National Organic Program, Sunset Review (2011), 13795-13798 [E8-5103]
Download as PDF
13795
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 73, No. 51
Friday, March 14, 2008
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 205
[Docket Number AMS–TM–07–0136; TM–07–
14]
RIN 0581–AC77
National Organic Program, Sunset
Review (2011)
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking with request for comments.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Sunset of the exempted or
prohibited use of substances under the
National Organic Program (NOP) is
required by the Organic Foods
Production Act of 1990 (OFPA). This
ANPR announces the sunset of 12
exempted substances added to the
National List on September 12, 2006.
This ANPR establishes September 12,
2011, as the date by which the sunset
review and renewal process must be
concluded. This advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPR) also
begins the public comment process on
whether the identified existing
exemptions should be continued.
Finally, this ANPR discusses how the
NOP will manage the sunset review and
renewal process.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before May 13, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may
submit written comments on this ANPR
using the following addresses:
• Mail: Robert Pooler, Agricultural
Marketing Specialist, National Organic
Program, USDA–AMS–TMP–NOP, 1400
Independence Ave., SW., Room 4008–
So., Ag Stop 0268, Washington, DC
20250.
• Internet: www.regulations.gov.
Written comments responding to this
ANPR should be identified with the
docket number AMS–TM–07–0136. You
should clearly indicate your position on
continuing the allowance of the
substances identified in this ANPR and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:26 Mar 13, 2008
Jkt 214001
the reasons for your position. You
should include relevant information and
data to support your position (e.g.,
scientific, environmental,
manufacturing, industry impact
information, etc.). You should also
supply information on alternative
substances or alternative management
practices, where applicable, that
support a change from the current
exemption of the substance. Only the
supporting material relevant to your
position will be considered.
It is our intention to have all
comments concerning this ANPR,
including names and addresses when
provided, whether submitted by mail or
internet available for viewing on the
Regulations.gov (www.regulations.gov)
internet site. Comments submitted in
response to this ANPR will also be
available for viewing in person at
USDA–AMS, Transportation and
Marketing Programs, National Organic
Program, Room 4008—South Building,
1400 Independence Ave., SW.,
Washington, DC, from 9 a.m. to 12 noon
and from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, (except official Federal
holidays). Persons wanting to visit the
USDA South Building to view
comments received in response to this
ANPR are requested to make an
appointment in advance by calling (202)
720–3252.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Pooler, Agricultural Marketing
Specialist, National Organic Program,
USDA/AMS/TM/NOP, Room 4008–So.,
Ag Stop 0268, 1400 Independence Ave.,
SW., Washington, DC 20250. Phone:
(202) 720–3252. Telephone: (202) 720–
3252. E-mail: Robert.pooler@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The OFPA, 7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.,
authorizes the establishment of the
National List of exempted and
prohibited substances. The National List
identifies synthetic substances
(synthetics) that are exempted (allowed)
and nonsynthetic substances
(nonsynthetics) that are prohibited in
organic crop and livestock production.
The National List also identifies
nonsynthetics and synthetics that are
exempted for use in organic handling.
The exemptions and prohibitions
granted under the OFPA are required to
be reviewed every 5 years by the
National Organic Standards Board
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(NOSB). The Secretary of Agriculture
has authority under the OFPA to renew
such exemptions and prohibitions. If
they are not reviewed by the NOSB and
renewed by the Secretary within 5 years
of their inclusion on the National List,
their authorized use or prohibition
expires. This means that synthetic
substances Hydrogen chloride (CAS
#7647–01–0) and Ferric phosphate (CAS
#10045–86–0), currently allowed for use
in organic crop production, will no
longer be allowed for use after
September 12, 2011. This also means
that Egg white lysozyme (CAS #9001–
63–2), L-Malic acid (CAS #97–67–6),
Microorganisms, Activated charcoal
(CAS #s7440–44–0; 64365–11–3),
Cyclohexylamine (CAS #108–91–8),
Diethylaminoethanol (CAS #100–37–8),
Octadecylamine (CAS #124–30–1),
Peracetic acid/Peroxyacetic acid (CAS
#79–21–0), Sodium acid pyrophosphate
(CAS #7758–16–9), and Tetrasodium
pyrophosphate (CAS #7722–88–5),
currently allowed for use in organic
handling, will no longer be allowed for
use after September 12, 2011.
