Formal Recommendation 

From: National Organic Standards Board (NOSB)

To: National Organic Program (NOP)

Date: October 22, 2021

Subject: Ammonia Extracts

NOSB Chair: Steve Ela

The NOSB hereby recommends to the NOP the following:

Rulemaking Action: X

Statement of the Recommendation: 

The NOSB classified ammonia extracts as nonsynthetic and passed two listing motions pertaining to 

definitions for stripped ammonia and concentrated ammonia. A third listing motion, to add nitrogen 

products with a C:N ratio of 3:1 or less, including those that are components of a blended fertilizer 

formulation, with an annotation at § 205.203(f): 

Rationale Supporting Recommendation: 

At the Fall 2021 NOSB meeting, the Board passed three motions relating to the 

ammonia/ammonium extracts petition. Public comments and subsequent Board discussion during 

the meeting are pertinent to the document and are summarized here to provide context for the 

three motions that were passed. The Board was unanimous or nearly unanimous on the votes for 

each motion. In the following document, references to ammonia extracts refer to both ammonia 

and ammonium forms unless specifically stated otherwise.

The motion to classify ammonia extracts as non-synthetic was unanimous. Only those extracts that 

use non-synthetic processes as defined in the organic regulations are included under this motion. 

Ammonia extracts using synthetic processes are not included in this motion.

The next two motions to define and list ammonia extracts as prohibited were passed by a 13-1 vote, 

indicating broad support from the Board. The definitions and prohibition received broad support 

from many organic stakeholders, while opposition to the definitions rested primarily with 

manufacturers of the products. While some commenters noted that the definitions were unclear 

and potentially included products such as compost teas or fish emulsions, many other commenters 

were in support of the language. Comments in support of the motions included, but weren’t 

exclusively from, the Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI), the Accredited Certifiers 

Association (ACA), National Organic Coalition (NOC), Organic Farmers Association (OFA), Organic 

Farmers’ Agency for Relationship Marketing (OFARM), Organic Trade Association (OTA), Montana 

Organic Association, Cornucopia, Beyond Pesticides, Pennsylvania Certified Organic (PCO), Maine 

Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA), Organic Eye, Midwest Organic Services

Association (MOSA), and Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association(OEFFA). 

As discussed at the Fall 2021 meeting, the intent of the Board is that these definitions cover 

ammonia extracts but do not cover materials that have traditionally been used on organic farms. 
These other materials include, but aren’t limited to, compost teas, fish emulsions, and protein 

hydrolysates. The motion to add stripped ammonia at §205.602 was the primary motion that 

commenters noted could include these other products. However, OMRI and the ACA were 

comfortable that they would interpret these definitions as intended by the Board. Furthermore, a 

common chemical definition of “stripping” is an activity that captures and refines vapor coming off 

an agricultural feedstock or other source. The production of manure teas, fish fertilizers, and 

compost teas does not use vapor capture and would not be prohibited under this definition. The 

second defined term, concentrated ammonia, would not prohibit these products either. These 

products generally do not contain the concentrations of ammonia prohibited by the recommended 

definition of concentrated ammonia. Thus, it seems that the language as written is adequate and 

acceptable to material review organizations. The Board intent is explicit in that it is recommending

prohibition of ammonia extracts without affecting compost teas, fish emulsions, or protein 

hydrolysates.

The Board recommends ammonia extracts be listed as non-synthetic prohibited materials and 

suggests in its recommendation where on the National List these materials could be listed. 

However, the National Organic Program (NOP) can define the details of how and where these 

materials appear on the National List.

The prohibition of these materials is based on OFPA criteria (§6513(b)) and/or §6518(m)(7)) that soil 

management practices maintain or improve soil organic matter and that producers must select and 

implement practices that maintain or improve the physical, chemical, and biological condition of the 

soil. The scientific literature is mixed as to the effects of ammonia extracts on the biological activity 

of the soils. However, the trend indicates that these materials have a negative impact on soil biota 

and do not contribute to maintaining or improving soil organic matter. Several studies documented 

these negative effects. Literature citing that ammonia extracts improve soil organic matter were

often based on systems that were nitrogen deficient. This deficiency meant that any nitrogen 

product would increase plant growth and from that additional plant growth, increase soil organic 

matter. There are a number of accepted alternatives, such as cover crops or robust crop rotations 

that include legumes or other nitrogen-fixing crops, that can be used to increase nitrogen in an 

organic system. Additionally, in non-nitrogen-limited systems the addition of ammonia extracts 

may accelerate organic matter decomposition and reduce the development of future organic matter 

in the soil. 

Public comments indicated yellowing in some crops that disappeared after several weeks. This 

yellowing is an indicator of initial plant toxicity to the application of ammonia extracts. Another 

commenter described how these materials would be necessary in areas where water is limited and 

only materials that can be applied through drip systems are needed. This inherently means that 

cover cropping, manure application, and other organic matter building practices would not be used. 

Proponents of ammonia extracts often noted that these materials must be used in conjunction with 

manures or cover cropping in order to meet OFPA criteria for maintaining or increasing soil organic 

matter. This inherently points to the idea that these materials, in themselves, do not maintain or 

increase organic matter.

There are references, cited in the proposal, that ammonia extracts do change soil biota. In general, 

few research projects were conducted on organic systems. That further complicates the 

interpretation of how these materials react in organic soils. Several researchers conducted studies 
that demonstrated increased nitrogen leaching in conventional plots as compared to integrated or 

organic plots. They also found that crop rotations with legumes or other nitrogen fixating crops can 

be especially effective for soil health. At least one meta-analysis of the literature found that the 

inclusion of legumes in the rotation, along with organic inputs, were all significant factors affecting 

the soil microbial size and diversity. The soil differences may change how nitrogen is available in 

these organic systems, something not addressed in nitrogen cycling research on conventionally 

treated soils. These references are cited in the proposal and were reiterated in public comments. 

Several commenters noted that human health concerns from ammonia extracts are not 

documented. However, a farmer noted that after using an ammonia extract that is currently 

available, they had to vacate their tractor for several hours because of the caustic fumes.

Another point made in public comments was that the manufacture of these products helps to 

recycle ammonia that might otherwise be lost to the atmosphere or might not be readily available 

due to transportation or other availability. Several farmers noted that there were manure 

shortages in their area and that they might have to compete with ammonia extract manufacturers 

for manure sources. Other commenters noted that there were adequate manure sources in their 

area. While capturing or recycling ammonia present in manures may be of interest, OFPA does not 

require organic farms to be the market for the extracts. OFPA does not require the recycling or 

capturing of materials. In fact, the current organic regulations prohibit recycling some materials,

including colored or glossy papers in newspaper or ash from manure burning. Thus, the capture of 

ammonia is not a viable reason for rejecting the petition to prohibit these extracts.

The historical interpretation of OFPA supports prohibition of these highly soluble fertilizers such as 

ammonia extracts. In the preamble to the National Organic Program final rule, the NOP agreed with 

the NOSB recommendations to put limits on materials of high solubility. For example, sodium 

nitrate was limited to 20% of crop needs and subsequent Boards recommended prohibition of 

sodium nitrate. Calcium chloride use was also strictly limited. Ammonia extracts are substances of 

high solubility and should be prohibited under these interpretations unless a use can be 

demonstrated where they are uniquely needed. Alternatives to ammonia extracts exist and most

stakeholders commented that these alternatives are preferable to ammonia extracts. One 

commenter voiced this approach in noting that if there are nutrient problems on a particular soil, 

solving them with a single, highly soluble material should not be allowed. Those nutrient problems 

should be addressed using a systems approach, not just the use of a single product. In contrast to 

the reductionism of chemical-intensive agriculture, the origins of organic agriculture are based on

holistic and ecological principles. Past NOSB decisions and actions in reference to OFPA criteria have 

upheld these principles.

As noted in the proposal the Board determined that ammonia extracts are not compatible with a 

system of organic agriculture. The scientific literature documenting negative effects on soil biota 

and negative effects on the maintenance or improvement of soil organic matter led the Board to 

vote that extracts should be prohibited for organic use. As noted in the guidance for determining 

compatibility with a system of sustainable agriculture (NOSB Policy & Procedures Manual, pg. 38, 

appendix), an abundance of caution would lead to the conclusion that these materials should be 

prohibited. Future sunset reviews can reassess the scientific literature at that time to reevaluate 

this conclusion.
NOSB Vote: 

Classification Motion: 

Motion to classify ammonia extracts as nonsynthetic 

Motion by: Steve Ela 

Seconded by: Jerry D’Amore 

Yes: 14 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

Motion Passed

National List Motions: 

Motion to add at §205.602, non-synthetic substances prohibited for use in organic crop production: 

Stripped Ammonia – created by separating, isolating and/or capturing ammonia or ammonium from 

an agricultural feedstock or other natural source using methods such as, but not limited to, steam 

stripping, pressurized air, heat, condensation, and/or distillation. 

Motion by: Steve Ela 

Seconded by: Jerry D’Amore 

Yes: 13 No: 1 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

Motion Passed

Motion to add at §205.602, non-synthetic substances prohibited for use in organic crop production: 

Concentrated Ammonia – contains greater than 3% ammoniacal nitrogen and the total nitrogen 

content is predominately (i.e., >50%) in the ammonia or ammonium form. 

Motion by: Steve Ela 

Seconded by: Asa Bradman 

Yes: 13 No: 1 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

Motion Passed

Motion to send final motion (below) back to Subcommittee for further work:

“Motion to add at §205.203(f): Nitrogen products with a C:N ratio of 3:1 or less, including those that 

are components of a blended fertilizer formulation, are limited to a cumulative total use of 20% of 

crop needs.” 

Motion by: Kyla Smith 

Seconded by: Nate Powell-Palm 

Yes: 10 No: 4 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

Motion Passed

See recommendations below
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

National Organic Standards Board 

Crops Subcommittee 

Petitioned Material Proposal 

Ammonia Extracts 

August 3, 2021 

Summary of Petition: 

Note: Throughout this document references are made to the 2020 technical report (TR). It is intended 

that the citation of the TR inherently includes the citations of the references contained within the TR. 

When the TR is quoted the citations noted in the text of the TR have been removed for clarity – for a full 

list of references, please refer to the TR. 

References to ammonia or ammonium are specifically intended to include both unless specifically stated 

otherwise. 

