7 C.F.R. § 205.668

Noncompliance procedures under State organic programs

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A State organic program's governing State official must promptly notify the Secretary of commencement of any noncompliance proceeding against a certified operation and forward to the Secretary a copy of each notice issued.

(b) A noncompliance proceeding, brought by a State organic program's governing State official against a certified operation, shall be appealable pursuant to the appeal procedures of the State organic program. There shall be no subsequent rights of appeal to the Secretary. Final decisions of a State may be appealed to the United States District Court for the district in which such certified operation is located.

(c) A State organic program's governing State official may review and investigate complaints of noncompliance with the Act or regulations concerning accreditation of certifying agents operating in the State. When such review or investigation reveals any noncompliance, the State organic program's governing State official shall send a written report of noncompliance to the Program Manager. The report shall provide a description of each noncompliance and the facts upon which the noncompliance is based.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2013–2015 · leading case: Quesada v. Herb Thyme Farms, Inc., 361 P.3d 868 (Cal. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Quesada v. Herb Thyme Farms, Inc., 361 P.3d 868 (Cal. 2015). “§ 6507 ); once federally approved, these state programs take principal responsibility for certifying growers and instituting administrative proceedings for noncompliance with the governing standards ( 7 C.F.R. § 205.668 (b) (2015)). California’s state program authorizes anyone…”

Quesada v. Herb Thyme Farms (Cal. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “( 7 C.F.R. § 205.668 (a) (2012).) ―In States with approved SOP‘s [sic], the SOP will oversee certification compliance proceedings and handle appeals from certified operations in the State.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.