U.S. Plans Spot Tests of Organic Products - NYT

U.S. Plans Spot Tests of Organic Products - NYT


The Department of Agriculture said on Friday that it would begin enforcing rules requiring the spot testing of organically grown foods for traces of pesticides, after an auditor exposed major gaps in federal oversight of the organic food industry.

Spot testing is required by a 1990 law that established the basis for national organic standards, but in a report released on Thursday by the office of Phyllis K. Fong, the inspector general of agriculture, investigators wrote that regulators never made sure the testing was being carried out.

The report pointed to numerous shortcomings at the agriculture department’s National Organic Program, which regulates the industry, including poor oversight of some organic operations overseas and a lack of urgency in cracking down on marketers of bogus organic products.

The audit did not name growers or processors that marketed products falsely labeled organic or say where any such products had been sold.

The head of the National Organic Program, Miles McEvoy, said on Friday that enforcing testing rules was one of several steps the agency was taking to improve oversight of the industry. It will also require unannounced inspections of organic producers and processors and start regular reviews of organic products in stores to make sure they are correctly labeled and meet federal regulations, he said.

“There’s a real commitment from this administration to improve the integrity of this program,” Mr. McEvoy said.

The testing for pesticide residues is expected to begin in September. It will be done by the network of independent certifying agents that are already accredited by the department to inspect and certify organic growers, processors and handlers.

As of last July, 98 independent agents were licensed to inspect and certify about 28,000 organic operations worldwide, the inspector general’s report said.

Mr. McEvoy said that details of the pesticide inspections were still being worked out but that they would probably focus on growers whose risk of pesticide contamination might be highest, like those whose organic fields are cultivated next to nonorganic fields or those that raise both organic and conventional crops.

Some certifiers already do spot tests, he said, but many do not, testing only if they suspect a problem. The inspector general’s report said a review of four large certifiers, which were collectively responsible for inspecting almost a third of the organic operations nationwide, found that none did regular spot testing.

The organic program’s budget increased to $6.9 million for the current fiscal year, from $3.9 million the previous year, Mr. McEvoy said, while its staff is slated to nearly double, to 31 from 16. The Obama administration is seeking to increase the budget to $10 million in the next fiscal year and allow the program to expand to about 40 employees.

Christine M. Bushway, executive director of the Organic Trade Association, an industry group, said improved oversight, and more money to make it possible, were needed to ensure that consumers had faith in the United States Department of Agriculture’s organic seal. “Compliance and enforcement are critical to the seal and the long-term health of the industry,” she said.

Sales of organic products reached $26 billion last year and, until the recession hit, had been growing by double-digit percentages each year.

Ms. Bushway said the organic program never had the resources to keep up with the industry’s growth. “They were underfunded and understaffed,” she said.

The inspector general’s report focused largely on conditions at the organic program at the end of the Bush administration, from 2006 through 2008.

It said that in several cases officials had taken up to 32 months to act against producers or processors that had sold conventional products claiming they were organic — even as those products remained on the market. In one case, the report said, officials failed entirely to take action against an operator that, for two years, sold nonorganic mint under an organic label.

The report also said that the organic program had failed to adequately vet several of the independent certifying agents it allowed to approve organic operations in foreign countries.

Under normal circumstances, the program gives preliminary accreditation to certifying agents based on a review of paperwork they submit. That allows them to begin certifying and inspecting organic producers and processors. But the program is supposed to follow up with a site visit to inspect a certifier’s operations before making accreditation permanent.

In five cases, the inspector general found, officials failed to make the follow-up visits, allowing the certifiers to operate for as long as seven years with only preliminary accreditation.

Officials at the program said that in three cases, involving certifiers operating in Bolivia, Israel and Turkey, they did not send staff members to make the inspections because the State Department had issued travel warnings about potentially dangerous conditions in those countries.

In two other cases, involving certifying agents in Australia and Canada, officials said that scheduling problems blocked them from arranging visits — in one instance for as long as five years.

The Department of Agriculture said in its response to the audit that it had now visited and completed its review of four of the five foreign certifiers cited in the report and had scheduled a visit to the remaining certifier. It did not say if the reviews had found compliance problems.

The audit also highlighted numerous inconsistencies in the way that certifiers operating in the United States enforced organic regulations.

The report warned that officials must tighten oversight of the industry to give consumers the assurance “that products labeled as organic are meeting a uniform standard.”