Use 

Ammonium extracts are used as a source of nitrogen (N) for the production of a wide range of annual 

and perennial crops. In the past, ammonia products have been produced via synthetic processes and 

have not been allowed for use in organic production. The synthetic production methods primarily use 

the Haber-Bosch process, and that process has allowed for widespread commercial use of nitrogen for 

conventional farms. From this process, urea accounts for about 50% of nitrogen fertilizers. Other 

common forms include aqueous ammonia, ammonium nitrate, ammonium sulfate, ammonium 

phosphates and other ammonium salts. Ammonia compounds can be used as bioavailable fertilizer 

sources and can be rapidly taken up by plants (2020 TR). 

More recently, non-synthetic processes for the production of ammonium fertilizers have been 

developed. These processes produce high ammonia/ammonium products that can potentially be used 

in organic agriculture since they meet the criteria for use as non-synthetic fertilizer compounds. Before 

development of these non-synthetic processes for ammonia production, other N containing fertilizers 

have been allowed for organic use. These include, but are not limited to, soy protein hydrolysate, liquid 

fish products, and sodium nitrate. 

Nitrogen is often a major limitation to crop yields and is biologically important as a macronutrient. It 

contributes to plant growth through the formation of amino acids and as the building blocks for proteins 

and can improve photosynthetic efficiency (2020 TR). 

It should be noted that there is a wide range of ammonia/ammonium products that are approved for 

use in food processing and manufacturing. These include ammonium carbonate and bicarbonate which 

appear on the National List. Several products are approved for agricultural use, such as ammonium 

carbonates and ammonium soaps, but are limited by annotation to uses that do not directly contact 

crops. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 23 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Manufacture 

While the Haber-Bosch process is the primary method for making nitrogen fertilizers, it is not relevant to 

organic processing and use. More recently, several methods have been developed to produce ammonia 

products non-synthetically. As noted in the 2020 technical report and through public comment on the 

two NOSB discussion papers (Fall 2020 and Spring 2021) regarding ammonium extracts, the two 

methods are defined as ammonia stripping and ammonia concentration: 

Ammonia stripping – ammonium compounds occur in a number of agricultural, biological, and 

other sewage wastes. Ammonium is commonly produced through the metabolism, hydrolysis, 

or anaerobic digestion of these feedstocks. Once the ammonium ions are converted to 

ammonia by adjusting the pH to alkaline, the ammonia is extracted from the feedstock as a gas 

by the use of a combination of pressurized air and/or heating. After further processing, the 

ammonia is reacted with an acid to re-form ammonium. This stabilizes the nitrogen at which 

point the ammonium can be isolated as an aqueous solution or slurry or isolated as a solid by 

precipitation. The direct output of the “ammonia stripping” process is a pure ammonia gas (or 

when cooled and distilled, a pure aqueous ammonia condensate) isolated from the original 

agricultural feedstock. Products produced by this method are considered novel; new products 

are only recently being approved and/or are still in development and not yet fully 

commercialized. 

Ammonia concentration – rather than isolating only the ammonia ions, ammonia concentration 

uses a physical process to remove solids from the nitrogen containing liquid waste mixture. The 

remaining filtrate includes only water-soluble components. These include ammonia and 

ammonium, as well as phosphate, potash, secondary and micronutrients, and other organic 

compounds. This liquid is subjected to pressured air and/or heat to remove water by 

evaporation. This concentrates the remaining ammonium/ammonia compounds while also 

retaining the other nutrients and organic compounds from the original feedstock. Products 

produced by this method have been Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI) listed. 

The output of the stripping method produces a near pure ammonia that would be similar to that 

produced by the Haber-Bosch process whereas the product of ammonia concentration retains more of 

the original compounds of the feedstock. The specific quantities and types of nutrients in the remaining 

concentration vary depending on the original feedstock. 

The other aspect of these concentrated and stripped ammonia products is that the nitrogen isotope 

ratio is different than ammonia from synthetic sources. Testing for isotope ratios of nitrogen is 

common. The nitrogen isotope ratio (δ15N) of natural materials also rarely falls below five and they are 

typically greater. Any products that go beyond this threshold (i.e., show higher δ15N values) are almost 

certainly not adulterated (California Department of Agriculture, public comment, Spring 2020). 

International 

As discussed in the 2020 TR: 

Canadian General Standards Board Permitted Substances List (CAN/CGSB-32.311-2015), Organic 

Production Systems Permitted Substances List - Ammonia extract is not listed in the Canadian Standards 

Board Permitted Substances List (CAN/CGSB- 2.311-2015); however, it does include a variety of 

ammonium compounds. Copper ammonia base, copper ammonium carbonate, ammonium forms of 

micronutrients, potassium sulfate made with ammonia reactants, and ammonium stillage are prohibited 

for “soil amendments and crop nutrition” uses. Ammonium carbonate is allowed “as an attractant in 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 24 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

insect traps.” Ammonium soaps are allowed “as a large animal repellent,” with the stipulation that 

“direct contact with soil or edible portion of crop is prohibited.” Ammonium lignosulphate is prohibited 

for “crop production aids and materials.” Ammonium bicarbonate and ammonium carbonate are 

allowed “as leavening agent[s].” Dibasic ammonium phosphate (diammonium phosphate, DAP) is 

allowed as a “yeast food for use in alcoholic beverages,” with the limitation that concentrations are 

“restricted to 0.3 g/L (0.04 oz./gal.) for cider, mead and wine.” 

CODEX Alimentarius Commission, Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Labelling and Marketing of 

Organically Produced Foods (CXG 32-1999) Ammonia extract is not listed in the CODEX; however, 

ammonium carbonates are listed in the CODEX as a “food additive.” 

European Economic Community (EEC) Council Regulation, EC No. 834/2007 and 889/2008 Ammonia 

extract is not listed in the EEC Council Regulation EC No. 834/2007 and 889/2008. However, several 

ammonium compounds are listed in EC No. 889/2008. Ammonium stillage is prohibited for use as a 

“fertilizer and soil conditioner.” Diammonium phosphate is allowed as an “attractant” for traps in 

“pesticides and plant protection products.” Ammonium molybdate is allowed as a nutritional “trace 

element” in animal feeds. Ammonium carbonates are allowed for the “preparation of foodstuffs of plant 

origin.” Ammonium hydroxide is allowed for the “preparation of foodstuffs of animal origin” in gelatine 

production. 

Japan Agricultural Standard (JAS) for Organic Production Ammonia extract is not listed in the JAS for 

Organic Production. However, ammonium bicarbonate and ammonium carbonate are listed in 

Notification No. 1606 and allowed for use as “food additives, limited to use for processed foods of plant 

origin.” 

International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) Ammonia extract is not listed in the 

IFOAM; however, it does list several ammonium compounds. Ammonium phosphate is allowed as an 

“additive,” with the stipulation that concentrations are “restricted to 0.3gm/l in wine.” Ammonium 

sulfate is allowed as an “additive,” with the stipulation that it is only allowed for wine and is “restricted 

to 0.3 mg/l.” Ammonium carbonates are allowed as “additives,” with uses limited to “cereal products, 

confectionary, cakes and biscuits.” 

While not addressed specifically, sodium nitrate is not allowed in Canadian production and crops grown 

with sodium nitrate may not be exported to Canada. While it is unknown, comments received at the 

Spring 2021 NOSB meeting included concerns that the use of ammonia extracts in the United States 

might result in the rejection of exported products by other countries. 

Summary of Review 

The review of this petition has resulted in a wide variety of public comments and perspectives. These 

perspectives range from issues with soil health and environmental concerns, the use of multiple sources 

of highly soluble nitrogen fertilizers, and the potential for fraud. Commenters argued both pro and con 

on each of these issues. 

In general, the comments from long-time organic organizations and growers tend to be in favor of the 

petition to prohibit ammonia extracts based on the organic principles of enhancing soil biological 

processes rather than applying a nutrient that is immediately available to the plant. They also noted the 

low carbon to nitrogen ratio, the high solubility of these extracts in terms of environmental issues, and 

the potential for these materials to increase the chances for fraud. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 25 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Opponents of the petition cite the need for immediately available nitrogen sources to act as a shortterm nitrogen bridge. This would be needed when unusual events cause nitrogen deficits to crops and 

soil processes have not had a chance to recharge the available nitrogen. They also note that some use 

of these materials can help prevent nitrogen loss since they could allow better targeting of nitrogen 

applications to specific crop needs. In terms of fraud, they note that many organic nitrogen fertilizers 

could also be subject to fraud. Rigorous inspections, unannounced site visits, nitrogen isotope testing, 

and mass balance reviews make fraud very unlikely. 

As noted previously, there are several materials already in the organic marketplace. These materials 

have been approved by OMRI and other material review organizations, although, with the caveat that 

nonsynthetic, liquid fertilizers that have a nitrogen analysis greater than 3 percent must comply with 

additional recordkeeping and inspection requirements in accordance with NOP Guidance on the 

Approval of Liquid Fertilizers for Used in Organic Production (NOP 5012). Non-synthetic fertilizers that 

test above 3 percent ammoniacal nitrogen are considered at higher risk for violating the soil fertility and 

crop nutrient management practice standards at §205.203. OMRI attaches a note that “this product 

contains highly soluble nitrogen and must be applied in a manner that does not contribute to the 

contamination of crops, soil or water. Its use must be part of an organic system plan that maintains or 

improves the natural resources of the operation, including soil and water quality, and comply with crop 

nutrient and soil fertility requirements.” 

Soil Health 

The USDA organic regulations at § 205.203(a) requires that a producer must select and implement 

tillage and cultivation practices that maintain or improve the physical, chemical, and biological condition 

of the soil and minimize soil erosion. At §205.203(c) and (d) the organic regulations state that the 

producer must manage plant and animal materials or crop nutrients and soil fertility to maintain or 

improve soil organic matter content. 

Many commenters noted that the use of ammonia extracts runs counter to this principal by directly 

applying plant nutrients rather than applying nutrients that improve the biological condition of the soil. 

Inherently, the annotation added to high N, ammonia/ammonium containing products notes that “this 

product contains highly soluble nitrogen and must be applied in a manner that does not contribute to 

the contamination of crops, soil, or water. Its use must be part of an organic system plan that maintains 

or improves the natural resources of the operation, including soil and water quality, and comply with 

crop nutrient and soil fertility requirements.” This annotation would not be added unless there was a 

risk that the materials do not contribute to the stated OFPA criteria. Indeed, a number of oral 

commenters testifying at the Spring 2020 NOSB meeting in favor of the use of ammonia extracts 

reinforced this by stating that ammonia extracts should not be used alone, but must be used with other 

soil building practices to comply with OFPA. 

