitating training of Board members

o Managing information reporting and communication between the NOSB and NOP

o Administering and maintaining a year-round public communication mechanism 

ROLE OF THE Designated Federal Officer (DFO)/Advisory Board Specialist (ABS)

A Designated Federal Officer is assigned to the National Organic Standards Board and its 

Subcommittees under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (U.S.C. App.2) and its 

implementing regulations (41 CFR Part 101-6.10)., The DFO’s duties include but are not 

limited to: 

• Approving and calling the meeting of the NOSB

• Approving the Semi-annual meeting agenda

• Attending the meetings

• Adjourning the meetings when such adjournment is in the public interest

• Chairing the meeting when directed by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary’s 

designee

Fall 2013 82 of 268
The position of Advisory Board Specialist (ABS) (formerly the Executive Director) was added in 

2005 to facilitate communication and collaboration between the NOP and the NOSB. Advisory 

Board Specialist duties include but are not limited to:

• Ensuring that all FACA and OFPA requirements are implemented. 

• Managing calendars and workplans to facilitate Subcommittee and Board activities

• Arranging, facilitating, and documenting the NOSB Subcommittee conference calls

• Ensuring Board members have all necessary materials and information to provide 

informed, structured and timely recommendations to the NOP 

• Conducting meeting planning activities for the semi-annual Board meetings, including 

preparation of Federal Register notices and press releases, and facilitation of public 

comments 

• Coordinating the Board nomination and chartering process

• Facilitating training of Board members

• Managing information reporting and communication between the NOSB and NOP

• Administering and maintaining a year-round public communication mechanism 

Please note: The DFO and ABS may or may not be the same person as designated by the 

NOP

NOSB OFFICER RESPONSIBILITIES 

Three principal officers – Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary – guide the Board. 

Chair 

The Chair is responsible for ensuring the integrity of the Board process, effectiveness of 

meetings and adherence to Board policies and procedures. The Chair: 

• Schedules meetings of the Executive Subcommittee, in cooperation with the NOP

• Serves as a member of the Executive Subcommittee 

• Convenes and facilitate Executive Subcommittee meetings 

• Convenes and preside over NOSB meetings 

• Participates in the administrative team meetings

• Drafts NOSB meeting agendas in consultation with Subcommittee chairs and NOP staff 

• Reviews Subcommittee work plans

• Reviews NOSB meeting minutes for accuracy 

• Assists with the annual election of NOSB officers and announces the new officers

 

Vice Chair 

The Vice Chair acts in the absence of the Chair, and:

• Serves as a member of the Executive Subcommittee

• Participates in the administrative team meetings

• Serves as a member of the Policy Development Subcommittee

• Works collaboratively with the PDS’s members on the maintenance of the Policy and 

Procedures Manual

Secretary 

The Secretary works with the Advisory Board Specialist to maintain the integrity of all legal and 

governing documents of the Board. The Secretary: 

Fall 2013 83 of 268
• Serves as a member of the Executive Subcommittee

• Participates in the administrative team meetings

• Ensures that official NOSB transcripts are posted for the public 

• Records all Board member votes at NOSB meetings and circulates that record to NOSB 

members for approval 

• Reviews all additions to the Federal Register to report any unexplained discrepancies 

between Board recommendations and proposed rules published in the Federal Register 

• Transfers custody of the Board’s voting records to the incoming Secretary

• Assist with the annual election of NOSB officers 

The Secretary may delegate tasks to others, but retains responsibility for the official record. 

Administrative Team 

The Administrative Team consists of the Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary and DFO/ABS. This 

group is responsible for coordinating logistics and operations of the Board. The Administrative 

team will meet via teleconference on an as-needed basis, to be determined by the 

Administrative Team. 

ELECTION OF OFFICERS 

 

A. NOMINATIONS 

• Any NOSB member is eligible for consideration for any officer position

• A Board member may nominate his or her self or may be nominated by another member of 

the Board 

• Should the Chair, Vice Chair, or Secretary resign or fail to serve the full term, the Executive 

Subcommittee shall appoint an interim officer. The interim officer shall serve in that 

capacity until the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board, during which an election 

will be held to fill the remainder of the term

• Members may serve more than one consecutive term in an officer position. However, more 

than two consecutive terms are not recommended. 

• Members may serve more than one term in any officer position; However, historically more 

than two consecutive terms in any given officer position has not been recommended. 

B. VOTING SCHEDULE 

• Officers shall be elected for terms of one year by majority vote at the fall Board meeting. 

• Newly elected officers will assume their positions at the conclusion of the fall Board 

meeting, and assume the responsibilities thereof at that time

• Outgoing Board officers will assist the incoming officers in the transition into their new roles, 

to be completed no later than January 23rd of the following year.

C. ELIGIBILITY TO VOTE

• Only NOSB Board Members present are eligible to vote for nominated officers

• Board members are entitled to cast one vote for each officer position

Fall 2013 84 of 268
D. COUNTING OF VOTES

• Voting will be by secret ballot immediately following nominations for each office

• Ballots for officers will be cast in the following order:

1. Chair

2. Vice Chair

3. Secretary

• The ballots will be counted for one office and the Chair will announce the tally before the 

next office is opened for nominations

• The Secretary and NOP representative will prepare and distribute the ballots, then collect 

them after each vote 

• The Chair will tally the votes after each officer nomination and the Secretary will verify the 

results 

• The candidate receiving the greatest number of votes will be elected

• In the event of a tie there will be a revote until a nominee obtains a majority. All nominees 

will be included in the revote or may be given the opportunity to withdraw at their discretion 

• Votes will remain confidential, and ballots will be disposed of by the Chair or Secretary 

EXECUTIVE SUBCOMMITTEE

 

The Executive Subcommittee of the NOSB shall be comprised of the Chair, Vice Chair,

Secretary, and the chairs of each of the standing Subcommittees. The Executive 

Subcommittee, the DFO/ABS, and the NOP Deputy Administrator, shall meet monthly, as 

needed, or as called by the Chair, and shall conduct business on behalf of the Board. Only the 

full Board may take decisive action on guidance and other policy proposals from 

Subcommittees, including the status of materials proposed for addition or deletion on the 

National List. The Executive Subcommittee will provide guidance and feedback to the 

Subcommittees on their proposed work plans.

 

BOARD MEETINGS 

 

All Board meetings, assembled for the purpose of making recommendations to the NOP, are 

subject to FACA (see appendix B for FACA facts) and as such must be open to the public and 

must meet public notification requirements. Not all meetings are subject to FACA and do not 

require public notification. Examples of these exempted meetings include: Subcommittee calls, 

assemblies for completing work, planning retreats, training or sharing information. Full Board 

conference calls are not currently practiced. The date and location of in-person Board 

Meetings-currently held twice each year in spring and fall), will to the extent possible, be set at 

the mutual scheduling convenience of the NOSB and the NOP. 

Board actions include but are not limited to; adoption of the proposal as presented by the 

Subcommittee, amendment and then adoption of the proposal, rejection of the proposal, or 

referral of the proposal back to Subcommittee for further development. 

The Board, through the Board Chair, communicates its recommendations to the NOP using 

standardized forms and procedures.

 

Fall 2013 85 of 268
SECTION IV

BOARD SUBCOMMITTEES

 

Subcommittees play an important role in administering the Board’s responsibilities to make 

informed decisions. The Subcommittees are responsible for conducting research and 

analyses, and drafting discussion documents, guidance documents or proposals to be 

considered by the full Board. Except for the Executive Subcommittee, no Subcommittees are 

authorized to act in place of the Board. Subcommittees are empowered to analyze information 

and bring draft proposals to the Board for action. 

 

Subcommittee chairs are appointed by the Board Chair. The current standing Subcommittees 

are: 

• Certification, Accreditation, and Compliance (CACS)

• Crops (CS)

• Handling (HS)

• Livestock (LS)

• Materials (MS)

• Policy Development (PDS)

The Livestock, Crops, and Handling Subcommittees will each have two Co-Chairs. One will

guide all Subcommittee discussion and will oversee the Subcommittee’s workplan. The other 

will be responsible for the Subcommittee’s consideration of materials and will serve as the 

liaison to the Materials Subcommittee. 

 

STANDING SUBCOMMITTEES 

 

Certification, Accreditation, and Compliance Subcommittee (CACS) The Certification, 

Accreditation, and Compliance Subcommittee drafts proposals for consideration by the Board 

to provide guidance, clarification or proposed standards of the certification, accreditation and 

compliance sections of the organic regulations [7CFR Part 205] and OFPA. The CACS 

occasionally works with other Subcommittees to develop joint proposals where certification 

and compliance issues are involved

 

Crops Subcommittee (CS) The Crops Subcommittee drafts proposals for consideration by 

the Board to provide guidance, clarification or proposed standards of the crop production 

section of the organic regulations as contained in [7CFR Part 205] and OFPA. The CS reviews 

petitions, substances scheduled to sunset, technical advisory panel reports, and public 

comments concerning materials used for crop production which have been requested for 

addition to or removal from the National List. The CS occasionally works with other 

Subcommittees to develop joint proposals where crop issues are involved.

 

Handling Subcommittee (HS) The Handling Subcommittee drafts proposals for consideration 

by the Board to provide guidance, clarification or proposed standards of the handling and 

labeling sections of the organic regulations as contained in [7CFR Part 205] and OFPA. The 

HS reviews petitions, substances scheduled to sunset, technical advisory panel reports and 

public comments concerning materials used for processing and handling which have been 

requested for addition to or removal from the National List. The HS occasionally works with 

other Subcommittees to develop joint proposals where handling issues are involved.

Fall 2013 86 of 268
Livestock Subcommittee (LS) The Livestock Subcommittee drafts proposals for 

consideration by the Board to provide guidance, clarification or proposed standards of the 

livestock and livestock feed sections of the organic regulations as contained in [7CFR Part 

205] and OFPA. The LS reviews petitions, substances scheduled to sunset, technical advisory 

panel reports and public comments concerning materials used for livestock production which 

have been requested for addition to or removal from the National List. The LS occasionally 

works with other Subcommittees to develop joint proposals where livestock issues are 

involved.

Materials Subcommittee (MS) The Materials Subcommittee drafts proposals for 

consideration by the Board to provide guidance, clarification or proposed standards of the 

National List section of the organic regulations as contained in [7CFR Part 205] and OFPA. 

The MS works with the NOP and, other NOSB Subcommittees in managing the Materials 

Review Process, which includes tracking petitions, sufficiency reports, materials scheduled to 

sunset and the sunset review process. In addition to a Chair appointed by the Board Chair, the 

MS shall include in its membership a representative from each of the Livestock, Crops, and 

Handling Subcommittees. Other members may be appointed as needed. The MS occasionally 

works with other Subcommittees to develop joint proposals where materials are involved.

Policy Development Subcommittee (PDS) The Policy Development Subcommittee drafts 

proposals for consideration by the Board to provide guidance, clarification or proposed 

standards of Board operations, policies and procedures. The PDS maintains and updates the 

NOSB Policy and Procedures Manual (in collaboration with the NOSB Vice Chair and the 

Advisory Board Specialist), as well as the New Member Guide. The PDS occasionally works 

with other Subcommittees to develop joint proposals where policy issues are involved.

SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS 

 

Subcommittees hold meetings via telephone conference calls. Calls should be scheduled at 

least 2 weeks in advance and should be the result of Subcommittee dialog regarding the most 

conducive dates and times. This dialog may occur on a previous conference call or through 

email. A minimum of 48 hours should be allowed for responses to email requests. 

 

Emergency calls may be scheduled with less notice only after each member is contacted. If 

the members do not respond to email requests, the Chair or their designee must contact the 

member by phone. 

TASK FORCES 

As determined by the Board or Executive Subcommittee and with approval/support from the 

NOP, task forces shall be appointed to explore specific issues and present draft proposals to 

the Board or to a Subcommittee, and may include non-Board members. Each task force shall: 

• Include at least one member of the NOSB

• Record and maintain meeting minutes 

• Submit a final report to the Board

Fall 2013 87 of 268
• Disband when its work has concluded or when the Board determines the task force is 

no longer necessary. 

With approval from the NOP, Task Forces may be appointed by either the Board or Executive 

Subcommittee to explore specific issues or concerns relevant to the organic community and 

industry and present to the Board draft proposals, discussion documents, or reports. Each task 

force shall:

 

• Have a specific Work Plan approved by the Board or Executive Subcommittee

• Have a clearly articulated project deliverable identified 

• Include at least one current member of the NOSB

• Record and maintain meeting or conference call minutes, made available to the Board 

and the NOP 

• Submit a final report to the Board

• Disband when its work has concluded or when the Board determines the task force is 

no longer necessary

AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES 

At the discretion of the NOSB Chair, and with approval of the Executive Subcommittee, ad hoc 

NOSB Subcommittees may be formed to develop policy and guidance on specific issues that 

involve multiple standing Subcommittee jurisdictions, or for issues or tasks that are very large 

and require additional resources to complete. Ad hoc Subcommittees must be comprised of 

current NOSB members, and may be either a combination of two or more standing 

Subcommittees to form a “joint” Subcommittee, or may be a completely new Subcommittee

comprised of selected NOSB members from various standing Subcommittees. Ad hoc 

Subcommittees can be dissolved at the recommendation of the NOSB chairperson with the 

approval of the Executive Subcommittee. Ad hoc Subcommittee chairpersons are non-voting 

members of the Executive Subcommittee. 

