TITLE 4.AGRICULTURE

Part 1. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Chapter 3. BOLL WEEVIL ERADICATION PROGRAM

Subchapter J. ORGANIC COTTON RULES

4 TAC §§3.600, 3.601, 3.604-3.608

The Texas Department of Agriculture (the department) proposes amendments to Chapter 3, Subchapter J, §§3.600, 3.601 and 3.604-3.608, concerning organic cotton production in boll weevil eradication zones. The amendments are proposed to make the sections consistent with state law and with emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions included in the recently adopted National Organic Standards, to make the process for determination of whether an organic field has reached a trap count trigger more efficient, and to provide for compensation, with the approval of the Texas Boll Weevil Eradication Foundation (the foundation), to an organic grower who elects treatment of a field that had triggered under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provision.

The department adopted new Subchapter J, §§3.600-3.606 to be effective on May 15, 2000, and §§3.607-3.609 to be effective on June 14, 2000. In the adoption preamble of these rules, the department stated its intent to review the effectiveness of these sections after the 2000 growing season and to conduct public hearings in January of 2001 to take public comment on whether or not changes should be made to the rules for the next growing season. Public hearings were conducted by the department on January 8, 2001 in Lubbock and Lamesa, Texas. Approximately 20 individuals attended the hearing in Lubbock and 25 in Lamesa, with a total of 9 individuals providing oral testimony. In addition to conducting hearings, the department accepted written comments on the regulations until January 18. Many written comments from the previous rulemakings were resubmitted. General comments regarded the department's responsibility to maintain the viability of organic production in Texas and the department's oversight role over the boll weevil eradication program and the activities of the Texas Boll Weevil Eradication Foundation (the foundation), the concerns of growers over the use of malathion as opposed to alternative control methods, the concern that the eradication of the boll weevil may take precedence over the private property rights of organic growers and opposing comments on the amount of compensation to be paid organic growers in the event a crop must be destroyed. Organic growers feel that the indemnification formula would not pay enough, while conventional growers and their representatives feel that organic growers will be paid too much under the indemnification formula. Also in regard to indemnification, conventional growers requested that the production history used to determine indemnification be based on the actual organic cotton production of the particular field, rather than an average of up to 10 years.

Other comments expressed the opinion among organic growers that the foundation is not doing what it can to minimize drift onto organic crops and that the foundation should be required to indemnify a grower in the event drift or an inadvertent direct application occurs. In regard to trigger levels, comments from organic growers requested that an organic field and conventional field be judged in the same manner-that no organic fields be destroyed unless it exceeds trap counts in conventional fields in the zone and that an organic grower be appointed to the technical review committee that determines when a field has triggered. Other comments requested that a representative of the department be appointed to the committee. Other comments requested a change in the definition of "cutout". Comments were also received regarding the newly adopted National Organic Standards that establish organic certification requirements and the allowance for treatment of an organic field under an emergency pest and disease treatment program provision included in those rules. The comments suggested that this provision would allow for treatment of an organic field that has triggered without causing the organic grower to lose his or her certification status. Upon a review of all comments and considering the experience to date that the department has gained with the implementation of the regulations during the 2000 crop year, the department is proposing changes to §§3.600, 3.601 and 3.604-3.608, as follows.

The proposed amendments to §3.600 add, based on comments received, statutory language found in §74.125 of the Texas Agriculture Code, that rules and procedures for organic cotton production are also to ensure that certification continues to meet national standards for organic cotton to maintain marketability; and add reference to an application made under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions of the National Organic Standards as an allowed treatment that will not affect the certification status of an organic operation. The recently adopted National Organic Standards, which establish standards for certification of organic production, provide that when a prohibited substance is applied to a certified operation under an emergency pest or disease treatment program, and the certified operation otherwise meets the requirements for certification, the certification status of the operation will not be affected as a result of the application of the prohibited substance. However, the National Standards require that any harvested crop or plant part to be harvested that has contact with the prohibited substance cannot be sold, labeled, or represented as "Organically Produced" or "Transitional-Organic Certification Pending". The boll weevil eradication program is covered by this federal rule. The department is also proposing, in a separate submission, amendments to its organic certification program rules found in Title 4, Chapter 18, to also make those rules consistent with the National standards in regards to the affect of treatment made to an organic operation under emergency pest and disease treatment programs.