An example of a comment that refers to basic tenets of organic agriculture and prior OFPA and NOSB 

actions was submitted at the Spring 2020 meeting: 

In contrast to the reductionism of “conventional” chemical-intensive agriculture, the origins of 

organic agriculture are in holistic and ecological thinking. Historically, perhaps the most 

important principle of organic production is the “Law of Return,” which, together with the 

foundational philosophy “Feed the soil, not the plant” and the promotion of biodiversity, 

provide the ecological basis for organic production. Together these three principles describe a 

production system that mimics natural systems. The Law of Return. In an organic system, 

residues are returned to the soil by tillage, composting, or mulching. While most organic 

growers depend on some off-site inputs, most of the fertility in a soil-based system comes from 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 26 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

practices that recycle organic matter produced on-site. The cycling of organic matter and on-site 

production of nutrients—as from nitrogen-fixing bacteria and microorganisms that make 

nutrients in native mineral soil fractions available to plants—is essential to organic production. 

The Law of Return is not about feeding plants, but about conserving the biodiversity of the soilplant-animal ecological community. The Law of Return says that we must return to the soil what 

we take from the soil. Non-crop organic matter is returned directly or through composting plant 

materials or manures. To the extent that the cash crop removes nutrients, they must be 

replaced by cover crops, crop rotation, animal manures, or additions of off-site materials, when 

necessary. Feed the soil, not the plant. 

The dictum to “Feed the soil, not the plant” reminds us that the soil is a living superorganism 

that supports plant life as part of an ecological community. We do not feed soil organisms in 

isolation, to have them process nutrients for crop plants; we feed the soil to support a healthy 

soil ecology, which is the basis of terrestrial life. 

Biodiversity. Finally, biological diversity is important to the health of natural ecosystems and 

agroecosystems. Biodiversity promotes balance, which protects farms from outbreaks of 

damaging insects and disease. It supports the health of the soil through the progression of the 

seasons and stresses associated with weather and farming. It supports our health by offering a 

diversity of foods. Ultimately, holistically healthy, truly organic farms produce healthy plants 

that require far fewer applications of insecticides and fungicides (even if approved for organic 

production). 

In the case of ammonia extracts, we are particularly interested in the principle of feeding the 

soil rather than the crop. OFPA §6513(b) requires that organic operations establish a plan 

designed to “foster soil fertility, primarily through the management of the organic content of 

the soil through proper tillage, crop rotation, and manuring.” Substances of high solubility, i.e., 

those materials that provide nutrients directly to the plant because they are quickly taken up 

into the plant from the soil solution, are counter to foundational organic principles, so they 

have always been restricted. Such materials are listed in §205.602—Nonsynthetic substances 

prohibited for use in Organic Crop Production or the “prohibited naturals” section of the 

National List: 

1) Calcium chloride is limited to treating a physiological disorder; 

2) Potassium chloride must be used in a manner that minimizes chloride accumulation in the soil 

and; 

3) Sodium nitrate is restricted to no more than 20% of the crop's total nitrogen requirement. 

The organic regulations limit substances of high solubility. In the preamble to the publication of 

the NOP Final Rule on December 21, 2000, NOP discusses how it decided to agree with the 

NOSB recommendation and to put specific regulation of substances of high solubility into the 

annotations for each of these materials where they appear on the National List of Allowed and 

Prohibited Substances. NOP goes on to say, "Based on the recommendation of the NOSB, the 

final rule would prohibit use of these materials [substances of high solubility], unless the NOSB 

developed recommendations on conditions for their use and the Secretary added them to the 

National List." At the time, the discussion was about mined substances of high solubility because 

there were no concentrated, highly soluble plant nutrient materials other than mined sources 

available at that time. New materials of high solubility should be prohibited or restricted. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 27 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These concerns were echoed by another commenter that stated that there are significant concerns with 

the compatibility of purified natural ammonia with organic principles: their mimicry of conventional 

synthetic fertilizers and their use requires the removal of carbon value from organic waste. 

There are studies that show the addition of nitrogen to nitrogen-limited fields can increase plant 

production. Addition of N increased production yields, biomass and thus, additional carbon resources 

that can be returned to the soil. Some of these studies show that the addition of nitrogen, no matter 

what the source, can improve soil health indices (Miner, Delgado, et al., 2020). Fertilizing nutrientdeficient soils usually results in greater crop yields. Higher yields achieve greater amounts of crop 

residue—roots, stems, and leaves—resulting from larger and healthier plants (Magdoff and Van Es, 

2021). A caveat is that a number of these studies are conducted on conventionally treated soils and 

focus on nitrogen deficient systems where the addition of any nitrogen enhances plant production. If 

nitrogen were not deficient and additional nitrogen did not result in greater plant growth, then it is 

unlikely that any nitrogen addition would improve soil health indices. 

Other studies show that long-term organic fertilizer inputs enrich carbon related soil functions. Manure 

additions can strongly influence the formation, storage and cycling of soil organic carbon and nitrogen 

and soil microecology (Sharaf, Thompson, et al., 2021; Ozlu, Sandhu, et al., 2019). The total amount 

(weights) of living organisms varies in different cropping systems. In general, soil organisms are more 

abundant and diverse in systems with complex rotations that return more diverse crop residues and use 

other organic materials such as cover crops, animal manures, and composts. When crops are rotated 

regularly, fewer parasite, disease, weed, and insect problems occur than when the same crop is grown 

year after year (Magdoff and Van Es, 2021). These biotic links can also have a positive influence on the 

ability of plants to resist insect pests. Plants grown in a balanced nutrient system are less likely to be 

attacked by pests as compared to plants that have readily available nitrogen added (Phelan, Mason, et 

al., 1995). 

There were several public comments noting that the use of ammonia extracts could increase the rate of 

mineralization in soils and thus be beneficial. In a short timeframe this could be true, but this 

accelerated rate of mineralization could come at the cost of long-term soil carbon resources. Wang, 

Juliang, et al., 2018, found that long-term application of N-fertilizers causes an abundance of bacterial 

groups responsible for the denitrification process, which causes the turnover of nitrogen to increase and 

results in greater nitrogen loss over time. Essentially, adding more nitrogen fertilizer results in a longterm loss of nitrogen while altering other soil components, like decreasing soil pH and C:N ratio. When 

soil carbon and nitrogen are reduced in response to the application of chemical fertilizers, beneficial 

enzymatic activity of the soil also decreases (Ozlu, Sandhu, et al., 2019). Another study concluded: 

Annual nitrate leaching was 4.4–5.6 times higher in conventional plots than in organic plots, 

with the integrated plots in between. This study demonstrates that organic and integrated 

fertilization practices support more active and efficient denitrifier communities, shift the 

balance of N2 emissions and nitrate losses, and reduce environmentally damaging nitrate losses. 

Although this study specifically examines a perennial orchard system, the ecological and 

biogeochemical processes we evaluated are present in all agroecosystems, and the reductions in 

nitrate loss in this study could also be achievable in other cropping systems (Kramer, Reganold, 

et al., 2006). 

Of interest is that nearly all the public comments stating that ammonia extracts help prevent 

environmental damage from excess application of manures and composts neglected to mention that an 

organic systems approach uses multiple sources of crop fertility. Comparing the use of ammonia 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 28 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

extracts to a system that only uses manures focuses on only one part of an organic system. An organic 

system includes cover cropping, interplanting, and varied crops, in addition to manures and composts. 

This mix of fertility sources is used to mitigate issues of nutrient excesses. 

The incorporation of crop residues and compost [emphasis added] provides a potential longterm alternative to ammonia extract and other nitrogen fertilizers. Nitrogen content in compost 

is slowly released through mineralization processes in the soil, primarily facilitated by its 

metabolism by microorganisms in the soil. Unlike ammonia extract, the use of compost also 

contributes to soil organic matter, and available carbon, phosphorous, and micronutrients, as 

well as soil microorganism populations and activities. The incorporation of compost into the 

agro-ecosystem has been reported to improve soil characteristics, specifically water holding 

capacity and cation exchange capacity (CEC). Increased soil CEC allows it to retain cations more 

effectively, including ammonium ions and metal cations required as micronutrients (e.g., iron 

[Fe], copper [Cu], zinc [Zn]) (2020 TR) 

Public comments and scientific research publications demonstrate that much more research regarding 

the use of these materials and of the soil health, plant health, and biological interactions is needed. 

There is conflicting information from studies on conventional soils and very little research conducted on 

organic soils. For example, a study on tomatoes in California, (Bowles, Hollander, et al., 2015) found 

that the complex plant and microbial processes that affect nitrogen cycling are affected by the ecology 

of each farm as well as between fields within a farm. Most research oriented toward nitrogen cycling 

takes place at research stations with fixed factors and limited soil variation. There has been little 

research about how nitrogen cycling occurs on working organic farms. The study detailed how organic 

tomato farms can achieve high yields even though tests showed relatively low nitrogen availability. 

They attributed this to the possibility that the nitrogen cycling was tightly coupled with tomato plant 

needs. While tests showed low nitrogen with respect to conventional standards, the sustained release 

curve of the nitrogen in those plots met plant needs. They concluded that new indicators of N 

availability are needed that consider active C and N processes in organic systems. This is another 

indicator of our lack of understanding of nutrient processes and needs in organic systems. This lack of 

understanding results in conclusions about the need for fast acting nitrogen applications and is 

problematic. 

In the absence of consistent research showing overwhelming benefits from the applications of 

ammonia extracts, and with the requirement to fulfill OFPA criteria, use of ammonia compounds raises 

questions regarding soil health and the maintenance or improvement of soil organic matter. There are 

effective organic systems that pay close attention to nitrogen needs through the use of multiple 

approaches to fertility that include the basics of crop rotations and applications of manure and 

composts. By paying attention, these systems do not result in large buildups of phosphorous or in 

excessive loss of nitrogen to the environment. While there is a segment of organic stakeholders that 

express an interest in using these extracts, there is a larger segment that believes ecosystem 

management to maintain or increase soil organic matter does not include reliance on a highly soluble 

fertilizer. 

Total Use of High N Fertilizers: 

While USDA organic regulations criteria require an organic soil fertility plan to maintain or improve soil 

organic matter (§205.203), the interpretation of this requirement can be very difficult for certifiers to 

enforce. Does growing the same crop for several years, followed by a different crop, and then back to 

the first crop conform to this requirement? What level of highly soluble, low carbon-to-nitrogen ratio 

materials can be used before they are too much and do not comply with OFPA. Given the wide range of 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 29 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

organic soil fertility options available, it can be very difficult for certifiers to enforce a notice of noncompliance. 

