Eileen S. Stommes, Deputy Administrator				Date:
USDA-AMS-TM-NOP
Room 4007  - South
Ag Stop 0275
P.O. Box 96456
Washington, DC  20090-6456

Re: docket number TMD-94-00-2

Dear Ms. Stommes,

This letter is to reflect my dismay at the USDA's Proposed Rules on the
National Organic Program.  As written, the Proposed Rules will destroy
my confidence as a consumer in both the term "organic" and the ability
of the government to regulate the safety and health of the American
People.  It is complicated, very complicated, and therefore I am forced
to rely on experts I trust.

The comments on the following pages are very important to me.  Please
take them seriously.

Basically the USDA's Proposed Rule contradicts the Organic Foods
Production Act of 1990.  A major concern of mine is that consumers,
myself included, will lose the high standard of organic foods we have
come to accept as the norm.  The USDA Proposed Organic Rule as written
would take the Organic Foods Production Act and destroy its meaning to
farmers and consumers alike; it has usurped the authority of the
National Organic Standards Board.  This is a big deal!

Therefore I ask the USDA to modify The Proposal to reflect the many
years of good work done by the National Organics Standards Board and
organic producers around the nation.  As a consumer, I want to have
faith in standards that the USDA would implement, not distrust The
Proposal as a reflection of less-than-above-board corporate input.  I
look forward to a high standard for organic food that as a consumer I
have come to expect.

Thank you for your time,

Sincerely,




enclosure















pg 2, comments of
on organics Proposed Rule, Re: docket number: TMD-94-00-2

-Topic & Section: National List: Sec. 205.22(c)(9), 205.22(c)(5) and 205.13(a)(3),
205.22(c)(6),(c)(11),(c)(1),(d), 205.22(c)(10) and 205.7(c)(2),(iii), 205.22(g), 205.24(b)(c) and (f).
Violates OFPA Sec. 2105, Sec. 2118(b),(c)(1)(A) and (B)(i). The proposal allows for the use of
categories of active synthetic substances in organic farming like Piperonyl butoxide (a toxic
synergist), amino acids used as growth promoters, antibiotics, boric acid and acetic acid used as
pesticides, genetically modified substances (GMOs), high soluble synthetic substance to correct a
nutrient deficiency, a cation balancing agent like potassium sulfate1 cotton defoliants, pest control
substances for livestock, nutrients and dietary supplements and feed additives, all synthetic
substances that cannot be considered for use under the National List Procedures.

-Topic & Section: National List: Sec. 205.14(b) and (b)(1) and (2), 205.22(c)(3), 205.22(f), 205.24(d))
Violates OFPA Sec. 2118(b). The Proposal allows categorical use in organic farming and livestock
production of active synthetic substances like vitamins and minerals, animal drugs and parasiticides,
without itemizing by specific use or application as required by OFPA.


- Topic & Section: National List: Sec. 205.20(b)(3)(ii).
Violates OFPA Sec. 2118(b), (c)(1) and (A) and (B)(ii). The Proposal does not provide for review,
evaluation and inclusion on the National List of all pesticide product ingredients in botanical 
pesticides including undisclosed "inert" but toxic substances. The Proposed Rule allows synthetic 
inert ingredients to be used on organic farms without review for toxicological concern that includes 
EPA list 2, Potentially Toxic Inerts (130 substances) and List 3, Inerts of Unknown Toxicity (1200 
substances).

- Topic & Section: National List: Sec. 205.2, 205.17(a), and 205.26.
Violates OFPA Sec. 2105 and 2107(b)(1)(C) and 2111(a) and (a)(1) through (4), Sec. 2118(b), (c)(1) 
and (A) and (B)(iii)  The Proposal allows for synthetic food additives, processing aids, enzymes and 
ingredients (incidental additives) in processed foods labeled and sold as organic.


-Topic & Section: National List: Sec. 205.26
Violates OFPA Sec, 2105 and 2l07(b)(1)(C) and 2111(a) and (a)(1) through (4), Sec. 2118(b), (c)(1) 
and (A) and (B)(iii). The Proposal allows for genetically modified organisms(GMOs) in processed food 
labeled and sold as organic.

- Topic & Section: Definitions: Sec. 205.2 defined, 205,3(b)(2), 205.7(c) 205.17(a), sec, 
205.13(a)(3),205.7(b)(4) 205.28(a)(4)(i) 205.2O(b)(2), 205.l6(2)(iii)
Violates OFPA. The Proposed Rule creates new definitions, categories, criteria and exceptions that 
would allow wide use of synthetic substances in organic farming and processing of organic foods. 
The new terms defined in the Proposed Rule that are meant to circumvent OFPA are: "non-synthetic," 
"incidental additive" "synthetic amino acid additives," "non-active residue", "non-agricultural 
ingredient", "nonorganic agricultural ingredient or product", "active ingredient in any input other than 
pesticide formulations", "inert ingredient in any input other than pesticide formulations". The use of 
these and terms in the Supplementary Information of "inconsequential additives", "extraneous 
additives" and "unintentional additives" as acceptable in organic farming and handling indicates 
USDA doesn't support existing organic farming, processing and handling standards.

