I hate to throw cold water on such a good idea, but the $5,000.00 gross
income limit is not a proposed part of the rules. It is already codified
in the OFPA and therefore I believe excempt from the RFA rules.
In this particular point, the USDA has no choice but to follow the law
(OFPA), although I personally don't think they were unhappy about that point.
The only way I know of to increase the gross income allowed in the
definition of a small operator (farmer or handler) is to convince your
Congress Critter to change the law.
At 09:59 4/26/98 -0700, sal wrote:
>>Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 08:18:00 -0700
>>Reply-To: organic-certification@listserv.oit.unc.edu
>>Sender: owner-organic-certification@listserv.oit.unc.edu
>>From: "S. Moore" <sfmoore@earthlink.net>
>>To: "BIODYNAMIC MAIL LIST (E-mail)" <bd-l@biodynamics.com>,
>> "Lawrence London (E-mail)" <london@sunsite.unc.edu>,
>> <organic-certification@listserv.oit.unc.edu>
>>Subject: USDA Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
>>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
>>
>>In the uproar over the absurdity of USDA's proposed rules I have heard or
>>seen very little about the Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis contained
>>therein. I believe this could provide a legal pathway for virtually all
>>organic growers to seek relief from the insanity that USDA seeks to visit
>>upon us. The RFA, as amended in 1996, provides that a small business which
>>is adversely affected by agency action is entitled to judicial review of
>>agency compliance with certain aspects of RFA. The agency is required to
>>prepare an analysis of the economic impact on small entities of its
>>regulatory action. All of this appears to me to be a possible legal path to
>>overcome one of the worst features of OFPA, mandatory certification.
>>However, as with all other aspects of the rule making process, these issues
>>probably need to be raised during the public comment period. The comments
>>on RFA, which I am submitting personally and on behalf of the BD
>>Association, are presented below. I urge other concerned parties to also
>>submit comments to USDA on this issue.
>>
>>Steve Moore
>>Moore Ranch
>>Carpinteria, CA
>>sfmoore@earthlink.net
(Comments cut in the interest of brevity in this note)
--Dan in Sunny Puerto Rico--
ddworley@caribe.net
dan.worley@mindless.com
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".