1990 Oranic Food Production Act passed by Congress
is compared side-by-side with the USDA's 1997 proposed regulations:
http://www.iquest.net/ofma/sdbysd.htm

January 1, 1998

The Organic Farmers Marketing Association, Inc. has composed this document, A
SIDE BY SIDE REVIEW of the USDA's Proposed National Organic Program Rule.

The Side By Side compares the language of the USDA's Proposed National Organic
Program Rule and the "Preamble", the document published by the NOP offering
supporting evidence of why they wrote the Proposed Rule as it reads,
with the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA), the House-Senate
Conferee Report, the document published by joint houses of Congress upon final
passage of an Act and the Senate Report, a committee report that discusses the
legislative objectives concerning the Senate version of what became OFPA.

Fifty years of work by traditional farmers of the forties and fifties, rebels
of the sixties and seventies and innovative and conventional farmers of the
eighties and the nineties are embodied in The Organic Foods Production Act.
Many organic farmers and consumers have been involved in encouraging open
dialogue on the quality of our common lands, waters and health. The Organic
Foods Production Act of 1990 symbolizes a consensus of the best thoughts,
instincts and intuitions of what is beneficial for our nations food security
and environmental future. The hopes of small to moderate size farmers, small
businesses and consumers to see a market driven label for food and fiber that
meets very high, consistent and specific criteria of farming, processing and
handling rides on the Organic Foods Production Act.

Foremost of our concern is for the consumer to have the choice to buy
synthetic substance free food and fiber. The USDA Proposed Organic Rule as
written would take the Organic Foods Production Act, an outstanding Act of
Congress, and destroy its meaning to organic farmers and customers alike.

THE USDA HAS PROPOSED an Organic Rule with a large number of inconsistencies
with the Organic Foods Production Act. The USDA in the Proposed Rule has
usurped the authority of the National Organic Standards Board. The USDA has
structured for unreasonable costs for their accreditation services to the
organic community.

The USDA has been directed by Congress to implement the Organic Foods
Production Act with Rules that are consistent with OFPA and the principals of
organic farming and handling. Certified organic farmers, handlers and
interested consumers are the guardian of those principals. OFPA is the
greatest opportunity we as a national community have, with trust and clear
identity, to institute a labeling choice that may represent pure and
unadulterated food in the near future. It may take public advocacy to our
State governments and Congressional Representatives through our businesses,
community, labor, farming and religious organizations to secure our
objectives. Now is the time to speak up for a National Organic Program that
meets our highest expectations.

Proposed Rules become Final Rules after the Secretary of Agriculture's staff
review all the comments and respond to the substantial comments. There are
90-days for the public to provide email, postal or fax comment. The
Secretary's staff will take six or months to respond to the Public Comments
and publish a Final Rule. The Proposed Rule is published in the December 16,
1997 Federal Register, found frequently available at public libraries. A
standard paper copy of The Proposed Organic Rule can be bought by calling
202-512-1800 or an internet copy can be accessed at www.ams.usda.gov/nop.

The Side By Side, prepared on a volunteer basis by organic farmers, and the
following other relevant info, is available on the Organic Farmers Marketing
Association (OFMA) website at http://www.iquest.net/ofma/sdbysd.htm

How to get a copy of the Proposed Rule

OFMA's Side by Side Comparison of OFPA and the Proposed Rule

OFMA's Side By Side Comparison of OFPA and The Rule's Definitions

Where to Comment on the National Organic Proposed Rule

Read the Proposed Rule (Text version)

USDA's requests for specific Comments on the Proposed Rule

Contributions and Comments by OFMA Members:

"The Mouse That Roared"

"Compostia"

Add your name to our mailing list

Press Advisory

"USDA Releases Proposed National Organic Rule"


Please encourage others to visit our Website for information to assist the
public in making informed and timely comments to the USDA.

Membership in the Organic Farmers Marketing Association is open to everyone
with dues of $25 annually. The objective of OFMA, for the benefit of both the
organic farmer and consumer is the enhancement of the marketing and trusting
relationship. Our major objective of the next year is to secure a consistent,
clear and high quality National Organic Standard for organic farming and
handling. To ensure high quality organic standards, the Organic Farmers
Marketing Association maintains a website, publishes a newsletter, the Organic
Organizer, and physically provides organic farmer public advocacy
representation. Donations are also accepted.

Please direct your written inquiries, membership and donations to:
Organic Farmers Marketing Association,
8364 S SR 39, Clayton, IN 46118
317-539-6935, (phone/fax), cvof@iquest.net
www.iquest.net/ofma/

"We are carefully to preserve that life which the Author of nature has given
us, for it was no idle gift," Harvey W. Wiley, first administrator of the
FDA, formerly the Pure Food and Drug Administration


An update: OFMA has completed the first reading and writing of the side by
side for all the livestock, crop and handling standards in the Proposed Rule
and the "Preamble" which extends into the certification section about 15
pages. I am now going over the entire document once more before I send it
complete to the Organic Farmers Marketing Association website
http://www.iquest.net/ofma/ for your thoughts, improvements and comments, to
whatever extent you want to get into it. The conclusion is: every thing we
have indicated as wrong up to now is correct.