Fall 2013 88 of 268
SECTION V

DUTIES OF SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRS 

Subcommittee Chair duties:

• Appoint a Subcommittee Vice Chair in consultation with Board Chair 

• Consult with Board Chair regarding Subcommittee appointments

• Schedule Subcommittee meetings as needed 

• Draft Subcommittee meeting agendas and work plans in consultation with 

Subcommittee members, the Executive Subcommittee, and NOP staff 

• Convene and preside over Subcommittee meetings 

• Ensure Subcommittee meeting notes are recorded

• Ensure that the Subcommittee meeting notes are reviewed for accuracy 

• Report actions of the Subcommittee to the Board 

• Serve as mentor/trainer for new Subcommittee chair during transition periods 

Subcommittee chairs shall not act unilaterally, especially concerning issues that involve 

statutory responsibilities of the Board. 

DUTIES OF SUBCOMMITTEE VICE CHAIRS 

Subcommittee Vice Chair duties: 

• Provide support in developing and completing Subcommittee work plans

• Assist in reviewing Subcommittee meeting notes for accuracy

• Represent the Chair in the event of the Chair’s absence

• The Vice Chairs of the Crops, Livestock and Handling Subcommittees will serve on the 

Materials Subcommittee as liaisons for reviewing all petitioned substances. 

Subcommittee Vice Chairs shall not act unilaterally, especially concerning issues which involve 

statutory responsibilities of the Board. 

TRANSITION OF SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRS, VICE CHAIRS, AND MEMBERS (NEW AND 

CONTINUING)

Subcommittee Chairs, Vice Chairs and members shall be appointed to serve annually by the 

Chair of the Board. The annual Subcommittee term shall be concurrent with the one-year term 

established by the Secretary (beginning on January 24 and ending on the following January 

23). Newly appointed Chairs, Vice Chairs and Subcommittee members will assume their 

positions at the beginning of the new term, after a period of orientation and mentorship 

Fall 2013 89 of 268
provided by the outgoing Chair, Vice Chair, and members.

To avoid disruption in the quality and volume of work produced by the NOSB, the following 

procedures will be observed: 

After the election of NOSB Officers at the Fall Meeting: 

Appointment of Subcommittee Chairs 

The Board Chair should appoint Subcommittee Chairs from members with at least one year of 

NOSB experience. It is recommended that a new Subcommittee Chair have experience as 

Subcommittee Vice Chair

 

Appointment of Subcommittee Vice Chairs 

Vice Chairs shall be appointed by the incoming Subcommittee Chair and should be someone 

who has expressed interest in eventually serving as Subcommittee Chair

 

Time Frame for Appointments 

Subcommittee Chairs shall be appointed and seated not more than 30 days after the newly 

elected NOSB Chair takes office (or continues in office), and Vice Chairs shall be appointed 

by Subcommittee Chairs no more than two weeks after that

 

Exchange of Subcommittee Files 

Upon appointment, new and outgoing Subcommittee Chairs should have a formal meeting to 

exchange all files related to the Subcommittee’s work and to complete the first Subcommittee

work plan under the new leadership

 

Review of Subcommittee Files 

New Subcommittee Chairs should review all work plan items and active files involving 

Subcommittee work

 

Mentorship Period 

The incoming Chair and Vice Chair of each Subcommittee shall participate in an orientation 

and mentorship period with the outgoing Chair and Vice Chair of their Subcommittee until 

seated in their positions at the beginning of the new term on January 24

Appointment of the New NOSB Members (prior to January 24):

The Board Chair will appoint each new NOSB member(s) to appropriate Subcommittees no 

more than two weeks after his or her appointment, after consulting with outgoing and incoming 

Subcommittee Chairs, and other Board officers, with due consideration of the member interest, 

expertise, and background, and well as composition and needs of the new Board. 

 

Once appointed, incoming Subcommittee members shall be included in all email

communication pertaining to the Subcommittees on which they serve.

 

Incoming members of the Subcommittee are encouraged and advised to participate in 

observer status on Subcommittee conference calls, and should be encouraged to attend the 

full Board meetings, if the selection precedes the fall meeting prior to the beginning of his or 

her term. 

Fall 2013 90 of 268
To facilitate an effective transition for new Board members and to ensure effective participation 

in Subcommittee and board deliberations, the Board Chair shall askincoming Board members 

to identify a mentor from existing Board members no later than two weeks after his or her

appointment, or, if the Board member prefers or the Board member takes no action, the Board 

Chair shall assign a mentor

Between Board Appointments and Board Meetings: 

Changing Subcommittee Appointments

Board members who would like to join or leave a Subcommittee, shall submit a written 

request to the Board Chair. If the request does not alter the preferred number of Subcommittee

members, in the range of five to seven, the expectation is that the request will be approved, 

unless the Board Chair states in writing that such a change will interfere with the functioning of 

the Subcommittee or the Board. The Chair’s determination should be made in consultation with 

Subcommittee Chairs and the Executive Subcommittee. 

Filling a Subcommittee Chair and/or Vice Chair vacancy

If a Subcommittee Chair position becomes vacant, the Subcommittee Vice Chair shall assume 

the position as Chair and the new Subcommittee Chair shall appoint a new Vice

 -Chair in accordance with the consultation procedures cited above.

PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 

Developing committee recommendations follows these broad steps:

 

1. The committee prepares a recommendation or discussion document as agreed to in the 

committee work plan (see p. 32 PPM). 

2. The recommendation or discussions document is posted for public comment. 

3. During the Board meeting, the committee presents its recommendation for discussion by the 

full Board. 

4. At any point in the process prior to the Board’s vote on the status of the recommendation, 

the presenting committee may convene and vote to withdraw its recommendation, based on 

approval of this action by the majority of the members of the committee. 

5. Once presented, the Board votes on the committee recommendation. 

In order to be considered a voting item, all recommendations must be submitted to the NOP at 

least forty five (45) days prior to a scheduled NOSB meeting. This time is needed in order to 

allow the Program to publish a meeting notice and allow for public comment. 

PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING SUBCOMMITTEE PROPOSALS AND DISCUSSION 

DOCUMENTS

Subcommittee proposal and Discussion document process: 

1. The Subcommittee drafts the proposal or discussion document based on workplan 

items (See Section V for detailed discussion about workplans) 

Fall 2013 91 of 268
2. The draft proposal or discussion document is voted upon by the Subcommittee 

members in order for it to pass from the Subcommittee to the full Board

3. The draft proposal or discussion document is posted for public comment 

4. At any point in the process prior to the Board’s vote a Subcommittee may convene and, 

by simple majority, vote to withdraw its proposal.

5. During a subsequent Board meeting, the Subcommittee presents the proposals and 

discussion documents, as well as a summary of public comments, for discussion by the 

full Board.

In order to be considered for a vote during an NOSB meeting, all proposals must be voted on 

by the Subcommittee and submitted to the NOP at least forty five (45) days prior to a 

scheduled NOSB meeting. This will allow the Program to publish a meeting notice and accept

public comment. 

Guidelines for Writing Subcommittee Proposals and Discussion Documents 

(See Appendix E for examples of proposals and discussion documents) 

There are several formats for writing proposals and discussion documents, based on the 

subject under review:

• Proposals related to material petitions or sunset reviews 

• Proposals for policy or procedure changes 

• Discussion documents

Presenting Subcommittee Proposals and Discussion Documents at NOSB Meetings 

NOSB Subcommittees and task forces should follow the outline presented below when 

presenting proposals or discussion documents for consideration by the Board: 

I. Introduction: A brief summary of the issue or statement of the problem. 

II. Background: An explanation with sufficient detail and rationale to support the proposal, 

including reasons why the proposal should be adopted, historical context, and the 

regulatory framework pertinent to the issue. 

III. Proposal: A concise explanation of the recommended action. 

IV. Subcommittee Vote: The Subcommittee or task force vote shall be reported. In the 

case of petitions to add materials to the National list, two votes will be reported; one for 

classification of the material as a synthetic or non-synthetic, and the other a motion to 

list or not.

V. Public Comment: A brief summary of the public comments

VI. Minority opinion: If applicable, the dissenting opinion(s) of Subcommittee or task force

members shall be reported.

NOSB-NOP COLLABORATION 

 

The Organic Foods Production Act (6518 (a)) directed the Secretary of Agriculture to establish 

a National Organic Standards Board to assist in the development of standards for substances 

Fall 2013 92 of 268
to be used in organic production and to advise the Secretary on any other aspects of the 

implementation of the Act. In 6503 (a) of the Act, the Secretary was directed to establish an 

organic certification program. The National Organic Program (NOP) has become the 

governmental institution responsible for this and is the means through which the NOSB 

provides advice and assistance to the Secretary of Agriculture. 

Maintaining, enhancing, and promoting integrity of organic products, principles and products is 

accomplished through team work and collaboration of the NOSB and the NOP, as well as 

others in the organic community. Successful collaboration is dependent on effective 

communication and constructive feedback. Collaboration is facilitated by the Advisory Board 

Specialist (ABS), who participates in all NOSB calls. Additionally, the NOP Deputy 

Administrator or designee will participate in all ES calls, and in other standing subcommittee 

calls upon request and mutual agreement. In addition, each standing subcommittee will be 

assigned an NOP staff person to provide additional technical, legal, and logistical support.

Several factors to keep in mind with regard to the working relationship between the NOP and 

the NOSB: 

The NOSB is a FACA advisory committee, and as such, must conduct business in the open, 

under the requirements of P.L. 94-409, also known as “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 

U.S.C.552b). 

The USDA cannot delegate its authority as a regulatory body to private citizens, even when 

those private citizens are appointed by the Secretary to provide advice. However, the NOSB 

has unique statutory authority related to the recommendation of materials as approved or 

prohibited substances for inclusion on the National List. 

The NOSB cannot direct USDA or bind the Secretary through its actions; for example, it cannot 

obligate funds, contract, make NOP staffing decisions, or initiate policies of its own accord. 

WORK PLANS

Workplans are developed by the Board and NOP in advance of each public Board meeting, 

where they are presented, discussed and potentially revised based on public comments, Board 

discussion, and NOP priorities and resources. Workplan procedures are described in detail in 

Section VI.

The NOSB expects that requests from the NOP regarding work plan items will be made 

publicly, either in written form or oral form made at an NOSB meeting. Requests made orally to 

the NOSB are to be followed up in writing stating the problem to be addressed, background, 

statutory authority and the time frame for response. The proposed Subcommittee work plans 

will be reviewed at the next ES call following the Board meeting, with participation by the NOP 

Deputy Administrator. This participation in the development of work plans is vital for effective 

NOSB/NOP collaboration. Due to change in circumstances, these work plans may need to be 

revised prior to the posting of the final agenda of the upcoming Board meeting. Subcommittee 

work plan changes must be approved by the ES and NOP.

Below are descriptions of common NOSB workplan items and the corresponding NOP and 

NOSB responsibilities. In all cases, the end product should be a recommendation by the Board 

to the NOP. Each recommendation should be accompanied by a cover sheet (See Appendix 

Fall 2013 93 of 268
E) 

• Materials proposed to be added to, or removed from, the National List. 

The NOSB has the statutory authority to consider and recommend materials for addition 

to, or deletion from, the National List of Approved and Prohibited Substances, or to add, 

remove, or modify annotations restricting the use of such listed materials. 

• Recommendations for modification of existing standards or new standards. 

The NOSB will use the decision making procedures outlined in Section VI to justify 

modification of existing standards or proposal of new standards. The NOP may request 

that the NOSB develop recommendations in support of this. The request should be in 

writing and should include: a statement of the problem to be addressed; background, 

including the current policy or situation; statutory/ regulatory authority; legal issues; and 

the desired timeframe for receipt of the recommendation. The request will be posted on 

the NOP web site.

• Advice on NOP policy and interpretation of standards.

The NOSB periodically provides advice about specific NOP policies and actions, such 

as the yeast and compost policies.

• Compliance and Enforcement. 

The NOP is responsible for compliance and enforcement of the Organic Standards. The 

NOP welcomes NOSB input on standards, but NOSB involvement in active 

investigations or enforcement actions is not appropriate. The NOP reports to the NOSB 

and the public the status of enforcement actions and also posts the status on the NOP 

web site 

• Management Review.

The NOSB may review the quality management system and internal audits to ensure 

that the NOP is managed effectively and efficiently. For example, the NOSB may be 

asked for informal feedback or to work on specific workplan items that relate to the 

development or implementation of audit corrective actions, 

Adopted October 2010 Yes: 14 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recusal: 0

Fall 2013 94 of 268
SECTION VI

 

NOSB PROCEDURES

SUBCOMMITTEE WORKPLANS

At the end of every NOSB meeting, each Subcommittee chair is required to present the 

Subcommittee’s workplan. Each Subcommittee should follow four general steps to develop 

their workplan: 1) Identify all issues before the Subcommittee; 2) Prioritize each issue; 3) Set 

a calendar for reviewing items; and 4) Obtain feedback from the Executive Subcommittee and 

the NOP. 