Expiration of the exempted or
prohibited use of substances is provided
for under the OFPA’s sunset provision.
This ANPR announces the sunset of 12
exempted substances added to the
National List on September 12, 2006.
This ANPR establishes September 12,
2011, as the date by which the sunset
review and renewal process must be
concluded. Substances not renewed will
be removed from the National List. This
ANPR also begins the public comment
process on whether the existing specific
exemptions on the National List should
be continued. This ANPR discusses how
the NOP will manage the sunset review
and renewal process.
Because these substances may be
critical to the production and handling
of a wide array of raw and processed
organic agricultural products, their
expiration could cause disruption of
well-established and accepted organic
production, handling, and processing
systems. Therefore, the NOP is initiating
the sunset review and renewal process
now, in order to provide ample
opportunity for you to make your views
known.
Glycerine oleate (Glycerol
monooleate) (CAS #37220–82–9) was
also added to the National List on
September 12, 2006, but for use only
until December 31, 2006. Because
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
13796
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 51 / Friday, March 14, 2008 / Proposed Rules
authorized use of this substance expired
on December 31, 2006, it is not included
in this sunset review.
The Sunset Process
As the first step in this process, we
invite public comment on the specific
exemptions currently on the National
List that are described in this document.
All substances currently on the National
List have been previously evaluated and
determined by the NOSB for
consistency with OFPA and its
implementing regulations. According to
§ 6517(e) of the OFPA, these substances
must be reviewed by the NOSB and
renewed by the Secretary for their use
to continue after 5 years of their
addition to the National List which will
be September 12, 2011. Public
comments submitted will be considered
in the review and renewal process.
The NOP will forward comments
received under this ANPR to the NOSB
for review. The NOSB will review the
exemptions of the substances designated
to sunset, including the public
comments received during this review.
The NOSB will review each of the
substances listed in this ANPR and may
determine that certain substances
warrant a more in-depth review and
require additional information or
research that considers new scientific
data and technological and market
advances.
Following the NOSB’s review, the
NOSB will make a recommendation to
the Secretary about the continuation of
specific exemptions for the substances
listed in this ANPR. After the Secretary
receives the NOSB’s recommendations,
the NOP will publish a proposed rule
enacting the NOSB recommendations.
This proposed rule will provide an
additional opportunity for you to
express your views. Comments received
on the proposed rule will be used to
develop a final rule. Because the sunset
review and renewal process involves
rulemaking, the NOP believes it is
appropriate to initiate the process now.
Guidance on Submitting Your
Comments
Comments That Support Existing
Exemptions
If you provide comments that support
the renewal of any or all existing
exemptions included within this ANPR,
you should clearly indicate this and
provide your reasons and any relevant
documentation that supports your
position.
Comments That Do Not Support
Continuing an Existing Exemption
If you provide comments that do not
support continuing an existing
exemption, you should provide reasons
why the use of the substance should no
longer be allowed in organic agricultural
production and handling. The current
exemptions were originally
recommended by the NOSB based on
evidence available to the NOSB at the
time of review which demonstrated that
the substances were found to be: (1) Not
harmful to human health or the
environment, (2) necessary because of
the unavailability of wholly
nonsynthetic alternatives, and (3)
consistent and compatible with organic
practices. Therefore, comments against
the continued exemption of a substance
should demonstrate how the current
substance is: (1) Harmful to human
health or the environment, (2) not
necessary to the production of the
agricultural products because of the
availability of wholly nonsynthetic
substitute products, or (3) inconsistent
with organic farming and handling.
An Appendix to this ANPR contains
worksheets to assist you in gathering
relevant information concerning these
issues. These worksheets are not
required to submit a comment. These
worksheets are used by the NOSB to
develop their recommendations to the
And is a (an). . .
Crop or Livestock Production ..........
Synthetic substance ......................
Crop or Livestock Production ..........
Handling ..........................................
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
If the currently listed substance is
used in. . .
Synthetic inert substance (pesticidal).
Synthetic substance ......................
Handling ..........................................
Nonsynthetic (non-ag) substance ..
Handling ..........................................
Nonorganic agricultural product ....
The NOP understands that supportive
technical or scientific information for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:26 Mar 13, 2008
Jkt 214001
Then the recommended alternative
should be a (an). . .
