NOP and Community Grower Group Inspection

I want to share some information that may shed some light on the NOP's position on this topic. The NOP regulation is pretty clear about requiring an inspection of "each production unit, facility, and site":

§ 205.403 On-site inspections.
(a) On-site inspections.
(1) A certifying agent must conduct an initial on-site inspection of
each production unit, facility, and site that produces or handles
organic products and that is included in an operation for which
certification is requested. An on-site inspection shall be conducted
annually thereafter for each certified operation that produces or
handles organic products for the purpose of determining whether to
approve the request for certification or whether the certification
of the operation should continue.

The law upon which the regulations are based also requires inspection of every farm:

OFPA 2107 (a): In General. A program established under this title
shall--
(5) provide for annual on-site inspection by the certifying agent of
each farm and handling operation that has been certified under this
title;

Here is the text of a recent NOP appeal decision that reveals one source of the NOP's concern about grower group inspection.

6. Improper inspection procedures

Proposed Adverse Action: Denial of certification

SUMMARY: A denial of certification was issued to community grower
group, located in Mexico, for improper personnel structure of the
Internal Control
System (ICS) and lapses in its administration. Specifically, the ICS
failed to detect the application of a prohibited insecticide by one
producer and to provide evidence that the use of empty fertilizer
bags for crop storage was confined to one producer. The appellant
admitted fault, but contested that the severity of the sanction was
disproportionate to the frequency and extent of the noncompliances.

RULING: The appeal was denied. The findings demonstrated that the
operation's oversight mechanisms for maintaining compliance were
inadequate. Further, the certifying agent's policies and procedures
for the certification of community grower groups were deemed
inconsistent with the NOP and had been implemented prematurely prior
to evaluation by the NOP. In conflict with the provision
§205.403(a)(l), whereby each production unit must be inspected, the
agent selected a percentage of the producers within a community
grower group for on-site inspection. The internal inspection
procedures, whereby each production unit is inspected, was overseen
by members of the grower group who were not required to have
sufficient expertise, be subject to an annual performance review or
to disclose conflicts of interest. *The ruling established that
**use of an internal inspection system as a proxy for mandatory
on-site inspections of each production unit by the certifying agent
is not permitted.* The appellant waived the right to a hearing, and
the denial of certification was final. (from
http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/Compliance/AppealsSummaries/Sept05-Mar07.pdf)

The sentence that I highlighted in bold text appears to be the result of decision-making that goes to the highest levels of the NOP.

Mark Bradley was pretty clear at the BioFach training regarding the NOP's concerns regarding the way grower group inspection has been taking place. He reported that USDA auditors had also witnessed members of groups with no Organic System Plans, no records, and so-called group members who did not know they were members of the group. He told us that groups cannot obtain certification by default simply by being in an area that does not use synthetic inputs. The regulations require more than just the absence of prohibited substances. He stated that the intent is to protect the integrity of the "USDA Organic" seal. I remember that he made additional points, but my notes are incomplete.

Here are the notes provided by Mark Bradley from that training:

1.

Grower groups

1.

Grower groups are fine, but all sites have to be inspected
per 205.403

1.

Group discussion: Comparing grower groups to large,
single certified operation with several plots. All
sites visited but reports, closing meetings, etc. only
done once.

2.

NOSB recommendation regarding grower groups had not
been incorporated into guidance or regulations.

2.

Same policy would apply to other “group” certifications,
such as voluntary certification of retail chains; all sites
must be inspected.

After the training, I discussed some of his concerns with representative of other certification bodies. They acknowledged that the observations raised by Mark Bradley did reflect actual situations that sometimes occurred during group certification.

I don't believe it will be enough to lobby the USDA for a change in policy. The position of the NOP is consistent with the law and regulations. It appears that it would take an act of Congress to change this policy.

OneCert has certified grower groups in compliance with the Guidelines for Certification of Grower Groups contained in the National Programme of Organic Production in India. In cases where the ICS was not fully functioning, we have inspected 100% of the members of the group.
Although I believe that a well-functioning ICS may improve a group's ability to comply with organic regulations, it may be that certification bodies will need to adjust the way we inspect groups to remain in compliance with the NOP.

I would like to see some discussion on ideas for other ways to meet the NOP regulations regarding inspection while providing quality inspection and certification at an affordable cost. It is not enough for us to claim that IFOAM's ICS approach to group certification is effective when the NOP has evidence to the contrary. Does anyone have ideas to share?

Sam Welsch
OneCert