The proposed amendment to §3.601 concerns the definitions of a "certified organic crop" and "transitional crop". These definitions are being amended to provide that an application under the emergency pest and disease treatment program provisions of Title 4, Chapter 18 will not interfere with the timeline for organic certification. The proposed amendments to §3.604, concerning protection of organic certification, also add a reference to an application made under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions of the National Organic Standards as an allowed treatment which will not interfere with the certification status of an organic operation. This section is also being amended for purposes of clarification and to make it consistent with the Texas Agriculture Code, §74.125, which allows for the department to provide by rule indemnification for organic cotton growers for reasonable losses resulting from a prohibition of production or for any requirement to destroy organic cotton. Consistent with statutory authority, this section does not allow for the department to require indemnification by the foundation for losses due to drift or an inadvertent direct treatment of an organic crop, nor was this section intended to require such indemnification. The department's intent was for the foundation to take a role in working with its contract applicators and organic producers to obtain reasonable compensation for organic growers where it was determined by the department that drift or an inadvertent direct treatment occurred. The proposed amendments clarify the foundation's role in the process. New language is also added to provide that where appropriate, the department may seek penalties against an applicator making an application for the foundation either as a contractor or an employee. The department will continue to work with the foundation to ensure that measures are taken to minimize the incidence of drift or inadvertent direct application on organic crops.

The proposed amendment to §3.605, concerning trigger levels, at subsection (d)(1), replaces the Texas Agricultural Extension Service (TAEX) representative on the technical review committee that determines when a field has triggered with a representative from the department designated by the commissioner. The proposed amendment to subsection (d)(4), regarding who makes a determination as to whether a crop has reached cut-out stage, also replaces the TAEX representative with a department representative designated by the commissioner. These amendments are proposed based on comment received and at the request of the TAEX. The proposed language does not prevent the department's representative from consulting with a TAEX IPM agent or specialist, as deemed necessary. The proposed amendment to subsection (d)(6) provides for an election by a grower to either destroy a crop that has triggered or allow the crop to be treated under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions of Chapter 18.

The proposed amendment to §3.606, concerning crop destruction, extensions and conventional treatment, at subsection (d) provides that a grower may elect for his crop to be treated under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provision in Chapter 18, and if approved by the foundation, may receive compensation in the form of an organic premium based on the amount of cotton actually harvested from the field. Another amendment provides that a grower must notify the foundation of their agreement to allow treatment of their certified crop under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions within 3 calendar days of notification that destruction or treatment is necessary. The amendments further provide that if a field is treated under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions, such treatment will not affect the certification status of the operation, but the crop cannot be sold, labeled, or represented as "Organically Produced" or "Transitional-Organic Certification Pending".

The proposed amendments to §3.607 clarify that growers may negotiate and enter into voluntary indemnification agreements with the foundation and that such agreements are to be approved by the commissioner. This makes this section consistent with current practice. The amendments more accurately reflect the involvement of growers in the zone in the negotiation process. This amendment is made based on comments received and the department's determination that although grower steering committees may be involved in the negotiation, they are not formal entities to which the department can delegate the function of being the primary negotiator. The proposed language does not prohibit the foundation's seeking input from grower steering committees, or growers in general, in regards to voluntary agreements, and the foundation may seek such input as it deems appropriate.

The proposed amendments to §3.608(b) add the emergency pest or disease treatment program option to the timeline by which a grower is entitled to compensation. The proposed amendments to subsection (e) clarify when notice of required destruction is deemed received by a grower. Proposed new subsection (h) is added to establish the amount of compensation a grower will receive if his crop is treated by conventional means and such compensation is approved by the foundation. Under this proposal, a grower who voluntarily elects and is approved for conventional treatment will be able to sell his cotton as conventional, and may, upon approval by the foundation, receive an organic premium of $0.39 per pound for the actual weight of cotton harvested. The amount, on a per pound basis, is the same premium amount established in §3.609 for payment in the case of required destruction. As noted in the adoption preamble for the adoption of §§3.607-3.609, the premium was determined by evaluating the five-year average price of conventional cotton and organic lint and seed. The department believes that allowing for the payment of a premium under this section as well as allowing a grower to benefit from the sale of cotton in the conventional market will provide reasonable compensation to the grower and will also benefit the eradication program. Further, because under the National Organic Standards and upon adoption of proposed amendments to Texas' state standards the certification status of an operation is not jeopardized by an application made under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions, the marketability of an organic grower's cotton will not be affected for future years.