The restriction on the use of sodium nitrate to 20% of crop needs limits the potential for overuse of that 

form of highly soluble nitrogen fertilizers. In fact, the prior vote of the NOSB to completely prohibit this 

form of nitrogen illustrates the concern the organic community has for the use of these high nitrogen 

fertilizers. One comment received at the Spring 2020, meeting demonstrates the slippery slope of using 

these types of fertilizers, including ammonia extracts: 

Fertilizing through drip irrigation systems allows for precise placement and timing of the 

fertilizer for optimum crop production. Drip irrigation has become a major method of irrigating 

crops, especially in California. The growth in drip irrigation is driven by drought, over-draft of 

aquifers, and the need for more precise fertilization... The type of crops irrigated with drip 

irrigation include all types of vegetables, tree fruit, strawberries, cane berries, and tomatoes. 

Many of these crops, such as tree fruit and berries, are only irrigated using drip irrigation 

systems. These crops often have very long cropping cycles making it impossible to apply 

nutrients by a method other than through the drip irrigation system. Any fertilizing material 

added to drip irrigation water must have little to no solids with most of the nutrients in a 

soluble form [emphasis added]. Two of the major liquid nitrogen products are made with liquid 

fish (fish solubles, fish protein, fish emulsion, hydrolyzed fish) and or corn steep liquor. These 

ingredients contain high levels of insoluble material which cause costly plugging of drip irrigation 

lines. 

This illustrates a system that utilizes a large amount of highly soluble fertilizer for the fertility program 

with little or no attention to other organic fertilizer inputs. At what point would ammonia extracts 

become the main source of nitrogen while other organic soil building practices become a minority? 

Sodium nitrate, another highly soluble, immediately available nitrogen source is approved for organic 

use with a limitation to 20% of crop nitrogen needs. Like ammonia extracts, sodium nitrate is a nonsynthetic alternative of bioavailable nitrogen for plants. Unlike other naturally derived substances that 

must undergo mineralization to be plant available, ammonia extracts and sodium nitrate act more like 

conventional fertilizers. The 2020 TR cites a number of sources that demonstrate the benefits of 

materials that need to undergo mineralization as opposed to those that are immediately available and 

states: 

Many substances derive from natural products that are allowed as organic fertilizers, including fish 

meal, liquid fish residues, feather meal, bird or bat guano, alfalfa meal, soybean meal, bone meal, 

kelp, seaweed, blood meal, and meat meal. Like crop residues and compost, organic fertilizers 

require additional mineralization processes and provide a slow release of nitrogen, which is 

primarily present in complex molecules. Like crop residues and compost, organic fertilizers also 

contribute to increased soil organic matter, CEC capacity, and other nutrients and micronutrients. 

Unlike nitrogen fertilizers used in conventional agriculture, organic fertilizers have been reported to 

have minimal negative to long-term positive effects. 

There is the potential to use multiple sources of low C:N ratio, high bioavailability fertilizers to replace 

basic soil fertility methods such as crop rotation, intercropping, and appropriate manure and compost 

use. Traditional organic materials, with the exceptions of sodium nitrate and guano, have a C:N ratio 

above 3:1 : 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 30 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

Material C:N ratio range 

Sodium nitrate 0.02: 1 

Sea bird guano 1.2 - 3.3: 1 

Blood meal 3.1 - 3.8: 1 

Fish powder 3.4 - 4.0: 1 

Feather meal 3.5 - 3.8:1 

Bone meal 3.6: 1 

Liquid food-based fertilizer 4.6-5.2: 1 

Liquid fish emulsion 5.2: 1 

Cotton seed 5.5: 1 

Poultry litters 8-12: 1 

Composts 10.7 - 99.3:1 

Soil 10-12 

Clover and alfalfa (early) 13 

Alfalfa meal 15.9: 1 

Dairy manure (low bedding) 17 

Alfalfa hay 20 

Green rye 36 

Corn stover 60 

Wheat, oat, or rye straw 80 

Oak leaves 90 

Fresh sawdust 400 

Newspaper 600 

Sources: Cassity-Duffey, Cabrera, et al., 2020; Hartz and Johnstone, 2006; Lazicki, Geisseler, et al., 2020; 

Magdoff and Van Es, 2021. 

Ammonia extracts have C:N ratios below 3:1 as compared to other liquid products: 

Type of product Ammonia-N 

(%) 

Total N (%) Ammonia-N/Total 

N (%) 

C:N 

manure tea 0.003 - 0.42 0.09 - 0.71 3.3 - 59.2 17:1 

restricted ammonia product 4.2 – 7.47 5.78 – 8.23 51.0 – 99.6 2:1 

liquid fish fertilizer 0.4 - 0.95 3.96 – 5.25 7.6 – 20.7 3.35 

anaerobic digestate 0.048 - 0.68 0.28 – 2.21 2.2 – 43.2 1.25 - 5.48 

Source: OMRI 

Any amendment that is over 40:1 can cause temporary plant nitrogen deficits since nitrogen must be 

taken from surrounding soil to enable breakdown of these materials. Conversely, amendments with 

lower C:N ratios can contribute available nitrogen to the system (Magdoff and Van Es, 2021). 

As written by one public commenter (Spring 2021): 

The prohibition of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers manufactured through the Haber-Bosch process is a 

longstanding and fundamental prohibition in organic agriculture. The proliferation of these fossilfuel based synthetic fertilizers in conventional agriculture was a primary motivator of the modern 

organic agricultural movement. The principles of organic (as described in the 2001 NOSB 

Recommendation) seek to achieve agricultural and environmental goals through the “use of cultural, 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 31 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

biological, and mechanical methods, as opposed to using synthetic materials to fulfill specific 

functions within the system.” Therefore, substances that mimic the chemistry and functionality of 

synthetic nitrogen fertilizers can understandably be considered as equally incompatible with 

traditional organic principles. Purified natural ammonia and ammonium compounds mimic 

conventional synthetic nitrogen 

Another commenter stated: 

Highly soluble sources of nitrogen cannot be addressed in a vacuum, and we cannot look at one 

material at a time. We must take a broader approach to limiting highly soluble sources of nitrogen 

as a whole. To evaluate and list each individually, even with a restriction, is a slippery slope and 

raises the concern of “stacking.” [Question #4 of the Spring 2020 Discussion document] asks: 

“Should the use of natural ammonia extract be limited to a certain percent of nitrogen use in crops 

(similar to the Chilean nitrate restriction)?” With this approach, producers could potentially “stack” 

highly soluble sources of nitrogen, using 20% of the crop’s needs from Chilean nitrate, 20% of the 

crop’s needs from another source, and 20% of the crop’s needs from yet another source. 

Products that are immediately plant bioavailable mimic conventional nitrogen sources. Products that 

require additional mineralization, such as protein sources, require soil biotic transformation to be 

bioavailable to plants. While not perfect, organic products with greater than a 3:1 C:N ratio fit into the 

category of materials that require soil biotic transformation. Non-synthetic products that are below a 

3:1 ratio tend to be those that are immediately plant available. 

Fraud potential 

While the potential for fraud is not specifically referenced in OFPA, it does affect the ability of certifiers 

and the NOP to evaluate whether organic standards are being followed by crop producers. Given 

additional emphasis on organic enforcement and that both the petitioner and public commenters are 

concerned with the potential for fraud with these ammonia extracts, it seems prudent to note the 

issues. However, commenters have noted that the potential for fraud exists with many fertilizers. 

OMRI stated in public comments that it conducts audits and inspections of high nitrogen liquid fertilizer 

(HNLF) facilities twice a year. NOP guidance states that “the material evaluation program must...Conduct 

a balance-in/balance-out analysis of all ingredients and finished products including, when appropriate, 

by nitrogen content.” A mass balance exercise should expose fraudulent uses of synthetic nitrogen. If 

concentrated ammonia products of concern are those liquid fertilizers with above 3% ammoniacal 

nitrogen, they are considered HNLF and subject to regular mass balance audits. Formulations that may 

contain less than 3% ammoniacal nitrogen would not be subject to the same requirements, so the risk of 

adulteration remains. However, that risk already exists for all liquid fertilizer products that are not 

subject to inspection. OMRI’s inspectors certainly encounter challenges in completing mass balance 

calculations for complex formulations, particularly those derived from waste stream materials. OMRI 

therefore is not suggesting that the mass balance calculation is an absolute fail-safe measure against 

fraud, but rather a risk mitigation measure. 

In terms of N15 to N14 isotope ratio testing, OMRI expressed its concerns in public comments at 

the Fall 2020 NOSB meeting. OMRI no longer requests isotope ratio testing due to the unreliability of 

test results for complex blended formulations. 

A public commenter, citing a study from the University of California presented a different perspective. 

The University determined that there is a very marked difference in N15 isotope concentration between 

natural and synthetic ammonia, and the test for determining nitrogen isotopes in products is common. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 32 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The nitrogen isotope ratio (δ15N) of natural materials also rarely falls below a certain threshold, with a 

few exceptions. Fish tissue and guano, for example, do not have ratios less than 5, and they are typically 

greater. Any products that go beyond this threshold (i.e., show higher δ15N values)

are almost certainly not adulterated. It is important to note, however, that plants that rely on symbiotic 

nitrogen uptake can have δ15N values as depleted, or close to atmospheric values, as nonorganic 

nitrogen sources. So, in fertilizers where biomass from nitrogen-fixing plants (e.g., legumes) has been 

added, it may be difficult to distinguish them from nonorganic sources. 

(http://californiaagriculture.ucanr.edu • OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2013) 

The California Department of Agriculture submitted public comments that state they can use isotope 

ratios and inspections to prevent fraud: 

Concerns about fraud, i.e., fraudulent use of synthetic materials to produce organic input 

materials, have prompted calls to employ stable isotope techniques to help detect 

adulteration of organic liquid ammonia products with synthetic ammonium. Therefore, 

the potential usefulness and limitations of stable isotope testing will be discussed below. 

Nitrogen-containing materials have unique isotope ratios, or “isotopic signatures.” In a 

solution, N isotope ratios [15N/(14N+15N)] are uniform and stable, and measurements by 

isotope mass spectrometers are repeatable with great precision. 