Step 1: Identify all issues

The Subcommittee workplan will be based on:

• Items assigned to a Subcommittee by the Board during an official session. 

• Items that are reviewed by a Subcommittee on a regular basis such as materials sunset 

review, petitions submitted by members of the public, and PPM updates. 

• Requests or suggestions from the NOP such as clarifications on a particular issue or 

guidance on enforcement.

• Proposals stemming from the Subcommittee members’ contact with the organic 

community.

Selection criteria for workplan items:

• Relevance to the organic community (Is it an important issue or is it an interesting 

issue?)

• Criticality regarding mandate (Is the issue within the Subcommittee’s or the NOSB’s 

realm?)

• Feasibility. Can a proposal realistically be implemented and enforced by the NOP?

Step 2: Prioritize the issues

Workplan items should be prioritized according to the following criteria:

• Petitioned materials are given preference

• Relevance to the organic community, public at large and the environment

• Size of the population affected by the issue

• Timeline since the issue/petition was submitted

These criteria are listed in order of importance and should be used to rank or prioritize each 

issue accordingly. For example, a petitioned material has priority over an item that has been 

waiting to be reviewed for an extended period of time.

Step 3: Set a calendar for completing reviews

Once the workplan items are prioritized, the Subcommittee chair should define a calendar for 

Fall 2013 95 of 268
discussion of each issue. The calendar should include deadlines and the posting/publication 

target dates mandated by the Program and the Federal Regulation.

Step 4: Incorporate input from the Executive Subcommittee, NOP, and finalize work plan. 

 

Subcommittees propose work plans to the Exec Subcommittee and NOP before the NOSB 

biannual meeting. The NOP provides formal comments and feedback. Subcommittees revise 

work plans as deemed appropriate. The NOP displays final work plans at the NOSB meeting 

for discussion and finalization. Final workplans are validated at first ES call after the NOSB 

meeting. These work plans encompass the work that is planned to be done for subsequent 

meetings. 

Fall 2013 96 of 268
SECTION VII 

 

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURES

 

Invited Speakers

• Subcommittees identify the possible need for a presentation at the NOSB meeting. NOP 

may also identify needs for presentations and candidate speakers. 

• The Subcommittee chairperson should send a request to the NOP, through the NOSB 

Chair, at least 60 days prior to meeting. 

• Speakers must be approved and invited by the NOP. 

• The purpose for the presentation, the subject area and the bio/resume of speaker should

be circulated via email to the entire Board at least 2 weeks prior to the Board meeting. 

• Invited speakers must provide objective information. 

• Current petitioners cannot be invited to speakers about the topic under discussion. 

• Speakers must disclose any actual or perceived conflict-of-interest including information 

about who may have provided funding for the presentation.

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURES

 

Invited Speakers

• Subcommittees, the NOSB or the NOP may identify the need for presentations and 

candidate speakers regarding subjects of interest or concern to be addressed at NOSB 

meetings. 

• Requests must be made by the NOSB chair to the NOP no less than 60 days prior to the 

target NOSB meeting. 

• Speakers must be approved and invited by the NOP. 

• If approved by the NOP, the purpose for the presentation, the subject area and the 

bio/resume of speaker(s) should be circulated via email to the entire Board at least 2 weeks 

prior to the Board meeting. 

• Current petitioners cannot be invited to speakers about the topic under discussion. 

• Speakers are expected to disclose any financial interests that he or she has that can be 

reasonably assumed to influence his or her presentation content. 

Fall 2013 97 of 268
Surveys Conducted on Behalf of NOSB Subcommittees 

• All surveys, including electronic surveys, conducted on behalf of the NOSB, must be 

approved by the NOSB Executive Subcommittee before they are submitted for approval to 

USDA, who must then submit them for approval to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB); and 

• A written report summarizing the results of the survey must be submitted to the full Board 

and the NOP as soon as possible after completion. 

Public Comment at NOSB Meetings:

• All persons wishing to comment at NOSB meetings during public comment periods must, 

in general, sign-up in advance per the instructions in the Federal Register Notice for the 

meeting. However, the NOSB will attempt to accommodate all persons requesting public 

comment time. Persons requesting time after the closing date in the Meeting Notice, or 

during last minute sign-up at the meeting, will be placed on a waiting list and will be 

considered at the discretion of the NOP working closely with the NOSB Chair and will 

depend on availability of time.

• All presenters are encouraged to submit public comment in writing according to the 

Federal Register Notice. Advance submissions allow NOSB members the opportunity to 

read comments in advance electronically, and decreases the need for paper copies to be 

distributed during the meeting.

• Persons will be called upon to speak according to a posted schedule. However speakers 

should allow for some flexibility. Persons called upon who are absent from the room could 

potentially miss their opportunity for public comment.

• Time allotment for public comment per person will be four (4) minutes, with the options of 

reducing to a minimum of three (3) and extending to a maximum of five (5) minutes at the 

discretion of the NOP working closely with the NOSB Chair in advance of the meeting.

• Persons must give their names and affiliations for the record at the beginning of their 

public comment.

• Proxy speakers are not permitted.

• Public comment requests may be scheduled according to topic.

• Individuals providing public comment will refrain from any personal attacks and from 

remarks that otherwise impugn the character of any individual.

• Members of the public are asked to define clearly and succinctly the issues they wish to 

present before the Board. This will give NOSB members a comprehensible understanding 

of the speaker’s concerns.

Fall 2013 98 of 268
Adopted October 17 2012; 15 yes, 0 no, 0 absent, 0 abstain, 0 recuse

Policy for Public Communication between NOSB Meetings.

The NOSB and NOP seek public communication outside of Board biannual meetings

and public comment periods to inform the NOSB and NOP of stakeholders’ interests,

and to comment on the NOSB’s and NOP’s work activities year around.

Adopted April 11 2013; 15 yes, 0 no, 0 absent, 0 abstain, 0 recuse

Fall 2013 99 of 268
SECTION VIII 

NOSB PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIC PRODUCTION AND HANDLING 

 

1.1 Organic agriculture is an ecological production management system that promotes and 

enhances biodiversity, biological cycles, and soil biological activity. It emphasizes the 

use of management practices in preference to the use of off-farm inputs, taking into 

account that regional conditions require locally adapted systems. These goals are met, 

where possible, through the use of cultural, biological, and mechanical methods, as 

opposed to using synthetic materials to fulfill specific functions within the system. 

1.2 An organic production system is designed to: 

1.2.1 Optimize soil biological activity; 

1.2.2 Maintain long-term fertility; 

1.2.3 Minimize soil erosion; 

1.2.4 Maintain or enhance the genetic and biological diversity of the production system and its 

surroundings; 

1.2.5 Utilize production methods and breeds or varieties that are well adapted to the region; 

1.2.6 Recycle materials of plant and animal origin in order to return nutrients to the land, thus 

minimizing the use of non-renewable resources; 

1.2.7 Minimize pollution of soil, water, and air; and 

1.2.8 Become established on an existing farm or field through a period of conversion 

(transition), during which no prohibited materials are applied and an organic plan is 

implemented. 

1.3 The basis for organic livestock production is the development of a harmonious 

relationship between land, plants, and livestock, and respect for the physiological and 

behavioral needs of livestock. This is achieved by: 

1.3.1 Providing good quality organically grown feed; 

1.3.2 Maintaining appropriate stocking rates; 

1.3.3 Designing husbandry systems adapted to the species' needs; 

1.3.4 Promoting animal health and welfare while minimizing stress; and 

1.3.5 Avoiding the routine use of chemical allopathic veterinary drugs, including antibiotics. 

1.4 Organic handling practices are based on the following principles: 

1.4.1 Organic processors and handlers implement organic good manufacturing and handling 

practices in order to maintain the integrity and quality of organic products through all 

stages of processing, handling, transport, and storage; 

1.4.2 Organic products are not commingled with non-organic products, except when 

combining organic and non-organic ingredients in finished products which contain less 

than 100% organic ingredients; 

1.4.3 Organic products and packaging materials used for organic products do not come in 

contact with prohibited materials; 

1.4.4 Proper records, including accurate audit trails, are kept to verify that the integrity of 

organic products is maintained; and 

1.4.5 Organic processors and handlers use practices that minimize environmental 

degradation and consumption of non-renewable resources. Efforts are made to reduce 

packaging; use recycled materials; use cultural and biological pest management 

strategies; and minimize solid, liquid, and airborne emissions. 

1.5 Organic production and handling systems strive to achieve agro-ecosystems that are 

Fall 2013 100 of 268
ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable. 

1.6 Organic products are defined by specific production and handling standards that are 

intrinsic to the identification and labeling of such products. 

1.7 Organic standards require that each certified operator must complete, and submit for 

approval by a certifying agent, an organic plan detailing the management of the organic 

crop, livestock, wild harvest, processing, or handling system. The organic plan outlines 

the management practices and inputs that will be used by the operation to comply with 

organic standards. 

1.8 Organic certification is a regulatory system which allows consumers to identify and 

reward operators who meet organic standards. It allows consumers to be confident that 

organic products are produced according to approved management plans in 

accordance with organic standards. Certification requires informed effort on the part of 

producers and handlers, and careful vigilance with consistent, transparent decision 

making on the part of certifying agents. 

1.9 Organic production and handling operations must comply with all applicable local, state, 

and federal laws and address food safety concerns adequately. 

1.10 Organic certification, production, and handling systems serve to educate consumers 

regarding the source, quality, and content of organic foods and products. Product labels 

must be truthful regarding product names, claims, and content. 

1.11 Genetic engineering (recombinant and technology) is a synthetic process designed to 

control nature at the molecular level, with the potential for unforeseen consequences. 

As such, it is not compatible with the principles of organic agriculture (either production 

or handling). Genetically engineered/modified organisms (geo/gmo’s) and products 

produced by or through the use of genetic engineering are prohibited. 

1.12 Although organic standards prohibit the use of certain materials such as synthetic 

fertilizers, pesticides, and genetically engineered organisms, they cannot ensure that 

organic products are completely free of residues due to background levels in the 

environment. 

Adopted October 17, 2001

Fall 2013 101 of 268
NOSB GUIDANCE ON COMPATIBILITY WITH A SYSTEM OF SUSTAINABLE 

AGRICULTURE AND CONSISTENCY WITH ORGANIC FARMING AND HANDLING 

 

A significant responsibility of the NOSB is to determine the suitability of materials for use in organic 

production and handling. Among the criteria the Board must consider, OFPA requires the NOSB to 

determine the compatibility of a material with organic practices. The following questions were 

developed by the NOSB to assist in determining the compatibility of materials with organic 

practices. 

 

In order to determine if a substance, its use, and manufacture are compatible with a system of 

sustainable agriculture and consistent with organic farming and handling, and in consideration of the

NOSB Principles of Organic Production and Handling, the following factors are to be considered: 

• Does the substance promote plant and animal health by enhancing the soil’s physical 

chemical, or biological properties? 

• Does use of the substance encourage and enhance preventative techniques including 

cultural and biological methods for management of crop, livestock, and/or handling 

operations? 

• Is the substance made from renewable resources? If the source of the product is nonrenewable, are the materials used to produce the substance recyclable? Is the substance 

produced from recycled materials? Does use of the substance increase the efficiency of 

resources used by organic farms, complement the use of natural biological controls, or 

reduce the total amount of materials released into the environment? 

• Does use of the substance have a positive influence on the health, natural behavior, and 

welfare of livestock? 

• Does the substance satisfy expectations of organic consumers regarding the authenticity 

and integrity of organic products? 

• Does the substance allow for an increase in the long-term viability of organic farm 

operations? 

• Is there evidence that the substance is mined, manufactured, or produced through reliance 

on child labor or violations of applicable national labor regulations? 

• If the substance is already on the National List, is the proposed use of the substance 

consistent with other listed uses of the substance? 

• Is the use of the substance consistent with other substances historically allowed or 

disallowed in organic production and handling? 

• Would approval of the substance be consistent with international organic regulations and 

guidelines, including Codex? 

• Is there adequate information about the substance to make a reasonable determination on 

the substance's compliance with each of the other applicable criteria? If adequate 

information has not been provided, does an abundance of caution warrant rejection of the 

substance? 

• Does use of the substance have a positive impact on biodiversity? 

Adopted April 29, 2004 - 13 yes, 0 no, 1 absent 

Fall 2013 102 of 268
MATERIALS REVIEW PROCESS 

Evaluation procedures for substances petitioned for addition to, or removal from, the 

National List. A petition to change the annotation to a listed material is in effect the addition or 

removal of one or more materials.

Definitions: 

Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) - Group of third party experts convened by the Board to 

provide a technical review related to a material petition under review by the NOSB. 

Technical Review - A report prepared by a third party expert under contract addressing the 

environmental, human, and industrial impact of a petitioned material per the OFPA and 

regulatory evaluation criteria to aid in the thorough evaluation of that material by the NOSB.

Phase 1: Receipt of petition and examination of petition for completeness and 

 eligibility

During this phase the NOP will:

 

• Notify the petitioner via letter and/or email of receipt of the petition

• Determine whether the petition is complete. 

• Determine whether the petitioned substance is eligible for petition under the Organic 

Foods Production Act (OFPA) and its implementing regulations; document this review 

using the NOP-OFPA checklist. 