Brian Murray, Special Assistant for Producer Relations, has determined that for the first five year period that the amended sections are in effect, there will be no fiscal implications for state or local government as a result of enforcing or administering the sections. Costs of administering and enforcing the sections, including any cost of grower compensation will be borne by the foundation, using other than state funds.

Mr. Murray also has determined that for each year of the first five years the amended sections are in effect the public benefit anticipated as a result of enforcing the sections will be having in place clearer and more efficient procedures regarding the growing of organic cotton in active boll weevil eradication zones, which will facilitate boll weevil eradication in Texas, while providing another mechanism by which organic growers may receive reasonable compensation. The adoption of the emergency pest and disease treatment program provisions of the National Standards will also benefit organic cotton production and marketability because growers who are able to utilize this provision will not lose their organic certification on that operation for years other than the year a direct treatment is made. The anticipated economic impact on persons or small businesses operated or owned by organic growers who will be required to comply with the amended sections, as proposed, is not determinable at this time. The department believes that only the amendments relating to the option to treat an organic field and possibly receive compensation based on actual yield will have an economic impact on growers. Because the option is voluntary as to the grower, there is no actual requirement to participate. If this option is utilized, the impact would be a positive one, since the grower would benefit from the sale of cotton as conventional and may also receive an organic premium from the foundation. The amount in which an individual grower would benefit would depend on the yield of the affected field as the $0.39 per pound premium would be applied to actual yield.

Comments on the proposal may be submitted to Brian Murray, Special Assistant for Producer Relations, P.O. Box 12847, Austin, Texas 78711, and must be received no later than 30 days from the date of the publication of this proposal in the Texas Register .

The amendments are proposed under the Texas Agriculture Code (the Code), §74.125, which provides the department with the authority to develop rules and procedures to protect the eligibility of organic cotton growers to be certified by the commissioner of agriculture, ensure that certification by the commissioner meets national certification standards and in all events maintain the effectiveness of the boll weevil or pink bollworm eradication program administered under the Code, Chapter 74, Subchapter D, including rules that provide indemnification for organic cotton growers for reasonable losses that result from prohibition or production of organic cotton or from any requirement of destruction of cotton; and, the Code, §74.120, which provides the department with the authority to adopt reasonable rules to carry out the purposes of the Code, Chapter 74, Subchapter D.

The code that will be affected by the proposal is the Texas Agriculture Code, Chapter 74, Subchapter D.

§3.600.Statement of Purpose and Authority.

The Texas Agriculture Code (the Code), Chapter 74, Subchapter D, §74.1011 designates the Texas Boll Weevil Eradication Foundation, Inc. (the foundation) as the entity to carry out boll weevil and pink bollworm eradication in Texas. The Code, §74.120, provides the Commissioner of Agriculture with the authority to adopt reasonable rules to carry out the purposes of Chapter 74, Subchapter D. The Code, §74.125 provides that the Commissioner shall adopt rules and procedures to protect the eligibility of certified organic and transitional cotton production in active eradication zones and ensure that organic and transitional certification by the commissioner continue to meet national certification standards in order for organic cotton to maintain international marketability, while ensuring the ultimate success of the boll weevil eradication program in Texas. Section 74.125 further provides that rules adopted under that section may provide indemnity for the organic cotton growers for reasonable losses that result from a prohibition of production of organic cotton or destruction of organic cotton. Mitigation of losses with production of an alternative crop may be required by the foundation board of directors. The foundation board may not treat or require treatment of organic cotton with chemicals that are not allowed for use on certified organic cotton except as provided in Chapter 18 of this title (relating to Organic Standards and Certification) . Plow-up of an organic cotton field may be required as an alternative to treatment with chemicals.

§3.601.Definitions.

The following words and terms, when used in this subchapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

(1)

(No change.)

(2)

Certified organic crop--A crop which has undergone independent third party verification by the department or a registered private certifying agent that the crop has been produced in compliance with the Texas Organic Standards, Chapter 18 of this title (relating to Organic Standards and Certification), and qualified for full organic status, including the requirement that the land on which the crop is grown has had no prohibited materials applied for at least 36 months prior to harvest , except for a treatment made under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions in Chapter 18 of this title (relating to Organic Standards and Certification) .

(3)-(6)

(No change.)

(7)

Transitional crop--A crop which has undergone independent third party verification by the department or a registered private certifying agent that the crop has been produced in compliance with the Texas Organic Standards, Chapter 18 of this title, and fulfills all requirements except the 36 months required for full organic status. A certified transitional organic crop must be produced on land that has had no prohibited materials applied for at least 12 months prior to harvest , except for a treatment made under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions found in Chapter 18 of this title .