-Topic & Section: National List: Sec. 205.22, 205.24 and 205.26
Violates the authority and role mandated by OFPA, Sec, 2104(c) and 2118(d)(1) and (2), 2119(a), (k), 
(1) and (2), (L). The USDA usurped the NOSB's responsibilities and powers to limit USDA 
consideration of allowed and prohibited substances for inclusion on the National list by adding never 
considered active synthetic substances in farming and by adding NOSB rejected substances like 
"ionizing radiation," "biosolids" (sewage sludge) and GMOs to the Proposed National List.

- Topic & Section: National List: Sec. 205.14(b), (b)(l) and (b)(2), 205.24(d)
Violates OFPA Sec. 2118(b), (c)(1)(A) and (B)(i). The Proposal allows the use of any kind of synthetic 
medicines, antibiotics and parasiticides on meat producing animals, poultry and dairy animals from 
birth and through all stages of growth that are not itemized on the Proposed National List for specific 
use or application.






















pg 3. comments 
on organics Proposed Rule, Re: docket number TMD-94-00-2

-Topic & Section: Livestock: Sec. 205.13(a)(1) and (a)(1)(i)
Violates OFPA Sec. 2110(a), (c)(1), (c)(1) and (2). The Proposal allows the feeding of 20% 
non-organically produced feed to livestock raised for "organically produced" meat, dairy and egg 
production. Such feed could be from GMO plant material or their derivatives.

- Topic & Section: Livestock: Sec.205.13(a)(1)(iii)
Violates OFPA Sec. 21l0(e)(2). The Proposal allows feeding dairy animals organically produced feed 
for only 3 months prior to producing milk and dairy products labeled and sold as organic.

-Topic & Section: Livestock: Sec. 205.15(b)
Violates OFPA Sec. 2110(d)(2), (h). The Proposal allows for perpetual and intensive confinement of 
organically raised livestock. Such confinement does not allow adequate space for movement and 
access to the outdoors.

-Topic & Section: Labeling: Sec. 205.16, 205.26, 205.28(c)(3)
Violates OFPA Sec. 2106(c)(1) and (2). The Proposal does not provide an exemption from certification 
requirements of the Act when using the term "made with (certain) organic ingredients" (Processed 
food made with less than 50% or at least 50% organic ingredients.).

- Topic & Section: Certification: Sec. 205.201(a)
Violates OFPA Sec. 2106(a)(1)(A) and (B), 2107(a)(1)(A) and (B) and (2) and(5). The Proposal 
provides an exemption from certification for handling operations that contract to process, package 
and store certified organic products that work for no more than three certified operations.

-Topic & Section: Certification: Sec. 205.202(b)(2) and (3)
Violates OFPA Sec. 2103(10), Sec. 2106(a)(1)(A) and (B), 2107(a)(1)(A) and (B) and (2) and(5). The 
Proposal provides an exemption from certification for restaurants and retail establishments, that 
process products and sell those products as "organically produced."

- Topic & Section: Definition: Sec. 205.2
Violates OFPA Sec. 2103(4) and(5), 2104(d). The Proposal creates a new category of certification, 
the "certified facility" allowing for example perpetual and intensive livestock confinement.

- Topic & Section: National List: Sec. 205.28
Violates OFPA Sec. 2103(12), 2105(1), (2), 2118 and 2119. The Proposal does not review active 
synthetic substances in conformance to OFPA; does not include the class of synthetic inert 
substances on the National List contradictory to OFPA's mandate; does not conform to the OFPA 
mandate to only allow the use of non-synthetic, but not organically produced substances in up to 5% 
of processed organic foods, if they are petitioned and included on the National List.

- Topic & Section: Compliance: Sec. 205.430(a)
Violates Sec 2105. The Proposal relies on costly residue testing for synthetic substances rather than 
conforming to OFPA which utilizes a system of farming that prohibits any use of synthetic substances 
that are not properly placed on the National List; allbws organic crops to be drifted on from 
neighboring farms by synthetic pesticides and sold as "organically produced."

-Topic & Section: Fees: Sec. 205.421,205.422
Violates OFPA Sec. 2107(a)(l0). The Proposal discourages and does not promote organic family 
farming and small businesses by proposing to charge unreasonable and excessive fees either forcing 
the price of organic products higher or the certified farm or handling operation to pay more out of net 
profit.

Therefore I ask the USDA to modify The Proposal to reflect the many years of good work done by the 
National Organics Standands Board and organic producers around the nation. As a consumer, I want 
to have faith in standards that the USDA would implement1 not distrust that The Proposal now 
reflects based on less-than-above-board corporate input. Thank you for your time. I look forward to a 
high standand for organic food that as a consumer I have come to expect.

Sincerely,