ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
DECISION
26 March 2009
Application Code
HSC09004
Application Type
To import into containment or manufacture in containment a
hazardous substance under Section 31 of the Hazardous
Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 (“the Act”)
Applicant
Perrys Berrys Limited
Purpose of the Application
To carry out field trials of a mixture of the fumigants methyl
iodide and chloropicrin for the prupose of establishing the
minimum effective concentration that can be used in soil
fumigation.
Date Application Received
25 March 2009
Consideration Date
26 March 2009
Considered by
Rob Forlong, Chief Executive of ERMA New Zealand.
1
Summary of decision
1.1
The application to trial in containment the hazardous substance, Ripper 500 (stored
in containment), has been approved with controls in accordance with the relevant
provisions of the Act and the HSNO (Methodology) Order 1998 (“the
Methodology”).
1.2
The substance has been given the following unique identifier for the ERMA New
Zealand Hazardous Substances Register:
Ripper 500 (field trial in containment)
2
Purpose of the Application
2.1
The applicant is seeking approval to carry out field trials of a mixture of the
fumigants methyl iodide and chloropicrin (Ripper 500 – 50% chloropicrin and 50%
methyl iodide) for the purpose of establishing the minimum effective concentration
that can be used in soil fumigation, when VIF (virtually impenetrable film) is used
to cover the fumigated soil. The applicant has noted that Ripper 500 is intended to
replace methyl bromide as a pre-plant soil fumigant in strawberry crops.
2.2
A ‘full’ Part 5 application for the use of this substance as a soil fumigant in New
Zealand has been received by the Authority (HSR07095). This application was
formally received from Elliot Technologies Limited on 27 June 2008; further
consideration of this application has been postponed pending the resolution of
several issues raised by the applicant in relation to the controls that were proposed
in the draft Evaluation and Review report.
3
4
Application process
3.1
The application was formally received on 26 March 2009.
3.2
Project Team:
Elizabeth Morgan
Advisor (Hazardous Substances)
Mike Morris
Reassessments Manager (Hazardous Substances)
Lynne Waterson
Applications Manager (Hazardous Substances)
3.3
The applicant supplied the following documents:
 the application;
 the Trial Plan (including the trial site map).
3.4
The Department of Labour, the Ministry of Health and the ACVM Group were
notified that the application had been received.
3.5
The applicant was provided with a copy of the proposed controls for the Ripper 500
trial and given the opportunity to comment on them.
Consideration
Eligibility
4.1
The applicant is seeking to establish whether the substance Ripper 500 can be
efficacious when applied at rates which are lower than that which has been
proposed in the full Part 5 application (350kg Ripper 500/ha). Both the applicant
and the Agency consider that the information gathered in this containment trial may
be relevant to the finalising the Agency’s evaluation of the full Part 5 application.
4.2
The Agency notes the purpose of the application (see sections 2.1 and 2.2 above “research on any hazardous substance to acquire information for use in assessing
that substance in accordance with this Part of the Act and “research and
development on any hazardous substance”) and considers that the application may
properly be considered under section 30(b) and 30(ba).
Life cycle
4.3
The application form itself indicates that the Ripper 500 will be imported.
However, subsequent information from the applicant has clarified that the
components of the formulation will be imported (methyl iodide and chloropicrin)
but that the Ripper 500 formulation will be manufactured at a site in Napier and
transported to the applicant’s trial site in Wiri, Auckland.
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 2 of 17
4.4
Once transported to the trial site, the applicant intends to store the substance at a
secure dangerous goods chemical storage facility located at their growing site in
Wiri, Auckland, until it is required for use in the trials.
4.5
The applicant intends to trial the substance at their commercial strawberry growing
site. The trial itself will take place in rows which cover a total distance of 5400m.
The width of the treated rows will be approximately 1450cm (this width is
essentially dictated by the width of the VIF).
4.6
The applicant has provided a map of the trial site and has indicated that the nearest
houses are at least 220m from the intended trial site. The map indicates that a
tractor shed and tea room are near the intended trial site, but the trial is not located
near to any sensitive environmental or human receptors.
4.7
The applicant has indicated that the trial itself will be undertaken by two licensed,
experienced fumigators who are approved handlers for soil fumigation and hold
controlled substance licences, issued under section 95B of the Act, for the storage
and use of the fumigants dichlorpropene, methyl bromide and chloropicrin.
4.8
The soil fumigation will be completed on a single day, at the locations marked on
the map submitted with the applicant’s trial plan. The soil fumigation is carried out
using specialised equipment consisting of a sealed tyne fumigation unit that is
calibrated to deliver the desired amount of the substance at a depth of 20 to 25 cm.
During the fumigation process, the soil will be covered with VIF, which the Agency
understands is intended to trap the fumigant in the soil for a longer period of time
than other films; thus maximising its effectiveness in killing pests that live in the
soil.
4.9
The applicant is seeking approval to carry out the trial during the period March
2009 – January 2010. The applicant has indicated that any unused substance will be
returned to the supplier (Elliot Technologies).
Hazardous properties
4.10
The Agency notes that containment applications only require a sufficient
understanding of a substance’s hazardous properties to ensure that any risks posed
can be managed by controls set under the containment provisions.
4.11
In preparing the containment application document, the applicant obtained
permission from Elliot Technologies to use technical information relating to the
nature of the substance, that was submitted in their full Part 5 application for the
Ripper formulations. The hazard profile proposed by Elliot Technologies for
Ripper 500 is as follows:






