Bill 44 revises the Agricultural Operation Practices Act to replace the term “composting materials” with a broader term, “organic materials,” defines “digestate” (by‑product from anaerobic digestion) and folds those materials into the Act’s permitting, storage and application rules. The bill also transfers many decision and enforcement responsibilities from the former Board to approval officers and inspectors, lengthens some public and affected‑party timelines, and explicitly allows the Minister to create and publish codes, standards or guidelines that regulations may adopt by reference.
This matters for producers operating composting facilities or anaerobic digesters, approval officers and municipal planners, and neighbouring landowners. The changes expand the Act’s scope to cover new bioenergy by‑products, streamline administrative decision‑making, and shift substantive rule‑making power toward ministerial codes — a trade‑off between faster, more flexible policy and reduced formal oversight and potential drafting ambiguities that could raise compliance and legal questions.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill replaces references to “composting materials” with “organic materials,” adds a definition of “digestate,” and applies the Act’s authorization, storage and application rules to those materials. It reassigns many Board functions to approval officers and inspectors, lengthens public response windows to 20 working days, and authorizes the Minister to issue and publish codes and standards that regulations can adopt.
Who It Affects
Confined feeding operations, composters and farms operating anaerobic digesters; approval officers and provincial inspectors; municipalities and intermunicipal planning bodies; and nearby landowners or public intervenors who participate in approval processes.
Why It Matters
Operators who produce or handle digestate will now fall squarely within AOPA’s permitting and storage requirements. The ministerial code mechanism and expanded regulatory incorporation by reference let the province update technical standards outside of the formal regulation‑making process, changing how compliance obligations are developed and enforced.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Bill 44 systematically replaces the phrase “composting materials” throughout the Agricultural Operation Practices Act with “organic materials,” and then defines that term to include substances produced by specified agricultural activities, expressly including “digestate” — the solids or liquids produced as a by‑product of anaerobic digestion. The change brings outputs of anaerobic digesters into the Act’s regulatory perimeter (storage, application, transport and disposal) alongside manure and compost, and requires authorizations and approvals to address organic materials in the same way they currently address manure.
The bill tightens the technical definition of “composting” to describe a controlled aerobic process that includes a thermophilic (high temperature) phase. It also adjusts multiple operational provisions — for example, redefining what constitutes a manure collection area to reference manure, organic materials, compost or their runoff, and extending the Act’s authorization requirements to organic materials that are predominantly liquid.
These edits mean existing permitting, storage‑design and application rules will apply to a wider range of farm by‑products and residues.Procedurally, Bill 44 moves many powers formerly held by the Board to approval officers and shifts enforcement and amendment authorities in practice to inspectors. It lengthens several participant deadlines (notably giving affected persons and the public 20 working days to apply for status or make certain submissions) and requires approval officers to consider intermunicipal development plan land‑use provisions in addition to municipal plans.
Finally, the Minister gains explicit authority to establish, amend and publish codes, standards or guidelines for any subject the regulations could address, and the regulations may adopt those documents — either as fixed to a date or as amended over time.Practically, farm operators who install digesters or otherwise handle a broader set of organic residues should expect their facilities and management practices to be evaluated under existing AOPA standards for storage, runoff control and application rates; approval officers may impose development‑style conditions. Municipalities and intermunicipal planning bodies should watch how approval officers interpret compatibility with local land‑use provisions, because approval officers can now impose terms similar to municipal development permits.
The ministerial code route will allow technical rules to be updated quickly but will change how stakeholders monitor and influence technical requirements.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill adds “digestate” as a defined term and defines “organic materials” to include digestate and other substances permitted by regulation, making anaerobic digestion by‑products explicitly subject to AOPA.
It replaces nearly all uses of “composting materials” with “organic materials,” bringing storage, application and transport rules that previously focused on manure/compost into scope for a wider set of residues.
The bill shifts decision‑making and enforcement language away from the Board to approval officers and inspectors, effectively centralizing administrative authority at the approval‑officer/inspector level.
Public and affected‑party timeframes to seek status or challenge applications are extended to 20 working days after an application is determined complete (up from 10 working days in several places).
The Minister may establish, amend and publicly post codes, standards or guidelines, and regulations may adopt those documents (by date or as amended), allowing technical standards to take effect outside the formal regulation‑making process.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
New definitions and broader terminology
The bill rewrites the Act’s definitions: it replaces “composting materials” with “organic materials,” defines “composting” as a controlled aerobic process that includes a thermophilic phase, and adds “digestate” as any liquid or solid by‑product from anaerobic digestion using permitted organic materials. It also expressly allows regulations to permit other substances to be classified as organic materials. Practically, this is the core scope change: material streams from biogas/anaerobic systems are now captured by the Act’s permitting, storage and application rules.