• Determine whether the petitioned use is approved under the statutory and regulatory 

authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA), or other appropriate federal agency if applicable 

• Identify and secure any confidential business information (CBI) designated by the 

petitioner 

• Notify, as applicable, the petitioner via letter and/or email of determination of 

completeness and eligibility, and acknowledge the designation of certain information as 

CBI. 

• Upon determination by the NOP of completeness and eligibility, the following actions will 

be taken: 

o Publish the petition on the NOP website 

o Notify the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) Materials Subcommittee

chairperson and the chairperson of the Subcommittee that will review the substance

(Crops, Livestock, Handling or other pertinent Subcommittees) that the petition is 

complete, provide to them the OFPA review and EPA/FDA determination checklist, 

and request that the Subcommittee review the petition for sufficiency, and submit a 

request for supplemental or clarifying information. 

Fall 2013 103 of 268
Phase 2: Determine whether or not a third party technical review is required

During this phase: 

The appropriate NOSB Subcommittee, working with other applicable NOSB Subcommittees, 

has 60 days to submit any questions or comments to the NOP. Comments/questions should 

be based on the OFPA criteria, and seek to clarify or augment specific background 

information. 

The appropriate Subcommittee should review the petition, and using the NOP evaluation 

checklist for materials review (see appendix E), determine whether or not the material is 

appropriate to be added to, or removed from, the National List (pending detailed criteria). If the 

material is deemed appropriate, the Subcommittee must decide whether; 

a) there is sufficient information in the petition 

b) the Subcommittee can reasonably research any pending technical information, or 

c) there is a need to secure a technical review from a third party expert

If the material is deemed inappropriate for inclusion on, or removal from, the National List, 

the Subcommittee Chair will inform the NOP that the petition is ineligible, and will include 

an explanation. If the petition is found incomplete or insufficient, the Subcommittee may

request, via the NOP, additional information from the petitioner. If the reviewing 

Subcommittee concludes there is a need for a third party technical review, the appropriate 

Subcommittee Chair will proceed to make the request to the Program.

• Notify the petitioner, via letter and/or email, that the petition is incomplete or ineligible

Phase 3: Evaluation by a Third Party Expert 

During this phase the NOP will: 

• Notify the third party expert of the petition’s determination of completeness and eligibility. 

The third party must have technical expertise relevant to the petition and the notification will 

constitute official notice of the need for a technical review. 

During this phase the Third Party Expert will: 

• Conduct activities necessary to provide responses to evaluation questions contained in the 

Statement of Work (SOW) and any additional questions identified by the NOSB as 

described above 

• Use the TR template to prepare and distribute to the NOP a draft technical report (TR) in 

electronic format. 

Phase 4: Sufficiency Determination 

During this phase the NOP will: 

• Submit a copy of the draft TR for review to the NOSB Materials Subcommittee and the 

pertinent Subcommittee that will conduct the review (Crops, Livestock or Handling); 

• Review the draft TR using the following performance criteria. The 

Fall 2013 104 of 268
 report will be acceptable when it: 

o Is consistent in format, level of detail and tone 

o Is technically objective and free from opinions or conjecture 

o Is written in a style appropriate for non-technical readers (e.g. free of technical jargon) 

o Is prepared using a well-defined and consistent procedure consisting of information 

gathering, information synthesis and document preparation, and quality assurance 

o Is based on the best available information that can be obtained within the designated 

time frame 

o Is thoroughly supported using literature citations 

o Addresses all evaluation questions as set out in the SOW

 

During this phase the NOSB materials Subcommittee and the pertinent Subcommittee (Crops, 

Livestock or Handling) will: 

• Review the draft TR using the following criteria. The report will be acceptable when it: 

o Is consistent in format, level of detail and tone

o Is technically objective and free from opinions or conjecture 

o Is written in a style appropriate for non-technical readers (e.g. free of technical jargon)

o Is prepared using a well-defined and consistent procedure consisting of information 

gathering, information synthesis and document preparation, and quality assurance 

o Is based on the best available information that can be obtained within the designated 

time frame

o Is thoroughly supported using literature citations

o Addresses all evaluation questions as set out in the SOW

• Notify the NOP via letter and/or email, within 60 days of receiving the TR, that theTR is 

sufficient If the TR is not found sufficient, the Subcommittee must provide the NOP with an 

explanation of why, including a request for additional information or improvements

• Upon concurrence by the NOP that the TR is insufficient, the NOP will notify the contractor 

by letter and/or email including the rationale for drawing such a conclusion and the 

improvements to be made so that the document can be determined sufficient. The time 

frame required for the completion of the changes will be determined through mutual 

agreement between the contractor and the NOP. 

Phase 5: Action by the Subcommittee conducting the review (Crops, Livestock or

Handling) 

During this phase the Subcommittee conducting the review will: 

• Discuss and recommend an action on the petitioned substance. The Subcommittee may 

convene as the TAP by email or conference call to provide complete evaluation of the 

petitioned substance, as provided by OFPA 6518(k)(3). The Subcommittee must convene 

and recommend an action on the petitioned substance no later than 60 days before a 

scheduled meeting of the full NOSB. 

Phase 6: Action by Full NOSB 

During this phase the NOP will: 

Fall 2013 105 of 268
• Publish the proposal on the NOP website and request a minimum of 30 days of written 

public comment on the proposal prior to the public NOSB business meeting. 

• Include sufficient time on the agenda at the NOSB meeting for the Board to discuss the 

proposal and make a recommendation. 

TECHNICAL REVIEWS

The Board has the option of requesting, through the NOP, a written technical review or report 

from a third party expert. 

Third party experts can consist of the following:

• Employees from other USDA agencies such as AMS Science & Technology, Agriculture 

Research Service, or other federal agencies with appropriate expertise, as needed

• Consultants or contractors

Steps to determine the need for a third party expert: 

1. Determine whether the Subcommittee has the expertise needed to address the questions 

related to the petition, with respect to:

a. Impact on the environment

b. Impact to human health

c. Sustainability and compatibility with organic principles.

2. If the Subcommittee does not have the expertise or resources (e.g., time), the 

Subcommittee chair should make a request to the Chair of the Materials Subcommittee for 

a third party expert specifying:

a. The third party expert’s required background and level of expertise

b. Existence of potential sources of conflict that could result in biased reviews.

3. When requesting the assistance of a third party expert to evaluate a material, a 

Subcommittee must identify the main technical issues needed to be addressed, including, 

but no limited to:

a. All uses of the petitioned material beyond what the petitioner has requested

b. All uses of the petitioned material in combination with other material(s) that have 

already been approved on the same section of the National List

c. Interactions of the petitioned material, not addressed by the petitioner, and that may 

involve materials currently on the same section of the National List 

d. All possible manufacturing methods for a petitioned material 

e. Potential effects on public health and biodiversity

f. Environmental risks and hazards including, but not limited to, potential for developing 

pesticide resistance, or long-term effects on sustainability 

4. If required, the Subcommittee should conduct a final review of the technical report and 

complete an assessment on the quality of work performed by the third party expert

Basic principles that should be considered when requesting third party expert advice: 

Fall 2013 106 of 268
• A Subcommittee cannot proceed with a recommendation on a material if it is determined 

that there is insufficient valid scientific information on that material’s impact on the 

environment, human health and its compatibility with organic principles. 

• The decision to request a third party expert needs to be made independent of the 

availability of funds. If there is a lack of funding to secure third party expert advice, the 

review of the material should be placed on hold.

• Although the Board has the final word on the approval or rejection of a petition, the decision 

to request a third party expert is the responsibility of the Subcommittee reviewing the 

material. In some cases the Materials Subcommittee can take the initiative to request a 

third party expert. 

• Defining the required expertise is the responsibility of the Subcommittee reviewing the 

material or issue.

• To incorporate a diversity of opinions and to minimize the risk of bias, a Subcommittee

should strive to work with a range of technical experts (individuals, or institutions). 

WITHDRAWAL OF A PETITION BY THE PETITIONER

When a petition involving a material is withdrawn by the petitioner, the Subcommittee should 

suspend its review and recommendation procedure. In the case of a petition not involving a 

material, Subcommittee members have the option of completing its review and providing a 

recommendation or guidance. 

If a petition is resubmitted, the Board should review it in the order in which it was received. 

Thus, are-submitted petition should be considered a new request and will be placed at the end 

of the queue of materials pending review. 

The petitioner can withdraw a petition at any time during the process.

A petitioner should have the opportunity to withdraw a petition with the intent of improving it 

(e.g., conducting additional research) only. 

TECHNICAL ADVISORY PANEL (TAP) CONTRACT PROCEDURES 

The NOSB does not hold contracting authority, and contract/SOW development is not an 

NOSB procedure. NOP/USDA writes and issues the SOW, and it is updated each time a new 

contract is announced. See Appendix G for more information regarding the contract 

procedures

 

Fall 2013 107 of 268
PRIORITY OF PETITIONS GUIDELINE

Prioritization

National List materials’ petitions received and deemed sufficient by the NOP/NOSB will be 

prioritized by the appropriate Subcommittee Chair as follows:

1. Petitions to remove a material from the National List:

a. Priority 1: A petition to remove a material presently on the National list that raises 

serious health, environmental, or regulatory concerns, including petitions to 

reconsider previous decisions, will be given the highest priority - Priority 1, above 

all other petitions in the queue of the reviewing Subcommittee (Crops, Handling, or 

Livestock). 

b. Priority 2: A petition to remove a material presently on the National list not based 

on serious health, environmental, or regulatory concerns, but based on other new 

information, such as commercial availability status, would be assigned a Priority 2, 

behind Priority 1 petitions, but above any petitions to list materials that are in the 

queue of the reviewing Subcommittee (Crops, Handling, or Livestock). This priority 

assignment would include any removal petitions requesting reconsideration of 

previous board decisions, if the resubmitted petition contains substantive new 

information to warrant reconsideration. 

2. Priority 3: Petitions to add a material to the National List:

A petition to add a material to the National List will be considered by the reviewing 

Subcommittee (Crops, Handling, or Livestock) in the chronological order in which it 

was received, and will be designated as Priority 3. 

3. Priority 4: Petitions to reconsider a material for addition to the National List:

A petition to reconsider adding a material that had previously been rejected by a 

Board vote would be given the lowest priority - Priority 4, and would go to the 

bottom of the Subcommittee (Crops, Handling, or Livestock) queue of petitioned 

materials. Petitions submitted for reconsideration must contain substantive new 

information to warrant reconsideration.

This prioritization guideline is only that, a guideline. When situations occur beyond the control 

of the reviewing Subcommittee, such as, but not limited to, Technical Report budgetary 

constraints, or a delay in the delivery of a Technical Review for a petitioned substance, the

workplan may require adjustment by the NOSB and NOP. 

Fall 2013 108 of 268
• BOARD PROCEDURES FOR THE MATERIALS’ REVIEW PROCESS-Petitions

• Upon receipt of the Technical Report each Subcommittee member should read it, along 

with the submitted petition, additional information and recommendations of the 

contracted panel of experts. 

• Questions or clarification of the review may be answered by further review of the 

literature provided by the TR contractor or by the Chair of the Subcommittee who will 

contact the NOP, who will in turn contact the contractor directly. Questions regarding 

the process can be directed to the Chair of the Materials Subcommittee or NOP Material 

Program Director. 

• The Subcommittee members will vote on whether the material is synthetic or 

nonsynthetic (and agricultural or non-agricultural if appropriate to handling materials) 

after a classification motion is made. The Subcommittee members will then vote on 

whether the material is to be allowed or prohibited for specific use as either a crop, 

livestock or handling material. Proposals may also contain an annotation which 

qualifies the use or context of use of the material in question. 

• Subcommittee draft proposals will be submitted to the NOP at least sixty (60) days prior 

to the next NOSB meeting where the material will be considered. 

• The Chair or Chair designate of each Subcommittee will present the proposals at the 

NOSB meeting. The proposals are to be presented in the form of a motion which must 

be seconded by an NOSB member, and following Robert’s Rules of Order, the Chair will 

open the motion for discussion. After discussion board members will vote on the motion. 

• NOSB Secretary will record the votes of each NOSB member and the Chair will 

announce whether or not the motion passed. 

• If the motion fails the Board Chair may ask for a new motion and the procedure is 

repeated until a final motion is passed by a 2/3 majority (see page 11 for required 

votes). 

BOARD PROCEDURES FOR THE MATERIALS’ REVIEW PROCESS - Sunset 

 

This is a regulatory process for determining the continued listing of a material already 

approved or prohibited on the National List for use in organic agriculture production and 

handling. It is not used to petition to add a new substance (nor is it used to change an existing 

annotation) or new uses of a listed substance. If the review and renewal process is not 

concluded by the expiration date, the use of the material will become prohibited. (Since sunset 

is defined as the review of regulations to ensure the continued relevance and not the creation 

of new regulation, all substances must be renewed as listed. If there is a need to consider 

changing an annotation or moving a material from one list to another, this may be 

accomplished through the existing procedures for petition.)

Since the sunset review process is an assessment of National List substances to ensure their 

Fall 2013 109 of 268
continued compliance with regulatory standards, the NOSB may determine that new 

restrictions in the form of annotations are necessary given changes in use patterns and 

scientific understanding. An annotation to expand the use of a substance does not fall within 

the purview of the sunset process and must only be considered through the petition process.

