[X] CLOSEMAIN MENU

[X] CLOSEIN THIS SECTION

photo

Learn About the Issues at the Spring 2016 NOSB Meeting

Keeping Organic Strong: Changes in organic regulations and farming practices
National Organic Standards Board

Spring 2016 NOSB Meeting
Comment by April 14, 2016!

On our Public Comment Alerts page, we have provided our positions on top priority issues, which you may use as the basis for your comments.

When: Monday, April 25, 2016 - 8:30am to Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 5:00pm
Where: Omni Shoreham Hotel, 2500 Calvert Street, NW, Washington, DC 20008

The spring 2016 meeting dates have been announced and public comments are due by April 14, 2016. Your comments and participation are critical to the integrity of the organic label.

The proposals of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), as a part of its ongoing review of practices and materials, were published for public comment. The public comment period will end April 14, 2016. On this page in the next few days, Beyond Pesticides will be providing the public with a listing and analysis of the issues under consideration of the Board when it meets in Washington, D.C. on April 25-27, 2016. You can view USDA's announcement of the NOSB recommendation here. Please check back to see Beyond Pesticides' analysis.

To truly make an impact in the future of organic, Beyond Pesticides encourages you to:

**On certain browsers, it may be necessary to download a PDF version of Beyond Pesticides' comments in order to view the navigation pane**

About the Board

The 15 member board, consisting of 4 farmers, 3 environmentalists, 3 consumers, 2 food processors, and one retailer, scientist and certifying agent, votes to allow or prohibit substances and practices in certified organic food and farming. The NOSB acts as a life-line from government to the organic community as it considers input from you, the public - the concerned citizens upon whom organic integrity depends. That is why your participation is vital to the development of organic standards. Rest assured, if you submit a public comment either in person or online, your concerns will be considered by the Board. Remember that the NOSB can't take serious action to protect organic integrity without your input!

Issues Before the NOSB for Spring 2016

Materials in the list below are either the subject of petitions or the subject of sunset review. Petitioned materials must have evidence summarized in the proposals that they meet the OFPA requirements of essentiality, no adverse effects on humans and the environment, and compatibility with organic practices. Sunset items are already on the National List, and being considered for delisting. They are subject to the same criteria, but are being considered under NOP's new rules.

The NOSB will receive and consider public comments on materials subject to "2018 Sunset Review" at this Spring 2016 meeting. All substantive comments must be submitted during the comment period or at the NOSB meeting. Comments received on 2018 sunset materials after that (i.e. at the Fall 2016 meeting) will be considered "untimely."

 

 

Crops Subcommittee

Handling Subcommittee

Livestock Subcommittee

Materials Subcommittee

Policy Development Subcommittee

   

 

 

See Full Meeting Agenda

 

Take Action at Regulations.gov!
(Comments Due April 14, 2016!)

 

See All
Comments So Far

 

See Beyond Pesticides' Commenting Guidelines

 

See All Meeting Materials and Issues

 

The Organic Foods Production Act

 

Proposals

  • Ash from Manure Burning - petitioned
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: Burning a material that is central to maintaining soil fertility and tilth in organic soils would be incompatible with organic production systems. There is nothing in the petition that refutes the judgment that ash from manure –including that produced by the petitioner’s process—is incompatible with organic production. Organic practices incorporate carbon in the soil. The petitioner’s process, like open burning, destroys high-energy carbon molecules that are essential for feeding the soil microbiology. The petitioner does not consider carbon a nutrient, and therefore devalues its presence in manure. While carbon may not be a plant nutrient, its presence as food for microbes and as humus is essential to organic soils. Therefore, Beyond Pesticides supports the CS recommendation to deny the petition.
  • Squid and Squid Byproducts - petitioned
  • Hypochlorous Acid - petitioned
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: The petition for hypochlorous acid claims that because sodium and calcium hypochlorite, which are currently on the National List in all three sections, exist in solution as hypochlorous acid, it is essentially allowed. In September 2015, NOP issued a memorandum accepting the argument of the petitioner, and at the same time, asked NOSB to review hypochlorous acid and the process used to make it. This process does not respect the role of the NOSB as gatekeeper of the National List, and therefore we ask that the NOP rescind their memorandum until the NOSB takes action on hypochlorous acid. The NOSB should delay recommending the addition of more sanitizers until it performs a thorough review of all sanitizers/disinfectants and their uses. In considering the inclusion of hypochlorous acid, the NOSB should evaluate the impacts of disposal of the sodium hydroxide that is co-generated with hypochlorous acid.
  • Soy Wax - petitioned
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here

Back to the table of contents

Crops 2018 Sunset Summaries 205.601 (Synthetic Materials Allowed in Organic Crop Production):

See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here

  • Copper Sulfate
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: 205.601(a)(3) Copper sulfate—for use as an algicide in aquatic rice systems, is limited to one application per field during any 24-month period. Application rates are limited to those which do not increase baseline soil test values for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by the producer and accredited certifying agent.