Apply AOPA duties to liquid organic materials
These provisions expand existing authorizations and inspection powers so that where the statute mentioned manure or composting materials before, it now covers organic materials as well — including those in a predominantly liquid state. Inspectors can require operational adjustments for equipment used to manage organic materials under the same sections that historically applied to manure, which will affect design standards for storage tanks, lagoons and application equipment.
Administrative process, timelines and who decides
The bill removes many references to the Board and replaces them with approval officer or inspector, narrowing the role of the provincially established Board and vesting frontline administrative authority in approval officers. It standardizes and lengthens participation windows to 20 working days for affected persons and public applicants to seek determinations of direct effect or make submissions after an application is complete. Approval officers retain discretion to grant variances, include variances in approvals, and impose conditions similar to municipal development permits.
Land‑use consistency and intermunicipal plans
Amendments instruct approval officers to assess applications for consistency not only with municipal development plans but also with any applicable intermunicipal development plan land‑use provisions, and to have regard to those plans when conducting reviews. Section 25 clarifies the Board (where applicable) must consider but is not bound by municipal and intermunicipal plans. These changes elevate intermunicipal planning documents as express considerations for AOPA approvals.
Enforcement and emergency measures moved to inspectors
Where the Act previously referred to the Board issuing enforcement or emergency orders and amending orders, the bill reassigns those powers to inspectors. It also extends the categories of materials — explicitly naming manure and organic materials — that can trigger emergency orders or inspector actions where releases pose immediate and significant environmental risk.
Minister may create and publish codes, and regulations may adopt them
The bill expands the statutory adoption‑by‑reference mechanism and adds an express ministerial power to establish, amend and publish codes, standards or guidelines on any subject regulations could address. Regulations may adopt those documents in whole, in part, or with modifications, and may adopt them as fixed to a specific date or as amended over time. The Minister must publish new or amended codes on the departmental website as soon as practicable.
Coming into force
The bill leaves commencement to proclamation, meaning the new definitions, powers and procedural changes will take effect on dates set by the government rather than automatically on Royal Assent. That allows staged implementation but also requires stakeholders to monitor proclamations for compliance deadlines.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Operators of anaerobic digesters and bioenergy facilities — they gain clear statutory recognition because digestate is now explicitly defined and brought into AOPA, removing ambiguity about whether those by‑products fall under provincial agricultural rules.
- Approval officers and provincial inspectors — the bill consolidates decision‑making and enforcement authority at the approval‑officer/inspector level, reducing reliance on a separate Board and potentially speeding administrative decisions.
- Municipal and intermunicipal planners — approval officers must consider intermunicipal development plan provisions explicitly, giving intermunicipal plans formal weight in provincial approvals.
- Producers using mixed organic residues — the broader “organic materials” category clarifies that permitted regulation can treat multiple farm‑generated residues consistently, which can simplify compliance once regulations/codes are issued.
Who Bears the Cost
- Farms and composting operators — they face expanded compliance obligations for storage, application and transport of digestate and other organic residues and may need to retrofit facilities to meet AOPA standards.
- Small municipalities and intermunicipal bodies — approval officers can impose development‑style conditions that overlap local planning, potentially creating implementation and coordination costs for municipal governments.
- Public interest intervenors and neighbouring landowners — although deadlines for participation are lengthened, centralizing decisions with approval officers may reduce the perceived independence of decision‑makers compared with a Board model, increasing the transaction cost of appeals or legal challenges.
- Provincial administration (Minister’s office) — creating, maintaining and publishing codes and standards, plus potentially responding to faster iterative changes adopted by regulation, will require resources and technical capacity.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances two legitimate goals that pull in opposite directions: bringing new agricultural materials (notably digestate) under clear provincial rules and allowing the province to update technical standards quickly, versus preserving procedural safeguards, transparent rule‑making and predictable standards for operators, municipalities and the public. Greater regulatory flexibility and centralized administrative power improve responsiveness but reduce formal oversight and create short‑term uncertainty about the exact compliance requirements.
Bill 44 intentionally broadens material coverage to capture contemporary agricultural residue streams, but it leaves important technical details to regulations and ministerial codes. For digestate and other organic outputs, the bill does not set storage design, pathogen reduction, nutrient limits or allowable application rates — those will depend on regulatory drafting and any codes the Minister issues.
That creates a compliance gap in the short term: operators know these materials are regulated, but not the standards they must meet until subordinate instruments are published.
The shift from the Board to approval officers and inspectors streamlines decision‑making, but it also concentrates discretion in administrative officers who are less formal than the Board. Coupled with the new power for the Minister to publish and amend technical codes outside the formal regulation‑making process, the bill increases regulatory agility while reducing some layers of external scrutiny and parliamentary oversight.
Finally, several textual edits in the bill alter how approval officers assess municipal consistency (including added references to intermunicipal plans) and appear to change wording from “is inconsistent” to “is consistent” in key sections; as drafted this could create interpretive conflict about the standard an approval officer must apply, potentially producing litigation or requiring clarifying regulations or ministerial guidance.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.