The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA) authorized a National List of Allowed and 

Prohibited Substances (Section 6517). Sections 6517 (e) mandates a Sunset Provision as 

follows: 

“No exception or prohibition in the National list shall be valid unless the National Organic 

Standards Board has reviewed such exemption or prohibition as provided in this section within 

5 years of such exemption or prohibition being adopted and the Secretary has reviewed such 

exemption or prohibition.”

The National List that was implemented in October 21, 2002 contained over 200 substances

and the first sunset review of listed materials was completed in October, 2007. Decisions made 

through the Sunset review must be transparent, non-arbitrary, based on the best current 

information and in the interest of the organic community and public at large.

Sunset Process (See Charts 1- 4 below)

Although not all listed materials reach sunset status at the same time, the review process 

remains the same: 

1. An Advance Notice of Proposed Rule Making (ANPR) is placed in the Federal Register 

(listing the pending sunset materials. The public has 60 days from the publication date to 

provide written comment. A Subcommittee may request a third party technical review in 

anticipation of any public comments or questions.

2. Public comments are collected and forwarded to the NOSB. 

3. The appropriate NOSB Subcommittee begins review of the material with the intent of 

providing a proposal to the entire Board for the material’s removal, renewal, or renewal with 

the addition of an annotation. The review is conducted based on “Force of Evidence” as 

presented by Board members, public comments, and scientific data from other sources 

This includes the original recommendation from the Board. The Subcommittee may request 

a third party technical review, if needed, to verify scientific evidence and claims made 

during public comment to the ANPR.

4. The reviewing NOSB Subcommittee provides its proposal to the full Board and the public 

no less than 60 days prior to the Board Meeting which would include the following:

• A simple motion to remove, add or amend an annotation, resulting in the restriction 

or clarification of the use of a material (if applicable).

• A simple motion to renew the existing listing. 

5. At the public NOSB business meeting, the NOSB hears additional public comment, 

discusses the force of evidence, and votes on the Subcommittee’s proposal. 

6. The NOP reviews the NOSB recommendation and accompanying documentation and 

publishes a proposed rule to review the National List. The public has 90 days after the 

publication date to comment. All comments are made available on the NOP website.

The NOP will review public comment and draft the final rule. The final rule will proceed 

Fall 2013 110 of 268
Subcommittee Proposals Posted on NOP 

Website

60 days prior to NOSB meeting

Additional Public Comments Received

NOSB Final Vote

NOP Receives Public Comments

Subcommittee Reviews Evidence for 

Delisting

(See chart 3 for detail) 

Complete Material Review Forms

NOSB Notified of Comments

(within 5 days of NOP receipt)

Notification to Materials Chair

Notification to Subcommittee Chair

Comments Posted on NOP Website

(within 5 days of NOP receipt)

Posted by Category

Handling (H), Crops (C), Livestock (L)

Additional Comments Received

On Posted Materials

NOSB Notified of Additional Comments

through interagency (i.e. OGC, OMB, and department) and congressional review, and upon 

clearance from the appropriate parties, the NOP will publish the final rule in the Federal 

Register. The final rule process is illustrated in Chart 4. 

Chart 1: Sunset Review – NOP Posts an ANPR

Chart 2: Sunset Review – NOP Collects and Forwards Public Comment to the NOSB

Chart 3: Sunset Review – 

NOSB Subcommittee Reviews Evidence for 

Delisting

NOP Develops Regulatory review work plan and drafts Advanced Notice of Public Rulemaking

(60 days)

OGC Review and Departmental Clearance

(60 days)

NOP publishes an FR notice for an Advanced Notice of Public Rulemaking

(Allow 60 days for public comment)

NOP receives comments, forwards to NOSB, and posts to the NOP Website

(All comments shall be in NOSB possession no later than 7 days after the closing date of public comment)

Fall 2013 111 of 268
Chart 4: 

Sunset 

Review

Final Rule 

Process

NOSB submits 

recommendation 

to remove material

Does NOSB 

committee have 

evidence for 

removal?

Yes

No

No

NOP provides 

public 

announcement

Yes

Yes

Evidence for 

removal from the 

Public Input?

NOSB submits 

recommendation to 

continue listing material

NOSB Committee Receives Request to 

Review Sunset Material – plus copies of 

public input

Is a Technical 

Review needed to 

make decision?

No

Form a 

Technical 

Advisory Panel 

(TAP)

TAP completes 

technical review 

and submits 

findings to 

NOSB 

committee

 NOP Drafts Final Rule

(90 days)

OGC Review

(90 days)

Interagency Review

(90 days)

OMB Review

(90 days)

Congressional Review

(60 days)

Final rule is Final

Fall 2013 112 of 268
HANDLING TECHNICAL ERRORS AFTER AN ITEM HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE 

FEDERAL REGISTER 

In order to minimize confusion in the organic community, the Board needs to monitor and 

correct any discrepancies that may occur between the time an item is voted on and 

subsequently published in the Federal Register. Examples include:

• Annotations that differ from the original NOSB recommendation. Annotations may be 

changed by the Program to accommodate the requirements of other federal regulatory 

bodies (ex: livestock medications withholding times).

• Annotations added to address any unforeseen consequences of an NOSB 

recommendation, to accommodate the requirements of the organic industry. For example, 

the absence of an explicit description of what methods of extraction are allowed for specific 

materials could result in the unwanted use of materials extracted using prohibited extraction 

processes.

The Board should follow these steps to monitor and correct technical discrepancies: 

• The Secretary of the Board, with the assistance of the Advisory Board Specialist, shall 

review all additions to the Federal Register and report to the Board any discrepancies 

between Board recommendations and those published in the Federal Register. 

• When the NOP incorporates changes to a recommendation that was voted on by the 

Board, the Board Officers (Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary) should be notified prior to 

any final action. The Board Officers will notify the Board and then work with the Program

to document the reasons for such deviations in the preamble to the Rule. 

• In the case of unintended consequences with a published recommendation, the Chair of 

the Board, with the approval of the Executive Subcommittee, will assign a 

Subcommittee to resolve the issue. 

Fall 2013 113 of 268
APPENDICES AND RESOURCES

Appendix A - DECISION MAKING GUIDELINES FOR THE NOSB

• Define the Problem 

o What is the problem? 

o Identify where we are now. 

 State the present condition in no more than two sentences. 

o Identify where we want to be. 

 State the future objective in no more than two sentences. 

• Analyze the Problem 

o Why is there a problem? 

o Is the evidence of the problem supported by credible and compelling facts or 

data? 

 What are the facts or data used to draw an affirmative conclusion? 

o Who does this problem affect? 

o What is the problem's effect? 

o In what time frame must the problem be resolved? 

o If the problem deserves immediate attention, what other priorities must be 

adjusted to accommodate this problem? 

o If the problem deserves immediate attention, what are the consequences of a 

delay? 

• Develop Possible Solutions 

o Propose ideas for possible solutions 

o Evaluate ideas for possible solutions 

 List pros for each possible solution 

 List cons for each possible solution 

o Select a Solution 

 Is the recommended solution legal? 

 Is the recommended solution practical? 

 Is the recommended solution supported by credible and compelling facts 

or data? 

• What are the facts or data used to draw an affirmative conclusion? 

 How does the recommended solution solve the problem? 

 How does the recommended solution meet the time frame identified in 2(b)? 

o Review recommended solution for unintended consequences. 

• Develop Action Plan 

o Develop Action Steps 

 Identify action steps to bridge the gap between present condition and 

future objective using the recommended solution. 

o Approve Action Plan 

o Implement Action Plan 

Fall 2013 114 of 268
Appendix B - FACA FACTS

 

• The Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.2) and its implementing 

regulations (41 CFR Part 101-6.10) govern the creation, operation, and termination of 

advisory committees in the Executive Branch of the Federal Government. The National 

Organic Standards Board (NOSB) is a Department of Agriculture (USDA) non-discretionary 

advisory committee required by the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, as amended. 

• Advisory committees must be chartered before they can meet or conduct any business. 

Charters must be renewed every two years or they will be terminated under the sunset 

provisions of Section 14 of the FACA, unless otherwise provided by law. 

• Advisory committee meetings are required to be open to the public, with limited exceptions 

as provided for in Section 552b of title 5, United States Code. Meetings not subject to 

FACA include NOSB briefing meetings initiated by the USDA to exchange facts and 

information, member orientation and training, and NOSB Subcommittee meetings. Such 

meetings are not subject to FACA because they are not conducted for the purpose of 

providing the USDA with NOSB advice or recommendations. 

• Designated Federal Officers must approve all meetings and agendas, and attend meetings. 

The Advisory Board Specialist is the NOSB’s Designated Federal Officer. 

• Meeting notices and agendas must be published in the Federal Register to accommodate 

public participation. Although not required by FACA, the NOP strives to: 

o Post a provisional agenda on its web site no later than 90 days before the meeting is 

scheduled to begin 

o Post a final agenda, on its web site, no later than 45 days before the meeting is 

scheduled to begin

o Publish notice of the meeting in the Federal Register no later than 45 days before the 

meeting is scheduled to begin 

• While meeting transcripts are not required under FACA, the NOP invests in transcripts to 

support the transparency of Board meetings and to support subsequent rulemaking activities. 

The NOP also issues a short meeting summary, which is required by FACA, after each 

biannual meeting that summarizes the key issues discussed, and the outcome of voting. 

• Advisory committee documents must be available for public inspection and copying until 

the committee ceases to exist 

• Interested persons shall be permitted to attend, appear before, or file statements with any 

advisory committee, subject to reasonable rules or regulations. 

• Additional information may be found at the FACA homepage: 

http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/channelView.do?pageTypeId=8203&channelPage=/ep/chan

nel/gsaOverview.jsp&channelId=-13170

 

Fall 2013 115 of 268
Appendix C - PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE AT A GLANCE 

TO DO THIS YOU SAY THIS 

May you 

interrupt 

speaker?

Must you 

be 

seconded

?

Is the 

motion 

debatable?

Vote required

Adjourn the meeting I move that we adjourn no yes no majority

Recess the meeting I move that we recess 

until... no yes no majority

Complain about noise, 

room temperature, etc. Question of privilege yes no no no vote

Suspend further 

consideration of 

something 

I move that the motion 

be laid on the table no yes no majority

End debate I move the previous 

question no yes no 2/3 vote

Postpone consideration 

of something 

I move we post pone 

this matter until... no yes yes majority

Have something studied 

further 

I move to refer the 

motion to the 

Subcommittee

no yes yes majority

Amend a motion I move to amend... no yes yes majority

Introduce business (a 

primary motion) I move that... no yes yes majority

Object to procedure or 

to a personal affront Point of order yes no no chair decides

Request information Point of information yes no no no vote

Ask for a vote by actual 

count to verify a voice 

vote 

I call for a division no no no no vote

Object to the 

consideration of some 

undiplomatic matter

I object to the 

consideration of the 

question 

yes no no 2/3 vote

Take up a matter 

previously tabled 

I move to take from the 

table no yes no majority

Reconsider something 

already disposed of I move to reconsider... yes yes yes majority

Consider something 

vote out of its scheduled 

order 

I move we suspend the 

rules and consider... no yes no 2/3 vote

Vote on a ruling by the 

chair 

I appeal the decision of 

the chair yes yes yes majority

Table a motion - take 

matter from table

I move to take from the 

table No Yes No majority

Rescind motions –

Cancel previous action I move to rescind No Yes Yes 2/3 vote

Source: Robert’s Rules of Order

Fall 2013 116 of 268
Appendix D - BASIC CHEMISTRY

The science of chemistry deals with the structure of matter--material things--and the changes 

that matter undergoes. Matter can exist in any size, shape, or color. It is solid, liquid, or gas; 

living or nonliving. Chemistry seeks to identify the simplest parts of matter; how they are 

separated and purified; how they are put together; how they are rearranged to produce new 

forms of matter; and what energy is absorbed or released when such rearrangements are 

made (Matta and Wilbraham, 1986). A distinction should be made between chemical and 

physical changes. The OFPA and NOS definition of synthetic specifically mentions chemical 

change but not physical change. A physical property is a quality or condition of a substance 

that can be observed or measured without changing the substance’s composition. It can be 

specified without reference to any other substance. Other physical properties of matter include 

color, solubility, mass, odor, hardness, density, electrical conductivity, magnetism, melting 

point and boiling point. Physical properties help chemists identify substances (Matta and 

Wilbraham, 1986). When contractors are hired to technical review of substances for the NOSB 

and USDA/NOP, they typically list the physical properties of the substances in their review 

because this is the common way in which substances are described. 

Physical changes may result when the temperature of a substance changes. Raising the 

temperature of a solid may turn it into a liquid (i.e., ice turns into water). A conversion without 

causing a change in the composition of the substance is called a physical change (Matta and 

Wilbraham, 1986). When ice undergoes the physical change of melting, this change does not 

change the nature of water. The physical properties are the same for water that has been 

frozen and melted as for water that has been converted into steam and then condensed (Matta 

and Wilbraham, 1986). Historically, the organic industry and the NOSB have acknowledged 

that physical changes do not render a substance synthetic. 

