When Congress drafted and passed the framework for the National Organic Program, it acutely understood that “trust” and “integrity” were values that could not be compromised.
Hence, it specifically wrote legislation to prevent any conflict of interest from taking place between an organic certifier and the entity that it oversees. However, despite the clarity of this directive, it appears that the law is not being followed.
Even worse, there appears to be a continuing pattern of this law not being followed, something we have covered in Organic Insider (see here and here). When we reached out to the USDA for an update on these two complaints, the agency said that the CCOF complaint is “ongoing.”
The latest news is that watchdog group OrganicEye has filed a conflict of interest legal complaint against a third separate organic certifier.
This time, Florida Organic Growers (FOG) and its certification arm, Quality Certification Services (QCS), based in Gainesville, FL, are being accused of receiving contributions, conference sponsorships and other payments over and above certification fees from operations that FOG oversees.
At issue is something directly addressed in the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, as ratified by Congress; namely, that the relationship between an organic certifier and the entity it is certifying, such as a farm or co-packing facility, be arms-length and completely objective.
To meet this very specific goal, federal code 7 USC 6515 (h)(2): Requirements of certifying agents says the following:
h) Conflict of interest
Any certifying agent shall not —
(2) accept payment, gifts or favors of any kind from the business inspected other than prescribed fees
Prior to 2002, organic certifiers took on many roles, including certification and advocacy, and raised money from the industry to underwrite their work.
Yet, when the USDA began to implement the National Organic Program in that year, the agency required organic certifiers to separate these roles, so that the certification entity could operate without a conflict of interest. For example, NOFA/Mass separated its advocacy and certification arms, and it spun off Baystate Organic Certifiers as an independent entity with its own governance and offices.
According to OrganicEye’s complaint, Florida Organic Growers still fully owns its certification arm, QCS, and receives “payment, gifts or favors of any kind from the business inspected other than prescribed fees,” which violates federal law, the watchdog group contends.
In response to OrganicEye’s allegations, Ramkrishnan Balasubramanian, CEO of Florida Organic Growers, told Organic Insider that “the complaints expressed have no merit.”
In addition to this conflict of interest legal complaint against FOG and QCS, OrganicEye has updated its request to the USDA Office of Inspector General to investigate the National Organic Program. The group alleges malfeasance at the National Organic Program in its lack of preventing corporate influence peddling, in the form of financial payments to certifiers over and above inspection fees, and failing to enforce the agency’s regulations preventing conflicts of interest, leading to the erosion of the integrity of the organic label.
MOTIVATION BEHIND LEGAL COMPLAINT
When asked about what led OrganicEye to investigate a possible conflict of interest at Florida Organic Growers, the group said it was trying to determine why some legacy certifiers are willing to certify giant hydroponic (soil-less) operations and industrial livestock operations, while many of their counterparts do not view such operations as legal under the Organic Foods Products Act of 1990 and federal regulations.
It is now up to the USDA’s National Organic Program to decide whether this legal complaint against Florida Organic Growers and Quality Certification Services has merit or not. Additionally, the USDA Office of Inspector General must determine whether the National Organic Program is guilty of malfeasance.
Organic Insider will keep its readers informed as developments related to these matters unfold.
 |
With gratitude, 
Max Goldberg, Founder |
The investment includes $70.4 million to support specialty crop production research and $50.5 million to support farmers and ranchers who grow and market organic products.
A very disconcerting trend.
The chain will focus on Chicago and Dallas.
Founded by Emily Griffith, the sprouted organic buckwheat brand closed a round led by Proterra Investment Partners.
More companies are incorporating these grains into their products to enhance nutrition and sustainability.
Aurora Abad, secretary general of the Organic Processing and Trade Association, takes a look at the key issues in the coming years.
After a yearlong hiatus, Amazon has begun to open new locations of its Fresh supermarket chain.
The Center for Biological Diversity, along with Center for Food Safety and Pesticide Action Network North America, sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for failing to adequately protect more than 1,500 species of wildlife and plants from the insecticide malathion.
A proposed class action lawsuit filed against Mondelēz International – alleging ‘false and deceptive marketing and sale of cocoa products that display its Cocoa Life logo’ – presents significant ramifications for the company, the broader food industry and consumers alike.
Want to share this newsletter on social media? You can use this link: Newsletter Link