      205.601(e)(4) Copper sulfate—for use as tadpole shrimp control in aquatic rice production, is limited to one application per field during any 24-month period. Application rates are limited to levels which do not increase baseline soil test values for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by the producer and accredited certifying agent.

      Rice paddies replace natural wetlands and provide alternative habitat for animals threatened by the loss of wetlands. Unfortunately, many of these animals are sensitive to copper. In addition, copper sulfate is toxic to aquatic animals that could provide some biological control for the algae the copper is used to kill. The particular impacts on amphibians found in rice fields not only have a negative impact on biodiversity, but they also reduce possibilities for biological control of algae and tadpole shrimp. Thus, the use of copper sulfate in an aquatic environment like a rice field is inconsistent with a system of organic and sustainable agriculture.

  • Ozone Gas
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background:

      Ozone has high acute toxicity. Concentrations above 0.1 mg/L by volume average over an 8 hour period may cause nausea, chest pain, reduced visual acuity and pulmonary edema. Inhalation of >20 ppm for at least an hour may be fatal. In terms of chronic effects, ozone may have deleterious effects on the lungs and cause respiratory disease. The use of ozone may be seriously detrimental to the health of humans who work with it, and those exposed indirectly, downwind of exposure. The use of a known and problematic air pollutant could make its consideration as a tool in organic farming questionable. In view of the dangers associated with the use of ozone, the Crops Subcommittee should ask:

      1. Does the use of ozone in organic crop production pose a hazard for workers?
      2. Would restrictions on the use of ozone help protect workers?
  • Peracetic Acid
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: 

      205.601(a)(6) Peracetic acid—for use in disinfecting equipment, seed, and asexually propagated planting material. Also permitted in hydrogen peroxide formulations as allowed in §205.601(a) at concentration of no more than 6% as indicated on the pesticide product label. 205.601(i)(8) Peracetic acid—for use to control fire blight bacteria. Also permitted in hydrogen peroxide formulations as allowed in §205.601(i) at concentration of no more than 6% as indicated on the pesticide product label.

      Questions regarding peracetic acid:

      1. Is there new information about occupational hazards that should be taken into account in the sunset decision and/or in formulating an additional annotation?
      2. Can peracetic acid be used for fireblight without harm to soil and workers?
      3. Is peracetic acid effective for all uses of chlorine? If peracetic acid remains on the National List, can chlorine be eliminated from use in organic production?
  • EPA List 3 - Inerts of Unknown Toxicity 
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: The NOSB must take the sunset review of List 3 “inerts” seriously. Although List 3 “inerts” are included in the annotation change approved at the fall 2015 NOSB meeting, it may be several years before that annotation takes effect. Meanwhile, in 2012, the NOSB recommended an expiration date for List 3 that has now passed. The NOSB has identified the three List 3 “inerts” in use in organic production, and should review them according to OFPA criteria as required by law.

Back to the table of contents

Crops 2018 Sunset Summaries 205.602 (Non-Synthetic Materials Prohibited in Organic Crop Production):

  • Calcium Chloride
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: This petition appears to be essentially the same as the petition denied in 2006. It is also one in a series of a number of petitions that seeks to use organic agriculture as waste disposal. Others include calcium sulfate from flue gas desulfurization, ash from manure burning, sulfuric acid, and vinasse. While the use of organic waste products for fertility is a hallmark of organic production, organic agriculture should not be seen as a dumping ground for synthetic industrial waste products. The arguments in favor of denying the petition have already been stated by the NOSB. Therefore, Beyond Pesticides urges the NOSB to follow the reasoning of past Boards and deny the petition to use calcium chloride as a soil amendment.

