The following article was published on Standards New Zealand Touchstone news website.
Thank you to everyone who sent us comments on the draft standard for the testing and decontamination of methamphetamine-contaminated properties (NZS 8510).
NZS 8510 is aimed at methamphetamine testing and clean-up/decontamination companies; laboratories that analyse samples taken from methamphetamine contaminated properties; health, safety, and environmental regulators; and property owners, managers, and insurers.
Public comments on the draft standard closed on Monday 20 February 2017. All comments were collated and sent to committee members on Thursday 23 February for review ahead of a 2-day committee meeting on 28 February and 1 March.
We received 130 emails containing 1269 individual comments. Many of these were several pages long and very detailed. Comments were received from a wide range of organisations and individuals including District Health Boards (Medical Officers of Health); methamphetamine testing and drug testing organisations; decontamination contractors; environmental and health scientists and researchers; insurance industry; Government agencies covering drug education, community housing, and human rights; landlords, property managers, lawyers and real estate agents; and local authorities.
Many submitters commented on the options for proposed maximum levels of methamphetamine after a property has been decontaminated. These comments varied on which of the two options presented in the draft should apply, and whether it is necessary to distinguish between a property that has been a clandestine lab or for the use of methamphetamine, but a common view was that the post-decontamination level(s) in the final standard should focus on reducing risk of exposure to methamphetamine, and should be clear and easily understood. The development committee discussed this at length and is giving further consideration to the level(s) and wording that will avoid any potential confusion over the application of the standard’s decontamination requirements.
Standards New Zealand collated all 1269 comments into three categories that totalled 540 pages of comments that the committee had to consider:
- general comments (128 pages)
- section-specific comments (391 pages)
- additional comments (21 pages of mainly PDF documents that could not be collated into a table and had to be viewed separately by the committee.
The committee is expected to review each of the 1269 comments and decide whether to accept or decline them and, if they are accepted, what changes need to be made to the draft standard. A record is kept of all committee decisions.
At the public comment review meeting on 28 February and 1 March, the committee first reviewed all general comments, and then decided to divide into six working groups to review comments on each section of the draft standard. Each working group reported back to the whole committee towards the end of the second day, highlighting key issues that need further discussion by the whole committee. There was insufficient time left at the end of day two for this discussion to take place, so it was agreed to hold a further meeting in late March after a revised draft is circulated to the committee.
Standards New Zealand will now collate into a revised draft all changes recommended by the six working groups. This will be sent to the committee prior the meeting in late March. At this meeting the time frame for completing the standard will also be reviewed. Due to the large volume of comments that need to be taken into account when redrafting the standard, it is unlikely that the final standard will be published by the end of April 2017, which was the planned publication date before public comments were received.
The committee also suggested that, after the standard is published, it would be helpful to prepare one or more supplementary ‘handbooks’. For example, one could provide more detailed practical information for those involved in carrying out decontamination of properties. Such a handbook could cover types of suitable cleaning materials, personal protective equipment (PPE) for operators, and other details that cannot be covered in a standard. Such a handbook would be linked to the standard and could be a reference document for operator training courses developed separately by industry training organisations (ITOs).
Read the Qs and As.