6.1C Acute toxicity (oral)
6.1C Acute toxicity (dermal)
6.1A Acute toxicity (inhalation)
6.3A Skin irritation/corrosion
8.3A Eye irritation/corrosion
6.5A Inhalation sensitisation
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 3 of 17







6.7B Carcinogenicity
6.8B Reproductive/developmental toxicity
6.9A Target organ toxicity
9.1A Aquatic ecotoxicity
9.2A Soil ecotoxicity
9.3B Ecotoxicity to terrestrial vertebrates
9.4A Ecotoxicity to terrestrial invertebrates
4.12
Given the information assessed so far as part of the HS1 Evaluation and Review
process for the Ripper full release application (HSR07095) the Agency considers
that the 6.1B classification for dermal exposure is more appropriate that the 6.1C
classification, and that there is insufficient data to support the 9.4A classification.
4.13
The Agency has reviewed the data and other information supplied by the applicant
and considers that the information is sufficient to determine that any risks posed
within the defined lifecycle of the substance in New Zealand can be managed
through the application of containment controls.
Identification and evaluation of the significant risks of the substance in
containment
4.14
The Agency has assessed the risks to the environment, human health and welfare and
Maori issues and concerns, based on the information provided in the application and
on other information available to the Agency as a result of the full Part V assessment
of the substance, which is currently underway.
4.15
The Agency considers that, as indicated by its hazard profile, Ripper 500 has the
potential to cause adverse effects to the environment and to human health and safety.
The Agency notes that the physical properties of the substance are such that if it is
spilled, a toxic vapour cloud may form. Depending on the nature of the environment
in which a spill occurs, the vapour cloud may or disperse rapidly or it may remain
concentrated in the area, presenting a risk to organisms or people in that area.
4.16
The potential for adverse environment or human health effects exists throughout the
whole lifecycle of the substance i.e. import, transport, storage, use (at the trial site)
and disposal.
4.17
The Agency considers that these risks can be adequately managed for the purposes of
this containment trial, provided the controls specified in Appendix 1 are strictly
adhered to.
4.18
In considering the controls which are appropriate to this trial of Ripper 500, the
Agency has taken into consideration the controls which are currently under
development for the HS1 application. In addition to the default HSNO controls
triggered by the hazard profile proposed by the Agency for Ripper 500, the Agency
considers that several additional controls should also apply to this trial. These
controls are given in Appendix 1.
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 4 of 17
Māori issues and concerns
5
4.19
The Project Team considered this application using the framework contained in the
ERMA New Zealand user guide “Working with Māori under the HSNO Act 1996”.
4.20
The applicant and the Agency noted that Ripper 500 triggers HSNO thresholds for
toxicity and ecotoxicity and may therefore have adverse effects on the relationship
of Māori to the environment, particularly with regard to the mauri of native and/or
valued species and ecosystems.
4.21
Taking into account the containment measures proposed, the Agency considers any
likely impact of the substance on the relationship of Māori to their ancestral lands,
water, sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga to be negligible.
In addition, because of the nature of the storage regime there is no evidence to
suggest that the storage of this substance will breach the principles of the Treaty of
Waitangi or inhibit the ability of iwi/ Māori to fulfil their role as kaitiaki.
4.22
This assessment is made on the condition that the substance is stored and disposed
of in accordance with the explicitly stated HSNO controls, and any controls
stipulated in other applicable Acts. However, should an accident result in the
contamination of waterways or the environment, the applicant should notify the
appropriate authorities including the relevant iwi authorities in the region. This
action should include advising them of the contamination and the measures taken to
contain and remedy it.
Containment and controls
5.1
The Agency has evaluated the adequacy of the containment arrangements proposed
by the applicant and the controls listed in Appendix 1, and notes that these cover
the matters set out in Part III of the Third Schedule of the Act, being:
 to limit the likelihood of escape of any contained hazardous substances or
contamination by hazardous substances;
 to exclude organisms from the containment area;
 to exclude unauthorized people from the containment area;
 to prevent unintended release of the substances by experimenters working with
the substance;
 to control the effects of any accidental release of the substance;