—Another currently listed synthetic substance;
—Nonsynthetic substance; or
—Management practice.
—Another currently listed synthetic substance or
—Nonsynthetic substance.
—Another currently listed synthetic substance;
—Nonsynthetic (non-ag) substance; or
—Management practice.
—Agricultural substance; or
—Management practice.
—Organic agricultural product.
synthetic alternatives not currently on
the National List may not be easily
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Secretary to include an exempted
substance on the National List. You do
not have to answer the questions on the
worksheets; they are intended only to
help you provide substantive comments
to the NOSB when you provide
comments on the specific substance.
In addition, comments that do not
support the continued use of a
substance(s) listed within this ANPR
should also provide evidence
concerning viable alternatives for the
substance you believe should be
discontinued. Viable alternatives
include, but are not limited to:
alternative management practices that
would eliminate the need for the
specific substance; other currently
exempted substances that are on the
National List which could eliminate the
need for this specific substance; and
other organic or nonorganic agricultural
substances. Such evidence also should
adequately demonstrate that the
alternative has a function and effect that
equals or surpasses the specific
exempted substance that you do not
want to be continued. Assertions about
an alternative substance except for those
alternatives that already appear on the
National List should, if possible include
the name and address of the
manufacturer of the alternative. Further,
your comments should include a copy
or the specific source of any supportive
literature, which could include product
or practice descriptions; performance
and test data; reference standards; name
and address of producers who have
used the alternative under similar
conditions and the date of use; and an
itemized comparison of the function
and effect of the proposed alternative(s)
with substance under review. The chart
below can help you describe
recommended alternatives for different
types of organic operations in place of
a current exempted substance that you
do not want to be continued.
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
available to organic producers and
handlers. Such information may,
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 51 / Friday, March 14, 2008 / Proposed Rules
however, be available from the research
community including universities, or
other sources, including international
organic programs.
Request for Comments
The NOP requests that you comment
whether the NOSB should continue to
recommend the following exemptions
on the National List of Allowed and
Prohibited Substances for organic
agricultural production and handling:
Section 205.601 Synthetic Substances
Allowed for Use In Organic Crop Production
(h) As slug or snail bait. Ferric phosphate
(CAS #10045–86–0).
(n) Seed preparations. Hydrogen chloride
(CAS #7647–01–0)-for delinting cotton seed
for planting.
Section 205.605 Nonagricultural
(Nonorganic) Substances Allowed as
Ingredients In or on Processed Products
Labeled As ‘‘Organic’’ or ‘‘Made With
Organic (Specified Ingredients or Food
Groups(S))’’
(a) Nonsynthetics allowed:
Egg white lysozyme (CAS #9001–63–2).
L-Malic acid (CAS #97–67–6).
Microorganisms—any food grade bacteria,
fungi, and other microorganism.
(b) Synthetics allowed:
Activated charcoal (CAS #s 7440–44–0;
64365–11–3)—only from vegetative sources;
for use only as a filtering aid.
Cyclohexylamine (CAS #108–91–8)—for
use only as a boiler water additive for
packaging sterilization.
Diethylaminoethanol (CAS #100–37–8)—
for use only as a boiler water additive for
packaging sterilization.
Octadecylamine (CAS #124–30–1)—for use
only as a boiler water additive for packaging
sterilization.
Peracetic acid/Peroxyacetic acid (CAS #79–
21–0)—for use in wash and/or rinse water
according to FDA limitations. For use as a
sanitizer on food contact surfaces.
Sodium acid pyrophosphate (CAS #7758–
16–9)—for use only as a leavening agent.
Tetrasodium pyrophosphate (CAS #7722–
88–5)—for use only in meat analog products.
All comments will be considered in the
development of the NOSB’s
recommendations to the Secretary.
13797
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq. and 7 CFR
part 205.
Dated: March 10, 2008.
Lloyd C. Day,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
Appendix
This Appendix contains worksheets
to assist you in gathering relevant
information concerning the
compatibility of substances with
evaluation criteria of the OFPA. These
worksheets are not required to submit a
comment. These worksheets are used by
the NOSB to develop their
recommendations to the Secretary to
include an exempted or prohibited
substance on the National List. You do
not have to answer the questions on the
worksheets; they are intended only to
help you provide substantive comments
to the NOSB when you provide
comments on the specific substance.
EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR SUBSTANCES ADDED TO THE NATIONAL LIST
Question
Yes
No
Documentation
(TAP; petition; regulatory agency;
other)
N/A1
Category 1. Adverse impacts on humans or the environment?
1. Is there environmental contamination during manufacture, use, misuse, or disposal? [§ 6518m.3]
2. Is the substance harmful to the environment? [§ 6517c(1)(A)(i);
§ 6517(c)(2)(A)i]
3. Does the substance contain List 1, 2, or 3 inerts? [§ 6517c (1)(B)(ii)]
4. Is there potential for detrimental chemical interaction with other materials used? [§ 6518m.1]
5. Are there adverse biological and chemical interactions in agro-ecosystem? [§ 6518m.5]
6. Are there detrimental physiological effects on soil organisms, crops,
or livestock? [§ 6518m.5]
7. Is there a toxic or other adverse action of the material or its breakdown products? [§ 6518m.2]
8. Is there undesirable persistence or concentration of the material or
breakdown products in environment? [§ 6518 m.2]
9. Is there any harmful effect on human health? [§ 6517c(1)(A)(i);
§ 6517c(2)(A)i; § 6518m.4]
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Category 2. Is the Substance Essential for Organic Production?
1. Is the substance formulated or manufactured by a chemical process?
[§ 6502(21)]
2. Is the substance formulated or manufactured by a process that
chemically changes a substance extracted from naturally occurring
plant, animal, or mineral, sources? [§ 6502(21)]
3. Is the substance created by naturally occurring biological processes?
[§ 6502(21)]
4. Is there a wholly natural substitute product? [§ 6517c(1)(A)(ii)]
5. Is the substance used in handling, not synthetic, but not organically
produced? [§ 6517c(1)(B)(iii)]
6. Is there any alternative substances? [§ 6518m.6]
7. Is there another practice that would make the substance unnecessary? [§ 6518m.6]
Category 3. Is the substance compatible with organic production practices?
1. Is the substance consistent with organic farming and handling?
[§ 6517c(1)(A)(iii); § 6517c(2)(A)(ii)]
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:26 Mar 13, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
13798
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 51 / Friday, March 14, 2008 / Proposed Rules
EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR SUBSTANCES ADDED TO THE NATIONAL LIST—Continued
Question
Yes
No
N/A1
Documentation
(TAP; petition; regulatory agency;
other)
2. Is the substance compatible with a system of sustainable agriculture?
[§ 6518m.7]
3. Is the substance used in production, and does it contain an active
synthetic ingredient in the following categories:
a. Copper and sulfur compounds;
b. Toxins derived from bacteria;
c. Pheromones, soaps, horticultural oils, fish emulsions, treated
seed, vitamins and minerals?
d. Livestock parasiticides and medicines?
e. Production aids including netting, tree wraps and seals, insect
traps, sticky barriers, row covers, and equipment cleaners?
1 If
the substance under review is for crops or livestock production, all of the questions from 205.600(b) are N/A—not applicable.
[FR Doc. E8–5103 Filed 3–13–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 956
[Docket No. AMS–FV–07–0157; FV08–956–
1 PR]
Sweet Onions Grown in the Walla
Walla Valley of Southeast Washington
and Northeast Oregon; Increased
Assessment Rate
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This rule would increase the
assessment rate established for the
Walla Walla Sweet Onion Marketing
Committee (Committee) for the 2008
and subsequent fiscal periods from
$0.21 to $0.22 per 50-pound bag or
equivalent of Walla Walla sweet onions
handled. The Committee locally
administers the marketing order which
regulates the handling of sweet onions
grown in the Walla Walla Valley of
Southeast Washington and Northeast
Oregon. Assessments upon Walla Walla
sweet onion handlers are used by the
Committee to fund the reasonable and
necessary expenses of the program. The
fiscal period begins January 1 and ends
December 31. The assessment rate
would remain in effect indefinitely
unless modified, suspended, or
terminated.
DATES: Comments must be received by
May 13, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit written comments
concerning this proposal. Comments
should be sent to the Docket Clerk,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:26 Mar 13, 2008
Jkt 214001
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; Fax: (202) 720–8938, or
Internet: https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments should reference the docket
number and the date and page number
of this issue of the Federal Register and
will be available for public inspection in
the Office of the Docket Clerk during
regular business hours, or can be viewed
at: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barry Broadbent or Gary Olson,
Northwest Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1220 SW. Third Avenue,
Suite 385, Portland, OR 97204;
Telephone: (503) 326–2724, Fax: (503)
326–7440, or E-mail:
Barry.Broadbent@usda.gov or
GaryD.Olson@usda.gov.
