This rule has been
reviewed under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (P.L.104-4). The Act requires that agencies
prepare a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that may result in annual expenditures by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any 1 year. According to the Act, the term, "Federal mandate," means
any provision in legislation, statute, or regulation that would impose an enforceable duty
upon State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector, except a duty arising from
participation in a voluntary Federal program.
The National Organic Foods Production
Act (OFPA) of 1990 mandates that the Secretary develop a national organic program to accredit
eligible governing State officials or private persons as certifying agents who would certify
producers or handlers of agricultural products that have been produced using organic methods
as provided for in the OFPA. The OFPA also permits a governing State official to voluntarily
establish a State organic program (SOP) if the program is approved by the Secretary and meets
the requirements of the OFPA. The OFPA does not require that States establish their own SOP's
or that State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector become accredited;
therefore, the OFPA is not subject to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act because it is a
voluntary program.
Although the U.S. Department of Agriculture has determined that
this rule is not subject to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, USDA has sought to consider the
rule's impact on various entities. USDA prepared a Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) that is
discussed in the section entitled "Executive Order 12866" (also attached as an
appendix to this regulation). The RIA consists of a statement of the need for the action, an
examination of alternative approaches, and an analysis of the benefits and costs. Much of the
analysis is necessarily descriptive of the anticipated impacts of the rule. Because basic
market data on the prices and quantities of organic goods and services and the costs of
organic production are limited, it is not possible to provide quantitative estimates of all
benefits and costs of the rule. The cost of fees and recordkeeping required by USDA are
quantified, but the anticipated benefits are not. Consequently, the analysis does not contain
an estimate of net benefits.
The analysis employed in reaching a determination that
this rule is the least costly and least burdensome to the regulated parties is discussed in
the sections entitled "The Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Effects on Small
Businesses" and "Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995." The rule has been designed
to be as consistent as possible with existing industry practices, while satisfying the
specific requirements of the OFPA.
We have had numerous occasions during which to
communicate with various entities during the development of the rule; States, for example.
Currently, there are 32 States with some standards governing the production or handling of
organic food and 13 States with organic certifying programs. Representatives of State
governments have participated in public meetings with the National Organic Standards Board,
while the NOP staff has made presentations, received comments, and consulted with States and
local and regional organic conferences, workshops, and trade shows. States have been actively
involved in training sessions for organic inspectors; public hearings concerning standards for
livestock products during 1994; a national Organic Certifiers meeting on July 21, 1995; a
USDA-hosted meeting on February 26, 1996; a State certifiers meeting in February 1999; and an
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 65 assessment training session for
certifiers in April-May 1999. More detail about contact with States regarding this rule is in
the Federalism section. It is unknown at this time how many States, if any, might voluntarily
establish their own SOP's pursuant to the OFPA and the regulations.
Many professional herbalists recommend <a href=http://www.cac.cn/milk-thistle-extract.htm>Milk Thistle Extract</a> for the prevention and/or treatment of various liver disorders including viral hepatitis, ...
<a href=http://www.cac.cn/methyl-cedryl-ketone.htm>Methyl Cedryl Ketone</a> 80%min coeur, Cas No. 32388-55-9, Aroma, Aromatic chemicals, Zhejiang Winsun aroma