A terse, but fairly comprehensive overview of the USDA's illegal Proposed Rule
under OFPA:

A.) National List (farm, and handling operations)
National List class of ACTIVE SYNTHETIC SUBSTANCES:

CROPS:
-The proposed allowance of GMOs-illegal
-The proposed allowance of many synthetic substances, including "chemically
altered plant and animal wastes" in crop production that do not fit into one
of the 10 categories allowed for consideration under the National List
process-illegal
-The exemption of all synthetic seed treatments from the National List
process--illegal

LIVESTOCK:
-The categorical allowance of therapeutic medicines (antibiotics, etc) with
normal FDA withdrawal times before returning to a milk line or selling eggs or
meat products at anytime during the life of all animals including milk, eggs
or dairy without being on the National List--illegal
-The categorical allowance of animal drugs for slaughter stock, other than
mammals, up to 7 days after arrival on a certified organic farm--illegal
-The categorical allowance of using medicines on mammals of any kind within
the first 21 days of life on a certified organic farm with FDA normal
withdrawal times before sale of dairy or slaughter as "organic"--illegal
-The use of synthetic parasiticides and topical FDA approved drugs anytime on
any type of livestock after 21 days of age including those producing organic
meat, eggs or dairy-illegal
-The suggested use of synthetic amino acids in livestock feed--illegal

National List Class of SYNTHETIC INERT SUBSTANCES:
-Not reviewing all inert synthetic ingredients in pesticides used on organic
farms--illegal

National List Class of NON-SYNTHETIC BUT NOT ORGANICALLY PRODUCED SUBSTANCES
USED IN PROCESSED ORGANIC FOODS
-Not limiting the review of non-synthetic but not organically produced
ingredients used in processed "organic" foods to the OFPA prescription, but
expanding it to include synthetic processing aids, food additives, colorings,
flavorings, enzymes and ingredients, including a GMO--illegal
-The application of the subsection of 2118, "unavailability of wholly natural
substitute products" to the "non-synthetic, but not organically produced"
possible exemption for inclusion in organic processed foods, when the section
pointedly outlaws the use of synthetic substances by stating the only
substances that can be considered are "non-synthetic substances" for the 5% in
processed organic foods--illegal

B.) Not certifying every handling operation labeling and selling a product as
"organically produced"--illegal
Includes USDA proposed exempting of restaurants and retail stores processing
and selling "organic" as a meal or sandwich, and retail stores processing
organic products and exempting handling operations that do not serve over
three organic farmers or other handling operations from certification--illegal

C.) Livestock feeding:
-The feeding of livestock consistently 80% organic feed--illegal
-The allowance of a one time per farm, 90 day feeding of organic feed before
selling organic milk and dairy products--illegal,
-The allowance of bringing newborn mammals on an organic farm without having
been organic feed up to 15 days after birth--illegal
-Diminished (to only 90 days) feeding standards for livestock producing
organic fibers--illegal
-The allowance of the production of organic livestock perpetually with
restricted available space for movement and access to the outside--illegal

D.) The denial of exemption for "made with certain organic ingredients" from
production and recordkeeping requirements and further proposed recordkeeping
requirements for exempted "small farmers"--illegal

E.) The usurpation of NOSB authority (granted under OFPA) by the USDA adding
active synthetics to the National List that were either never reviewed or
recommended by the NOSB (cotton defoliants) or were turned down for
recommendation (GMO Bt, and chymosin and PBO) to the Secretary for the
National List by the NOSB--illegal

F.) The illicit introduction of definitions and therefore approaches that are
inconsistent with OFPA,
-The term "certified facility" applied to livestock facilities, opening the
way to intensive, perpetual confinement livestock operations.
-The term "incidental additives" and the many other undefined "additives"
allowed under the Proposed Rule
-The term "active ingredient in any input other than pesticide formulations"
for introducing synthetic substances in handling and organic farming under
this term
-Introducing a new term "non-synthetic substance" to replace "natural"
substance
-The term "inert ingredient in pesticide formulations" to justify the use of
synthetic substances not allowed in organic farming
-The term "nonactive residues" to allow synthetic substances to exempted from
being prohibited substances
-The term "non-agricultural ingredient" to misrepresent the non-synthetic, but
not organically produced substances that can be included on the National List
for using in processed foods.
etc.

G.) Proposing unreasonable fees for organic farmers, handles and certifiers.
No system of oversight of efficiency and to limit the objectives of USDA/NOP
to the mandate of the Organic Foods Production Act.

Webmaster: steve@greenpeople.org