Small businesses may request
information on complying with this
regulation by contacting Jay Guerber,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720–
2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or E-mail:
Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.
This rule
is issued under Marketing Agreement
and Order No. 956, both as amended (7
CFR part 956), regulating the handling
of Walla Walla sweet onions grown in
Southeast Washington and Northeast
Oregon, hereinafter referred to as the
‘‘order.’’ The order is effective under the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act
of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674),
hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’
The Department of Agriculture
(USDA) is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Order
12866.
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Reform. Under the marketing order now
in effect, Walla Walla sweet onion
handlers are subject to assessments.
Funds to administer the order are
derived from such assessments. It is
intended that the assessment rate, as
proposed herein, would be applicable to
all assessable Walla Walla sweet onions
beginning on January 1, 2008, and
continue until amended, suspended, or
terminated. This rule will not preempt
any State or local laws, regulations, or
policies, unless they present an
irreconcilable conflict with this rule.
The Act provides that administrative
proceedings must be exhausted before
parties may file suit in court. Under
section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any
handler subject to an order may file
with USDA a petition stating that the
order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with
the order is not in accordance with law
and request a modification of the order
or to be exempted therefrom. Such
handler is afforded the opportunity for
a hearing on the petition. After the
hearing, USDA would rule on the
petition. The Act provides that the
district court of the United States in any
district in which the handler is an
inhabitant, or has his or her principal
place of business, has jurisdiction to
review USDA’s ruling on the petition,
provided an action is filed not later than
20 days after the date of the entry of the
ruling.
This rule would increase the
assessment rate established for the
Committee for the 2008 and subsequent
fiscal periods from $0.21 to $0.22 per
50-pound bag or equivalent of Walla
Walla sweet onions handled.
The Walla Walla sweet onion
marketing order provides authority for
the Committee, with the approval of
USDA, to formulate an annual budget of
expenses and collect assessments from
handlers to administer the program. The
members of the Committee are
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 51 (Friday, March 14, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13795-13798]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-5103]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 51 / Friday, March 14, 2008 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 13795]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 205
[Docket Number AMS-TM-07-0136; TM-07-14]
RIN 0581-AC77
National Organic Program, Sunset Review (2011)
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking with request for
comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Sunset of the exempted or prohibited use of substances under
the National Organic Program (NOP) is required by the Organic Foods
Production Act of 1990 (OFPA). This ANPR announces the sunset of 12
exempted substances added to the National List on September 12, 2006.
This ANPR establishes September 12, 2011, as the date by which the
sunset review and renewal process must be concluded. This advance
notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) also begins the public comment
process on whether the identified existing exemptions should be
continued. Finally, this ANPR discusses how the NOP will manage the
sunset review and renewal process.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 13, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may submit written comments on this ANPR
using the following addresses:
Mail: Robert Pooler, Agricultural Marketing Specialist,
National Organic Program, USDA-AMS-TMP-NOP, 1400 Independence Ave.,
SW., Room 4008-So., Ag Stop 0268, Washington, DC 20250.
Internet: www.regulations.gov.
Written comments responding to this ANPR should be identified with
the docket number AMS-TM-07-0136. You should clearly indicate your
position on continuing the allowance of the substances identified in
this ANPR and the reasons for your position. You should include
relevant information and data to support your position (e.g.,
scientific, environmental, manufacturing, industry impact information,
etc.). You should also supply information on alternative substances or
alternative management practices, where applicable, that support a
change from the current exemption of the substance. Only the supporting
material relevant to your position will be considered.
