Don't quite banding your corn, just only raise 20% conventional corn and you
can buy an airplane ticket to a crash.
Vaccinations have always been allowed and are under OFPA.
Synthetic parasiticides for hogs were never recommended to the Secretary, but
it appears the Department is proposing to indefinitiely and permanently allow
them under the catch all of "incidental additives." All "incidental
additives" are acceptable under the Proposed Organic Rule.
ACTION COMMENT:
The Department is using this definition to allow the use of synthetic
substances in organic farming and handling that are not allowed under the
Organic Foods Production Act. The Department does not stop with defining the
term "incidental additives" but uses numerous other terms as found below
meaning the same as "incidental additives" to introduce synthetic substances
in organic farming and handling that are prohibited under OFPA. The definition
and the rationale leading to acceptance of this concept should be removed from
the Proposed Organic Rule.
Quoting the Department's Preamble to the Proposed Rule:
"Incidental additive is defined so that handlers clearly know that the
substances included in this category may be used in handling organic products,
even though the incidental additive itself may not be included on the National
List. "
ACTION COMMENT:
The Department is using this definition to allow the use of synthetic
substances in organic farming and handling that are not allowed under the
Organic Foods Production Act. The Department does not stop with defining the
term "incidental additives" but uses numerous other terms as found below
meaning the same as "incidental additives" to introduce synthetic substances
in organic farming and handling that are prohibited under OFPA. The definition
and the rationale leading to acceptance of this concept should be removed from
the Proposed Organic Rule.
Quoting the Department's Preamble to the Proposed Rule:
"Incidental additive is defined so that handlers clearly know that the
substances included in this category may be used in handling organic products,
even though the incidental additive itself may not be included on the National
List. "
The language of the Proposed Rule enlarge dramatically on the above definition
which is illegal under OFPA itself. Throughout the Proposed Rule the
Department indicates the proposed definition, "incidental additive," does not
only propose to allow synthetic substances in processed foods labeled organic,
but proposes as applied to organic crop and livestock farming, to not review
the active and inert synthetic categories listed for review in OFPA.
Simultaneously the Department defines new categories of allowed synthetic
substances that are illegitimate under OFPA. The definition "incidental
additives" and its many variations in the rule, encompasses many substances
that OFPA declares illegal in organic farming and handling and opens the doors
of the USDA National Organic Program to those substances.
For example, this is the Department's rationale on the active synthetic
substance that is used in treating seed against disease.
"Treated seed, i.e., seed treated with pesticides, itself is not a synthetic
substance because seed is an agricultural product and the treatment does not
chemically alter or combine with the seed. When a treated seed is used as
permitted in proposed section 205.8(a), the seed treatment does not function
as an active ingredient for its intended use, nor do we consider it as causing
measurable degradation of soil or water quality; therefore, the seed treatment
is incidental or inconsequential when treated seed is used in organic
production."
Following the Department's logic the pesticides on seeds that may be used in
organic fields contrary to OFPA do not have to be put on the National List
contrary to OFPA.
In the Preamble and CFR, the Department lists all kinds of synthetic
substances under the umbrella of allowed in organic farming and handling. If
the substances were natural, they do not need to be mentioned. Under OFPA,
all natural substances not specifically prohibited are simply acceptable for
use in organic farming.
Quoting the Department's Preamble:
"Substances used to adjust the texture of dry materials (e.g., flocculants or
pelletizers) or to change the physical qualities of water (e.g., adjuvants or
surfactants) are considered to be inconsequential additives rather than active
ingredients in fertilizer, pest control, tank mixes, or other types of product
formulations."
"The following list of substances or categories of substances have been
determined by us to fall into this category because they are aids, devices, or
incidental additives that do not contain active synthetic ingredients and do
not meet the proposed definition. Production aids such as netting; tree wraps
and seals; sticky barriers; row covers; equipment cleaners; flocculants;
pelletizers; adjuvants; and surfactants and other substances added to water to
change its physical properties do not contain or function as active
ingredients under our proposed definition of active ingredient because proper
use of these substances has no consequential effects on biological and
chemical interactions in the agroecosystem and does not cause measurable
degradation of soil or water quality.
Substances used to adjust the texture of dry materials (e.g., flocculants or
pelletizers) or to change the physical qualities of water (e.g., adjuvants or
surfactants) are considered to be inconsequential additives rather than active
ingredients in fertilizer, pest control, tank mixes, or other types of product
formulations."
"We do not consider wood that is treated with synthetic preservatives and
used in buildings, trellises and fences to have a significant potential to
cause degradation of soil or water quality because the wood preservatives do
not chemically interact with, or affect the integrity of, any aspect of the
agroecosystem when used for structures, even structures that are used in
contact with the soil."
And the text now introduces an undefined term, "industrial by-product"
apparently another "incidental additive"We consider a non-synthetic substance
that is an industrial by-product to be synthetic only if the substance becomes
chemically altered as a result of a manufacturing process. This is consistent
with section 2103(21) of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6502(21)) which defines a
synthetic substance as one that is formulated or manufactured by a chemical
process or by a process that chemically changes the substance. Examples of
industrial by-products that are synthetic substances are: paper manufacturing
wastes, kiln dust, and leather meal. Whey solids and sawdust are examples of
industrial by-products that are not chemically altered and are therefore non-
synthetic.
