evatech

Safety Management Services
Nelson, New Zealand

AgriBusiness. Issue 61. Jan/Feb. 2007. HSNO- Series. Bruce Evans

HSNO Is Now Upon Us. Has The Sky Fallen Yet?

I thought I had written my last article on HSNO compliance a year ago. Constant requests for clarification and help have prompted a return of the compliance messages.

I thought I had written my last HSNO article for AgriBusinnes a year ago. It seemed then that the compliance message had been ‘done’, many times over. It was time for action, not further articles. A year down the track and with HSNO’s own compliance deadline for Approved Handlers just past on 1 January, it seems my decision was premature.

Going by frequent requests from readers to clarify the mysteries of HSNO compliance, and several suggested topics for future columns, more information appears to be needed!

HSNO nay-sayers originally predicted a Y2K-type scenario with this legislation.

The Act would fall into a big black hole; the thousands of Approved Handlers would never be trained in time etc.

Skepticism about how, when and by whom compliance would be undertaken was rife.

HSNO Shows Its Teeth

If there was any doubt about compliance; the Department of Labour made its presence felt late last year by taking what is believed to be the first case under HSNO.

It took a case against a Central Otago quarry company for failing to have an Approved Handler supervising Class 1 explosives.

About the same time some agrichemical suppliers reported visits by DoL HSNO enforcement officers scoping the industry’s compliance preparedness in a friendly pre-emptive fashion.

These visits also revealed some differences in opinion regards the interpretation of HSNO compliance controls.

I suspect that HSNO compliance agencies are like us all, on a steep learning curve trying to interpret non-prescriptive legislation.

Nevertheless they are gathering knowledge and momentum and their actions should by now have quelled any doubts about enforcement.

One storeowner who had incompatible substances stored with Class 5’s was served an abatement notice by the governing local body, which was only lifted when an expensive de-stocking and separation exercise was carried out.

Pay-off For Being Prepared

About the same time another rural retailer was benefiting from the pressure Imposed by HSNO.

It had Approved Handlers in place and emergency response procedures well worked out in advance of a live spill of 200 L of dairy cleanser.

The Fire Service was impressed with the company’s preparedness, ability to manage the spill, and prompt provision of Emergency Response Information via a HazNote.

The DoL and Regional Council probed the same spillage for preparedness not only for HSNO but also for potential breaches in the HSE Act, the RMA and the District Plan.

Scramble For AH Certificates

There was a real scramble for places on Approved Handler training courses late in 2006 and at time of writing (pre-Christmas), there were reputed to be approximately 30-40,000 Agrichemical Approved Handlers.

Nobody knows whether this number is about right for the wider agricultural industry or not - only time and the control agencies will determine that.

What is more certain is that there are many different types of Approved Handler Certificates. They are certainly not all of equal status.

Typical of the uncertainties about HSNO is the topic of Approved Handler coverage and appropriateness.

AH Certificates are issued in terms of the segments of a chemical’s life-cycle, appropriate for storage at supply stores whether they be a vet practice or rural agrichemical supply store.

AH Certificates For Suppliers

The vast majority of Approved Handler Certificates have been issued to farmers who have attended generic or standard Growsafe or Farmsafe courses tailored for the “use” sector of a chemical’s life-cycle.

These courses normally provide a sprayer calibration component.

A Test Certifier must ensure that when issuing an approved handler test certificate to vet technical staff that they are first approved by ERMA to do so and second that they assess the person’s knowledge in relation to veterinary medicines and flammables, as the case may be.

The generic “User” assessment of agrichemicals is not sufficient.

The same applies to rural retail staff, who should be assessed not only for general agrichemicals but veterinary medicines, pesticides, flammables and Class 5’s if that is what they handle. Check these issues when looking at the relevance of your Approved Handler Certificate to your operation. You can be sure Compliance agencies will also.

Has the AH Cert. been issued by a Test Certifier qualified to do so for the Ag/Vet Supply industry chemicals and classes and does it cover the life-cycle sectors applying to your part in the overall ‘supply’ chain; which could include: ’Manufacture’, ‘Storage’, ‘Transport’, ‘Disposal’?

Variations and Amendments to HSNO:

Topical events late last year included:

On farm Approved Handler controls for petrol were previously varied to allow fuel companies to provide coverage but this has not materialized and consequently the original variation to the controls is not working. There is talk about fuel not being delivered after January. More variations are expected as we go to press.
The original default Tracking controls for Ecotoxic substances with 9.1A, 9.2A, 9.3A and 9.4A status were varied and waived. Then came further changes to the products requiring Approved Handlers when Amendments to Gazette notices were published and glyphosate products subjected to the new 6A variation, which requires Approved Handlers when the products are applied in or on water. • But which glyphosate products require Approved Handlers? The brands with AH statements on the labels? Or those without label warnings? With no HSNO requirement or compulsion to print classes and warnings on labels the agrichemical supplier and purchaser are justifiably confused.
Labeling controls were also subject to another variation when proprietors were allowed more time to provide HSNO compliant labels - June 2007 vs June 2006.
The “Wide Dispersive” use variation for Ecotoxic substances also causes a number of questions. All a supplier has to remember is that it is the customer or user who has to decide on whether the product is going to need an Approved Handler or not. The supplier must however see tangible evidence [take all practical steps] that an Approved Handler is available to take responsibility for Class 6.1A, 6.1B and 6.1C substances.

New Year Optimism

Let’s hope 2007 brings some clarity and publicity to these issues and that we have come to the end of HSNO variations and amendments so that we can obtain certainty in compliance pathways.