It is our intention to have all comments concerning this ANPR,
including names and addresses when provided, whether submitted by mail
or internet available for viewing on the Regulations.gov
(www.regulations.gov) internet site. Comments submitted in response to
this ANPR will also be available for viewing in person at USDA-AMS,
Transportation and Marketing Programs, National Organic Program, Room
4008--South Building, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC, from
9 a.m. to 12 noon and from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
(except official Federal holidays). Persons wanting to visit the USDA
South Building to view comments received in response to this ANPR are
requested to make an appointment in advance by calling (202) 720-3252.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Pooler, Agricultural Marketing
Specialist, National Organic Program, USDA/AMS/TM/NOP, Room 4008-So.,
Ag Stop 0268, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250. Phone:
(202) 720-3252. Telephone: (202) 720-3252. E-mail:
Robert.pooler@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The OFPA, 7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq., authorizes the establishment of
the National List of exempted and prohibited substances. The National
List identifies synthetic substances (synthetics) that are exempted
(allowed) and nonsynthetic substances (nonsynthetics) that are
prohibited in organic crop and livestock production. The National List
also identifies nonsynthetics and synthetics that are exempted for use
in organic handling.
The exemptions and prohibitions granted under the OFPA are required
to be reviewed every 5 years by the National Organic Standards Board
(NOSB). The Secretary of Agriculture has authority under the OFPA to
renew such exemptions and prohibitions. If they are not reviewed by the
NOSB and renewed by the Secretary within 5 years of their inclusion on
the National List, their authorized use or prohibition expires. This
means that synthetic substances Hydrogen chloride (CAS 7647-
01-0) and Ferric phosphate (CAS 10045-86-0), currently allowed
for use in organic crop production, will no longer be allowed for use
after September 12, 2011. This also means that Egg white lysozyme (CAS
9001-63-2), L-Malic acid (CAS 97-67-6),
Microorganisms, Activated charcoal (CAS s7440-44-0; 64365-11-
3), Cyclohexylamine (CAS 108-91-8), Diethylaminoethanol (CAS
100-37-8), Octadecylamine (CAS 124-30-1), Peracetic
acid/Peroxyacetic acid (CAS 79-21-0), Sodium acid
pyrophosphate (CAS 7758-16-9), and Tetrasodium pyrophosphate
(CAS 7722-88-5), currently allowed for use in organic
handling, will no longer be allowed for use after September 12, 2011.
Expiration of the exempted or prohibited use of substances is
provided for under the OFPA's sunset provision. This ANPR announces the
sunset of 12 exempted substances added to the National List on
September 12, 2006. This ANPR establishes September 12, 2011, as the
date by which the sunset review and renewal process must be concluded.
Substances not renewed will be removed from the National List. This
ANPR also begins the public comment process on whether the existing
specific exemptions on the National List should be continued. This ANPR
discusses how the NOP will manage the sunset review and renewal
process.
Because these substances may be critical to the production and
handling of a wide array of raw and processed organic agricultural
products, their expiration could cause disruption of well-established
and accepted organic production, handling, and processing systems.
Therefore, the NOP is initiating the sunset review and renewal process
now, in order to provide ample opportunity for you to make your views
known.
Glycerine oleate (Glycerol monooleate) (CAS 37220-82-9)
was also added to the National List on September 12, 2006, but for use
only until December 31, 2006. Because
[[Page 13796]]
authorized use of this substance expired on December 31, 2006, it is
not included in this sunset review.
The Sunset Process
As the first step in this process, we invite public comment on the
specific exemptions currently on the National List that are described
in this document. All substances currently on the National List have
been previously evaluated and determined by the NOSB for consistency
with OFPA and its implementing regulations. According to Sec. 6517(e)
of the OFPA, these substances must be reviewed by the NOSB and renewed
by the Secretary for their use to continue after 5 years of their
addition to the National List which will be September 12, 2011. Public
comments submitted will be considered in the review and renewal
process.
The NOP will forward comments received under this ANPR to the NOSB
for review. The NOSB will review the exemptions of the substances
designated to sunset, including the public comments received during
this review. The NOSB will review each of the substances listed in this
ANPR and may determine that certain substances warrant a more in-depth
review and require additional information or research that considers
new scientific data and technological and market advances.
Following the NOSB's review, the NOSB will make a recommendation to
the Secretary about the continuation of specific exemptions for the
substances listed in this ANPR. After the Secretary receives the NOSB's
recommendations, the NOP will publish a proposed rule enacting the NOSB
recommendations. This proposed rule will provide an additional
opportunity for you to express your views. Comments received on the
proposed rule will be used to develop a final rule. Because the sunset
review and renewal process involves rulemaking, the NOP believes it is
appropriate to initiate the process now.
