Proposed changes to how verification certificates are issued for incinerators regulated under the Nutrient Management Act, 2002 (NMA)

Ontario is committed to looking for ways to reduce burden and costs while maintaining and strengthening environmental protections for the health of our people and province.

We are proposing changes to how verification certificates are issued for incinerators regulated under the Nutrient Management Act, 2002, which will allow farmers and businesses to show that the incinerators they use are in compliance with the regulation.

In its ongoing work to reduce red tape, the Ontario government is also seeking input on opportunities to make the verification process less burdensome in the future, while ensuring that human health and the environment continue to be protected.

Proposed Updates to the Disposal of Dead Farm Animals Regulation

We are proposing to amend O. Reg. 106/09 - Disposal of Dead Farm Animals to remove the reference to ETV Canada Incorporated in Section 11(2) and Section 11(4). The reference to ETV Canada Incorporated would be replaced with changes to:

1. Allow for an incinerator type that has been issued a verification certificate under the former ETV (Environmental Technology Verification) Canada program.
2. Allow for any incinerator of a type that has been issued a verification statement in accordance with the ISO 14034:2016 standard (as amended from time to time) stating it can meet the above-mentioned performance criteria.
3. Clarify that verification certificates or statements need only be issued once for a given incinerator type to meet the regulatory requirements (i.e. verification certificates would continue to be valid irrespective of expiry dates).

The intent of these amendments is to provide a viable pathway to compliance through the ISO 14034:2016 standard, as amended from time to time, while also allowing for previously issued verification certificates under the former ETV program to continue to meet the requirements of the regulation. The proposed clarification that verification certificates need only be issued once for a given incinerator type aligns with the original policy intent of the regulation.

Use of the ETV process to verify incinerator performance.

We are also exploring potential alternatives to the ETV process for establishing incinerator performance. Incineration is a useful method for disposing of dead farm animals that provides logistical and biosecurity advantages to certain operations. However, incinerator use must be balanced with sufficient requirements to ensure human health and the environment are protected.

Obtaining a Verification Certificate through the ETV process is expensive and can be a challenge for individual operators and may unduly prevent otherwise well designed and effective incinerator models from being available for use on-farm.

Discussion questions on alternatives to the ETV process

We are asking for input and advice on alternatives to the ETV process that would reduce burden and costs of verifying incinerator performance without changing the performance standards. We are seeking input specifically on the following questions:

• What are the issues and barriers to obtaining performance verification through the ETV process?
  • Are there particular issues and barriers for incinerator manufacturers?
  • Are there particular issues and barriers for farm operators?
• What other types of processes/approaches are available that could provide sufficient verification of the temperature and gas retention time performance, while being less burdensome than the ETV process?
  • What are the important considerations of these processes/approaches?
• What are the impacts/risks of removing or changing the current verification requirement for performance standards, given that all incinerators are required to meet the performance standards?
• How can users demonstrate compliance with the temperature and gas retention time performance requirements currently required under the regulation?
• Are there other options/opportunities that should be considered that would support streamlining verification of performance standards of on farm incinerators?

Background

In Ontario, the NMA provides for the management of materials containing nutrients in ways that will enhance protection of the natural environment and provide a sustainable future for agricultural operations and rural development. The responsibility for the NMA is shared jointly between the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

The Disposal of Dead Farm Animals Regulation (O. Reg. 106/09) under the NMA sets out the requirements for management and disposal of dead farm animals at the farm. Under the regulation, the disposal options for producers include:

• deadstock collection
• composting
• incineration
• burial
• disposal vessels
• anaerobic digestion
• delivery to licensed deadstock disposal facilities and waste disposal sites approved under the Environmental Protection Act

Records regarding animal death, disposal dates, and locations are required to be kept on-farm.

Current requirements for using an incinerator for on-farm disposal

There are risks associated with incineration, such as:

• the potential for nuisance impacts on neighbouring properties from odours and smoke
• possible health impacts from incinerator emissions

Therefore, there are regulatory requirements for using an incinerator for the on-farm disposal of dead farm animals in Ontario, which include performance criteria for the secondary combustion chamber of the incinerator. Specifically, the secondary combustion chamber must be capable of maintaining the gases that enter from the primary chamber for either at least 1 second at a temperature of 1,000 degrees Celsius or higher, or at least 2 seconds at a temperature of 850 degrees Celsius or higher.

To ensure proper equipment is used, the regulation currently requires that an incinerator must be of a type that has been issued a Verification Certificate by ETV Canada Incorporated certifying that it is capable of meeting these criteria. The regulation is specific as to the company that needs to issue the Verification Certificate.

The company that is required to issue the Verification Certificate for an incinerator (ETV Canada Incorporated) no longer administers the ETV program and cannot issue the required verification. The objective of the ETV process is to provide credible, reliable and independent verification of the performance of environmental technologies. In addition, the International Standards Organization standard 14034:2016 was established in 2016, specifying principles, procedures and requirements for the ETV process and can be broadly applied to a range of environmental technologies, including incinerators. Given these developments, we are proposing to update O. Reg. 106/09 to enable on-going verification of incinerators for disposal of dead farm animals on-farm.

At the same time, we recognize that obtaining a Verification Certificate through the ETV process is a time consuming and expensive process that requires detailed technical and scientific knowledge that can make it difficult for individual operators. Exploring options that streamline incinerator verification could result in reduced burden, but any future changes would need to ensure that human health and the environment continue to be protected.

Environmental impacts

This proposal would establish a viable pathway to compliance through updating O. Reg. 106/09 and would permit the issuance of verification statements that allow the use of on-farm incinerators for the disposal of dead farm animals in accordance with the regulatory standards. In addition, this proposal would seek input on potential alternatives to the ETV process and any considerations that should be taken into account in the future. The proposed amendment would create a regulatory pathway by addressing a company name that no longer provides ETV services. The regulatory standards associated with incinerator operation are not changing, so we do not anticipate any environmental impacts as a result of these changes. Any proposed changes to the ETV process as a result of the consultations would be part of a separate Environmental Registry of Ontario posting.

Regulatory impact analysis

The proposed updates to O. Reg. 106/09 and associated consultation of potential alternatives to the ETV process would not introduce new compliance or administrative costs.