(8)-(9)

(No change.)

§3.604.Protection of Organic Certification.

(a)

(No change.)

(b)

In the event the foundation or an individual working for the foundation inadvertently treats a certified organic or transitional field or portion of a crop, either directly or through drift, with prohibited materials, other than an application allowed under emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions of Chapter 18 of this title (relating to Organic Standards and Certification), the foundation will , to the extent appropriate, assist the grower in obtaining just and reasonable compensation. [ indemnify the grower in accordance with subsection (d) of this section. This indemnification will continue on an annual basis until the earliest date that the exposed field or crop is eligible to return to the status it held prior to the inadvertent treatment by the foundation. ]

(c)

(No change.)

(d)

In the event of a confirmed case of direct treatment or drift of chemical applied for or by the foundation, and where appropriate, the department will investigate and seek such penalties as warranted under the Texas Agriculture Code, Chapter 76, and Chapter 7 of this title (relating to Pesticides) [ the grower will receive just and reasonable compensation in an amount recommended by the foundation board and approved by the commissioner ].

§3.605.Trigger Levels

(a)-(c)

(No change.)

(d)

If an organic or transitional field surpasses the set trap count trigger level, a technical review committee will determine if destruction of that field or other alternative action should be required using the following procedures.

(1)

This committee will consist of the foundation program director or his designee, a member of the foundation's technical advisory committee appointed by the commissioner, and a department representative designated by the Commissioner [ and an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) specialist, or his designee, from the Texas Agricultural Extension Service serving the respective area ].

(2)-(5)

(No change.)

(6)

Should the commissioner determine that some type of eradication activity should occur, the grower may elect [ be required ] to either destroy the crop as prescribed in §3.606 of this title (relating to Crop Destruction), or may elect [ choose ] to allow the crop to be treated under the emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions of Chapter 18 of this title (relating to Organic Standards and Certification) .

(e)

Destruction of an organic cotton crop under this section will not be required, regardless of trap captures, once the crop in that field has reached cut-out stage for that season. This stage will be determined through the following process.

(1)

(No change.)

(2)

The grower will contact the foundation when they believe their crop has reached cut-out stage . [ ; ]

(3)

(No change.)

(4)

If there is a dispute relating to the stage of the crop, a department representative designated by the commissioner [ the IPM agent/specialist or county extension agent serving the area ], will inspect the crop and determine if cut-out stage has been reached.

(5)

(No change.)

§3.606.Crop Destruction; Extensions : [ , ] Choice of Conventional Treatment.

(a)-(c)

(No change.)

(d)

Choosing conventional treatment.

(1)

In lieu of crop destruction, a grower who qualifies under the emergency pest and disease treatment program provisions of Chapter 18 of this title may notify the foundation and the department in writing that he or she desires conventional treatment within three days of receiving notice that the field must be treated or destroyed. Under Chapter 18 of this title, any harvested crop or plant part to be harvested that has been treated cannot be sold, labeled, or represented as Organically Produced or Transitional-Organic Certification Pending; this treatment will not affect the certification status of the operation or future crops [ chooses to cancel his or her organic or transitional certification on the acreage that has been ordered to be destroyed so that conventional treatment may be used ].

(2)

Such notification must be provided in writing to both the foundation and the department and must be postmarked, if sent by mail, or faxed at least four days before the destruction deadline. [ The same penalties described in subsection (c) will apply if notification is not received by the destruction deadline. ]

(3)

Once notified, the foundation shall approve or deny the request for conventional treatment within 48 hours If the request is approved, the foundation may treat the crop with conventional methods. Should the request be denied, the grower must destroy the crop as outlined in subsection (a) of this section.

(4)

[ (3) ] Once [ After both ] the foundation [ and the department receives ] has approved the grower's request for conventional treatment [ this notification ], the Foundation will treat the field in the same manner as all conventional cotton fields in the same zone.

(5)

[ (4) ] A grower [ choosing to ] treated under Chapter 18 of this title [ cancel organic certification ] will [ not ] be entitled to compensation under §3.608 (h) of this title (relating to Calculation of Indemnity or Compensation) , for that acreage , if approved by the foundation .

§3.607.Eligibility for Indemnification.