Guidance on Submitting Your Comments
Comments That Support Existing Exemptions
If you provide comments that support the renewal of any or all
existing exemptions included within this ANPR, you should clearly
indicate this and provide your reasons and any relevant documentation
that supports your position.
Comments That Do Not Support Continuing an Existing Exemption
If you provide comments that do not support continuing an existing
exemption, you should provide reasons why the use of the substance
should no longer be allowed in organic agricultural production and
handling. The current exemptions were originally recommended by the
NOSB based on evidence available to the NOSB at the time of review
which demonstrated that the substances were found to be: (1) Not
harmful to human health or the environment, (2) necessary because of
the unavailability of wholly nonsynthetic alternatives, and (3)
consistent and compatible with organic practices. Therefore, comments
against the continued exemption of a substance should demonstrate how
the current substance is: (1) Harmful to human health or the
environment, (2) not necessary to the production of the agricultural
products because of the availability of wholly nonsynthetic substitute
products, or (3) inconsistent with organic farming and handling.
An Appendix to this ANPR contains worksheets to assist you in
gathering relevant information concerning these issues. These
worksheets are not required to submit a comment. These worksheets are
used by the NOSB to develop their recommendations to the Secretary to
include an exempted substance on the National List. You do not have to
answer the questions on the worksheets; they are intended only to help
you provide substantive comments to the NOSB when you provide comments
on the specific substance.
In addition, comments that do not support the continued use of a
substance(s) listed within this ANPR should also provide evidence
concerning viable alternatives for the substance you believe should be
discontinued. Viable alternatives include, but are not limited to:
alternative management practices that would eliminate the need for the
specific substance; other currently exempted substances that are on the
National List which could eliminate the need for this specific
substance; and other organic or nonorganic agricultural substances.
Such evidence also should adequately demonstrate that the alternative
has a function and effect that equals or surpasses the specific
exempted substance that you do not want to be continued. Assertions
about an alternative substance except for those alternatives that
already appear on the National List should, if possible include the
name and address of the manufacturer of the alternative. Further, your
comments should include a copy or the specific source of any supportive
literature, which could include product or practice descriptions;
performance and test data; reference standards; name and address of
producers who have used the alternative under similar conditions and
the date of use; and an itemized comparison of the function and effect
of the proposed alternative(s) with substance under review. The chart
below can help you describe recommended alternatives for different
types of organic operations in place of a current exempted substance
that you do not want to be continued.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the recommended
If the currently listed And is a (an). . alternative should
substance is used in. . . . be a (an). . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crop or Livestock Production.. Synthetic --Another currently
substance. listed synthetic
substance;
--Nonsynthetic
substance; or
--Management
practice.
Crop or Livestock Production.. Synthetic inert --Another currently
substance listed synthetic
(pesticidal). substance or
--Nonsynthetic
substance.
Handling...................... Synthetic --Another currently
substance. listed synthetic
substance;
--Nonsynthetic (non-
ag) substance; or
--Management
practice.
Handling...................... Nonsynthetic (non- --Agricultural
ag) substance. substance; or
--Management
practice.
Handling...................... Nonorganic --Organic
agricultural agricultural
product. product.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NOP understands that supportive technical or scientific
information for synthetic alternatives not currently on the National
List may not be easily available to organic producers and handlers.
Such information may,
[[Page 13797]]
however, be available from the research community including
universities, or other sources, including international organic
programs.
Request for Comments
The NOP requests that you comment whether the NOSB should continue
to recommend the following exemptions on the National List of Allowed
and Prohibited Substances for organic agricultural production and
handling:
Section 205.601 Synthetic Substances Allowed for Use In Organic
Crop Production
(h) As slug or snail bait. Ferric phosphate (CAS 10045-
86-0).
(n) Seed preparations. Hydrogen chloride (CAS 7647-01-
0)-for delinting cotton seed for planting.
Section 205.605 Nonagricultural (Nonorganic) Substances Allowed as
Ingredients In or on Processed Products Labeled As ``Organic'' or
``Made With Organic (Specified Ingredients or Food Groups(S))''
(a) Nonsynthetics allowed:
Egg white lysozyme (CAS 9001-63-2).
L-Malic acid (CAS 97-67-6).
Microorganisms--any food grade bacteria, fungi, and other
microorganism.
(b) Synthetics allowed:
Activated charcoal (CAS s 7440-44-0; 64365-11-3)--only
from vegetative sources; for use only as a filtering aid.
