24 October 1998
ERMA New Zealand
PO Box 131
WELLINGTON
Attention: Dr Basil Walker
Subject:
Comment on discussion paper - transfer of substances
under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act 1996
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the ERMA New Zealand proposals
to manage the transfer of substances.
NZCIC members constitute approximately 90% of the major manufacturers
and importers of hazardous substances, including representation in most
key user groups.
Charging Proposal:
In summary, our members reject the proposition that industry should pay
for the transfer of correctly submitted Notifications.
It is our strongly held view that industry has carried out our legal
and moral responsibilities under the existing Toxic Substances legislation
and therefore has no obligation to contribute money to enable the under-resourced
transfer process to be completed.
This position is reinforced by the Minister's assurance that sufficient
Government resources would be provided to accomplish the change-over from
the existing chemical control regulations to the provisions of the HSNO
Act. (1)
The widespread resentment likely to result from industry being forced
to partially fund the transfer exercise could undermine support for Government
initiatives intended to improve the management of hazardous substances
in New Zealand.
Industry Support:
Industry recognises the magnitude of the task confronting ERMA New Zealand
and the NZCIC members can help ERMA New Zealand to accomplish the transfer
of Notifications in a timely and cost effect programme to meet the current
target date of April 2002.
Some practical suggestions for assessing the thousands of Notifications
outstanding, could be managed within existing resources are explained
in Annex A and we would be pleased to discuss these alternatives at your
convenience..
Response to Questions:
These are incorporated in Annex A.
Yours sincerely,
Barry S. Dyer
Chief Executive
Annex A to NZCIC Submission
Dated 24 October 1998
Summary of industry comment on Nots discussion paper
ERMA Paper Comment
Paragraph No.
1 - 6 Introduction:
The NZCIC acknowledges the problem of managing almost 100,000 Notifications
is daunting and will require resources far in excess of original estimates.
NZCIC members are keen to help ERMA New Zealand resolve the NOTS problem
in a pragmatic and cost effective collaborative process acceptable to
all stake-holders.
It is unfortunate that the mismanagement of the Notification process
by the Department, now the Ministry of Health, has compounded what was
already a complex issue. Recent decisions involving Notifications are
widely considered to be disadvantageous to those company's which have
made every effort to comply with both the existing and proposed hazardous
substances control legislation.
A combination of a lack of information and changing interpretations
of the information has caused problems for an industry which basically
supports the Government's safety, health and environmental protection
objectives.
An example is the decision not to automatically transfer Notifications
for substances which will not actually be present in New Zealand by April
1999.
Industry appreciates the opportunity to aggregate similar substances
with similar effects into groups which can be covered by a single set
of controls. This will be particularly helpful for companies needing to
quickly and easily import small quantities of product to fill an occasional
order.
7 - 9 Categories of Existing Substances:
The proposed categories represent a sensible division of labour for the
purpose of defining the task.
ERMA Paper Comment
Paragraph No.
10 - 11 Block 1 - Assessed Substances:
The NZCIC is pleased to note these Notifications will be automatically
transferred and 'approved' free of charge.
The reassessment of Block 1 Notifications will presumably also be carried
out free of charge.
12 - 14 Block 2 - NOTS:
The development of the long awaited database by April 1999 is welcomed
by industry.
15 - 18 Initial Screening:
The NZCIC is concerned the transfer of non-controversial Notifications
(Block 1) is not expected to be completed for 18-24 months. Surely this
is an unduly pessimistic assessment of the task? The majority of these
Notifications will probably involve high volume commodity chemicals and
formulated products for which comprehensive data is readily available?
Why can't the processing of Block 1 and Block 2 substances proceed concurrently?
19 - 21 Transfer of NOTS (Stage 1):
Industry is divided on the feasibility of being able to reach a consensus
about the proposed method for classifying a group of Notifications.
Question by ERMA New Zealand:
The NZCIC considers it desirable to discuss this option further.
The reluctance of companies to share sensitive product formulation data
necessary to support a "Group" Notification could be largely
overcome if ERMA New Zealand accepted Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS's)
supplemented (as necessary). The MSDS is already in the public domain.
The relevant Performance Standard could be the need to use an MSDS in
the internationally approved format, viz. NZ Department of Labour (OSH)
Guidelines for the Preparation of a Material Safety Data Sheet in New
Zealand 1997 (see NZCIC Responsible Care™ Manager's Handbook, Vol.
2, Sect. 4, Pt. 2, Annex D, Appx 2).
ERMA Paper Comment
Paragraph No.
Stage 1 is considered to be a viable option, provided there is no charge
to industry and the criteria required by ERMA New Zealand is based on
information contained in a compliance MSDS.
22 - 23 Transfer of NOTS (Stage 2):
The intention to invite companies to review their Notifications as part
of the management process, despite the additional work involved, is supported.
It is not clear whether the assessment of those Notifications which will
not be captured by HSNO will be carried out by the Notifier or ERMA New
Zealand.
The NZCIC accepts the recent legal interpretation that Notified substances
not present in New Zealand by April 1999 will not be transferred and subsequently
automatically approved.
Companies would prefer to do their own assessment and advise ERMA New
Zealand accordingly.
Industry welcomes the opportunity to accept responsibility for self-assessment
of hazardous substances once the relevant threshold and control information
is available.
This process could be facilitated by industry association advisers and
certified consultants. The NZCIC has already identified this requirement
in our response to the tender to train, not just consultants, but also
industry personnel and 'test certifiers'.
Industry considers ERMA New Zealand should automatically cancel Notifications
which are not subject to HSNO.
25 - 26 Proposed Cost Recovery:
Industry does not accept the argument for partial or full cost recovery
for any activity relating to the transition from the existing to the new
hazardous substances control regime.
Industry considers these costs should be met by Government. Simply put,
industry has done everything necessary to comply with the current legislation
and believes this view was recognised by the Minister for the Environment
in his June 1998 speech.
ERMA Paper Comment
Paragraph No.
Timetable for Stage 2:
Industry would like Stage 2 to commence immediately and proceed concurrently
with Stage 1 to quickly provide a credible listing of "Approved"
substances.
28 - 30 Reassessment Provisions:
Reassessments are an integral part of the transfer from the existing
legislation to HSNO, therefore, they should be processed free of charge.
The suspension of any substance chosen for reassessment should be advised
to the Notifier or owner of the approval at least three months prior to
commencement of the suspension.
|