We do not consider non-synthetic substances that have been treated with a
synthetic substance, but which have not been chemically altered by a
manufacturing process, to be synthetic under the definition given in the Act.
This is because the residues of synthetic substances that may be present in
these materials do not chemically combine with or change the chemical
composition of the original substance. Additionally, the presence of these
residues has no significant effect on biological and chemical interactions in
the agroecosystem, including physiological effects on soil organisms, crops
and livestock, nor would the residues cause measurable degradation to soil or
water quality. The synthetic residues therefore are not considered to be
active synthetic ingredients or substances under the definition we have
proposed. Examples of non-synthetic substances that may have been treated
with a synthetic substance, but not chemically altered, include municipal yard
wastes and processing wastes from non-organically produced crops, such as
cotton gin trash or cocoa hulls."
"We also do not consider certain categories of substances that are delineated
in section 2118(c)(1)(B)(i) of the OFPA (7 U.S.C. 6517(c)(1)(B)(i)), which
provides one set of criteria for substances which may be included on the
National List of synthetic substances allowed for use in organic farming and
handling, as synthetic substances according to the definition of synthetic
given in the Act. We are therefore proposing to allow the use of the
following substances in organic production and handling without being included
in the National List of active synthetic substances allowed for use in organic
farming.
Toxins derived from bacteria are not synthetic and the use of non-synthetic
toxins as pest control substances in organic crop production would be
regulated under section 205.9(e)(1). We note, however, that toxins derived
from genetically engineered microorganisms are included in this document as a
separate listing on the proposed National List of active synthetic substances
allowed for use in crop production, as set forth in section 205.22(d) of
subpart B. We have included toxins derived from genetically engineered
bacteria on the proposed National List primarily so that we can receive
comment on the proper classification of these substances, and on whether they
should be allowed, prohibited, or approved on a case-by-case basis."
And yet more incidental additives:
"Finally, the NOSB recommended that biosolids, or municipal sludge, should be
classified as synthetic and were not appropriate for use in organic crop
production. The EPA defines biosolids as the primarily organic residuals,
produced by current wastewater treatment processes that treat domestic sewage,
that can be beneficially recycled. Under current EPA regulations, such
recycling can include land application of biosolids to provide primary plant
nutrients and micronutrients to crops and vegetation produced in agriculture
and to improve soil characteristics by providing necessary moisture and/or
organic matter to enhance soil tilth. Over the years, EPA, USDA and FDA have
issued joint policy statements that have endorsed the beneficial utilization
of biosolids on land for purposes that include the production of fruits and
vegetables. However, to prevent potential problems, the guidance contains
steps that must be taken relative to issues such as the amount of cadmium and
lead that can be applied to the soil, the amount of PCBs in the biosolids, and
the relative accumulation of heavy metals into edible plant parts. Under
these and other restrictions contained in 40 CFR Part 503, biosolids can be
safely used in conventional agriculture. However, we are requesting comments
to assess the extent to which biosolids may be used in organic production.
The USDA specifically invites comments on whether the use of biosolids
(municipal sludge) should be permitted or prohibited in organic production.
The USDA also invites comments on the classification of biosolids as a
synthetic rather than a non-synthetic substance. Comments should detail the
basis for the commenter's recommendation, including the agricultural, policy,
technical, or scientific factors."
And in processing organic foods, the Preamble to the Proposed Rule reads:
"It also includes certain production aids and other substances used in
handling that are considered to be incidental additives, as is consistent with
FDA and FSIS regulations governing ingredients that must be included on
product labels.
Continuing on the introduction of synthetics into organically produced raw
agricultural products:
"Our proposed definition also covers substances required to be listed as
ingredients or additives on food labels, but it does not include incidental
additives and processing aids that are not required to be listed on food
labels."
And the Department suggests another illegal synthetic, genetically modified
enzymes. OFPA states that no synthetics are allowed to contact or be part of
processed foods:
"Chymosin is an enzyme that occurs naturally in animals and currently is being
produced through genetically engineered microorganism in quantities suitable
for cheese production. The NOSB recommended that chymosin not be included on
the proposed National List of non-agricultural substances because it is
derived from a genetically engineered microorganism. We have included
chymosin on the proposed National List so as to solicit public comment."
ACTION COMMENT:
The Department, in proposing to define the term "inert ingredient" in two
different ways, is confusing the public with unnecessary and illegitimate
concepts. Under OFPA, all natural inert substances, whether in a pesticide or
not, are allowed. The only synthetic substance allowed to be a mixture with a
natural substance are either active synthetic substances or inert synthetic
substances reviewed, evaluated and included on the National List. Under OFPA,
there are no other categories, inert or active, allowed for consideration.
The definition and the rationale leading to acceptance of this concept should
be removed.
The Final Rule should incorporate a definition for "substance," and that
definition in combination with the OFPA definition of "synthetic" will provide
the public with a clear understanding of terms related to the National List.