Therefore, adulteration of an organic liquid ammonia product can be detected if the 

isotopic signature of a product is different from that obtained of the same product 

analyzed earlier, for example right after its manufacture. Comparing N isotope ratios of 

finished product batches with those of products offered in the marketplace can bring 

adulteration to light. CDFA-OIM measures the isotopic signature of finished liquid 

ammonia product batches at the manufacturing sites. The N isotopic signatures of 

products in the channels of trade must match the ones in the records. 

While changes of the isotopic signature of a given product can reliably be detected, 

using stable isotopes to distinguish between organic and synthetic sources of N is more 

problematic. The differences in N isotope ratios, or isotopic signatures, occur due to 

discrimination against the heavier (15N) isotope during biochemical and physical 

processes, such as soil-to-atmosphere fluxes of N gases. The N isotopic signature of 

the atmosphere, the source of synthetic N, is generally lower than that of organic 

materials. Thus, the N isotopic signatures of ammonium from organic sources are 

slightly, but consistently, higher than those of ammoniacal-N in synthetic fertilizer... 

It is not possible to use the isotopic signature alone to verify the integrity of the OIM 

liquid ammonia manufacturing processes due to the fact that there is a wide range of N 

isotope ratios among organic sources of N that in some cases overlap those of synthetic 

fertilizer. Thus, isotopic signatures are useful for discovering fraud committed in the 

channels of trade, but not as a tool to determine whether a product has been made 

solely from non-synthetic source materials. CDFA-OIM relies on thorough inspections of 

manufacturing plants, including N mass balance audits at announced and non-announced 

visits to deter fraud by manufacturers of organic liquid ammonia products. 

Other comments received at the Fall 2020, and Spring 2020, noted that the overlap in isotopic ratios 

between synthetic and natural ratios makes using isotope ratios alone difficult. Without extensive 

sampling of the exact ratios of lots at manufacture and at use, the chance for comixing or ammonia 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 33 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

products exists. Other commenters noted that, while California is deliberate about testing, their 

purview does not extend nationally or internationally. Likewise, adulterations at the farm scale are 

possible and farm inspections are often performed after nitrogen has been applied to crops. 

A public comment from the Spring 2020 meeting notes: 

Certifiers already face an uphill battle with those clients who treat soil as merely something to hold 

plants up and do all feeding through liquid injection rather than soil building. Adding more 

successful liquid to the system is just not in keeping with the intent or spirit of organic farming. How 

to stop people from cheating is also a major hurdle. Cheating has historically been an issue in 

making similar products by spiking them with synthetic nitrogen, and it is also an issue in users 

becoming too dependent on these products at the expense of cover crops, compost, and other 

fundamental organic practices. 

Finally, several commenters stated that the potential for fraud is increased when there is a significant 

cost difference between the biological ammonia fertilizers and the synthetic materials. The cost 

differences create an economic incentive for comingling products and presenting them as products 

approved for organic use. While legal penalties deter fraudulent activity, NOP enforcement activities 

have demonstrated that economic gains continue to motivate fraudulent activities. 

Category 1: Classification 

1. For CROP use: Is the substance X Non-synthetic or Synthetic? 

Is the substance formulated or manufactured by a process that chemically changes a substance 

extracted from naturally occurring plant, animal, or mineral sources? [OFPA §6502(21)] If so, 

describe, using NOP 5033-1 as a guide. 

The processing of ammonia extracts does not change the form of the ammonia/ammonium 

product. Naturally occurring biological processes, such as anaerobic digestion and fermentation, 

can be used to produce ammonia and ammonium compounds. While the production of 

ammonia and ammonium compounds (ammonia extract) occurs through natural, biological 

processes, isolation via ammonia stripping generally utilizes acid and base reactions. The 

classification of ammonia extract as synthetic or nonsynthetic is dependent on the identity of 

the acids and bases used in the production of ammonia extract. According to NOP decision 

trees, the use of synthetic substances for pH adjustment or other processing would result in the 

classification of the ammonia extract as synthetic, while the use of natural acids and bases 

would result in the classification of ammonia extract as nonsynthetic (2020 TR). 

2. Reference to appropriate OFPA category: 

Is the substance used in production, and does it contain an active synthetic ingredient in the 

following categories: [§6517(c)(1)(B)(i)]; copper and sulfur compounds; toxins derived from 

bacteria; pheromones, soaps, horticultural oils, fish emulsions, treated seed, vitamins and 

minerals; livestock parasiticides and medicines and production aids including netting, tree wraps 

and seals, insect traps, sticky barriers, row covers, and equipment cleansers; or (ii) is used in 

production and contains synthetic inert ingredients that are not classified by the Administrator 

of the Environmental Protection Agency as inerts of toxicological concern? 

Ammonium extracts do not include an active synthetic ingredient. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 34 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Category 2: Adverse Impacts 

1. What is the potential for the substance to have detrimental chemical interactions with other 

materials used in organic farming systems? [§6518(m)(1)] 

To the extent that the application of ammonia/ammonium extracts can affect soil pH and other 

microbial processes, other nutrients may or may not be released based on the soil pH effects. 

2. What is the toxicity and mode of action of the substance and of its breakdown products or any 

contaminants, and their persistence and areas of concentration in the 

environment? [§6518(m)(2)] 

Ammonia, ammonium, and their byproducts have short lifetimes in the environment, typically 

ranging from hours to days based on environmental conditions. The short environmental 

lifetimes of ammonia, ammonium, and their by-products are due to the bioavailability of 

nitrogen in these compounds, which are readily incorporated into amino acids and other 

biologically important molecules. The exception in the byproducts of ammonia and ammonium 

ions is the oxidation product nitrous oxide (dinitrogen oxide [N2O]), which can persist for 

approximately 120 years in the atmosphere. When excess ammonia is present in the 

environment, it is likely to volatize and move into the atmosphere as a gas (2020 TR). 

Furthermore, the TR states that the high-water solubility of ammonia, ammonium and nitrate 

ions makes them conducive to leaching into water ecosystems. While these compounds can be 

metabolized by aquatic microorganisms, if they are overabundant eutrophication can occur and 

ammonia and ammonium can be toxic to aquatic life. Algal blooms can be caused by the influx 

of high concentrations of nitrogen nutrients. Algal blooms can reduce oxygen concentrations 

and result in hypoxic and anoxic environments. 

3. Describe the probability of environmental contamination during manufacture, use, misuse or 

disposal of such substance? [§6518(m)(3)] 

The production of ammonia extracts can result in the release of ammonia to the environment. 

This is expected due to the inability of ammonia isolation processes to capture 100% of the 

ammonia content of feedstocks. The efficiency of capture depends on the feedstock and 

isolation conditions, but is reported to be in the range of 17-95% of total ammonia content with 

a 90% recovery considered acceptable. The remaining ammonia is lost to the environment 

either as a gas or as residual amounts that remain in the feedstock effluent (2020 TR). 

Other issues of environmental contamination are true of all ammonia compounds and are not 

specific to non-synthetic ammonias. The release of these compounds to the atmosphere can 

contribute to degradation of air quality and visibility due to the formation of ammonium 

aerosols. Additionally, the primary issue of environmental contamination is the over application 

of nitrogen products and their subsequent leaching into non-agricultural environments. 

Dramatic losses of 20-80% have been noted. (2020 TR). 

Finally, the disposal/use of the feedstock material that remains after filtration and/or ammonia 

isolation has not been mentioned in the TR or from public comments. Depending on the use of 

that feedstock there are potential environmental issues with that remaining material. 

Comments have focused on issues with phosphorous increases and issues when using 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 35 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

manures/composts. This same problem could be an issue when a feed stock is disposed of after 

ammonia has been removed. 

4. Discuss the effect of the substance on human health. [§6517(c)(1)(A)(i); §6517(c)(2)(A)(i); 

§6518(m)(4)]. 

FDA allows the use of a number of ammonium substances or lists them as Generally Recognized 

as safe. However, these substances differ from those used in agriculture. 

The 2020 TR refers to several human health effects. Ammonium is a positive ion and its effect on 

human health are dependent on the remaining negative portions of the ionic compound 

Ammonium ions play a critical role in the Krebs cycle. 

Ammonia is classified as a respiratory irritant – long term exposure to gaseous ammonia can 

result in bronchial or pulmonary inflammation. Repeated exposure can lead to pulmonary 

fibrosis. Direct inhalation or ingestion can cause esophageal burns. 

5. Discuss any effects the substance may have on biological and chemical interactions in the 

agroecosystem, including the physiological effects of the substance on soil organisms (including 

the salt index and solubility of the soil), crops and livestock. [§6518(m)(5)] 

The 2020 TR states: 

Ammonia and ammonium compounds can readily migrate from the applied soil system into the 

atmosphere and marine environments. When ammonia and ammonium compounds remain in 

their applied soils, they also induce changes to the local environment. The acidity of ammonium 

ions is recognized as a cause of soil acidification, reducing the soil pH. These pH changes result 

in changes to the solubility and bioavailability of other nutrients, affecting both crops and soil 

organisms. Changes to soil pH may also have negative impacts on the viability of soil 

organisms, including earthworms and various microbial populations. High soil concentrations of 

ammonia and ammonium have been shown to retard the natural nitrogen fixation processes of 

plants. This shift in natural ammonia production reduces the natural efficiency of the soil, 

making it more reliant on continued nitrogen inputs. The release of ammonia to the 

atmosphere directly contributes to ozone depletion and global warming (ammonia is a 

greenhouse gas). Ammonia and ammonium compounds contribute to the degradation of air 

quality and visibility due to the formation of ammonium aerosols. The production of nitric oxide 

and nitrous oxide contribute to ozone depletion. 

6. Are there any adverse impacts on biodiversity? (§205.200) 

The use of high nitrogen available fertilizers can alter the uptake rates of nitrogen and alter 

plant nutrient production. Studies by Phelan, Mason, et al., 1995, demonstrate that these 

altered plant nutrient production cycles can lead to increased susceptibility to pests. 

Other studies show that long-term organic fertilizer inputs enrich carbon related soil functions. 