However, there are some substances that have been identified where high temperatures 

during manufacturing do engender a chemical change in the substance. An example is mined 

minerals. Historically, the industry and NOSB has recognized that burning or excessive 

heating of mined mineral is considered to render them synthetic. Formerly, NOSB defined 

mined minerals as any naturally-occurring non-living substance derived from the earth or 

water. A mined mineral cannot have undergone molecular change through heating, 

acidification, basification or fortification with synthetic materials (NOSB Final Recommendation 

Addendum Number 25, Definitions and Interpretations, Austin, Texas, 1995). Therefore, heat 

can alter the physical properties of a substance and for other substances act as a catalyst in 

chemical reactions or change. 

In a chemical reaction, the starting substance or substances, referred to as reactants, are 

changed into new substances or products. Chemists use an arrow as a shorthand form of the 

phrase “are changed into”; reactants products (Matta and Wilbraham,1986). An example to 

distinguish between physical and chemical changes is illustrated when sulfur (a solid) is added 

to iron filings (a solid). They may be separated unchanged from a mixture of the two 

substances mixed together. This separation is an example of a physical change. If the 

mixture of these two substances is heated, a chemical change takes place and the sulfur and 

iron are changed into a nonmagnetic substance, iron sulfide: Iron + Sulfur Iron Sulfide (Matta 

and Wilbraham, 1986). A substances’ composition and behavior in chemical reactions--its 

chemical reactivity--comprise its chemical properties. 

 

Fall 2013 117 of 268
What is a substance? 

In chemistry, a pure substance is a homogenous material that has a definite chemical 

composition throughout. There are two kinds of pure substances. One kind can be 

decomposed into two or more different substances by simple chemical change; these are 

called compounds. There are many millions of compounds. 

An example of a compound is pure table salt, which can be decomposed into sodium and 

chlorine by an appropriate process. Many of the substances on the National Lists of Synthetic 

substances allowed for use in organic crop and livestock production (Sections 205.601 and 

205.603) are compounds. Examples include: isopropanol, chlorine dioxide, ammonium 

carbonate, lime sulfur and copper sulfate. 

 

The second kind of pure substances are called elements, which cannot be decomposed by 

chemical change. There are 90 natural elements; examples are gold, copper, oxygen, sulfur 

and hydrogen. Elements cannot be separated into simpler substances by chemical reactions. 

An example of an element on the National List is sulfur (elemental) for crop production 

(205.601(e)(3))(Boikess and Edelson, 1978). 

 

Mixtures consist of a physical blend or two or more substances in which the combined 

substances retain their identity. Most materials found in nature are mixtures. Mixtures can be 

either homogeneous (same composition throughout) or heterogeneous (has non-uniform 

composition). A solution is a type of a mixture where there is a homogeneous combination of 

different substances. The difference between a heterogeneous mixture and a solution is that 

any sample of a solution has the same composition, while the composition of a mixture is not 

the same throughout. Solutions may be gaseous, liquid or solid. Examples of mixtures on the 

National List are aquatic plants and fish emulsions. The various compounds and elements that 

make up these products are within the plant, animal or mineral. When a particular component 

of the plant is desired for use in an agricultural input it typically has to be extracted and in 

many cases undergo additional chemical reactions to make it into a substance that is 

functional when combined with other substances. 

 

A distinction should be drawn between a mixture and a compound. The elements making up 

a compound cannot be recovered without a chemical change. The substances making up 

a mixture or solution can. Some mixtures can be separated into their various components by 

simple physical methods. An example is a gray-colored mixture produced by stirring together 

powdered yellow sulfur and black iron filings. The individual particles of sulfur and iron can be 

readily distinguished from one another under a microscope. The mixture is easy to separate 

because the iron filings can be removed from the mixture with a magnet leaving sulfur behind. 

Both the sulfur and the iron are unchanged in composition (example from Matta and 

Wilbraham, 1986). 

 

The substances making up a mixture or a solution need not be elements. For example, one 

can prepare a solution by dissolving salt, a compound, in water another compound. In addition, 

the substances making up a mixture or a solution can be combined in varying proportions. 

The elements in a compound have fixed proportions (paragraph found in Boikess and Edelson, 

1978). Main groups of compounds can be classified based on similar chemical properties.The 

following are descriptions of each group (Boikess and Edelson, 1978).

Fall 2013 118 of 268
Salts: a compound of a metal and nonmetal, or of a metal with a negative polyatomic group. 

Compounds that have an ammonium group (NH4+) instead of a metal are also classified as 

salts. Some salts are NaCl, KCl, KMnO4 and NH4Cl. A salt is an ionic solid a room 

temperature. Most have two ionic components (a) a cation, which can be a polyatomic group 

such as ammonium or a monoatomic metal such as Na+, K+, Ca2+ or Mn3+ and (b) an anion, 

which can be a negative polyatomic group or a monoatomic ion such as Cl- or NH3-. A solid 

salt consists of ions in close association. When the salt dissolves in water, the ions are 

separated. Substances that exist as ions in solution are called electrolytes. When NaCl 

dissolves in water, the correct formula is Na+ + Cl-. This formula treats the component ions of 

the salts as independent entities, which is approximately how they behave in water solution. 

Salts are called strong electrolytes because they usually separate completely into ions in 

water. (Boyd text) 

Acids: a compound that is a source of H+ions. An acid is usually a compound of hydrogen 

and a nonmetal or a negative polyatomic group. Unlike salts, acids usually are not aggregates 

of ions. An acid may be a gas (hydrochloric), liquid (sulfuric) or a solid (oxalic). Like salts, 

acids tend to form ions when the dissolve in water. When a substance separates into ions it is 

said to dissociate. Some acids dissociate completely and are called strong acids. Most acids 

dissociate only partially when dissolved in water. These are called weak acids, they are weak 

electrolytes. 

 

Bases: a compound that is a source of OH- ions in water solution. A compound of a cation 

and the OH- anion is a base. Bases resemble salts in many ways. They are ionic solids that 

dissociate into ions when dissolved in water. Bases that contain a cation and OH- are 

generally dissociate completely in water and are classified as strong bases. Some strong 

bases are NaOH (sodium hydroxide) and KOH (potassium hydroxide). Compounds that do not 

contain hydroxide ions are defined as bases if they produce OH- ions by reaction with water. 

An example is ammonia (NH3) which reacts with water to produce hydroxide ions. 

 

Nonelectrolytes: Compounds containing only nonmetals usually exist as discrete molecules, 

rather than collections of ions. These compounds do not dissociate into ions when they 

dissolve in water. Many organic compounds are nonelectrolytes and they will not dissolve 

appreciably in water i.e. oil. Some will dissolve in water, although they will not dissociate into 

ions i.e. sugar, and ethyl alcohol. 

 

Oxides: is a binary compound of any element with oxygen, when the oxygen has an oxidation 

number of 

-2

. Almost every element forms at least on oxide. The properties of oxides vary 

widely- depending on the element they may resemble a salt, acid, base or non electrolyte. 

 

What constitutes a chemical change? 

The chemical properties of a substance are those that describe the way in which it can

undergo change, either alone or in interactions with other substances, to form different 

materials. Such changes are called chemical reactions. The chemical properties that are 

characteristic of any substance can be described- iron combines readily with oxygen to form 

the compound called rust. (Boikess and Edelson, 1978). 

The following are common types of chemical reactions that describe what is happening when 

different substances and compounds interact (Boikess and Edelson,1978). 

Fall 2013 119 of 268
• Addition or combination reaction: Two substances combine to form one: 

• 2Na+Cl

2

----2NaCl 

• Decomposition reactions: One compound breaks into two or more compounds or 

elements. 

• CaCO

3

-------CaO + CO

2

 

• Displacement reactions: Substances exchange parts. There are many types of these 

reactions but one of the most important is called metathesis which is the exchange of 

ions by two ionic compounds, with the anion of one compound joining the cation of the 

other compound and vice versa. AB+CD-AD + CB 

o 1. Hydrolysis is a displacement reaction of a substance or ion with water. Water 

is a source of both H+and OHions. The OHanion combines with the positive 

portion of the compound that is hydrolyzed. This positive portion may be a cation 

or an atom with a positive oxidation number. The H+

cation combines with the 

negative portion of the compound, which may be an anion or an atom with a 

negative oxidation number. 

o Acid-base reaction: an acid is a substance that can donate a proton, and a base 

is a substance that can accept a proton. 

Since many materials used in organic agriculture are derived from plants and animals it is 

important to mention chemical reactions that occur in by products of these organisms. In living 

organisms, enzymes play the role in catalyzing a specific reaction or type of reactions. 

Proteins are substances extracted from living organisms that maybe utilized in materials that 

are petitioned for use in organic production. Proteins are sensitive to relatively small changes 

in pH, temperature, or solvent composition may cause them to denature. Denaturation causes 

physical change, the most observable result is loss of biological activity. Except for cleavage 

of disulfide bonds, denaturation stems from changes in secondary, tertiary, or quaternary

structures through disruption of noncovalent interactions, such as hydrogen bonds, salt 

linkages and hydrophobic reactions. Common denaturing agents include the following: 

• Heat--most become denatured when heated above 50-60 degrees C. 

• Large changes in pH--adding concentrated acid or alkali to a protein in a aqueous 

solution causes changes in the charged character of ionizable side 

chains and interferes with salt linkages. 

• Detergents--treating a protein with sodium dodecylsulfate (SDS), a detergent, causes 

the native conformation to unfold and exposes the nonpolar protein 

side chains to the aqueous environment. These side chains are 

then stabilized by hydrophobic interaction with hydrocarbon chains 

of the detergent. 

• Organic Solvents- such as alcohols, acetone or ether. 

• Mechanical treatment. Most globular proteins denatured in aqueous solution if they are 

stirred or shaken vigorously. 

• Urea and guanidine hydrochloride- These substances can cause disruption of protein 

Fall 2013 120 of 268
hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic interactions. 

• Denaturation can be partial or complete. It can also be reversible or irreversible. 

Irreversible denaturation causes a fundamental change in the protein, in particular 

destroying any physiological (biological) activity. In the case of reversible denaturation, 

the change may only be temporary (Brown, 1988). 

 

References: 

 

Boikess, R.S. and Edelson, E. Chemical Principles. Harper and Row, New York, 1978. 

Brown, W.H. Introduction to Organic Chemistry. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, California, 

1988. 

Matta, Michael, and Wilbraham, A.C. General, Organic and Biological Chemistry. 

Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, California, 1986. 

Fall 2013 121 of 268
Appendix E - FORMS

NOSB Subcommittee proposal checklists (Handling, Crops/Livestock)

Template for Subcommittee Proposal Narrative

Proposals related to material petitions or sunset reviews, should include the following: 

National List reference: This section should identify the relevant Section(s) of the 

National List Annotations related to the material should also be included. 

Background: Background should include a brief discussion of the material under review, 

highlighting its uses, historical context, and past NOSB decisions. It should also include 

a short description of any current research done by the Subcommittee (e.g., review of 

technical reports, individual investigation, etc.) and should provide a description of the 

main arguments supporting the Subcommittee’s final decision, including any pertinent 

sections of the Regulation or OFPA. 

Proposal: The motion is the core idea of the proposal and should be stated clearly 

including any corresponding annotation(s). 

Subcommittee Vote: 

This section should include the names of the members who moved and seconded the 

motion, as well as the number of yes votes, no votes, absences, abstentions and 

recusals. A motion should always be presented in the affirmative. In the case of 

proposals for petitions to add materials to the National List, two votes should be taken 

and recorded; the first a classification motion for either synthetic or non-synthetic and 

the second to list or not list the material. 

 Back-up motion:

 Material Evaluation Checklist: (See appendix E) 

 Proposals for policy or procedure changes should include the following: 

Introduction: 

The introduction should include a brief summary of the proposal, key issues and 

relevance to the organic community, as well as the goals and intent of the proposal. 

Background: 

The background section should include information to justify the development of the 

proposal as well as any relevant work done by the NOSB or former Boards. 

Fall 2013 122 of 268
Relevant areas in the (Regulation): 

This section should include references to Sections of the Rule or OFPA which provide the 

basis for the proposal. 

Discussion: 

The discussion section should be a thorough explanation of the proposal. In this section 

you should emphasize the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of 

the proposal. Additionally, it is appropriate and advisable to mention any alternatives 

reviewed by the Subcommittee, and any stakeholders that might be affected

Proposal: 

 The core idea of the proposal should be stated clearly.

Subcommittee Vote: 

This section should include the names of the members who moved and seconded the 

motion, as well as the number of yes votes, no votes, absences, abstentions and 

recusals. A motion should always be presented in the affirmative. In the case of proposals 

for petitions to add materials to the National List, two votes should be taken and recorded; 

the first, a classification motion for either synthetic or non-synthetic, and the second to list 

or not list the material. 

 Back-up motion:

Minority opinion: 

A Subcommittee or task force member who holds a dissenting opinion can include a 

minority report in the Subcommittee proposal. A minority report should include the reasons 

for the opposition to a proposal and cite specific opposition points. In addition, alternative 

approaches, solutions, or suggested amendments could be included. The minority report 

will be included as a separate document at the end of the proposal. 