 inspection and monitoring requirements; and
 qualifications required of the person responsible for implementing the controls.
5.2
The Project Team is satisfied that, with adherence to the controls listed in
Appendix 1 and those controls in place under other legislation, Ripper 500 can be
adequately contained during the lifecycle of the trial proposed by the applicant.
6
Decision
6.1
I have considered this application made under section 31 and, pursuant to section
32, I am satisfied that this application is for the purposes specified in sections 30(b)
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 5 of 17
and 30 (ba), namely research on any hazardous substance to acquire information for
use in assessing that substance in accordance with Part 5 of the Act and research
and development on any hazardous substance.
6.2
Having considered the risks associated with the lifecycle of the substance, I am
satisfied that the controls imposed in Appendix 1 and those in place under other
legislation, will result in the substance being adequately contained. Further, I
consider that the controls applied are too onerous to be complied with.
6.3
The application to trial in containment the hazardous substance Ripper 500 is
approved with controls as set out in Appendix 1 and in accordance with the
relevant provisions of the Act and the Methodology as more specifically set out in
Appendix 2.
Rob Forlong
Date: 26 March 2009
Chief Executive of ERMA New Zealand
ERMA New Zealand Approval Code:
HSC000364
Ripper 500 (field trial in containment)
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 6 of 17
APPENDIX 1: LIST OF CONTROLS THAT APPLY TO
THE HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE, RIPPER 500 (FIELD
TRIAL IN CONTAINMENT)
General
1. Up to 200kg of Ripper 500 may be manufactured by Leicester’s for supply to Perrys
Berrys Limited. Perrys Berrys may store up to 200kg of Ripper 500 at their dangerous
goods storage facility, in Wiri, Auckland.
2. The trial shall be undertaken in accordance with the Trial Plan provided by the applicant
as part of the application. No modification may be made to the Trial Plan unless it has
first been approved in writing by ERMA New Zealand.
3. Access to the trial sites shall be by permission of the owner of the property on which it is
located.
4. Notwithstanding the requirements of control 2 above, the trial shall also comply with the
controls set out below.
5. This approval remains in place until 31 January 2010.
6. The following regulations apply to Ripper 500, with the variations as shown in Table
A1.1:
Hazardous Substances (Classes 6, 8, and 9 Controls) Regulations 2001;
Hazardous Substances (Identification) Regulations 2001;
Hazardous Substances (Packaging) Regulations 2001;
Hazardous Substances (Disposal) Regulations 2001;
Hazardous Substances (Emergency Management) Regulations 2001; and
Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Personnel Qualifications) Regulations 2001.
Regulation2
Control Code1
-
Topic
Variations
Hazardous Substances (Classes 6, 8 and 9 Controls) Regulations 2001 -Toxic Property Controls
T1
11-27
Limiting exposure to toxic
The following TELair values apply to the Ripper
substances
range:
TELair = 0.0004 mg/m3 for chloropicrin
1
Note: The numbering system used in this column relates to the coding system used in the ERMA New Zealand Controls Matrix. This links the
hazard classification categories to the regulatory controls triggered by each category. It is available from the ERMA New Zealand website
www.ermanz.govt.nz/resources and is also contained in the ERMA New Zealand User Guide to the HSNO Control Regulations.
2
These Regulations form the controls applicable to this substance. Refer to the cited Regulations for the formal specification, and for definitions
and exemptions. The accompanying explanation is intended for guidance only.
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 7 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
Topic
Variations
TELair = 0.017 mg/m3 for iodomethane
T2
29, 30
Controlling exposure in
places of work
The following WES values apply to the Ripper
range:
Substance
(Component)
Chloropicrin
CAS 76-88-4
Iodomethane (methyl
iodide)
CAS 74-88-4
T3
5(1), 6
Requirements for keeping
records of use
Comments
-
Skin*
WES (TWA)
ppm
Mg/m3
0.1
0.67
2
12
Regulation 6 of the Hazardous Substances
(Classes 6, 8 and 9) Regulations 2001 is varied
under section 77 so that the following clause is
added after regulation 6(1)(g), as follows:
(6) (1) (h) The size of the buffer zone, the
method by which the buffer zones were
calculated, and the factors taken into
account when determining the buffer zones.
(i) who has been notified of the intended
fumigation.
T4
E6
7
T5
8
T6
9
Requirements for
equipment used to handle
hazardous substances
Requirements for protective
clothing and equipment
Approved handler
requirements
Controls T4 and E6 are combined.
This control is varied under s77A as follows:
The following regulation is inserted immediately
after regulation 9:
9A Exception to approved handler requirements for
the transportation of packaged substances within
the Ripper range
(1) Regulation is deemed complied with if(a) in the case of substances within the Ripper range
being transported on land(i) in the case of substances within the Ripper range
being transported by rail, the person who drives
the rail vehicle that is transporting the substance
is fully trained in accordance with an approved
safety system under section 6D of the Transport
Services Licensing Act 1989 or a safety system
which is referred to in an approved safety case
under the Railways Act 2005; and
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 8 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
Topic
Variations
(ii) in every other case, the person who drives, loads,
and unloads the vehicle that is transporting the
substance –
a. for hire or reward, or in quantities which exceed
those set out in Schedule 1 of the Land Transport
Rule 45001/1: Dangerous Goods 2005, has a
current dangerous goods endorsement on his or
her driver’s licence; or
b. in every other case, the Land Transport Rule
45001/1: Dangerous Goods 2005 is complied
with; or
(b) in the case of substances within the Ripper range
being transported by sea, one of the following is
complied with:
(i) Maritime Rules: Part 24A – Carriage of Cargoes –
Dangerous Goods (MR024A):
(ii) International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code; or
(c) in the case of Ripper being transported by air, Part
92 of the Civil Aviation Rules is complied with.
(2) Subclause (1)(a)—
(a) does not apply to a tank wagon or transportable
container to which the Hazardous Substances
(Tank Wagons and Transportable Containers)
Regulations 2004 applies; but
(b) despite paragraph (a), does apply to an
intermediate bulk container that complies with
chapter 6.5 of the UN Model Regulations.
(3) Subclause (1)(c)—
(a) applies to pilots, aircrew, and airline ground
personnel loading and handling a hazardous
substance within an aerodrome; but
(b) does not apply to the storage and handling of
substances within the Ripper range in any place
that is not within an aerodrome, or within an
aerodrome by non-airline ground personnel.
(4) In this regulation, UN Model Regulations means
the 14th revised edition of the recommendation on
the Transport of Dangerous Goods Model
Regulations, published in 2005 by the United
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 9 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
Topic
Variations
Nations.]
T7
10
Restrictions on the carriage
of hazardous substances on
passenger service vehicles
Hazardous Substances (Classes 6, 8 and 9 Controls) Regulations 2001 - Ecotoxic Property Controls
E1
32-45
E2
46-48
E5
5(2), 6
Limiting exposure to
ecotoxic substances
Restrictions on use within
application area
No EEL values are set at this time and the default
EELs are deleted.
As no EEL is set at this time, an application rate
cannot be set under this control. An application
rate is proposed as an additional control under
s77A (refer to end of table).
Requirements for keeping
records of use
E7
9
Approved handler
requirements
Hazardous Substances (Identification) Regulations 2001
I1
6, 7, 32-35, General identification
36 (1)-(7)
requirements
Regulation 6 –
Identification duties of
suppliers
Regulation 7 –
Identification duties of
persons in charge
Regulations 32 and 33 –
Accessibility of
information
I2
8
I3
9
I8
14
I9
18
I10
19
Regulations 34, 35, 36(1)(7) – Comprehensibility,
Clarity and Durability of
information
Priority identifiers for
corrosive substances
Priority identifiers for
ecotoxic substances
Priority identifiers for
certain toxic substances
Secondary identifiers for all
hazardous substances
Secondary identifiers for
corrosive substances
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 10 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
I11
20
I16
25
I17
I18
26
27
I19
29-31
Topic
Secondary identifiers for
ecotoxic substances
Secondary identifiers for
toxic substances
Use of Generic Names
Use of Concentration
Ranges
Alternative information in
certain cases
Variations
Regulation 29 – Substances
in fixed bulk containers or
bulk transport containers
Regulation 30 – Substances
in multiple packaging
I20
36(8)
I21
37-39, 4750
Regulation 31 – Alternative
information when
substances are imported
Durability of information
for class 6.1 substances
Documentation required in
places of work
Regulation 37 –
Documentation duties of
suppliers
Regulation 38 –
Documentation duties of
persons in charge of places
of work
Regulation 39 – General
content requirements for
documentation
Regulation 47 –
Information not included in
approval
Regulation 48 – Location
and presentation
requirements for
documentation
Regulation 49 –
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 11 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
Topic
Documentation
requirements for vehicles
Variations
Regulation 50 –
Documentation to be
supplied on request
I22
40
Specific documentation