Manure additions can strongly influence the formation, storage and cycling of soil organic 

carbon and nitrogen and soil microecology (Sharaf, Thompson, et al, 2021; Ozlu, Sandhu, et al., 

2019). The total amounts (weights) of living organisms vary in different cropping systems. In 

general, soil organisms are more abundant and diverse in systems with complex rotations that 

return more diverse crop residues and that use other organic materials such as cover crops, 

animal manures and composts. When crops are rotated regularly, fewer parasite, disease, 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 36 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

weed, and insect problems occur than when the same crop is grown year after year (Magdoff 

and Van Es, 2021) 

There were several public comments noting that the use of ammonia extracts could increase the 

rate of mineralization in soils and thus be beneficial. In a short timeframe this could be true, but 

this accelerated rate of mineralization could come at the cost of long-term soil carbon 

resources. Wang, Juliang, et al., 2018, found that long-term application of N-fertilizers causes an 

abundance of bacterial groups responsible for the denitrification process, which causes the 

turnover of nitrogen to increase and results in greater nitrogen loss over time. Essentially, 

adding more nitrogen fertilizer results in a long-term loss of nitrogen while altering other soil 

components, like decreasing soil pH and C:N ratio. When soil carbon and nitrogen are reduced in 

response to the application of chemical fertilizers, beneficial enzymatic activity of the soil also 

decreases (Ozlu, Sandhu, et al., 2019). Another study concluded: 

Annual nitrate leaching was 4.4–5.6 times higher in conventional plots than in organic 

plots, with the integrated plots in between. This study demonstrates that organic and 

integrated fertilization practices support more active and efficient denitrifier 

communities, shift the balance of N2 emissions and nitrate losses, and reduce 

environmentally damaging nitrate losses. Although this study specifically examines a 

perennial orchard system, the ecological and biogeochemical processes we evaluated 

are present in all agroecosystems, and the reductions in nitrate loss in this study could 

also be achievable in other cropping systems (Kramer, Reganold, et al., 2006). 

The TR states that the incorporation of crop residues and compost provides a potential longterm alternative to ammonia extract and other nitrogen fertilizers. Nitrogen content in compost 

is slowly released through mineralization processes in the soil, primarily facilitated by its 

metabolism by microorganisms in the soil. Unlike ammonia extract, the use of compost also 

contributes to soil organic matter, and available carbon, phosphorous, and micronutrients, as 

well as soil microorganism populations and activities. 

Category 3: Alternatives/Compatibility 

1. Are there alternatives to using the substance? Evaluate alternative practices as well as nonsynthetic and synthetic available materials. [§6518(m)(6)] 

The following statements are taken from the 2020 TR. 

There are many natural soil amendments that can be used to deliver nitrogen for crops. Manure 

is a source of nitrogen compounds, including ammonia, ammonium ions, and urea, which are 

biological waste compounds. However, manure has a relatively low level of biologically 

available nitrogen compared to ammonia extract. The biologically available forms of nitrogen in 

manures may also lead to similar issues with nutrient leaching as ammonia extract, potentially 

polluting surrounding water systems and leading to atmospheric ammonia emissions. Manure 

from both organic and conventional livestock is permitted for use in the production of organic 

crops. However, the availability of manure may be limited regionally due to the continued 

segregation of crop and animal agricultural production. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 37 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In addition to manure, crop residues and compost may be added as a source of bioavailable 

nitrogen. This includes the direct integration and composting of both manure and other organic 

agricultural wastes. The high protein and amino acid content of these feedstocks allows for their 

conversion to ammonia and ammonium compounds through anaerobic digestion and 

metabolism by soil microorganisms. When composts do not include manures, they are generally 

low in nitrogen containing compounds (2020 TR). 

The incorporation of crop residues and compost provides a potential long-term alternative to 

ammonia extract and other nitrogen fertilizers. Nitrogen content in compost is slowly released 

through mineralization processes in the soil, primarily facilitated by its metabolism by 

microorganisms in the soil. Unlike ammonia extract, the use of compost also contributes to soil 

organic matter, and available carbon, phosphorous, and micronutrients, as well as soil 

microorganism populations and activities. The incorporation of compost into the 

agroecosystem has been reported to improve soil characteristics, specifically water holding 

capacity and cation exchange capacity (CEC). Increased soil CEC allows it to retain cations more 

effectively, including ammonium ions and metal cations required as micronutrients (e.g., iron 

[Fe], copper [Cu], zinc [Zn]) (2020 TR). 

Chilean nitrate (mined sodium nitrate) is a natural source of bioavailable nitrate ions. Sodium 

nitrate offers a natural alternative to ammonia extract as a nitrogen fertilizer, and is the 

historical source of nitrogen fertilizer prevalent before the advent of the Haber-Bosch process. 

Nitrate has been shown to be less toxic to terrestrial and aquatic organisms than ammonium 

ions, although it is toxic to some species at high concentrations. However, nitrate is more likely 

to contribute to environmental contamination than ammonium, and is the primary nitrogen 

compound associated with leaching into aquatic systems. Sodium nitrate is highly water soluble 

and may leach into aquatic systems as run-off. Nitrate also contributes to atmospheric 

contamination in the form of various nitrogen oxide compounds that are formed through 

denitrification reactions (2020 TR). 

Many other substances derived from natural products are allowed as organic fertilizers. These 

include fish meal, liquid fish residues, feather meal, bird or bat guano, alfalfa meal, bone meal, 

kelp, seaweed, and meat meal. These materials may be more readily available to crops due to 

their low C:N ratio, but all require mineralization to be plant bioavailable. The mineralization is 

required due to the nitrogen available in these materials being present as more complex 

molecules and proteins. These materials provide a slower N release than ammonia extracts. 

They also contribute to increased soil organic matter, CEC capacity and other nutrients and 

micronutrients. Unlike conventional fertilizers, organic fertilizers have been reported to have 

minimal negative to long-term positive effects on soil health (2020 TR). 

Crop rotation and intercropping are traditional methods to ensure soil health. They can be 

especially effective if legumes are included in the rotations. Legumes have the ability to fix 

nitrogen from the atmosphere by converting atmospheric dinitrogen into bioavailable nitrogen. 

Legumes and other nitrogen-fixing plants produce higher quantities of bioavailable nitrogen 

when there are low soil concentrations of ammonia and ammonium. Intercropping offers the 

potential of direct input of bioavailable nitrogen from legumes to other crops by growing them 

alongside each other. Intercropping has been shown to increase crop yields and these yields 

have been shown to be less dependent on nutrient inputs compared to monocropping systems. 

Cover cropping also promotes increased organic matter, increases CEC properties, and prevents 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 38 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

soil erosion. Cover crops use can be limited by regional climates and require adequate soil 

temperatures to grow between agricultural seasons (2020 TR). 

2. In balancing the responses to the criteria above, is the substance compatible with a system of 

sustainable agriculture? [§6518(m)(7)] 

To further evaluate compatibility, the Subcommittee review includes answers to the following 

12 questions as noted in the NOSB Policy and Procedures Manual 

• Does the substance promote plant and animal health by enhancing the soil’s physical 

chemical, or biological properties? 

A number of public commenters from the Spring, 2021, NOSB meeting indicated that ammonia 

extracts must be used with other soil building practices in order to comply with OFPA criteria. 

These comments would indicate that the use of ammonium extracts alone do not enhance the 

soil’s biological properties. For example: 

The Petition ignores that the use of any fertilizer, including presently approved 

ammonia extracts, can only be applied under a holistic certified organic system plan 

This is a complex issue and commenters also provided a range of responses that either indicated 

that these extracts would harm soil biological properties or that they would enhance these 

properties. However, it seems contradictory that proponents of ammonia extracts state that 

they must be used with other organic soil building materials to comply with OFPA. They then 

turn around and argue that these extracts promote soil biological properties and soil health. 

Of particular note, the comments supporting the use of ammonia extracts were often referring 

to extracts produced using the concentration method. This method simply concentrates the 

ammonia containing materials by the removal of water. The carbon and other nutrients are not 

removed and thus these materials are not the nearly pure ammonia product that is derived 

from the stripping method. Thus, from comments received it may be important to distinguish 

these two types of ammonia materials since they cause different soil effects: 

For instance, “ammonia concentration” can result in innumerable combinations and 

concentrations of ammonia salts, minerals, and organic matter depending on the 

starting feedstock used for the digestate as well as the concentration method (e.g., 

filtration versus evaporation, etc.), resulting in different types and concentrations of 

biofertilizers (e.g., liquid versus granular). Therefore, the interactions with plants, soil, 

and microbial communities will differ depending on the resulting end-use formula of the 

concentrate. In contrast, “ammonia stripping” results in specific ammonia compounds: 

some variation of ammonium salt depending on the acid used to trap (stabilize) 

ammonia gas at the end of the stripping process. Ammonia stripping from anaerobic 

digestion of animal manure, simply put, converts ammonium from organic matter (NH4) 

to ammonia (NH3) gas, which is then typically absorbed in an acid solution to create 

ammonium sulfate or ammonium nitrate 

Additionally, commenters often compared the use of all types of ammonia extracts in relation to 

the use of manures and composts. These references noted the use of manures and composts 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 39 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

can create potential for increased phosphorous levels in the soil, nitrogen leaching in seasons 

where crops are not present and other environmental issues: 

Concerns about damage to the health of the soil system are not unjustified when 

applying ammonium fertilizers. However, these problems are not any more pronounced 

with ammonium fertilizers than they are with fertilizers in general. In fact, the targeted 

use of liquid fertilizers can be less damaging to the soil ecosystem and surrounding 

water systems than the application of large amounts of manure or even compost, which 

are both commonly used in organic systems to supply nitrogen 

However, other commenters (see comments submitted by Hatfield) noted that a good organic 

soil program does not rely solely on manures and composts, but also incorporates crop 

rotations, cover crops and interplanting. In order to avoid phosphorus or calcium build up in the 

soils after manure or compost application, a complete wholistic approach is necessary for the 

organic farming system as OFPA states. Crop rotations that cycle between high and low 

consumption or nitrogen in addition to cover crops in the off-season or intercropping with cover 

crops during the season help reduce the dependency of consecutive topical applications of 

manures or compost that can leave phosphorus deposits over time. If phosphorus deposits over 

time occur, then switching to forage grasses such as alfalfa or other forms of hay can assist in 

“growing out” the soil problems over time, but the soil will need to be remediated if excesses 

exist and not ignored for long term soil health and viability. The use of these methods can limit 

the potential for environmental issues that could result from manure use alone. And, in fact 

these diverse soil fertility practices can increase soil biological activity: 

The impact of soil carbon on soil biological response was more closely related to the 

inputs of carbon due to crop rotations than fertilizer practice (Geisseler, 2014). These 

complexities have been explored by Hijbeeks et al. (2017) when they compared soil and 

crop responses to organic and inorganic fertilizers on a range of crop from long-term 

experiments across Europe. Their results showed no significant effect of the organic 

inputs on crop yield with the effects from organic additions dependent upon the clay 

content, climate, and the soil organic matter at the beginning of the experiment as 

shown from their results (Fig. 4). These findings are consistent with those from Lori et al. 