(a)

Certified organic and/or transitional cotton growers in active eradication zones may negotiate and enter into voluntary indemnification agreements with the Foundation, [ grower steering committees to negotiate indemnification ] provided that those agreements are negotiated and made in good faith by both parties and are approved by the [ foundation and the ] commissioner.

(b)-(c)

(No change.)

§3.608.Calculation of Indemnity or Compensation .

(a)

To be eligible for indemnification if a crop must be destroyed under §3.606 of this title (relating to Crop Destruction; Extensions; Choice of Conventional Treatment) , a grower must report the Farm Service Agency farm numbers, physical locations, and row acreage on each farm that the grower will use as the base acreage calculated in §3.607 of this title (relating to Eligibility for Indemnification or Compensation ), to the foundation before planting each year on a form provided by the foundation.

(b)

If certified organic or transitional cotton on the grower's base acreage is destroyed through the requirements of this subchapter, or if the acreage is treated by the foundation under emergency pest or disease treatment program provisions as provided under Chapter 18 of this title (relating to Organic Standards and Certification), any [ the grower will be entitled to ] indemnification or compensation will be made by October 31 of that year.

(c)-(d)

(No change.)

(e)

When a grower is entitled to indemnification as a result of crop destruction, the foundation will indemnify the grower in accordance with the following formulas:

(1)-(2)

(No change.)

(3)

For purposes of this subsection, notice is deemed received by the grower:

(A)

upon [ service of the notice by ] hand-delivery of the notice to the grower or an authorized representative by a department employee;

(B)

if mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, upon the date of delivery as shown on the green card receipt , if no delivery date is shown, three days after the date the department deposits the notice in the mail as shown by department records or other component evidence; [ by the department ]; or

(C)

(No change.)

(f)-(g)

(No change.)

(h)

If a field is treated under §3.606(d) of this title (relating to Crop Destruction; Extensions; Choice of Conventional Treatment) by conventional means the foundation will upon agreement by both parties compensate the grower at a rate of $0.39 per pound of lint harvested from that field that crop year.

This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority to adopt.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State, on February 16, 2001.

TRD-200100980

Dolores Alvarado Hibbs

Deputy General Counsel

Texas Department of Agriculture

Earliest possible date of adoption: April 1, 2001

For further information, please call: (512) 463-4075


Chapter 18. ORGANIC STANDARDS AND CERTIFICATION

4 TAC §18.10, §18.11

The Texas Department of Agriculture (the department) proposes amendments to §§18.10 and 18.11, concerning certification of organic food and fiber. The amendment to §18.10 is proposed to make the section consistent with the newly adopted National Organic Standards in regards to emergency pest or disease treatment programs. The National Standards provide that when a prohibited substance is applied to a certified operation due to an emergency pest or disease treatment program and the certified operation otherwise meets certification requirements, the certification status of the operation will not be affected as a result of the application of the prohibited substance. The National Standards also provide that any harvested crop or plant part to be harvested that has contact with the prohibited substance cannot be sold, labeled, or represented as "Organically Produced" or "Transitional-Organic Certification Pending". The department agrees with the rationale given by the National Organic Program (NOP) in its adoption of this provision that if a certified organic grower has been a good steward of his/her land and has managed the production of his/her product(s) in accordance with all established regulations, the certification status of the operation should not be affected when a prohibited substance is applied for an emergency pest or disease treatment program. The department also agrees with the NOP that maintaining consumer trust is important, and that any harvested crop or plant part to be harvested that has been treated with a prohibited substance as part of an emergency pest or disease treatment program should not be sold as organically produced. With this approach, the certified organic operation can retain its certification status, and the consumer can be assured that a product from a certified organic operation that has been in contact with a prohibited substance as the result of an emergency pest or disease treatment program will not enter the organic marketplace.

The amendment to §18.11 is proposed to provide a more efficient and reasonable procedure for establishing a residue tolerance level for a crop or product that is not intended for consumption for which an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tolerance level or Food and Drug Administration (FDA) action level has not been established. The current rule provides that products or crops that are contaminated with toxic, synthetic or other prohibited substances in excess of 5% of the EPA tolerance or FDA action level shall not be represented or sold as organic or transitional. The rule further provides that if an EPA tolerance for a substance is not established for the affected crop or product, the tolerance for the most closely related crop or product will be used as the basis for decisions; and, if available testing methods are not capable of measuring a specific contaminant at the 5% level, the crop or product may not be represented or sold as organic or transitional if the contaminant is detected in the sample. The department fully understands that the EPA tolerance is defined as the maximum legal level of a pesticide residue in or on a raw or processed agricultural commodity. The department also acknowledges that the EPA tolerance is a health-based standard. It is not the department's intent to override EPA's determination on the tolerance level for consumable crops or products; the department is not trying to apply the 5% standard in a manner similar to that of EPA. The proposed amendment will change the method for establishing the tolerance level for non-consumable crops or products. Under the proposed amendment, when crops or products are not intended for consumption and there is no EPA tolerance or FDA action level for a particular substance that is present, the crop or product may not be represented or sold as organic or transitional if the substance is detected in excess of 5% of the highest EPA tolerance or the FDA action level for that substance for all products or crops.