Back to the table of contents

Discussion Document

Proposals

  • Sodium Lactate and Potassium Lactate - petitioned
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
  • Oat beta-glucan - petitioned
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: Beyond Pesticides opposes the listing of oat beta-glucan because it is grown using chemical-intensive methods, is not essential for organic production and handling, and is incompatible with organic production and handling. Oat beta-glucan is a soluble fiber extracted from oats that is claimed to deliver same fiber-related benefits as whole oats. Two other petitions –for barley beta-fiber (barley beta-glucan) and sugar beet fiber—that made similar claims were resoundingly denied (by votes of 12-3 and 15-0) in April 2013. The concerns that were raised at that time were lack of essentiality and incompatibility.
  • Hypochlorous acid - petitioned 
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: The petition for hypochlorous acid claims that because sodium and calcium hypochlorite, which are currently on the National List in all three sections, exist in solution as hypochlorous acid, it is essentially allowed. In September 2015, NOP issued a memorandum accepting the argument of the petitioner, and at the same time, asked NOSB to review hypochlorous acid and the process used to make it. This process does not respect the role of the NOSB as gatekeeper of the National List, and therefore we ask that the NOP rescind their memorandum until the NOSB takes action on hypochlorous acid. The NOSB should delay recommending the addition of more sanitizers until it performs a thorough review of all sanitizers/disinfectants and their uses. In considering the inclusion of hypochlorous acid, the NOSB should evaluate the impacts of disposal of the sodium hydroxide that is co-generated with hypochlorous acid.
  • Sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate (SDBS) - petitioned
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: Sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate is used –along with lactic acid—as one of the active ingredients in a formulated antimicrobial product for use in produce wash waters. The intended function of the product is to reduce the number of microorganisms in fruit and vegetable process water and on the surface of the fruit or vegetable. The proposed use is on raw and processed fruits and vegetables and involves a minimum ninety (90) second immersion in the antimicrobial wash water, followed by a draining process prior to further processing and/or serving. It may also be used on food contact surfaces.  The product causes substantial but temporary eye injury, and is harmful if absorbed through the skin. Prolonged or frequently repeated skin contact with the concentrate may cause allergic reactions. Beyond Pesticides opposes the listing of SDBS at this time. SDBS has advantages over other antimicrobials, particularly chlorine-based materials, including acidified sodium chlorite. However, we believe that the NOSB needs to base any decisions on petitions for antimicrobial products on a thorough review of the need for antimicrobials and the available products. Please see our comments on hypochlorous acid for more discussion of that issue.
  • Ancillary Substances
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Background: Ancillary substances are added to ingredients found in organic foods to achieve some effect in those ingredients --preservative, adjusting moisture, even pest control. The NOSB adopted a policy in 2013 that all ancillary substances would be reviewed according to OFPA criteria, but the Handling Subcommittee has simply been listing those ancillary substances known to be in use. Now the Handling Subcommittee is proposing to modify the policy.
      • Definitions are needed. In order to be meaningful and useful, the ancillary substances policy must define terms it uses: technical or functional effect, direct food additive, incidental food additive, food contact substance, functional class, and significant amount.
      • Each ancillary substance must be approved for each particular use. Whether the approval of ancillary substances is communicated by means of listing on the National List –which we believe to be required by OFPA—or by other means, each ancillary substance must be reviewed according to OFPA criteria. The NOSB must not categorically allow substances in a functional class that have not been specifically reviewed and it must not rubber stamp ancillary substance just because they are currently in use.

Back to the table of contents

Handling 2018 Sunset Summaries 205.605(a) (Synthetic Nonorganic Nonagricultural Materials Allowed in Organic Processing and Handling)

See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here

    • Submit your comment here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Submit your comment here
    • Submit your comment here

Back to the table of contents

Handling 2018 Sunset Summaries 205.605(b) (Synthetic Nonorganic Nonagricultural Materials Allowed in Organic Processing and Handling)

  • Cellulose
    • Submit your comment here
  • Potassium hydroxide
    • Submit your comment here
  • Silicon dioxide
    • Submit your comment here

Back to the table of contents

Handling 2018 Sunset Summaries 205.606 (Nonorganic Agricultural Materials Allowed in Organic Processing and Handling)

  • Beta-carotene extract color
    • Submit your comment here

 Back to the table of contents

Discussion Document

 Back to the table of contents

 

Proposals

  • Hypochlorous Acid - petitioned
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here
    • See Beyond Pesticides' draft comments here
    • Submit your comment here

Back to the table of contents

Proposals

See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here

  • Excluded Methods Terminology
    • Submit your comment here

Discussion Documents

  • Excluded Methods Terminology
    • Submit your comment here
    • Submit your comment here

Back to the table of contents

Policy and Procedures Manual

  • Policy and Procedures Manual Revisions
    • See Beyond Pesticides' final comments here
    • Submit your comment here

Discussion Documents

Back to the table of contents