requirements for corrosive
substances
I23
41
Specific documentation
requirements for ecotoxic
substances
I28
46
Specific documentation
requirements for toxic
substances
I29
51-52
Duties of persons in charge
of places with respect to
signage
I30
53
Advertising corrosive and
toxic substances
Hazardous Substances (Packaging) Regulations 2001
P1
5, 6, 7 (1), 8 General packaging
requirements
Regulation 5 – Ability to
retain contents
Regulation 6 – Packaging
markings
Regulation 7(1) –
Requirements when
packing hazardous
substance
Regulation 8 –
Compatibility
P3
9
P13
P15
19
21
P14
20
Regulation 9A and 9B –
Large Packaging
Packaging requirements for
substances packed in
limited quantities
Packaging requirements for
toxic and ecotoxic
substances
Packaging requirements for
corrosive substances (class
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Controls P13 and P15 are combined.
Page 12 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
Topic
Variations
8)
PG1
Schedule 1 The tests in Schedule 1
correlate to the packaging
requirements of UN
Packing Group I (UN PGI).
PS4
Schedule 4 This schedule describes the
minimum packaging
requirements that must be
complied with when a
substance is packaged in
limited quantities
Hazardous Substances (Disposal) Regulations 2001
D4
8
Disposal requirements for
Controls D4 and D5 are combined.
D5
9
toxic, corrosive, and
ecotoxic substances
D6
10
Disposal requirements for
packages
D7
11, 12
Disposal information
requirements
D8
13, 14
Disposal documentation
requirements
Hazardous Substances (Emergency Management) Regulations 2001
EM1
6, 7, 9-11
Level 1 emergency
management information:
General requirements
EM2
8(a)
Information requirements
for corrosive substances
EM6
8(e)
Information requirements
for toxic substances
EM7
8(f)
Information requirements
for ecotoxic substances
EM8
12-16, 18Level 2 emergency
20
management
documentation
requirements
EM11 25-34
Level 3 emergency
The trigger quantity for this control is varied to to
management requirements
50L in accordance with 77(3)(a).
– emergency response plans
EM12 35-41
Level 3 emergency
management requirements
– secondary containment
EM13 42
Level 3 emergency
management requirements
– signage
Hazardous Substances (Personnel Qualification) Regulations 2001
AH1
4-6
Approved Handler
requirements
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 13 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
Topic
Variations
Hazardous Substances (Tracking) Regulations 2001
TR1
4(1), 5, 6
General tracking
requirements
Hazardous Substances (Tank Wagons and Transportable Containers) Regulations 2004
Regulations 4 to 43
The Hazardous Substances
where applicable
(Tank Wagons and
Transportable Containers)
Regulations 2004 prescribe
a number of controls
relating to tank wagons and
transportable containers
and must be complied with
as relevant.
Additional controls
For the purposes of this trial, Ripper 500 may be applied at rates of up to 350kg/ha.
Ripper 500 shall not be applied into or onto water.
Ripper 500 shall be used for pre-plant soil fumigation only.
Soil fumigated with Ripper 500 as part of this trial shall be immediately covered with VIF (very
impenetrable film). The sheet must remain in place for 5 days following completion of installation of
the fumigant and slicing or removal of the sheet is prohibited during this time. Slicing or removal of the
sheet after this 5 day period is prohibited if it is raining, or if rain is expected to fall within 48 hours.
Where the removal of the impermeable plastic sheet covering fumigated soil is to take place within 14
days of the start of the installation of the fumigant, a minimum of two trained operators (i.e.
appropriately licensed and trained, approved handlers) shall be present.
Early re-entry by operators into the treated area (i.e. within 5 days after application of the substance)
shall be permitted for the inspection and/or repair of the impermeable plastic sheet, and for flood
prevention activities, only. Operators shall be wearing appropriate PPE during these activities. Access
to the fumigated site without appropriate PPE shall be prohibited until the residual soil level of
chloropicrin is below 0.1ppm.
Ripper 500 shall not be applied within 1m of the roots of non-target plants.
Installation of Ripper 500 shall be initiated no earlier than 30 minutes after sunrise and completed no
later than 1 hour before sunset.
For the purposes of this trial, no person may possess Ripper 500 unless that person has a licence issued
under section 95B of the Act for the use of methyl bromide and chloropicrin in soil fumigation from the
Authority that is obtained before the person takes possession of the substance.
Use within 400 m of any sensitive site such as school, day care facility, nursing home, hospital, prison,
playground, playing field, reserve or other amenity area where the public may lawfully be present shall
be prohibited.
For the purposes of this trial, a buffer zone of 30 m shall apply when Ripper 500 is used.

