- Print Friendly - Help

AgVetLink April 2004: Page 5

Comments on the revised Standard for Own Use of Agricultural Compounds

The ACVM Group received only one submission on its revised Standard for Own Use of Agricultural Compounds.

While Federated Farmers of New Zealand supported the apparent intent of the standard, they asked for some clarification and explanation as to why the standard required revision and why it is now called a standard, while previously it was called a ‘code of practice’. They also suggested that it would have been easier to comment on if it had included more rationale and specific cases in which the use of generic chemicals by their members was causing problems.

The ACVM Group intentionally limited the standard to the regulatory requirements because it is inappropriate to include rationale and examples in a standard. Nevertheless, an explanation of what has prompted the revision would clearly be beneficial.

Why is the standard necessary?

There are many generic chemicals that can be purchased by anyone and safely used as agricultural compounds. Some of them, such as copper sulfate or magnesium oxide, are so common and readily available that it is unlikely that any specific agricultural compound trade name product would ever be marketed. However, with the commencement of the ACVM Act it would have been illegal for these types of substances to be used even though they have been purchased as generic chemicals and used safely for decades.

An exemption to allow common practice was inserted into Schedule 1 of the ACVM Regulations 2001, but it was tied to a condition requiring compliance with an approved code of practice. The ACVM Group developed the code so that parties would know what their obligations were.

Is the purchase of generic chemicals for use as agricultural compounds causing problems?

For the most part this practice has not caused any problems. However, even though a number of generic chemicals were widely used by farmers there were still some risks. The ACVM Group developed a code of practice to legitimise common practice, but also to state the expectation that any party who did use generic chemicals as agricultural compounds would be fully responsible for managing those risks.

Why did the code of practice have to be revised?

It has come to the intention of the ACVM Group that almost any chemical can now be purchased in its generic form. It has also become apparent that a few people are buying active ingredients (pesticides and veterinary medicines such as antibiotics) that must not be used unless they are in trade name products that have been properly assessed and registered by the ACVM Group. Unfortunately, the original code of practice was too comprehensive and legitimised this practice as well. Hence the revised code (now called a standard) makes it clear that certain substances purchased as generic chemicals could not be used as agricultural compounds.

Why has the code of practice been converted into a standard?

The ACVM Group is in the process of developing a range of standards that it can use to measure the acceptability of codes of practice presented to the Group for approval under section 28 of the ACVM Act. This will ensure that any codes that are presented to the Group will be considered in a consistent and transparent manner. In addition, the

Code of Practice for Own Use of Agricultural Compounds was a statement of expectations rather than an actual code of practice. It did not provide any practical guidance as to how to comply with those expectations.

Is the standard in its new form going to be implemented?

Federated Farmers were in support of the intent of the standard. However, they pointed out that it would be difficult for farmers to know which substances could not be used. They suggested that the standard should list any chemical that could not be used. This is impractical but adjustment in the standard is required to assist parties in this regard.

The ACVM Group is working with Federated Farmers to develop a practical solution. When this occurs, a second draft standard will be made available for public comment.

PAR traders – who registers?

There is some confusion regarding registration as a trader in PARs – if the registrant is an organisation rather than an individual, who needs to register?

An organisation can be recognised as trading in PARs. However, it must specify the person who is responsible for PAR trading.

That responsible person can specify within their organisation a number of personnel who will carry out particular trading activities. A traceability of these specified personnel must lead back to the principal person. An organisation with multiple branches and multiple levels of control must have sufficient ACVM Group approved persons to control the specified personnel trading in PARs.