National Organic Program (NOP); Sunset Review (2012) for Nutrient Vitamins and Minerals

Score: 22 / 60
37%
F

View the Complete Report Card at Mercatus.org ➜

What this Rule is Proposing

This proposed rule would address a recommendation submitted to the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) on April 29, 2011. The recommendation pertains to the 2012 Sunset Review of the listing for nutrient vitamins and minerals on the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (National List). As recommended by the NOSB, the proposed rule would continue the exemption (use) for nutrient vitamins and minerals for 5 years after the October 21, 2012 sunset date. In addition, the proposed rule would amend the annotation to correct an inaccurate cross reference to U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations (FDA). The proposed amendment to the annotation would clarify what synthetic substances are allowed as nutrient vitamins and minerals in organic products labeled as ``organic'' or ``made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s)).''

Commentary

The rule simply seeks to close a loophole that previously allowed producers to include additional ingredients in food and infant formula labeled organic. This new rule grants the National Organic Standards Board greater control over what can be labeled as organic. The rule assumes that private parties are unable to determine what ingredients should be included in products listed as organic. The net effect might actually reduce the consumption of certain organic food if ingredients that have been found to be beneficial, such as DHA (docosahexaenoic acid—an essential amino acid for brain development and function), are no longer allowed in food labeled organic. The proposed rulemaking reflects to some extent a sensible process of review and adjustment, but it also reveals (i) the organic food industry encounters difficulties in attaining nutritional standards, in particular for infant foods; (ii) USDA encounters difficulty in monitoring, interpreting, and enforcing elements of the National List; and (iii) considerable interest-group activity surrounds this particular regulatory process. It is not clear why consumers should not be free to reach their own conclusions over “organicness” based on enhanced information flow, and the reason given against such a guidance approach (1988)—that the current list has inaccuracies—is unconvincing.