Cyclohexylamine (CAS 108-91-8)--for use only as a
boiler water additive for packaging sterilization.
Diethylaminoethanol (CAS 100-37-8)--for use only as a
boiler water additive for packaging sterilization.
Octadecylamine (CAS 124-30-1)--for use only as a boiler
water additive for packaging sterilization.
Peracetic acid/Peroxyacetic acid (CAS 79-21-0)--for use
in wash and/or rinse water according to FDA limitations. For use as
a sanitizer on food contact surfaces.
Sodium acid pyrophosphate (CAS 7758-16-9)--for use only
as a leavening agent.
Tetrasodium pyrophosphate (CAS 7722-88-5)--for use only
in meat analog products.
All comments will be considered in the development of the NOSB's
recommendations to the Secretary.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq. and 7 CFR part 205.
Dated: March 10, 2008.
Lloyd C. Day,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
Appendix
This Appendix contains worksheets to assist you in gathering
relevant information concerning the compatibility of substances with
evaluation criteria of the OFPA. These worksheets are not required to
submit a comment. These worksheets are used by the NOSB to develop
their recommendations to the Secretary to include an exempted or
prohibited substance on the National List. You do not have to answer
the questions on the worksheets; they are intended only to help you
provide substantive comments to the NOSB when you provide comments on
the specific substance.
Evaluation Criteria For Substances Added to the National List
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Documentation (TAP;
Question Yes No N/A\1\ petition; regulatory
agency; other)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category 1. Adverse impacts on humans or the environment?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Is there environmental
contamination during manufacture,
use, misuse, or disposal? [Sec.
6518m.3]
2. Is the substance harmful to the
environment? [Sec. 6517c(1)(A)(i);
Sec. 6517(c)(2)(A)i]
3. Does the substance contain List 1,
2, or 3 inerts? [Sec. 6517c
(1)(B)(ii)]
4. Is there potential for detrimental
chemical interaction with other
materials used? [Sec. 6518m.1]
5. Are there adverse biological and
chemical interactions in agro-
ecosystem? [Sec. 6518m.5]
6. Are there detrimental physiological
effects on soil organisms, crops, or
livestock? [Sec. 6518m.5]
7. Is there a toxic or other adverse
action of the material or its
breakdown products? [Sec. 6518m.2]
8. Is there undesirable persistence or
concentration of the material or
breakdown products in environment?
[Sec. 6518 m.2]
9. Is there any harmful effect on
human health? [Sec. 6517c(1)(A)(i);
Sec. 6517c(2)(A)i; Sec. 6518m.4]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category 2. Is the Substance Essential for Organic Production?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Is the substance formulated or
manufactured by a chemical process?
[Sec. 6502(21)]
2. Is the substance formulated or
manufactured by a process that
chemically changes a substance
extracted from naturally occurring
plant, animal, or mineral, sources?
[Sec. 6502(21)]
3. Is the substance created by
naturally occurring biological
processes? [Sec. 6502(21)]
4. Is there a wholly natural
substitute product? [Sec.
6517c(1)(A)(ii)]
5. Is the substance used in handling,
not synthetic, but not organically
produced? [Sec. 6517c(1)(B)(iii)]
6. Is there any alternative
substances? [Sec. 6518m.6]
7. Is there another practice that
would make the substance unnecessary?
[Sec. 6518m.6]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category 3. Is the substance compatible with organic production practices?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Is the substance consistent with
organic farming and handling? [Sec.
6517c(1)(A)(iii); Sec.
6517c(2)(A)(ii)]
[[Page 13798]]
2. Is the substance compatible with a
system of sustainable agriculture?
[Sec. 6518m.7]
3. Is the substance used in
production, and does it contain an
active synthetic ingredient in the
following categories:
a. Copper and sulfur compounds;
b. Toxins derived from bacteria;
c. Pheromones, soaps,
horticultural oils, fish
emulsions, treated seed, vitamins
and minerals?
d. Livestock parasiticides and
medicines?
e. Production aids including
netting, tree wraps and seals,
insect traps, sticky barriers,
row covers, and equipment
cleaners?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If the substance under review is for crops or livestock production, all of the questions from 205.600(b) are
N/A--not applicable.
[FR Doc. E8-5103 Filed 3-13-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P