Template for Subcommittee Discussion Document

Cover sheet for Final NOSB recommendations

Fall 2013 123 of 268
Appendix F - INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN A PETITION 

 

 

Any person may petition to add a substance to or remove a substance from the National List of 

Allowed and Prohibited Substances by submitting the appropriate information and following the 

procedures identified below. 

ITEM A

The petitioner should identify which of the following categories the substance is being 

petitioned for inclusion on or removal from the National List:

• Synthetic substance's allowed for use in organic crop production 

• Nonsynthetic substances prohibited for use in organic crop production 

• Synthetic substances allowed for use in organic livestock production 

• Nonsynthetic substances prohibited for use in organic livestock production 

• Nonagricultural (nonorganic) substances allowed in or on processed products labeled 

as “organic'' or “made with organic (specified ingredients) or 

• Nonorganic agricultural substances not commercially available in organic form 

ITEM B

The petitioner must submit the following information: 

• The substance’s common name. 

• The manufacturer’s name, address, and telephone number. 

• The intended or current use of the substance such as use as a pesticide, animal feed 

additive, processing aid, nonagricultural ingredient, sanitizer, or disinfectant. 

• A list of the crop, livestock, or handling activities for which the substance will be used. If 

used for crops or livestock, the substance's rate and method of application must be 

described. If used for handling (including processing), the substance’s mode of action 

must be described. 

• The source of the substance and a detailed description of its manufacturing or 

processing procedures from the basic component(s) to the final product. Petitioners with 

concerns for confidential business information can follow the guidelines in the 

Instructions for Submitting Confidential Business Information (CBI) listed in #13. 

• A summary of any available previous reviews by State or private certification programs 

or other organizations of the petitioned substance. 

• Information regarding EPA, FDA, and State regulatory authority registrations, including 

registration numbers. 

• The Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) number or other product numbers of the 

substance and labels of products that contains the petitioned substance. 

• The substance's physical properties and chemical mode of action including (a) chemical 

interactions with other substances, especially substances used in organic production; 

(b) toxicity and environmental persistence; (c) environmental impacts from its use or 

manufacture; (d) effects on human health; and, (e) effects on soil organisms, crops, or 

livestock. 

• Safety information about the substance including a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) 

Fall 2013 124 of 268
and a substance report from the National Institute of Environmental Health Studies. 

• Research information about the substance which includes comprehensive substance 

research reviews and research bibliographies, including reviews and bibliographies 

which present contrasting positions to those presented by the petitioner in supporting 

the substance's inclusion on or removal from the National List.

• A “Petition Justification Statement'' which provides justification for one of the following 

actions requested in the petition:

o Inclusion of a Synthetic on the National List, §§ 205.601, 205.603, 

205.605(b)

 Explain why the synthetic substance is necessary for the production or 

handling of an organic product. 

 Describe any non-synthetic substances, synthetic substances on the 

National List or alternative cultural 

o methods that could be used in place of the petitioned synthetic substance. 

 Describe the beneficial effects to the environment, human health, or farm 

ecosystem from use of the synthetic substance that support its use 

instead of the use of a non-synthetic substance or alternative cultural 

methods. 

B. Removal of a Synthetic From the National List, §§ 205.601, 205.603, 205.605(b) 

• Explain why the synthetic substance is no longer necessary or appropriate for the 

production or handling of an organic product. 

• Describe any non-synthetic substances, synthetic substances on the National List or 

alternative cultural methods that could be used in place of the petitioned synthetic 

substance. 

C. Inclusion of a Prohibition of a Non-Synthetic, §§ 205.602 and 205.604 

• Explain why the non-synthetic substance should not be permitted in the production of 

an organic product. 

• Describe other non-synthetic substances or synthetic substances on the National List 

or alternative cultural methods that could be used in place of the petitioned substance. 

D. Removal of a Prohibited Non-Synthetic from the National List, §§ 205.602 and 205.604 

• Explain why the non-synthetic substance should be permitted in the production of an 

organic product. 

• Describe the beneficial effects to the environment, human health, or farm ecosystem 

from use of the non-synthetic substance that supports its use instead of the use of other 

non-synthetic or synthetic substances on the National List or alternative cultural 

methods. 

E. Inclusion of a Non-Synthetic, Non-Agricultural Substance Onto the National List, § 

205.605(a) 

Fall 2013 125 of 268
• Explain why the substance is necessary for use in organic handling. 

• Describe non-synthetic or synthetic substances on the National List or alternative 

cultural methods that could be used in place of the petitioned synthetic substance. 

• Describe any beneficial effects on the environment, or human health from the use of 

the substance that support its use instead of the use of non-synthetic or synthetic 

substances on the National List or alternative cultural methods. 

F. Removal of a Non-Synthetic, Non-Agricultural Substance From the National List, § 

205.605(a) 

• Explain why the substance is no longer necessary for use in organic handling. 

• Describe any non-synthetic or synthetic substances on the National List or alternative 

cultural methods that could be used in place of the petitioned substance. 

G. Inclusion of a Non-Organically Produced Agricultural Substance Onto the National List, 

§ 205.606 

• Provide a comparative description on why the non-organic form of the substance is 

necessary for use in organic handling. 

• Provide current and historical industry information/research/evidence that explains 

how or why the substance cannot be obtained organically in the appropriate form, 

appropriate quality, and appropriate quantity to fulfill an essential function in a system of 

organic handling. 

• Describe industry information on substance non-availability of organic sources 

including but not limited to the following guidance regarding commercial availability 

evaluation criteria: 

(1) Regions of production, including factors such as climate and number of 

regions; 

(2) Number of suppliers and amount produced; 

(3) Current and historical supplies related to weather events such as hurricanes, 

floods, and droughts that may temporarily halt production or destroy crops or 

supplies; 

(4) Trade related issues such as evidence of hoarding, war, trade barriers, or 

civil unrest that may temporarily restrict supplies, and 

(5) Other issues which may present a challenge to a consistent supply. 

H. Removal of a Non-Organically Produced Agricultural Substance From the National List, 

§ 205.606 

• Provide a comparative description as to why the non-organic form of the substance is 

not necessary for use in organic handling. 

• Provide current and historical industry information/research/evidence that explains 

how or why the substance can be obtained organically in the appropriate form, 

appropriate quality, and appropriate quantity to fulfill an essential function in a system of 

organic handling. 

• Provide new industry information on substance availability of organic sources 

including but not limited to the following guidance commercial availability evaluation 

criteria: 

Fall 2013 126 of 268
(1) Region of production, including factors such as climate and number of 

regions; 

(2) Number of suppliers and amount produced; 

(3) Current and historical supplies related to weather events such as hurricanes, 

floods, or droughts that temporarily halt production or destroy crops or supplies; 

(4) Trade related issues such as evidence of hoarding, war, trade barriers, and 

civil unrest that may temporarily restrict supplies and; 

(5) Any other issues which may present a challenge to a consistent supply. 

• A Commercial Confidential Information Statement which describes the specific required 

information contained in the petition that is considered to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or confidential commercial information and the basis for that 

determination. Petitioners should limit their submission of confidential information to that 

needed to address the areas for which this notice requests information. Instructions for 

submitting CBI to the National List Petition process are presented in the instructions 

below: 

• Financial or commercial information the applicant does not want disclosed for 

competitive reasons can be claimed as CBI. Applicants must submit a written 

justification to support each claim. 

• “Trade secrets'' (information relating to the production process, such as formulas, 

processes, quality control tests and data, and research methodology) may be claimed 

as CBI. This information must be 

• commercially valuable, 

• used in the applicant's business, and 

• maintained in secrecy. 

• Each page containing CBI material must have “CBI Copy'' marked in the upper right 

corner of the page. In the right margin, mark the CBI information with a bracket and 

“CBI.'' 

• The CBI-deleted copy should be a facsimile of the CBI copy, except for spaces 

occurring in the text where CBI has been deleted. Be sure that the CBI-deleted copy is 

paginated the same as the CBI copy. (The CBI-deleted copy of the application should 

be made from the same copy of the application which originally contained CBI.) 

Additional material (transitions, paraphrasing, or generic substitutions, etc.) should not 

be included in the CBI-deleted copy. 

• Each page with CBI-deletions should be marked “CBI-deleted'' at the upper right corner 

of the page. In the right margin, mark the place where the CBI material has been 

deleted with a bracket and “CBI- deleted.'' 

• If several pages are CBI-deleted, a single page designating the numbers of deleted 

pages may be substituted for blank pages. (For example, “pages 7 through 10 have 

been CBI-deleted.'') 

• All published references that appear in the CBI copy should be included in the reference 

list of the CBI-deleted copy. Published information usually cannot be claimed as 

confidential. 

National List substance evaluations conducted by the NOSB will involve a public and open 

process. No confidential information will be available for public inspection. 

Fall 2013 127 of 268
The NOP National List Manager may request additional information from the petitioner 

following receipt of the petition. 

Appendix G - TECHNICAL ADVISORY PANEL (TAP) CONTRACT PROCEDURES 

Statement of Work 

Request for Proposals to Perform Technical Advisory Panel Evaluation of Substances 

Petitioned for Inclusion on or Removal from the National Organic Program's National List of 

Allowed and Prohibited Substances. 

 

Agency Need 

See Statement of Work, 1.0 Background.

 

• Background 

The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA), as amended, requires the Secretary of 

Agriculture (Secretary) to establish a National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances 

(National List). This list identifies the synthetic substances that may be used, and the 

nonsynthetic substances that cannot be used, by organic production and handling 

operations. The OFPA authorizes the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) to 

develop and forward to the Secretary a recommended Proposed National List, and 

subsequent proposed amendments to it. The OFPA provides that persons may petition the 

NOSB to evaluate a substance for inclusion on or removal from the National List 

The NOSB submitted a Proposed National List to the Secretary that was subsequently 

published on December 21, 2000, as part of the National Organic Program (NOP) final rule, 

65 Fed. Reg. 80548-80684, (2000). Based on information supplied to the NOSB by trade 

associations, certification organizations and other organic industry sources, there are many 

substances currently used in organic production and handling that have not been evaluated 

by the NOSB for inclusion on the National List. Evaluations of these substances must be 

expedited to prevent the possible disruption of well-established and accepted production, 

handling, and processing systems. 

Section 2119 of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6518 (k)(3)) provides that the NOSB shall convene 

Technical Advisory Panels (TAP) to provide scientific evaluation of substances for inclusion 

on the National List. TAP evaluations assist the NOSB in evaluating substances being 

considered for addition to or removal from the National List. The NOP, on behalf of the 

NOSB, establishes contracts to conduct the TAP evaluations. 

 

• Mission of USDA/AMS/NOP 

 

The mission of NOP is to establish national standards governing the marketing of certain 

agricultural products as organically produced. The NOP is assisted by the NOSB, which 

provides policy advice in carrying out the program, including advising the Secretary on 

substances for inclusion on or removal from the National List. 

The NOSB reviews information from various sources in evaluating substances for inclusion 

on or removal from the National List. Sources include TAP evaluations, the Environmental 

Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institute of 

Environmental Health Studies, and public comment. The NOSB submits its 

Fall 2013 128 of 268
recommendations, along with the results of the required evaluation and technical advisory 

panel evaluation for each substance, to the Secretary for consideration in accordance with 

the requirements of section 2118(d) of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6517(d)). 

 

• Specific Task 

The contractor(s) shall furnish technical advisory panel evaluations for crop production,

livestock production, and processing substances submitted to the NOSB in response to 

petition notices, such as was published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2000, as well as 

other substances requiring evaluation as determined by the NOP. 

For crop and livestock production substances, the contractor(s) shall use the criteria in 

Section 2119 of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6518 (m)(l-7)). The criteria are: 

• The potential of the substance for detrimental chemical interactions with other materials 

used in organic farming systems; 

• The toxicity and mode of action of the substance and of its breakdown products or any 

contaminants, and their persistence in the environment; 

• The probability of environmental contamination during manufacture, use, misuse or 

disposal of the substance; 

• Its effects on human health; 

• The effects of the substance on biological and chemical interactions in the 

agroecosystem; 

• The alternatives to using the substance; and, 

• The compatibility of the substance with a system of sustainable agriculture. 

 

For processing substances, the contractor(s) shall use the criteria approved at the February 

10, 1999, NOSB meeting. The criteria are: 

• Processing aid or adjuvant cannot be produced from a natural source and has no 

organic ingredients as substitutes; 

• Manufacture, use, and disposal do not have adverse effects on the environment and are 

done in a manner compatible with organic handling as described in section 6513 of the 

OFPA; 

• The nutritional quality of the food is maintained and the material itself or its breakdown 

products do not have adverse effects on human health as defined by applicable Federal 

regulations; 

• The primary purpose is not as a preservative or used only to recreate/improve flavors, 

colors, textures, or nutritive value lost during processing, except in the latter case as 

required by law; 

• It is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) by FDA when used in accordance with 

Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and contains no residues of heavy metals or 

other contaminants in excess of FDA tolerances; 

• Its use is compatible with the principles of organic handling; and, 

Fall 2013 129 of 268
• There is no other way to produce a similar product without its use and it is used in the 

minimum quantity required to achieve the process. 