David Kostroun, assistant commissioner for regulatory programs, has determined that for the first five-year period the new and revised sections are in effect there will be no fiscal implications for state or local governments as a result of enforcing or administering the amended sections.

Mr. Kostroun also has determined that for each year of the first five years the new and revised sections are in effect the public benefit anticipated as a result of enforcing the sections, as proposed, will be greater availability of Texas organic agriculture products in the marketplace. The effect on large and small organic businesses is to provide more product to sell in the organic marketplace. There are no anticipated economic costs to small businesses and persons who are required to comply with the proposed changes.

Comments on the proposal may be submitted to David Kostroun, Assistant Commissioner for Regulatory Programs, and must be received no later than 30 days from the date of publication of the proposal in the Texas Register.

The amendments are proposed under the Texas Agriculture Code (the Code), §18.002, which provides the department with the authority to adopt rules necessary for the enforcement and administration of Chapter 18, Subchapter A., concerning Organic Standards and Certification.

The code sections which will be affected by the proposal are the Texas Agriculture Code, Chapter 18.

§18.10.Pesticide Drift and Emergency [ Spray or ] Pest or Disease Treatment [ Management ] Programs.

(a)

(No change.)

(b)

Emergency [ spray or ] pest or disease treatment [ management ] programs.

(1)

Producers shall comply with federal, state, or local emergency [ spray or ] pest or disease treatment [ management ] programs [ and adhere to a pest management plan designated or authorized by the department ]. When a prohibited substance is applied to a certified operation due to an emergency pest or disease treatment program and the certified operation otherwise meets the requirements of this chapter, the certification status of the operation shall not be affected as a result of the application of the prohibited substance, provided that any harvested crop or plant part to be harvested that has contact with the prohibited substance cannot be sold, labeled, or represented as "Organically Produced" or "Transitional-Organic Certification Pending."

(2)

The department shall provide the applicable officers and agents of federal, state, or local emergency pest or disease treatment [ spray ] programs [ or pest management programs ] with a list of certified organic and transitional producers in each emergency [ spray or ] pest or disease treatment [ management ] zone.

(3)

(No change.)

§18.11.Fertility, Water Quality and Residue Testing.

(a)

(No change.)

(b)

Residue testing.

(1)

(No change.)

(2)

The department, or an organic certifying agent , may require testing of certified food or fiber when it has a reasonable cause to suspect that it may have been contaminated.

(3)

Products or crops that are contaminated with toxic, synthetic or other prohibited substances in excess of 5% of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tolerance or Food and Drug Administration (FDA) action level shall not be represented or sold as organic or transitional. Except as provided in subsection (b)(4), if [ If ] an EPA tolerance for a substance is not established for the affected crop or product, the tolerance for the most closely related crop or product will be used as the basis for decisions. [ If available testing methods are not capable of measuring a specific contaminant at the 5% level, the crop or product may not be represented or sold as organic or transitional if the contaminant is detected in the sample. ]

(4)

A product or crop for which an EPA tolerance or an FDA action level does not exist for a particular substance and which is not intended for consumption shall not be represented or sold as organic or transitional, if the product or crop is contaminated with the toxic, synthetic or other prohibited substance in excess of 5% of the highest EPA tolerance or FDA action level for that substance for all products or crops.

(5)

If available testing methods are not capable of measuring a specific contaminant at the 5% level, the crop or product may not be represented or sold as organic or transitional if the contaminant is detected in the sample.

(c)

The tolerance levels established in subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall apply to testing of any samples taken of organic crops in crop year 2000 and subsequent crop years.

This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority to adopt.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State, on February 16, 2001.

TRD-200100972

Dolores Alvarado Hibbs

Deputy General Counsel

Texas Department of Agriculture

Earliest possible date of adoption: April 1, 2001

For further information, please call: (512) 463-4075