(2017) in their meta-analysis of 56 experiments across the world. They found organic 

systems exhibited 32-84% greater microbial biomass carbon, microbial biomass 

nitrogen, total phospholipid fatty acids, and dehydrogenase, urease, and protease 

activities than conventional systems. When they used subgroup analyses, they found 

that crop rotation, inclusion of legumes in the rotation, along with the organic inputs 

were all significant factors affecting the soil microbial size and activity. 

There were few comments comparing the environmental effects of any type of ammonia extract 

to a complete organic system using manures, composts, crop rotations, cover crops and 

interplanting. Several commenters wrote that this is an area where research is limited, and 

effects may largely be unknown. 

Given that the comments and citations supporting the use of ammonia extracts generally 

compare these extracts to the use of manures and composts rather than whole soil systems, 

that these materials can only be used in conjunction with other carbon contributing soil 

practices, and that some research indicates their negative effects on soil biology, a conservative 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 40 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

approach to this answer is that the use of these extracts does not positively contribute to plant 

health over the long term. 

• Does use of the substance encourage and enhance preventative techniques including cultural 

and biological methods for management of crop, livestock, and/or handling operations? 

As noted by commenters, the use of ammonia extracts must include the uses of other cultural 

and biological processes to meet the OFPA criteria for maintaining or increasing soil organic 

matter. The ammonia extracts themselves do not encourage or enhance preventative 

techniques for crop management. 

Commenters have argued that the limited use of these materials, in situations where nitrogen 

might be limited due to unusual weather events or cold soils, could “prime” the soil system to 

increase biological activity or to bridge short term nitrogen deficits. But these situations do not 

meet the criteria of the wording “encourage and enhance preventative techniques” since they 

would be a response in an unusual situation when other techniques have failed. Others have 

noted that if soils are wet or cold during planting time, this points to inefficiency of the 

mycorrhizal fungi or the root system itself. Nitrogen is not generally needed in large amounts 

early on, and it is actually phosphorus that is needed. If mycorrhizal fungi are not active due to 

weather, they cannot process the needed phosphorus to assist with early plant germination. 

Even in excess phosphorus soils, there can be a phosphorus deficit in the plants when cold / wet 

soils occur. With the viewpoint of conventional farmers, a true starter fertilizer is actually 10-

34-0, indicating more phosphorus is needed early on to charge the soil for the plant “pop-up” 

than nitrogen itself. This same issue goes for an organic soil. 

Additionally, the purified ammonia compounds require the removal of the carbon value of 

organic waste, either through filtration or by stripping. In the past, the NOSB has prohibited 

materials sourced from agricultural waste when the carbon value of the original source material 

was not retained in the final product. The prohibition of ash from manure burning is an example 

where the carbon from the manures is removed by burning and the value of the materials for 

restoring soil organic matter is destroyed. 

• Is the substance made from renewable resources? If the source of the product is nonrenewable, are the materials used to produce the substance recyclable? Is the substance 

produced from recycled materials? Does use of the substance increase the efficiency of 

resources used by organic farms, complement the use of natural biological controls, or reduce 

the total amount of materials released into the environment? 

The substance is made from renewable materials in the form of animal manures and crop 

wastes. They can increase the efficiency of use since large volumes of manure and compost do 

not have to be hauled from their source to farms. Ammonia extracts are concentrated and thus 

much easier to haul and handle. 

Ammonia extracts can be applied when needed and only in the amounts needed at that point in 

time by the crop. Arguments are made both ways as to whether the applications of these 

materials and their ready availability to plants reduces their leaching potential (since only the 

amounts needed can be applied) or whether they bypass soil systems that tie up and release soil 

nitrogen dynamically (those systems only have a small proportion of nitrogen available to leach). 

The timing of nitrogen application can be controlled with ammonia extracts and they can be 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 41 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

applied in quantities that the crop needs at that point. This could lead to a better match of 

nitrogen added to nitrogen needed by the crop. However, there is also evidence that dynamic 

soil systems that release and then reabsorb nitrogen can supply crop needs while minimizing 

free nitrogen (Bowles, Hollander, 2015). The free nitrogen would be limited and thus leaching 

potential reduced. 

One researcher (Phelan, Mason, et al., 1995) has conducted studies showing that plants are 

more resistant to insect damage when organic fertilizers are used, as opposed to readily 

available mineral materials. Thus, the use of ammonia extracts (or sodium nitrate for that 

matter), since they are readily available, can disrupt biological controls. 

• Does use of the substance have a positive influence on the health, natural behavior, and 

welfare of livestock? 

N/A 

• Does the substance satisfy expectations of organic consumers regarding the authenticity and 

integrity of organic products? 

While the answer to this question is not referenced in the TR or other research reports, one 

public commenter noted that: 

Objections to the compatibility of these substances with organic principles are serious 

enough to potentially lead to fragmentation of the organic market. Some companies 

have indicated they may be prepared to establish private standards that exclude 

products produced with this input from their supply chain. This is an indication that the 

substance could fail to align with the 2004 NOSB Recommendation which asks NOSB to 

consider whether the substance would “satisfy expectations of organic consumers 

regarding the authenticity and integrity of organic products.” 

• Does the substance allow for an increase in the long-term viability of organic farm operations? 

This is a complex question. Some commenters argue that the potential for yield increases, 

precision application of nitrogen, and reduction of environmental contamination from excess 

nitrogen or phosphorous from composts and manures will increase long-term viability of organic 

farms. 

Others argue that the use of ammonia extracts will degrade soil biological systems and interfere 

with biological processes that are important to plant and soil health. The use of these extracts 

may give short term yield increases but are not promoting long term carbon building of the soil. 

Thus, long-term resiliency and viability may be hurt by the use of these materials. 

Using OFPA and deploying a total systems approach is necessary. Precision technology is 

independent of ammonia extract and should be adopted by organic farmers that are interested 

in increasing their yields and applying the right nutrients in the right places. Excess nitrogen or 

phosphorus applications need to be currently regulated through soil samples, removal rates, 

etc., and should not be an issue if the total systems approach is applied. Also, if there are 

nutrient management problems on a particular soil, avoiding solving them and bypassing them 

with a material that mimics conventional materials should not be permitted in an organic 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 42 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

system. At a minimum, ammonia extracts should be listed as a restriction on the OMRI 

certificate that they cannot be applied if work has not been done to remediate excess 

phosphorus or calcium build up in soils due to over applications in prior years. 

• Is there evidence that the substance is mined, manufactured, or produced through reliance on 

child labor or violations of applicable national labor regulations? 

There is no evidence that these materials violate labor regulations. 

• If the substance is already on the National List, is the proposed use of the substance 

consistent with other listed uses of the substance? 

N/A 

• Is the use of the substance consistent with other substances historically allowed or disallowed 

in organic production and handling? 

This is a petition to prohibit a natural material. There are other materials currently used in 

organic production (liquid fish, soy protein hydrolysate, sodium nitrate) that are similar in use. 

Of these, only sodium nitrate has significant nitrogen in an immediately plant usable form. 

Sodium nitrate is annotated on the National List to a limit of not more than 20% of crop needs. 

It is an allowed alternative to ammonia extracts. It should be noted, however, that a previous 

NOSB voted to prohibit use of sodium nitrate due to concerns of salt buildup and similar 

concerns regarding soil biology effects. 

In general, natural substances allowed in organic production are made up of complex chemical 

structures including lignins, proteins, carbon, nitrogen and other minerals and materials. 

Ammonia extracts produced through the concentration method may be similar to these 

historically allowed substances except that the ammonia content is concentrated and 

substantially higher than these naturally occurring substances. That concentration may cause 

these ammonia extracts to behave differently these other traditional natural materials. As 

noted above, that different behavior in the soil may be beneficial or detrimental. These 

differences may be exhibited by the differing C:N ration between ammonia extracts and other 

organic inputs. With the exception of sodium nitrate, most other traditional non-synthetic 

organic fertilizers have ratios of at least 3:1 and often greater. The low C:N ratio of ammonia 

extracts would be expected to cause different soil effects than those materials with higher 

carbon amounts. 

Proponents for the use of ammonia extracts argue that they are similar to other substances 

allowed and that they are only more immediately available. When used in moderate quantities 

they enhance soil biology and can cause soil and plant ecosystems to be more productive. 

Opponents argue that ammonia extracts bypass and short circuit soil biological processes and 

do not enhance long term carbon build up in the soil. Their low C:N ration is contrary to the 

original intent of the organic regulations in that soil fertility methods should promote long term 

soil health and ecosystem stability. 

• Would approval of the substance be consistent with international organic regulations and 

guidelines, including Codex? 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 43 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As noted in the TR, there are a number of ammonia materials listed for use in handling, but 

there are no listings regarding the use of ammonia extracts for crop production. The use of 

sodium nitrate for products exported to Canada is limited. Since ammonia extracts and sodium 

nitrate are similar in plant availability and solubility, it is possible that the use of ammonia 

extracts in products destined for Canada could also be restricted, but this is unknown at this 

point. Furthermore, Europe and Canada have systems of closed positive lists, meaning a 

material cannot be used unless it is on the allowed list. This contrasts with the United States 

where a non-synthetic material can automatically be used unless it is prohibited or annotated. 

If ammonia extracts do not appear on the Canadian or European lists, then growers in those 

countries are unable to use them. 

Inconsistencies between international certifiers reduces export market potential and creates 

additional confusion with countries that have substantially different standards that the United 

States receives imports from. 

• Is there adequate information about the substance to make a reasonable determination on 

the substance's compliance with each of the other applicable criteria? If adequate information 

has not been provided, does an abundance of caution warrant rejection of the substance? 

Given the conflicting information regarding ammonia extracts, it seems prudent to prohibit the 

use of extracts. These materials have only been developed in the last ten years and there is not 

adequate research that would demonstrate that these high nitrogen, carbon limited materials 

comply with OFPA criteria for the maintenance and increase of soil organic matter. As noted 

above, arguments can be made that these materials have a positive effect or a negative effect. 

Given that there is no clear answer and that negative effects on soil health have been 

documented, an abundance of caution warrants a prohibition of these extracts. If future 

research conclusively demonstrates that these materials comply with the OFPA criteria to 

maintain and build soil organic matter, a petition could be submitted to remove the prohibition. 