 

Minimum Skills and Experience Requirements 

Contractor(s) shall utilize qualified individuals or organizations who have specialized 

knowledge of the petitioned substances. Contractor(s) must have demonstrable expertise 

in organic production and handling or scientific disciplines such as veterinary medicine, 

chemistry, food technology, microbiology or toxicology. Contractor(s) must be familiar with 

the requirement for technical advisory panels described in the Organic Foods Production 

Act of 1990. 

 

Place of Performance 

Contractor(s) shall perform all task related activity within the United States of America at 

specific locations determined by contractor(s). During the contract period, the contractor(s) 

shall travel at contractor(s)’s expense to NOSB meetings for the purpose of disseminating 

substance review findings to the NOSB and general public. 

 

Government Furnished Equipment and Facility 

None, except that the NOP shall provide Contractor(s), on a non-routine basis, with 

substance review petitions, ancillary documents or other applicable information in 

possession of NOP. 

 

Compensation 

The NOP may award multiple contracts for tasks outlined in this statement of work. 

Contractor(s) shall be compensated at a firm-fixed price rate not to exceed $4,000.00 per 

substance reviewed. Total compensation shall not exceed $100,000.00. 

 

 Period of Performance 

September 30, 2001 – September 30, 2002 (262 working days)(Holiday time off is at 

contractor(s)’ discretion.) 

Scope of Performance 

Phase 1: Data Gathering and Compilation (120 days) 

Phase I is not to exceed 120 days for any one substance. During this phase the 

contractor(s) provider shall perform the following activities: 

• Characterize [the] substance(s) and identify uses and applications; 

• Determine whether [the] substance(s) are synthetic or non-synthetic (See 7.S.C. 6502 

(21) for definition of synthetic);

• Determine [the] substance(s) chemical or biological composition and possible impact on 

human/animal health and the environment; 

• Identify [the] substance(s) relevant toxicological studies, including ensuring substance 

does not contain residues of heavy metals or other environmental contaminants in 

Fall 2013 130 of 268
excess of Food and Drug Administration Action Level or Environmental Protection 

Agency tolerances; 

• Determine [the] substance(s) persistence in the environment; 

• Determine [the] substance(s) effect on soil structure and ecology; 

• Identify alternatives to the use of the substance(s); 

• Determine [the] substance(s) historical use in organic production, processing and 

handling; and 

• Determine [the] substance(s) status under OFPA and with other government agencies. 

Additionally, within 45 days of commencement of Phase I, the contractor(s) must notify the 

NOP in writing of any substance(s) not appropriate for National List evaluation. Other 

substances for evaluation may be substituted upon agreement between the NOP, the 

NOSB, and the contractor(s). 

 

Phase 2: Evaluation against Criteria (100 days) 

Phase II is not to exceed 100 days for any one substance. The contractor(s) shall engage 

no less than three evaluators for each substance. No current member of the NOSB may 

serve as an evaluator. Evaluators may use data from all relevant sources. Evaluators shall 

make recommendations to the contractor(s) as to the substance’s status as synthetic or

non-synthetic and whether, in either case, the substance should be added to or removed 

from the National List. 

 

Phase 3: Recommendation (42 days) 

Phase III is not to exceed 42 days for any one substance. Contractor(s) shall provide the 

NOP with a recommendation regarding each substance's suitability for inclusion on or 

removal from the National List. All data and analyses collected in Phase I and II will be 

forwarded to the NOP upon the completion of Phase III in accordance with the reporting 

requirements stated below. 

 

Evaluation Factors for Award 

The NOP may award multiple contracts for tasks outlined in this statement of work. 

Contractor(s) selection will be based on evaluation of proposals in accordance with the 

responses received to the criteria outlined in Section 4.0, Minimum Skills and Experience 

Requirements and Section 9.0, Scope of Tasks. Award will be made to that offeror whose 

combination of technical experience and cost represents the best value to the Government and 

is most advantageous (cost, and other factors considered), and which is within the available 

NOP resources. 

The NOP also reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received and/or request 

clarification or modification of proposals. The NOP reserves the right to determine a 

competitive range for negotiation based upon the technical and cost acceptability of proposals. 

In addition, the NOP reserves the right to award a contract without discussions. 

Cost evaluation will include an analysis of the total cost and cost elements (if applicable) to 

perform the required work. The total costs supplied by the offeror shall constitute the total firmfixed unit price for that service or deliverable. 

Fall 2013 131 of 268
Proposals that are unrealistic in terms of technical commitment, or unreasonably low or high in 

costs, will be deemed reflective of an inherent lack of technical competence or as indicative of 

a failure to comprehend the complexity involved in the contract requirements. Such may be 

grounds for rejection of the proposal. 

 

Other Evaluation Factors 

Technical proposals will be initially evaluated with respect to six (6) major factors for 

determination of the competitive range. Technical factors are listed in descending order of 

importance. The technical proposal is of greater importance than the cost proposal; when 

technical proposals are relatively equal in technical merit, cost will increase in importance. 

Technical Factors: 

Factor 1 Overall Technical Approach; Proposed Methodology; Demonstrated 

Understanding of the Scope of Work and the Requirements 

Factor 2 Previous Demonstrated Experience and Past Performance 

Factor 3 Quality Control 

Factor 4 Capability and Experience of Key Personnel 

Factor 5 Project Management and Support Capability 

Factor 6 Reasonableness of Cost 

 

Reporting Requirements 

Progress reports are due to the NOP each 60 days after the contract award date. A final report 

is due within 60 days of the end of the contract period. The contractor(s) shall forward five 

copies of the bi-monthly progress reports and the final report and all deliverables to the NOP in 

Washington DC. Documents should be addressed to: Richard H. Mathews, Program 

Manager, National Organic Program, USDA-AMS-TM-NOP, 1400 Independence Avenue, 

S.W., Room 4008-So., Ag Stop 0268, Washington, D.C. 20250-0200, Attention: Substance 

Evaluations. 

The narrative in the progress reports should refer back to the stated objectives and timeline of 

the original contract proposal. Beneath each objective, the objective's current status should be 

reported. Any substantive diversion from a stated objective, or any deviation from the proposed 

timeline should be explained. Only the activities required under the contract should be 

reported. At a minimum, the progress reports should also include the following: 

• A short summary of the accomplishments for the reporting period; 

• Progress on completing individual project tasks; 

• The planned and actual schedules for task completion; 

• Projected accomplishments for the next reporting period; and, 

• Data on financial expenditures by task category. 

Any deliverables required under the contract should be submitted upon completion and 

Fall 2013 132 of 268
addressed to: NOP Program Director, National Organic Program, USDA-AMS-TM-NOP, 1400 

Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 4004-So., Ag Stop 0268, Washington, D.C. 20250-0268, 

Attention: Substance Evaluations. 

Appendix H - Research Priorities Framework 

March 27, 2012

Introduction

A discussion document on a Research Priorities Framework was circulated at the last National 

Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meeting in November 2011. Relatively little public comment 

was received but much of the public comment on the other issues on the agenda brought up 

the ongoing need for research on many topics that come before the NOSB. We are therefore 

proceeding to adopt criteria and a process for making the research priorities of the NOSB 

known to researchers, funders, and the public.

Background

Please refer to the previous (September 27, 2011) Proposed Discussion Document for most of 

the background about why there is a need for this recommendation.

The discussion document was generally viewed favorably by the commenters with the primary 

constructive points being fleshing out how the information is prioritized and disseminated and 

the suggested addition of one criterion about need for alternatives to materials on the National 

List.

Relevant areas in the Rule 

The very definition of Organic Production implies a positive approach to farming and handling 

that would benefit from research into the integration of cultural, biological and mechanical 

practices:

"§ 205.2 Terms defined.

Organic production. A production system that is managed in accordance with the Act and regulations in 

this part to respond to site-specific conditions by integrating cultural, biological, and mechanical practices 

that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity."

The National List section requires the NOSB to evaluate a variety of criteria. In doing so, the 

NOSB often finds gaps in the research that would be relevant to making an informed decision 

on whether to add a substance to the National List.

"§ 205.600 Evaluation criteria for allowed and prohibited substances, methods, and ingredients

The following criteria will be utilized in the evaluation of substances or ingredients for the organic 

production and handling sections of the National List:

......."

Discussion

Much discussion of this topic occurred in the Discussion document from fall 2011. The goals of 

this recommendation are worth repeating here, with a little streamlining. 

Fall 2013 133 of 268
The primary goal of this framework is for the NOSB to align on criteria for prioritizing 

research needs and recommend a process for collecting and communicating research 

needs. Additional benefits include:

• Influencing where research dollars are directed and increasing the amount of research being 

done related to organic agriculture. 

• Allowing the NOSB to be more proactive with regards to problematic or controversial 

National List substances by creating a mechanism to advocate for primary research ahead 

of material review dates

• Reducing disagreement within the organic community by increasing the amount of primary 

research on which decisions could be based, while satisfying many different stakeholders 

that the criteria have been met.

• Making the research community aware of the research needs of organic producers and 

handlers. Awareness could allow for USDA funding of primary research in these top priority 

areas and provide support for researchers submitting grants requests these research areas. 

It has been recognized through the process of reviewing materials by the NOSB that it is 

important not only to identify the research topic, but to ask the specific questions on a topic 

around which research is needed. 

As a recent example, oxytetracycline, indicates, the topic may be "Alternatives to Antibiotics in 

Organic Fruit Production", but then the supplemental research questions could include (these 

are only examples): 

o Are there common elements, such as cultural or biological methods, that should be 

incorporated into any Organic System Plan for prevention of fireblight?

o What are the region-specific limitations of resistance to fireblight for both rootstocks and 

varieties?

o What strategies and characteristics can make a fireblight resistant apple or pear variety 

acceptable to consumers?

o Are any of the alternative materials and methods named in the TR effective in all areas 

of the country?

o Are there other alternative materials that have not yet been investigated?

Each one of these questions may take a considerable time to research, but each of them are 

important and may fit into different areas of expertise from different researchers. Therefore, the 

committee feels that at least some questions should be associated with each of the top group 

of research priorities chosen. By doing this, aspiring organic researchers from among plant 

breeders, laboratory scientists, livestock nutritionists, pesticide toxicologists and more can 

have some guidance on what is needed and justification to put into research proposals.

Recommendation

This recommendation consists of criteria for identifying research needs, a process for the 

NOSB to use in developing a yearly recommendation on research needs, including making the 

public aware of the research recommendations.

Criteria

The criteria for prioritization are for those topics that the NOSB believes will have the largest 

long-term impact on growth and integrity of organic agriculture. These criteria are not 

presented in order of importance, but will be evaluated by the Materials Committee in selecting 

the top research needs. 

Criteria for research topics are:

Fall 2013 134 of 268
• Persistent and chronic (i.e., perennial topics of debate and need)

• Challenging

• Controversial (i.e., topics on which there are widely differing perspectives or for which there 

have been close NOSB votes)

• Nebulous (i.e., the research need is hard to identify but the organic agriculture need is clear). 

For example, improved methods of weed control.

• Lacking in primary research. That is, topics for which there is no active research being 

conducted, primarily relating to the criteria in OFPA for review of materials..

• Relevant to assessing the need for alternative cultural, biological, and mechanical methods to 

materials on the National List.

Process Framework

1. The Materials Committee will collect research topics from public comment, NOP and NOSB 

committees on an on-going basis. Specifically, the Materials committee should review research 

topic needs after every NOSB meeting to ensure that public comment and NOSB discussion on 

new research needs are added to a ‘running’ list. 

2. Each NOSB Committee will address the question of research priorities that have been 

uncovered in the course of Committee business. Committees shall identify the specific research 

need(s), background on the problem(s), and a description of how the research will contribute to 

the ability of the NOSB to carry out its function of reviewing materials in an organic systems 

framework. They shall submit their committee list to the Materials Committee after each NOSB 

meeting. 

3. Research topics will be kept by the Materials committee on an all-inclusive ‘running’ list. The list 

would include a description of the research questions that need to be addressed, and how the 

research methods need to be applied in an organic context. It can include a preliminary list of 

what entities are involved in that type of research and an evaluation of funding opportunities, 

collaborations and endorsements. 

4. On an annual basis, the committee will review the list and based on the criteria adopted above 

sort the list into two groups: the top research priorities for NOSB review as a recommendation, 

and the rest of the research suggestions to remain on an on-going list. The top priorities will not 

be ranked, but will have descriptions of the key questions that the NOSB wishes to see 

researched about each topic.

5. The Materials Committee will present the recommendation of the top research priorities to the 

full NOSB each year at the fall meeting. At this time public comment can be sought about the 

priorities and the research questions, as well as unbiased entities or individuals who may be 

able to conduct pressing organic research activities. The list of remaining items that the 

Materials Committee has chosen not to bring forward to the full Board will also be made 

available to the public, so that individuals with desire to research specific subjects can know 

what some of the broader topics are.

6. After a recommendation is finalized by the NOSB each fall the Chair of the Board will make sure 

it is sent to the primary organic research funders such as NIFA, ARS, NRCS, OFRF, and private 

foundations and other funders that may be identified. In addition all NOP staff, NOSB members 

and stakeholders can use the list for inspiring appropriate research. 

Adopted May 2012 14 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain, 1 absent, 0 recuse

Fall 2013 135 of 268
Fall 2013 136 of 268