A ‘buffer zone’ is an area established around the perimeter of the trial site. The buffer zone must
extend from the edge of the application block equally in all directions.

An ‘application block’ is a field or portion of a field treated with a fumigant in any 24-hour
period.

Only a person who holds a licence issued under section 95B of the Act for the use of methyl
bromide and chloropicrin in soil fumigation, or who is undertaking duties in relation to the trial
under the supervision of the licence holder, may be present in the buffer zone during the buffer
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 14 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
Topic
Variations
zone period.

All other persons including field workers, nearby residents, pedestrians, and other bystanders,
must be excluded from the buffer zone during the buffer zone period except for transit (see next
bullet).

The ‘buffer zone period’ starts at the moment when any fumigant is delivered/dispensed to the
soil within the trial site and lasts for a minimum of 48 hours after the fumigant has stopped being
delivered/dispensed to the soil.

No fumigant applications will be permitted within 400 metres of any school, day care facility,
nursing home, assisted living facility, elder care facility, hospitals, in-patient clinic, prison, or
playground.

Bus stops or other locations where persons wait for public transport are not permitted within the
buffer zone.

Buffer zones may not include buildings used for storage such as sheds, barns, garages, etc.,
UNLESS:
 the storage buildings are not occupied during the buffer zone period; and
 the storage buildings do not share a common wall with an occupied structure.

Buffer zones may not include residential areas (including employee housing, private property,
buildings, commercial, industrial, and other areas that people may occupy or outdoor residential
areas, such as lawns, gardens, or play areas).