Additionally, the prohibition could be allowed to expire during future sunset reviews. 

Furthermore, an abundance of caution warrants a close look at the use of low (below 3:1) C:N 

ratio materials, such as ammonia extracts, for organic fertility. The NOSB has set precedents to 

the limitation of these types of materials. Sodium nitrate is limited to 20% of crop needs. Other 

highly soluble, non-nitrogen materials are also limited by annotation. It was noted in public 

comments that: 

In the preamble to the publication of the NOP Final Rule on December 21, 2000, NOP 

discusses how it decided to agree with the NOSB recommendation and to put specific 

regulation of substances of high solubility into the annotations for each of these materials 

where they appear on the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances. NOP goes on 

to say, "Based on the recommendation of the NOSB, the final rule would prohibit use of 

these materials [substances of high solubility], unless the NOSB developed 

recommendations on conditions for their use and the Secretary added them to the National 

List." At the time, the discussion was about mined substances of high solubility because 

there were no concentrated, highly soluble plant nutrient materials other than mined 

sources available at that time. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 44 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another commenter in favor of the use of ammonia extracts stated: 

I also believe that there should be a limit on the amount or percent of AE Nitrogen 

applied to the crop where no more than 20 – 30% of a crops total N comes from an AE 

or any high Nitrogen product that contains less than a C:N ratio of 2. 

This long-time concern for the use of highly soluble plant nutrients and the criteria of “an 

abundance of caution” is an important aspect of this petition. With respect to this petition, 

several options are open to the NOSB. The first is to prohibit ammonia extracts that meet the 

proposed definition. The second is to reject the petition altogether and allow any use of nonsynthetic ammonia extracts. The third would be to annotate the use of these extracts to some 

maximum percent of crop needs, similar to sodium nitrate. 

If an annotation to limit the use of ammonia extracts were to be put in place, the potential 

exists for sodium nitrate and ammonia extracts to both be used up to each of their maximum 

allowed rates. This stacked rate would allow for the use of higher applications than either 

alone. The combined use would put the burden on certifiers to identify whether the total use of 

these highly soluble products violated the OFPA criteria to maintain or build soil organic matter. 

It is likely that different certifiers would have different interpretations and that notices of noncompliance would be difficult to enforce. 

Additionally, the effectiveness of a prohibition or limitation is dependent on an exact definition 

of ammonia extracts. If new products are developed that fall outside the definition, a future 

petition would have to be submitted to determine if they should or should not be allowed. This 

could create additional work loads and a perpetual cycle of review for each new product 

produced. It would seem prudent to set an additional limitation for these extracts that might 

fall outside the current definition, as well as for other highly soluble nitrogen materials. A 

limitation that would restrict the total use of highly soluble nitrogen fertilizers would prevent 

the “stacking” of multiple highly soluble fertilizer types. The NOSB should not have to be 

continually concerned about the introduction of different novel ammonia extracts or other 

novel non-synthetic nitrogen materials before a petition is submitted to restrict them. 

Sodium nitrate was prohibited in part for this same rationale. As stated by NOSB in a past review 

to justify its recommendation to prohibit, the “use and dependence on sodium nitrate also can 

tend for producers to put off the need for strong soil-building practices, consistent with 

§205.203, since it behaves similarly to conventional synthetic nitrogen fertilizers.” This is 

evidence that the substance could fail to align with the 2004 NOSB Recommendation which asks 

NOSB to consider whether “use of the substance is consistent with other substances historically 

allowed or disallowed in organic production and handling.” Highly soluble sources of nitrogen 

cannot be addressed in a vacuum, and we cannot look at one material at a time. We must take a 

broader approach to limiting highly soluble sources of nitrogen as a whole. To evaluate and list 

each individually, even with a restriction, is a slippery slope and raises the concern of “stacking”. 

• Does use of the substance have a positive impact on biodiversity? 

Some commenters argue that ammonia extracts enhance soil biological processes, many others 

argue that these materials either do not impact or decrease biodiversity. A proponent of the 

use of ammonia extracts cited Jerry Hatfield in that: 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 45 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bio-based fertilizers been shown to increase the characteristics related to soil 

health, e.g., organic matter, soil aggregates, enhanced biological activity, increased 

nutrient cycling because they stimulate biological activity through a balanced 

carbon:nitrogen (C:N) ratio 

Contrarily, the 2020 TR states: 

While bioavailable nitrogen is also important for the function of microorganisms, high 

concentrations of ammonia and ammonium compounds result in changes to the native 

soil communities. These changes vary based on the initial soil communities and may 

result in either an increase or decrease in total population. However, while there are 

cases of population growth in some communities, the application of nitrogen fertilizers 

is associated with decreases to the diversity of these microbial communities 

Given the conflicting information regarding biodiversity impacts, it would be very difficult to 

state unequivocally that the use of ammonia extracts has a positive impact on biodiversity. 

While there is a chance that these extracts do increase diversity, there is a very likely chance 

that they decrease biodiversity. 

References 

Bowles, T.M., Hollander, A. D., Steenwerth, K. L., Jackson, L. E.; 2015; Tightly-coupled plant-soil nitrogen 

cycling: Comparison of organic farms across an agricultural landscape. PLoS ONE 10(6): e0131888. 

Cassity-Duffey, K., Cabrera, M., et al.; 2020; Nitrogen mineralization from organic materials and 

fertilizers: Predicting N release; Soil Science Society of America Journal, March/April, 84:2, p. 522-533. 

Geisseler, D. A; 2014; Long-term effects of mineral fertilizers on soil microorganisms: A 

Review; Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 75:54-63. 

Hartz, T.K., Johnstone, P.R.; Nitrogen Availability from H-nitrogen containing organic fertilizers; 2006; 

Horttechnology, January-March 16:1, p. 39-42. 

Hijbeek, R. M.; 2017; Do organic inputs matter - a meta-analysis of additional yield effects for 

arable crops in Europe; Plant Soil, 411:293-303. 

Kramer, S. B, Reganold, J. P., Glover, J. D., et al.; 2006; Reduced nitrate leaching and enhanced 

denitrifier activity and efficiency in organically fertilized soils; Proceedings of the National Academy of 

Sciences 103, April p. 4522-4527. 

Lazicki, P., Geisseler, D., Lloyd, M.; 2020; Nitrogen mineralization from organic amendments is variable 

but predictable; Journal of Environmental Quality, March/April, 49:2, p. 483-495. 

Lori, M. S.; 2017; Organic farming enhances soil microbial abundance and activity - A meta-analysis 

and meta-regression; PLoS One, 12:e0180442. 

Magdoff, F., Van Es, H.; 2021; Building soils for better crops – ecological management for healthy soils; 

SARE Handbook Series Book 10, Fourth Edition. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 46 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Miner, G. L., Delagado, J. A., Ippolito, J. A., et al.; 2020; Assessing manure and inorganic nitrogen 

fertilization impacts on soil health, crop productivity, and crop quality in a continuous maize 

agroecosystem; Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, July, 75:4, p. 481-498. 

Ozlu, E., Sandhu, S. S., Kumar, S., et al.; 2019; Soil health indicators impacted by long-term cattle manure 

and inorganic fertilizer application in a corn-soybean rotation of South Dakota; Scientific Reports, 9:1, p. 

11776. 

Phelan, P. L., Mason, J. F., Stinner, B. R.; 1995; Soil-fertility management and host preference by 

European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Hiibner), on Zea mays L.: A comparison of organic and 

conventional chemical farming; Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 56, p. 1-8. 

Sharaf, H., Thompson, A. A., Williams, M. A., et al.; 2021; Functional change in bacterial communities to 

fertilizer and rootstock; Soil Science Society of America Journal, July/August, 85:4, p. 1105-1121. 

Wang, X., Junliang, F., Guoce, X., et al.; 2018; The Effects of Mulch and Nitrogen Fertilizer on the Soil 

Environment of Crop Plants; Article in Advances in Agronomy, Chapter 3, October. 

The following are to be added at § 205.602 – non-synthetic substances prohibited for use in organic crop 

production as a new subsection , (j) ammonia fertilizers. Each type of ammonia fertilizer would be a 

separate subsection under ammonia fertilizers. For example: 

§205.602 

(j) ammonia fertilizers 

(i) Stripped ammonia 

(ii) Concentrated ammonia 

Stripped ammonia is intended to encompass a wide variation of novel thermo-mechanical derivations of 

steam stripping technology that result in ammonia-containing condensate, aqua ammonia, ammoniumcompound solutions, or any products thereof, such as further isolation of ammonium compounds into a 

solid by precipitation or solvent evaporation, and/or treatment with nitrifying bacteria. 

Concentrated ammonia is intended to focus on products with substantial levels of Am N and avoids 

products with minimal N. The limit on % ammoniacal nitrogen (greater than 3%) aligns with the OMRI 

category description for “Fertilizers with High Ammoniacal Nitrogen.” If both definitions are passed, the 

NOP could combine them into a single listing during rulemaking. 

Classification Motion: 

Motion to classify ammonia extracts as nonsynthetic 

Motion by: Steve Ela 

Seconded by: Jerry D’Amore 

Yes: 8 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 47 of 205
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

National List Motions: 

Motion to add at §205.602, non-synthetic substances prohibited for use in organic crop production: 

Stripped Ammonia – created by separating, isolating and/or capturing ammonia or ammonium from an 

agricultural feedstock or other natural source using methods such as, but not limited to, steam stripping, 

pressurized air, heat, condensation, and/or distillation. 

Motion by: Steve Ela 

Seconded by: Jerry D’Amore 

Yes: 8 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

Motion to add at §205.602, non-synthetic substances prohibited for use in organic crop production: 

Concentrated Ammonia – contains greater than 3% ammoniacal nitrogen and the total 

nitrogen content is predominately (i.e., >50%) in the ammonia or ammonium form. 

Motion by: Steve Ela 

Seconded by: Asa Bradman 

Yes: 7 No: 1 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

Motion to add at §205.203(f): Nitrogen products with a C:N ratio of 3:1 or less, including those that are 

components of a blended fertilizer formulation, are limited to a cumulative total use of 20% of crop 

needs. 

Motion by: Steve Ela 

Seconded by: Logan Petrey 

Yes: 7 No: 1 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

Approved by Rick Greenwood, Crop Subcommittee Chair, to transmit to NOP August 13, 2021. 

NOSB Proposals and Discussion Documents October 2021 48 of 205