Buffer zones may not include agricultural areas owned/operated by persons other than the
owner/operator of the application block, UNLESS:


the owner/operator of the application block can ensure that the buffer zone will not
overlap with a buffer zone from any adjacent property owners; and

the owner/operator of the areas that are not under the control of the application
provides written agreement to the applicator that they, their employees, and other
persons will stay out of the buffer zone during the entire buffer zone period.
Buffer zones may not include publicly owned and/or operated areas (e.g., parks, rights of way, foot
paths, walking paths, playgrounds, athletic fields, etc), UNLESS:

the area is not occupied during the buffer zone period; and

the owner/operator of the application block has taken every reasonable step or
precaution to ensure that entry by non-handlers is prohibited during the buffer zone
period.
The person in charge of this trial shall be responsible for establishing the buffer zone and ensuring that
workers or bystanders do not enter the buffer zone for 48 hours following the completion of the trial.
Notification of intended fumigation
The person in charge of this trial must notify every person who may be affected by the fumigation, of
their intention to carry out fumigation.
Signage
(1) A person who carries out a fumigation using Ripper 500 for the purposes of this trial must erect
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 15 of 17
Regulation2
Control Code1
Topic
Variations
signs around the perimeter of the buffer zone at potential points of entry. Signs must be posted
from the start of installation of the fumigant until 48 hours following the completion of the trial.
(2)
Signs must be erected at every point of access to the place where fumigation will be carried out
that –
a. State that fumigation is being carried out; and
b. Identify the hazardous substance being used and state that it is toxic to humans; and
c. Describe the general type of hazard associated with the substance.
(3) Signs erected in accordance with subclause (2) must –
a. Comply with regulation 34(1), (2), and (4) and regulation 35(1), (3), and (5) of the Hazardous
Substances (Identification) Regulations 2001, but as if the distances referred to in regulation
35(3) were a distance of not less than 10 metres; and
b. Identify the person in charge of the trail and provide sufficient information to enable the person
to be contacted during normal business hours; and
c.
State the day on which the trial commenced; and
d. State the actions that must be taken in an emergency.
(4) Signs must be removed within 3 days of the completion of the installation of the fumigant in
accordance with the control below relating to the notice of completion of the trial.
The trial site boundaries shall be clearly marked and distinctly visible from outside the trial site
throughout the life of the trials.
Completion of the trial and notice of completion
(1) The trial is complete when the impermeable plastic sheet covering the fumigated soil is removed, in
accordance with the controls which govern this activity.
(2) When fumigation is complete, the person carrying out the fumigation must give notice that
fumigation is complete to each person to whom notice was given in accordance with the control
describing requirements for the “Notification of intended fumigation”.
Plastic sheets used to cover fumigated soil must be disposed of as hazardous waste.
Installation of the fumigant must be initiated and completed within 1 (24 hour) day during the
period of time covered by this approval.
No produce grown in the trial area shall be consumed by people or (so far as is reasonably
practicable) animals or sold, offered for sale, given away, bartered or otherwise distributed
unless the ACVM Group has approved this process as part of a provisional registration or
research permit.
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 16 of 17
APPENDIX 2: LEGISLATIVE CRITERIA FOR THE
APPROVAL
A2.1 Unless otherwise stated, references to section numbers in this decision refer to
sections of the Act and references to clauses refer to clauses in the Methodology
A2.2 The application was lodged pursuant to section 31. The decision was made in
accordance with section 32, taking into account additional matters to be considered in
that section and matters specified under Part II of the Act (including the
Methodology) and the provisions of Part III of the Third Schedule of the Act.
A2.3 Government departments with an interest in this type of application were advised of
the receipt of the application in accordance with clause 2(2)(e).
A2.4 This application was considered by the Chief Executive of ERMA New Zealand
under delegation from the Authority (section 19(2)(e)).
A2.5 In accordance with section 32, the approach adopted when considering this
application was to confirm whether the application was for one of the purposes
specified in section 30, to identify and assess the risks (Clauses 9, 12, 13, 14, 22, 24,
25) and to determine whether the substance could be adequately contained by
controls to provide for each of the matters specified in Part III of the Third Schedule
of the Act.
A2.6 In accordance with clause 36(2)(b), it is recorded that, in reaching his decision, the
Chief Executive applied the criteria specified in section 32.
A2.7 The Chief Executive also applied the following criteria in the Methodology:
 clause 11 – characteristics of substance;
 clause 21 – the decision accords with the requirements of the Act and regulations;
 clause 26 – all risks negligible;
 clause 35 – the costs and benefits of the controls.
ERMA New Zealand Decision: Application HSC09004
Page 17 of 17